October 31, 2006

WWF Finds Cuba Only Country with Sustainable Development

Washington, Oct 25 (Prensa Latina)

A report published by the World Wildlife Foundation (WWF) claims that
the only country in the world with "sustainable development" is Cuba.

WWF includes in its report a graph which shows two features: the human
development index (established by the United Nations) and the so-called
"ecological footprint" which shows the per person energy and resources
comsued in each country.

Surprisingly [not surprisingly to anyone who knows anything about Cuba],
only Cuba has passed in both arenas, which is enough to be designated a
country that "meets the minimum sensitivity criteria".

The study's authors credit the high level of literacy, long life
expectancy and low consumption of energy for this success.

The authors also claim that Latin America is the region that leads in
sustainable development, but that generalization is a little bit
far-fetched, comments alternative US website VivirLatino. com

"For 20 years we've lived our lives in a way that far exceeds the
carrying capacity of the Earth," said Carter S. Roberts, President and
CEO of World Wildlife Fund on presenting the report.

The Living Planet Report 2006 was released globally Monday from Beijing,
China, and carries data indices which indicate the Earth's well-being
(the full text of the report is available online at
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/living_planet_report.pdf).

Violence returns to Mexican city

Demonstrators and riot police have again clashed in the Mexican city of Oaxaca, the scene of five months of protests against the state governor.

Several thousand protesters converged on the main square, vowing to retake the city centre after police moved in at the weekend to restore order.

Striking teachers and leftist activists are demanding that Governor Ulises Ruiz be sacked for abuse of power.

Mexico's lawmakers have urged Mr Ruiz to quit, but he says he will stay on.

Senators unanimously approved a resolution calling on him to "consider resigning from office to help restore law and order" in Oaxaca.

The Senate's motion came hours after a similar measure was approved by the lower house of the congress.

Calls for Mr Ruiz's resignation have been at the heart of a drawn-out protest by Mexican teachers and left-wing activists, who accuse him of authoritarianism and corruption.

Over the weekend, some 4,000 riot police entered Oaxaca, removing demonstrators from the city centre. One man was reported to have died in the operation.

Mexican President Vicente Fox ordered the action on Saturday, a day after unidentified gunmen killed three people, including a US journalist.

Tense stand-off

"Murderers! Murderers!" chanted the demonstrators, as they rallied near the police cordon in the central square of the state capital.

Governor Ulises Ruiz. File photo
Governor Ulises Ruiz has faced five months of protests

"The mood is very tense. We're standing with the protesters in front of police barricades and they have lit bonfire, are tossing fireworks," Mark Stevenson, an Associated Press reporter, told the BBC.

One policeman was reportedly injured by fireworks and taken to hospital.

Police responded with volleys of teargas and used water cannons to extinguish the fires.

Despite the growing pressure both from the protesters and the federal lawmakers, Mr Ruiz - who rejects the accusations against him - said he would not step down.

"Within the next few hours we expect life will return to normal in the state capital," he told reporters on Monday.

The governor also said the Mexican federal parliament had no control over Oaxaca.

Schools shut

The protests began in May, virtually paralysing the city.

The teachers initially staged the walk-out to demand higher pay and better working conditions.

However, after police attacked one of their demonstrations in June, they extended their demands to include a call for the governor's resignation.

The teachers were then joined in their protest by left-wing groups.

Thousands of schools have been closed since the strike began, leaving 1.3 million children out of school.

Threats to Venezuela's Chavez as December presidential election approaches

by Stephen Lendman

On December 3, 2006, voters in Venezuela will again get to choose who'll lead them as President for the next six years. There's no doubt who that will be, as the people's choice is the same man they first elected their leader in December, 1998, with 56% of the vote and reelected him in July, 2000, after the adoption of the Bolivarian Republic's new Constitution with a 60% total.

They then saw him survive three failed US-directed and funded attempts to unseat him beginning with the aborted two-day coup in April, 2002, followed by the 2002-03 crippling oil strike and the failed August, 2004 recall referendum.

Chavistas must believe the man they revere has at least six more lives and will use one of them in a few weeks to continue in the job the Venezuelan people won't entrust to anyone else as long as he wants the job.

They may also hope he has as much good fortune and as many lives as his friend and ally Fidel Castro who, in nearly 48 years as Cuba's leader, has survived over 5,700 US-directed terror attacks against his country and about 600 US attempts to kill him ... an astonishing survival record against a powerful and determined foe still trying to remove him to reinstate oligarchic rule over the island state.

The Bush administration has the same fate in mind for Hugo Chavez Frias and won't sit by quietly allowing Bolivarianism to flourish and spread ... which it's doing as more people in the region and beyond are fed up with the old order and want the same benefits Venezuelans have.

* It's playing out now in Bolivia, on the streets of Mexico and in the run-up to the December 3 Venezuelan presidential election where the people show up in massive numbers most every time Chavez makes a public campaign appearance.

Since beginning his presidency in February, 1999, Hugo Chavez and his Movement for the Fifth Republic (MVR) Party have transformed Venezuela from an oligarchy serving the rich and powerful to a model democratic state serving all the people.

From the start, Chavez kept his campaign promise and began implementing his vision for political and social change. He held a national referendum through which the people decided to convene a National Constituent Assembly to draft a new Constitution that was overwhelmingly approved in a nationwide vote in December, 1999. It became effective a year later, changed the country's name to the Republica Bolivariana de Venezuela, and mandated Hugo Chavez' broad revolutionary vision for a system of participatory democracy based on the principles of political, economic and social justice.

Ever since, the people of Venezuela haven't looked back and won't now tolerate a return to the ugly past they'll never again accept willingly.

The Chavez Campaign

Hugo Chavez began his reelection campaign by registering his candidacy at the National Electoral Council (CNE) on August 12, affirming his confidence in the country's electoral process and saying that his campaign "must be above all a debate about ideas, an opportunity to elevate the level of debate and the political culture." Afterwards he addressed many thousands of his red-shirted supporters in a Caracas Square and told them the "Bolivarian hurricane" was beginning with a goal of achieving 10 million votes that would assure a convincing electoral victory in a nation of 27 million people and just over 16 million registered voters according to the CNE as of September 4.

* If he achieves it, he'll have gotten the highest ever vote total in the country's history.

He sounded an optimistic note adding "The Bolivarian hurricane will become a million hurricanes in all corners of the country, carrying forward the Bolivarian project and defending the revolution."

Two polls out in September indicate he may be on track toward his goal although their results show a wide variance. Datanalisis reported Chavez had a voter preference of 58.2% (41% ahead of his closest rival) while IVAD's percentage was 76.9%. And the most recent October University of Miami School of Communication/Zogby International poll shows Chavez with a 59% voter support compared to 24% for his only serious rival, Manuel Rosales (discussed more fully below).

The Zogby poll also gave Chavez an overwhelmingly popular approval rating among Venezuelan voters based on his job performance. If the median between these poll results is closest to the right number on December 3 and the voter turnout is high enough, that would translate to a stunning victory for Hugo Chavez whether or not it's with the 10 million vote total he hopes to get.

Chavez' current overwhelming popularity is consistent with the results of the Chilean firm Latinobarometro interviews conducted with 20,000 Latin Americans in 18 countries in 2005. It found a higher percentage of Venezuelans calling their government "totally democratic" than any other nationality surveyed as well as Venezuelans expressing the highest degree of optimism about their country's future in the region. These results contrast to the pre-Chavez era when the country was ruled by oligarchs ... ordinary people had no political rights and the level of poverty was extreme enough to cause street riots the government chose to violently suppress.

Hugo Chavez changed all that ... and he's campaigning now on his Bolivarian record of accomplishment that made him a national hero to most Venezuelans who only want him as their President as long as he wants the job.

Chavez' plan to continue in office is part of his "Miranda Campaign" to go beyond the traditional party structure by forming local "platoons" of the "Miranda Campaign Command" across the country. It began with the swearing in of 11,358 battalions and 44,698 squads nationwide to mobilize all Venezuelans to vote on election day and to supervise and handle security, logistics, vote tabulation and other aspects of the voting process. Overall the aim is to bring together 200,000 grassroots leaders of the Revolution who then will be assigned the task of convincing 10 others to vote for Chavez that would mean 2 million votes if successful. In addition, other organizations representing social sectors, workers, peasants, women, small business owners and indigenous groups will be mobilized to support the campaign to build the "new socialism of the 21st century."

Chavez also wants to hold a nationwide recall referendum half way through his next term in 2010, if he's reelected, to let the Venezuelan people decide if the Constitution should be amended to eliminate the current two-term presidential time in office limit ... he also announced his Simon Bolivar National Project which includes the following:

-- a new socialist ethic especially against corruption

-- a new socialist productive model expanding the social economy

-- a revolutionary protagonist democracy under which the highest priority would be power to the people including through communal councils

-- the Bolivarian ideal of supreme social happiness

-- a new internal geopolitics (focused on internal development)

-- a new international geopolitics based on a multipolar world focused against US hegemony, and

-- assuring Venezuela is a global energy power by developing its Orinoco Belt extra-heavy reserves and raising its daily oil production to six million barrels daily

Hugo Chavez was greeted on September 1 by tens of thousands of supporters after returning from his international diplomatic tour. He went seeking to establish and solidify alliances and gain support for Venezuela's campaign for the Latin American seat on the Security Council for which voting began on October 16 in the General Assembly but that has been deadlocked since because of US coercive tactics.

Chavez told his supporters: "This is an election (for president) on whether we want to continue to be an independent republic or return to being a North American colony." He added: "For the first time in history, Venezuela is occupying a privileged position in the world, a position of respect ... because we defend with a clear voice the interests of the countries of the Third World and the sovereignty of the peoples."

Chavez has a lot of support to do it from most Venezuelans and the 25 political organizations that nominated him including the MVR's coalition partner Patria Para Todas, Podemos and several smaller parties. But Chavez also knows what he's up against, and said he is "the candidate of the revolution ... and the national majority (and that other candidates are) tools of the US government. In this electoral process there are two candidates only, namely Hugo Chavez and George W. Bush."

On September 9, Chavez's electoral campaign battalions and platoons were sworn in as part of his "Miranda campaign" to confront "North American imperialism." It was done at a huge rally and march of hundreds of thousands of supporters in Caracas. Chavez used the occasion to propose the formation of a single united political party of the Bolivarian Revolution to be formed in 2007 after the upcoming election. In a speech he called for unity to further "consolidate and strengthen" the spirit of Bolivarianism. He said he wanted it to be the "great party of the Bolivarian Revolution (and that) it should represent the republic and the revolution to the world and establish the strongest connections with the greatest revolutionary parties throughout the world."

The Opposition

A final unknown number of the currently 18 or so announced candidates will be on the ballot on December 3 opposing Hugo Chavez, but only one is of consequence because the US picked and backs him -- Zulia state governor (who by law should have relinquished his office to run for president but for whom the CNE made an exception and allowed him to remain in office) and regional Un Nuevo Tiempo party member Manuel Rosales. The other more prominent ones, including Primero Justicia candidate Julio Borges, dropped out to unite behind him as the main standard-bearer of the opposition thus ruling out a primary the US-funded right wing NGO Sumate planned to hold but then cancelled.

It still remains to be seen what strategy the opposition will decide on or even which, if any, of them will show up on election day. Already Accion Democratica, Venezuela's largest opposition party in size of membership, at first refused to back any candidate. The AD's General Secretary, Henry Ramos Allup, said the only option is to abstain from the election and that Rosales, Borges (before he dropped out of the race) and other candidates are "like drunks fighting over an empty bottle." Others in his party disagree though calling for an exercise of "democratic resistance."

Still it's clear to all in the opposition, Chavez is so far ahead in the polls there's no chance anyone can defeat him in a free, fair and open election so it's likely Rosales was chosen to run with something else in mind, and his strategy will show it as the campaign unfolds and especially as election day approaches.

Clearly the US had the final say in picking him for whatever strategy is planned that may have a lot to do with the fact that he's the governor of the state of Zulia that has 40% of Venezuela's oil and where in the past energy elites there supported the state's independence to free it from the government in Caracas.

Rosales also favors this idea (likely with a little coaxing from his US allies) and has called for a referendum to let the people of Zulia decide. He's also very close to the Bush administration and was the only governor to sign the infamous "(Pedro) Carmona Estanga Decree" after the 2002 coup that dissolved the elected National Assembly and Supreme Court and effectively ended the Bolivarian Revolution and all the benefits it gave the Venezuelan people (for two days).

Rosales' electoral plan, with considerable US National Endowment for Democracy (NED)-funded through Sumate support, should become clear close to or right after the December 3 election if he's able to win a majority of the votes in his own state. He may then try to go ahead with an independence referendum, claim fraud in the rest of the country, and make plans to declare himself president of the independent state of Zulia if he, in fact, moves to break away and form it.

The Chavez government, of course, will never accept this ... and the Sumate/Rosales/Bush administration opposition may use this as as justification to confront it violently when any attempt is made to stop them.

* This could provide the US a pretext it may be seeking to intervene militarily for whatever reasons it gives such as protecting the lives of US citizens and "defending democracy" and "human rights."

If it happens, it would be the same kind of stunt Ronald Reagan used to invade Grenada in 1983 and GHW Bush used to do the same thing against Panama in 1989. On both those occasions, the US acted against leaders who never threatened the US or its citizens. They were forcibly deposed solely because they were unwilling to obey "the lord and master of the universe" from el norte.

The same scenario may be planned for Venezuela after the upcoming election.

It won't be long before we find out.

Another possible strategy planned may be similar to what happened in the 2005 National Assembly elections. When it was clear then the major opposition candidates couldn't win, they dropped out claiming fraud that didn't exist. It was a cheap transparent stunt decided on a few days before the vote as a way to avoid a humiliating defeat, but it gave the corporate-run media a chance to trumpet their black propaganda and characterize a free and fair election as tainted. The tone out of Washington is always antagonistic and grabbed on to this and at other times with oxymoronic language like Venezuela under Chavez is an "authoritarian democracy, an elected authoritarianism, a threat to democracy, (and) an elected dictatorship," all of it said without a touch of irony. It also gave the opposition a chance to chime in and say voter turnout was low (mostly because opposition supporters had no one to vote for and stayed home) and the results thus had no legitimacy. So it organized street demonstrations in upscale neighborhoods and suburbs to create a false sense of turmoil and disorder.

There was also evidence uncovered at the time that violence was planned for around the time of the election to create unrest and further de-legitimize the results. This is how an oligarchy puppet regime in the wings allied with the power structure in Washington operates. They have no respect for the law or norms of conduct and will use any means including murder to try to regain the power they lost to Hugo Chavez democratically.

There's no doubt schemes have already been cooked up quietly that will be sprung between now and the election period.

Already on September 2, Caracas Diario Vea reported it learned about a plot involving the right wing opposition. It's called Plan Alcatraz and is aimed at making unacceptable demands on the National Electoral Council (CNE) sure to be rejected so as to allege fraud and then organize street actions in protest including occupying CNE offices.

Manuel Rosales is part of the scheme to lead the protests but he'd have to withdraw from the race to do it, which so far he's unwilling to do. He has been willing to consult with representatives of the Bush administration and met with them recently on a trip he made to south Florida where he reportedly met with the president's brother, Governor Jeb Bush.

Colombian right wing paramilitaries are also known to be involved and would be brought in to commit terrorist attacks along the border and in other parts of the country. If that happens, it won't be the first time as this tactic has been used before and foiled by Venezuelan police when a plot was uncovered and arrests were made.

This kind of state-directed terrorism should come as no surprise to those familiar with the government and ideological position of Colombian President Alvaro Uribe that's hard right and in line with neocon Bush administration policy.

Uribe comes from a wealthy land-owning family, has a history of links to the country's paramilitary death squads and drug cartels, and engaged in state terrorism in the various government positions he held for over 20 years that included kidnappings and assassinations of trade unionists, peasants in opposition groups, social and human rights activists, journalists and others. He's also committed gross violations of Venezuelan sovereignty and apparently still is doing it egged on by his US ally. In spite of it, or maybe in praise for it, the Wall Street Journal calls Uribe "(maybe) the most clear-thinking, courageous ally in the war on terror that the US has in Latin America."

* The Journal writer would have been right if she changed the preposition "on" to "of," and the adjectives "courageous" to "outrageous," and "clear-thinking" to "obedient."

In spite of his dubious background, Uribe was elected and then reelected the country's president (in elections heavily tainted with fraud) and was the only South American leader to support the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq. He even invited the US to "invade" Colombia to help it double the size of its military and supply it with weapons and intelligence. He already benefits hugely from the billions of dollars his government gets in "Plan Colombia" military aid that's used to fight the FARC and ELN resistance and has little to do with its supposed aim to eradicate coca cultivation except in areas controlled by those two groups. He's now the Bush administration's strongest and most subservient ally in the region, and thus it backs the right Uribe claims he has to intervene militarily in violation of another country's sovereignty -- with bordering Venezuela as the main target.

Reports are increasing that Uribe is directing his policy of state terrorism against Venezuela by continuing to send Colombian paramilitary hired assassins illegally across the border. They're apparently responsible for a large number of deaths in the countryside, and some have even infiltrated into metropolitan Caracas. High profile figures are also becoming targets as was state prosecutor Danilo Anderson who was killed in a December, 2004 car bombing likely because he headed an investigation of the hundreds of individuals (all from the opposition) suspected of being involved in the 2002 aborted coup attempt. More recently National Assembly (AN) for the Movement for the Fifth Republic, campesino leader, and Chavez supporter Braulio Alvarez escaped a second assassination attempt when his car was attacked and riddled with bullets. Alvarez is working with the government to implement its land reform law that redistributes large, underused land from the latifundistas (large land owners) to landless campesinos that surely is angering the rich landowners who now with Uribe's help are striking back.

One of Hugo Chavez' top priorities when first taking office in 1999 was land reform in a country run by oligarchs including rich land owners. He's been determined to rectify the inequality of land distribution the 1997 agricultural census revealed -- that 5% of the largest landowners control 75% of the land and 75% of the smallest ones only 6% of it. His plan led to the current confrontation, but Hugo Chavez is now responding more forcefully and on August 18 announced the creation of civilian/military security units in the large farms that have been taken over in Barinas, Apure and Tachira states. He's doing it to combat the wave of kidnappings and assassinations especially in areas bordering Colombia that are linked to paramilitary death squads infiltrating into the country. They likely are dispatched by Alvaro Uribe and are employed by the latifundistas.

Tachira has been particularly hard hit by this invasion as the number of killings there rose from 81 in 1999 to 93 in 2001, 212 in 2002 and exploded to 566 in 2005 for a total of 2037 deaths in the last seven years. In addition, the Caracas Daily Ultimas Noticias reported in July that 70% of businesses in Tachira bordering Colombia have to pay the paramilitaries a vacuna (vaccine) as protection money to keep from being attacked.

All this is mounting evidence that Hugo Chavez has every reason to fear the Colombian president and sees his close ties to the Bush administration as part of a greater strategy to provoke a confrontation giving the US a pretext to intervene to try to oust and assassinate him.

This also seems to be Uribe's aim as Colombia and Venezuela share a common border, and he fears for his own survival in a country plagued by poverty and violence. Uribe has an ugly record supporting the concentration of wealth and power while cutting vitally needed social services. He's also allowed his military and paramilitary assassins to displace three million peasants, has one of the worst records of state-directed terrorism in the world, and has a long-term disregard for democracy and human rights. Just across the border his people can see how the Bolivarian Revolution has benefited Venezuelans and many of them have emigrated there to take advantage of it. It's hard to imagine those staying behind don't want the same things and may one day act in their own self-interest to demand them.

Hugo Chavez also needs to be wary of the major new base the US is building in Mariscal Estigarribia, Paraguay, 200 kilometers from the Bolivian border even though it's far south of Venezuela.

Reportedly the base will be able to handle large aircraft and house up to 16,000 troops. Since July, 2005 small numbers of fully-equipped US forces have been in Paraguay and have been conducting secretive operations there. It's led some military analysts and human rights groups to suspect an interventionist operation is planned, likely directed at Bolivia and its president Evo Morales some of whose policies mirror those of his friend and ally Hugo Chavez. But with enough troops and long-range large aircraft in the region, the base could also be used as a staging area for an operation anywhere within its range that easily could include Venezuela. The human rights group Servicio Paz y Justicia (SERPAJ) in Paraguay believes the US wants the country to be what Panama once was, and to be able to operate there to control the southern cone region of the continent.

It's also been reported that George Bush recently bought a 98,842 acre farm in Paraguay to go along with the 173,000 acres his father already owns there. Both properties border Bolivia and Brazil and comprise 2.7% of the whole country that comprises an area the size of the state of California.

* It's not known what the Bush family has in mind there or whether it may have any connection to a planned US military intervention in the region.

It is known Paraguay has no laws criminalizing money-laundering, anti-terrorism or terrorist financing even though if does have an extradition treaty with the US. It's also important to be mindful of the fact that a dominant US family of two US presidents now owns a sizable piece of real estate in a country able to domicile a large number of US forces. It may only be for whatever personal use they have in mind, but it may not be and we can only speculate on what that may be.

We don't have to speculate that the US also has another major military base in Manta, Ecuador that's much closer to Venezuela on Colombia's southern border and is part of the US's increasing militarization of the southern continent. The Pentagon says it's tasked to carry out a variety of security-related missions, but that's just code language for interventionist ones. Ecuadorian presidential hopeful, Rafael Correa, who'll now face a runoff vote on November 26 after a tainted first round spoiled his victory, responded to a question recently that he'd allow the base to remain in his country provided the Bush administration gave Ecuador the same basing rights in Miami. But even if this base is closed, the US is currently building another new one in the Dutch colony of Curacao (a popular vacation destination that will be tainted by it) that's located near the Venezuelan coast and near the oil-rich state of Zulia.

It remains to be seen if he'll follow through if he wins the presidency, but one positive development to watch is Paraguay's decision not to renew a defense cooperation agreement with the US for 2007 because it's unwilling to grant US troops immunity from prosecution by the International Criminal Court in the Hague (ICC). The Court was established to assure perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide are brought to justice. Foreign Minister Ruben Ramirez announced his country's decision on October 2 saying his government concluded under international treaty law, exceptions to immunity are only permissible for foreign diplomats and administrative personnel. Paraguay is a member of the South American Mercosur trade block that also includes Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Venezuela. These countries have also refused to grant US troops such immunity in another sign the US is losing influence in the region as more leaders in it are standing firm against unreasonable demands from Washington as well as its failed policies. Hopefully the spirit and influence of Hugo Chavez is spreading.

US Intervention in Venezuela's Political Process - Again

It's no secret the Bush administration wants to oust Hugo Chavez, has already tried and failed three times to do it ... and is now planning another attempt at whatever time and by whatever means it has in mind. It may be staged in connection with the upcoming December election and likely will be a reworked version of what was tried earlier and failed but this time with some new twists and going further than before.

Hugo Chavez knows it's coming, has taken steps to counter it when it does, and has a hard-to-trump ace in his deck -- the many millions of Venezuelans who've already shown they'll come out in force to support him, especially if the stakes are to keep him as their president. Chavez witnessed some of that support when he spoke at an October mass rally in Valencia in the state of Carabobo and sounded the alarm about the Bush administration's plot to destabilize the election and assassinate him. He indicated to the crowd that "friendly nations" have warned him about this and said: "With God's favor this will not happen, but if it (did) you know what you would have to do; the Bolivarian Revolution at this stage does not depend on one man."

Chavez also said he's preparing for what he expects will happen and "we are going to hit back so hard that they will not stop running until they reach Miami."

* Chavez may not have long to wait to find out if his plan can best the one Washington has cooked up.

In the lead-up to whatever is planned, the Bush administration is relying on the usual kind of covert mischief from the CIA that specializes in it. It's been at it all over the world for nearly 50 years and in Venezuela since Hugo Chavez was first elected. Author and international human rights attorney Eva Golinger obtained top-secret CIA documents through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests showing the Agency had prior knowledge and was complicit in the two-day 2002 aborted coup attempt to unseat President Chavez and that the Bush administration provided over $30 million in funding aid to opposition groups to help do it.

It began in 2001 involving the same quasi-governmental agencies that are always part of these kinds of schemes -- the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), International Republican Institute (IRI), National Democratic Institute (NDI), and US Agency for International Development (USAID) which did its work through its Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI). These agencies funded and worked with the opposition staging mass violent street protests leading up to the day of the coup. The documents also showed NED and USAID funded and were otherwise involved in staging the 2002-03 crippling oil strike and the failed August, 2004 recall referendum.

The US State Department, National Security Agency (NSA) and White House had full knowledge of and had to have approved each coup attempt.

Most people have some idea how the CIA operates covertly but few know much about the National Endowment for Democracy that was (in language Orwell would have loved) established to "support democratic institutions throughout the world through private, nongovernmental efforts." If fact, its very much a part of government and its purpose is to be the somewhat overt counterpart to the CIA, and in that capacity its hands are almost as dirty as the spy agency short of having actual blood on them. The one objective it pursues above all others is the subversion of democracy including supporting the removal of democratically elected leaders unwilling to allow their countries to become submissive US client states.

It's already been learned from information made public, including NED Quarterly Reports, that this agency actively supports anti-Chavez organizations in Venezuela and that removal of Hugo Chavez is one of its top priorities. It will also be reported soon in a new book by Eva Golinger called Bush v. Chavez: Washington's War on Venezuela that the Bush administration since 2005 has increased its (anti-Chavez) "interference by providing funding, training, guidance, and other contacts, and other strategically important ways to support the opposition's presidential campaign here." Golinger also reports the US anti-Chavez campaign includes the use of "psychological warfare within Venezuela, but also in the international arena, and in the United States." It's trying "to make people think that Venezuela is a failed or failing state with a dictator, which is how the US government refers to him."

NED is an old hand at this kind of dirty business since it was established in November, 1982 by statute as a supposedly private non-profit organization. It's hardly that as Congress approves its funding as part of the Department of State budget going to its sister USAID agency. NED also gets some private aid from several well-known right wing organizations including supportive think tanks that provide considerable funding for ultraconservative and business-friendly enterprises.

USAID has considerably greater resources than NED to pursue its activities which supposedly are to function as an independent federal agency providing non-military foreign aid. In fact, however, it's a thinly disguised instrument of US foreign policy able to do its dirty work while avoiding congressional scrutiny. It, like NED, has in the past been an instrument of US efforts to oust Hugo Chavez, and in the run-up to the December election is likely to be working with the opposition again as it was learned it did in the other three attempts to oust the Venezuelan leader. We'll have to wait to learn more about what schemes CIA, NED, USAID and other US-related agencies are planning until they begin unfolding or are exposed in advance and are headed off before any harm is done.

The Role of Sumate

Sumate is a nominal non-governmental organization (NGO) founded in 2002 by a group of Venezuelans led by Maria Corina Machado and Alejandro Plaz and now headed by Ms. Machado. It's true purpose and activities belie the claims it makes to be an organization of independent citizens supporting the democratic process and promoting the political rights of Venezuelans under the country's Constitution. In fact, it's a US-supported and funded anti-governmental organization dedicated to the overthrow of the Chavez government and the return of the country to its ugly past ruled by the former oligarchs and the interests of capital.

In the US this kind of activity or any foreign interference in elections would never be tolerated. US election law specifically prohibits foreign nationals or corporations from contributing to any federal, state or local political campaign, and it would be unthinkable to imagine there being any tolerance if it was learned a foreign government attempted to influence the electoral process here.

* None of this, however, applies to what the US does all over the world routinely.

At least post-WWII, this country has a tainted history of meddling in the affairs of other countries almost like we had a birthright to do it. Put another way, according to "Washington-think," what's good for the US "goose" isn't allowed for any other country's "gander."

It's thus no surprise Sumate went on the Bush administration payroll when it first gained prominence in late 2003 becoming involved in organizing and providing support for the 2004 failed recall referendum signature collection process.

Ever since it's been at the center of anti-Chavez activities and is liberally funded to do it by US agencies like NED and USAID. As mentioned above, it cancelled a primary it planned to hold after the main opposition candidates dropped out so Manuel Rosales could run unopposed against Hugo Chavez in the December election. It's now moving ahead with the help of millions of dollars of Washington-supplied opposition candidate bankrolling. This was recently revealed in 132 USAID contracts made public that claimed the funding to be politically neutral but which Hugo Chavez believes is being used overtly and covertly to undermine his government. USAID and NED now admit they're spending (at least) $26 million on the December election, and those organizations never support democratically elected leaders running for office who don't obey US neoliberal diktats.

Chavez has lots of past experience to back up his claim of US interference and an added new one now after the Bush administration named career CIA agent Patrick Maher as the "mission manager" to oversee US intelligence on Venezuela and Cuba. His previous job was as deputy director of the CIA's Office of Policy Support and his background includes having been an architect of the counter-insurgency strategy in Colombia as well as managing the agency's operations in the Caribbean region. William Izarra, a former MVR Party leader and the national coordinator of the Centers for Ideological Formation that organizes grassroots discussions about the Bolivarian Revolution, believes this move elevates Venezuela and Cuba into the "axis of evil" category along with Iran and North Korea, and that heightens the risk of trouble ahead.

The Chavez government knows something is afoot and is taking preventive action by having Venezuelan prosecutors bring conspiracy charges against Sumate leaders. If convicted, Maria Corina Machado could face up to 16 years in prison, and three other Sumate members also face charges.

The National Assembly also intends to require "non-profit" groups like Sumate to reveal their funding sources. In addition, it's recommending Sumate be investigated for currency and tax law violations, and Chavez has threatened to expel US Ambassador William Brownfield whom he accuses of causing trouble as he's done in the past.

All this is playing out in a highly-charged atmosphere of mistrust that's well-founded according to Eva Golinger who wrote "The Chavez Code: Cracking US Intervention in Venezuela." The book cited clear evidence of the Bush administration's intent to overthrow the Chavez government, and Golinger recently said Washington is "trying to implement regime change. There's no doubt about it (even though it) tries to mask it saying it's a noble mission."

The Prospect for Fall Fireworks in Venezuela

The Bush administration must believe while it's often wrong it's never in doubt.

It's already dealing with two out of control conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and has blood-stained hands from its complicity with Israel on their co-sponsored conflicts against Lebanon and the one still raging in Palestine.

Undeterred, it seems determined to become even more embroiled in the Middle East by planning a possible attack against Iran according to some reliable reports (or at least putting up a good bluff to do it), even though the US public has grown disenchanted with George Bush's wars and it shows in his low public approval rating. He's even now drawing flack within his own party, and many Republican candidates for Congress on November 7 see him as radioactive and don't want him around.

So why would this administration be willing to risk making things even worse by trying to forcibly remove a democratically elected leader revered by his people who will never stand by and allow their Bolivarian Revolution to be taken away from them.

Here's why...

Soon after the Bush administration came to power, Vice President (and de facto head of state) Dick Cheney said the US must "make energy security a (top) priority of our trade and foreign policy." The Iraq and Afghanistan wars followed what, in fact, was "boss" Cheney's diktat with control of energy and its security one of several key reasons why we're now embroiled in the greater Middle East.

Now fast forward to June, 2006 and it gets more chilling. The US Southern (military) Command in Latin America (that has no business meddling in affairs of state) concluded that efforts by Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador to extend state control over their oil and gas reserves threatens US oil security.

A study it conducted states: "A re-emergence of state control of the energy sector (in those countries) will likely increase inefficiencies and ... will hamper efforts to increase long-term supplies and production."

* Even though the region produces only 8.4% of the world's oil output, it accounts for 30% of US consumption, and most of that comes from Venezuela and Mexico with each of these countries supplying about an equal percentage of our needs.

A secure supply and firm control of oil from the region is crucial to the US, but most of all from Venezuela because of its vast reserves (including its immense untapped amount of Orinco Basin super-heavy tar oil) that potentially are even greater than what's now available from Saudi Arabia - although that's debatable and merely suggesting it will open up a torrent of disagreement that may be right.

Still, Venezuela, by any measure, has the greatest hydrocarbon reserves in the hemisphere, and that makes the country and Hugo Chavez target number one in this part of the world for US energy security importance and second only after the greater Middle East that includes the Caspian Basin in Central Asia.

Couple that with the fact that the US sees Hugo Chavez as the greatest of all threats it faces anywhere -- a good example that may and is spreading throughout the region threatening US dominance over it and you have a recipe for a determined effort to oust him by any means including assassination and armed intervention.

Chavez, of course, knows the risk and so do the Venezuelan people who proved in 2002 they will rally en masse as they did then to restore their president to office after the US-staged two-day April coup that year briefly removed him. It's certain any attempt to oust him again will be met with the same resistance, and it's hard to imagine how intense it may be if the US succeeds in killing him.

* There's no question Washington wants to avoid six more years of Chavez rule and officials there have said it in so many words.

They call Hugo Chavez "a clear and present danger to peace and democracy in the hemisphere (and) US strategy must be to help Venezuela accomplish peaceful change (before 2007)."

Heinz Dieterich, a Chavez consultant, believes, as does Hugo Chavez, the Bush administration is plotting to assassinate him to prevent his serving another term in office.

So far there's been nothing more dramatic than the usual US Chavez-bashing especially after his September 20 tour de force at the UN General Assembly when the Venezuelan President had the courage to say what most other world leaders think but only speak about privately. The Bush administration responds claiming the Chavez government is a dictatorship that supports terrorism. It also unjustifiably accuses him suppressing the media and repressing his opposition, and it's guaranteed a Chavez victory will be challenged with outrageous accusations of electoral fraud arranged by a state-controlled CNE.

The truth on all counts is the opposite of the rhetoric, yet the vitriol continues unabated from Washington and is heard over the corporate-controlled media in both countries. What should be reported (but never is) is that the fairness of the Venezuelan electoral system shames the corrupted one in the US that's now run by corporate-owned and controlled electronic voting machines manipulated to assure enough business-friendly candidates win even when they're not the choice of the majority of US voters.

Venezuela has real democracy, while what's called that in the US is just a shameless mirage of one -- an illusion the public hasn't caught onto yet.

The Venezuelan people know the difference between that and the real thing and will fight to keep it. Sadly, most people in the US are kept uninformed, don't know what they've lost, and can't even imagine the kind of country they'd have if they had an enlightened leader like Hugo Chavez instead of the appalling one they're stuck with for two more years.

Things are certain to heat up in Venezuela between now and December 3 as the Bush administration tries to impose on the Venezuelan people what's it's already done here at home, and it will be relentless and ruthless about the way it does it. And if covert efforts are afoot, as almost for sure they are, we'll likely see them unveiled during the election period and they may be ugly.

Hugo Chavez expects them, is surely ready to confront them when they're sprung, and it now remains to be seen how the latest chapter in the Bush administration vs. Hugo Chavez will play out.

Stay closely tuned ... it won't be long before the fireworks begin.
*
Related:
Opposition Candidate Manuel Rosales Outlines His Plan for Government

Correa Objects OAS at Ecuador Vote

Quito
Oct 31

Ecuadorian Presidential Candidate Rafael Correa rejected the presence of the Organization of American States mission head Rafael Bielsa, in the November 26 second electoral round.

"Bielsa is guilty of inexcusable actions and omissions, leaving doors open for any kind of election fraud" in the October 15 first electoral round, Correa, from Alianza Pais party, highlighted.

The applicant accused OAS representative of adopting a partial position and closing his eyes before the irregularities that took place in the elections.

Corrrea came in second place, when at the beginning surveys revealed the other way around.

Argentine ex chancellor Bielsa, violated his condition as observer by giving his opinion concerning Alianza Pais party, and when predicting a dark future for the country in case Correa won, he pointed out in statements given to local TV channels.

For this reason, he warned, we cannot allow him to participate again. Bielsa has also been criticized by social and political movements.

Correa reiterated that the second electoral round is due to an electoral fraud, organized by the social Christians and the national oligarchy.

Bike Rides for Oaxaca!

Bike Rides for Oaxaca!, 9www.friendsofbradwill.org)

If you are in New York City,
join the Friends of Brad Will
this Wednesday, November 1st for a Bike Ride
in Solidarity with the People of Oaxaca!

We are meeting this Wednesday at 1 pm at 40th St & West Side Highway (12th Ave)
and will be riding to:
1. Expose the commercial media’s distortion of the current situation in Oaxaca.
2. Raise awareness about the capitalist forces in our city that are benefiting from the continued repression of the people’s movement.
3. Highlight the hypocrisy of the Mexican government holding a seat on the Human Rights Council of the United Nations.

If you are not in New York City,
we are calling on people from around the world
to join the Zapatista call for November 1st actions
in solidarity with the people of Oaxaca
by organizing a Bike Ride for this Wednesday
or As Soon As Possible!

I wonder how many USAers know the truth about their own country...

...
Venezuela is not a nation of barbarians, like the USA is, where 76% of the states (the people) believe in executing criminals for their crimes. Venezuela, at least under Chavez, does not want to be like the USA, and rightly so.

While the USA is killing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis and innocent US soldiers, while 76% of the USA is assassinating its criminals, the USA and people like the letter-writer arrogantly and erroneously elevate themselves above the rest of humanity.

After all, according to Toro’s article, at least 58% of US Christians believe in Armageddon and only 25% of the US population believes in evolution. Hey, that makes for a society which bases its notions on logic, right?

No!

If only 25% of the US population believes in evolution (which is evident to any healthy, non-ignorant, thinking person), then 75% of the people of the USA are irrational , to put it mildly (and I don’t mean it as an insult).

If 75% of the people of the USA are irrational, then whatever decisions are taken as a society are probably quite irrational as well. Look at Iraq … only one of the many examples that could be provided.

No wonder the letter-writer is so denigrating when it comes to Muslims … she probably doesn’t know the truth about her own country’s "chopping of heads" in 35 of 50 states! Perhaps she also believes in Armageddon and perhaps she does not believe in evolution. Perhaps she believes the Bible literally (as some Christians, Creationists, believe), perhaps she is a born-again Christian … perhaps she believes in a physical and real Heaven with great weather (not too hot and not too cold), five-star hotels, no-limit credit cards (payable only at the end of eternity) and exclusive "for US Christians only" beaches?

(Heaven to me would be a place where the daytime temperature is 35- 40 degrees centigrade (95 - 104 degrees Fahrenheit) and 30-35 degrees centigrade at night. I wonder how Heaven's administrators (or God herself) would deal with me? Would they send me to Hell? I'll take southern Zulia in Venezuela instead!)

Maybe she, like so many Christian USAers, believes that Hell really exists and that all "evil" people, such as Muslims (because they are "all" "terrorists") will burn in a USA-designed oil-powered furnace forever. (Whose gonna pay for the fuel? Where are they gonna get the fuel from? Iraq? Iran? Venezuela?).

These people can believe in Heaven and Hell … yet they cannot believe that what the USA is doing in Iraq (and planning to do against Iran and Venezuela) is wrong.

Now, who deserves to go to Hell?

Oscar Heck

Uruguay pleased with its debt swap

Creditors tendered US$1.17 billion of eligible bonds in Uruguay’s debt swap, in line with government expectations, in the country’s bid to scrap lightly traded bonds and extend debt maturities.

On October 19, Uruguay launched a bond swap for up to US$2.2 billion on 20 bonds due on or before 2019 and one series due in 2027, in exchange for dollar-denominated bonds maturing in 2022 and 2036, or a cash payment.

The bond swap attracted about 52 percent participation, the Economy Minister said yesterday. Some analysts had expected subscription of as much as 70 percent.

“The results have been very successful,” Economy Minister Danilo Astori told reporters. “Participation was nearly 60 percent in the 2011 and 2015 bonds, which worried us the most because during the next government’s term the country faced very significant payments” on them.

“The financial urgencies of this term have been completely cleared away,” Astori said.

Center-left President Tabaré Vazquez has a five-year mandate, which began in March 2005. His government has paid off US$1.55 billion in debt owed to the International Monetary Fund this year and next, thanks in part to nearly US$3 billion in dollar-denominated debt issues.

Uruguay said in a statement it will issue US$602 million in reopened 2022 global bonds and US$277 million in 2036 bonds as part of the swap. Uruguay had priced its global bonds due in 2022 and 2036 at 106.75 and 100.75, respectively.

Uruguay’s 2022 bonds changed hands in early evening trade at a bid of 108.25, with a yield of 7.128 percent. The global 2036 bonds traded at a bid of 100.50, with a yield of 7.581 percent.

UN agencies censure U.S. blockade of Cuba

UNITED NATIONS
Oct 27

At least 20 UN agencies have condemned the U.S. blockade of Cuba as "a unilateral policy" that is blocking economic and social cooperation with the island, according to an official report by the secretary general published October 27.

In that document the agencies state their disagreement with Washington’s imposition of coercive measures against Cuba over more than 40 years.

These international bodies have demanded the annulment of the blockade of Cuba on account of its violation of international law.

The report, which also includes considerations from 100 countries opposed to the blockade, confirms a universal consensus on ending that hostile policy.

The Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) particularly censured Washington’s decision to intensify the blockade of Cuba in order to make economic, political and social life on the island more difficult.

The ECLAC refers to a report from the Cuban authorities, according to which the accumulated direct and indirect damage to the economy of that underdeveloped country amounts to $82 billion.

For its part, UNICEF cited as a concrete example of the prejudicial effects of the blockade the serious problems in acquiring cytostatics for child suffering from cancer.

Pharmaceutical laboratories that had contracts with Cuba had to suspend supplies of those medicines after they were bought up by U.S. transnationals, UNICEF notes.

For the UN Conference on Trade and Development, the extra-territorial effects of the blockade imposed by Washington have significant consequences for Cuba due to the influence of U.S. interests in transnational enterprises.

In its turn, the UN Population Fund highlights in its report the efforts made by Cuba to contain the spread of HIV/AIDS over close to 20 years in the quality of the a country blockaded by the United States.

In the UN secretary general’s report the UN Development Program (UNDP) reiterated the impossibility of acquiring equipment and other supplies manufactured by the United States or protected via patents held by that country.

According to UN-Habitat, the blockade imposed on Cuba restricts that nation from having access to low-cost chemical products and equipment for the treatment of water and waste water, which has negative impact on the environment and public health.

"The UN system in Cuba has come up against difficulties and limitations for technical cooperation projects, above all acquiring equipment and other supplies manufactured in the United States or with components produced there," the UNDP notes.

The Secretary General’s report is circulating among UN members as part of the procedures prior to the annual debate on the "The need to end the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed on Cuba by the United States."

According to the official program, the 61st General Assembly is to discuss the issue on November 8, for the 15th year in succession.

On the 14 previous occasions the General Assembly passed by an overwhelming majority a resolution calling on Washington to end the blockade of Cuba.

Last year the vote reached the record figure of 182 votes in favor.

Interview with historian Judith Ewell: "Challenging the United States is positive"

by ROBERTO GIUSTI, EL UNIVERSAL

According to scholar Judith Ewell, the US media do not say anything good about Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez because they may be biased by the State Department

After some years of absence, Professor Judith Ewell walks down the streets of downtown Caracas with the feeling of being in a city different from the formerly familiar place. A historian focused on Latin America, she worked in Venezuela for some years. Recently she came back from Virginia to introduce the Spanish version of her book "The Indictment of a Dictator."

Q: Based on Venezuela's political evolution, did you anticipate a government such as the administration of President Hugo Chávez?

A: I think not. Obviously, the failure of the Punto Fijo Agreement was the reason for Chávez' taking office. If the democratic system and political parties had kept their strengths, that would have not happened. Neither (political parties) AD nor Copei transferred successfully the power from founding generations to the younger ones.

Q: (Rómulo) Betancourt quit after his second term in office, but (Rafael) Caldera wanted re-election, like (Carlos Andrés) Pérez, and now Chávez indefinitely.

A: This is politicians' standard sin. Sometimes they refuse to step down.

Q: You suggested some similarities between Betancourt and (Marcos) Pérez Jiménez. I think that these same similarities can be found between Chávez and Carlos Andrés Pérez in their attempt at establishing what some Venezuelan analysts label as sub-imperialism. Therefore, there is some continuity both in words and actions. Don't you think, however, that at bottom there is a basic difference between current players and those who, notwithstanding the warts of representative democracy, observed fundamental guidelines, such as turnover?

A: It is possible. However, I view polarization as a serious problem. This did not occur in the past. Chávez does not trust at all in the opposition. Nor the opposition trusts in Chávez. The relationship between Caldera and Betancourt was quite different. Regardless of being foes, they agreed on fundamental issues.

Q: How is Chávez viewed in the United States?

A: Very badly. Newspapers never say anything good about Chávez. It seems that they are permeable to the influence of the State Department and there is no major effort to understand the situation as a whole. If Chávez says that (US President George W. Bush) is the devil, then Bush says likewise about Chávez. Journalist James Reston stated once: "In the United States everything can be made for Latin America without reading a single line." There, people do not know much about Latin America, and our media are worse than most of the Venezuelan media. The international information is terrible and superficial.

Q: Do you think that Chávez represents a threat for the United States?

A: I do not think that he can change things much. Rather, it seems that his influence in Latin America is falling down. I view as positive the existence of a leader who criticizes and challenges Washington once in a while. Better still, if he does it in a rational manner instead of making nonsense.

Q: Is Chávez right when denouncing "the US imperialism"?

A: Since (Liberator Simón ) Bolívar's times, most Latin Americans think that the North, -rather than helping- harms, stages interventions where they are not needed and eludes them when they are. Now, therefore, I am not sure if Chávez has played this role successfully. His way to relate with the United States, in an attempt at building an alliance in the South, has been rough and steep.

Q: Do you mean, therefore, that he will not be successful?

A: That depends a lot on Washington. While at the present time they are not very interested in Latin America and are facing a lot of problems, perhaps Chávez will not gain much influence.

Q: In spite of his relations with Iran?

A: The United States looks on it with disapproval, even though the links between two oil countries, members of (the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries) OPEC, are reasonable. It is just that Washington does not view it this way.

Translated by Conchita Delgado

Why A Book About Hugo Chavez Touched A Nerve at The New York Times

by Nikolas Kozloff

Summing Up: The Times’ Belief System

Lowenstein’s discrediting of Chavez is not surprising in light of the overall economic philosophy at the Times. For years, the paper has been touting the so-called virtues of free trade and hemispheric integration, tendencies which Chavez has successfully challenged through anti-poverty programs and promotion of a regional initiative called Bolivarian Alternative of The Americas (known by its Spanish acronym ALBA). Chavez’s own trade initiative is a challenge to Washington, which has long pushed its own corporately friendly FTAA or Free Trade Area of the Americas.

The issue of the Times’ historic support for free trade was analyzed in a thorough 2001 report by the media watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR). Though the Times reported on the contentious FTAA summit at Quebec in 2001 which drew thousands of anti-globalization protesters, the paper “tended to focus more on the politicking and ‘challenges’ that Bush must navigate to seal the deal than on the particulars of what might happen if he succeeds.”

As I point out in my book, Chavez was critical of the FTAA in Quebec, and his antipathy towards the agreement only increased with time. In this sense Chavez shared some common ground with anti-globalization protesters, who were also vilified by the Times. According to FAIR, Times columnists Thomas Friedman and Paul Krugman led the charge in seeking to discredit FTAA critics and the anti-globalization movement. Friedman in fact went as far to say that protesters were “choking the only route out of poverty for the world's poor."

Krugman agreed with Friedman, remarking that "many of the people inside that chain-link fence [hemispheric politicians supporting the FTAA] are sincerely trying to help the world's poor. And the people outside the fence, whatever their intentions, are doing their best to make the poor even poorer."

In a telling aside, FAIR remarked: “Perhaps the most startling thing about these editorials was their failure to acknowledge that the ‘world's poor’ have in fact themselves been taking to the streets to protest globalization.”

Fast forward now from 2001 to 2006, and it’s not surprising that the Times would carry on the torch and seek to criticize Chavez. The fact that the Venezuelan leader has been able to successfully resist some of the tenets of “neo-liberal” economics, in line with the thrust of the earlier anti-globalization movement, is disagreeable to the paper of record.

Chavez will most certainly win the December 2006 presidential election. The question is now just a matter of how wide the margin shall be. George Bush and whomever his successor may be will almost certainly try to further destabilize Venezuela in future.

In light of Lowenstein’s piece, it seems likely that the mainstream media will take its cue from the Times, over generalizing and misrepresenting the truth on Venezuela until the public starts to become obsessed with Hugo Chavez.

Nikolas Kozloff is the author of the recently released Hugo Chavez: Oil, Politics, and The Challenge To The U.S. (St. Martin’s Press)
*
Why A Book About Hugo Chavez Touched A Nerve at The New York Times

Cuba: Peaceful Nuke Energy Is A Right

United Nations
Oct 30

Cuba stated Monday that all the countries in the world have the right to the pacific use of nuclear energy, and rejected all attempts on the margin of the International Atomic Energy Agency to certify those programs in some countries.

"IAEA is the only competent entity that can certify fulfilment of the obligations under the respective agreements for security of the IAEA member countries," declared Cuban Ambassador to the UN Rodrigo Malmierca.

Malmierca spoke before the 61st UN General Assembly s debate of a report presented by IAEA General Director Mohamed El-Baradei.

This report noted a growing expectation in relation to the future role of nuclear energy, particularly among many developing countries, because of its productivity, economic advantage, and less damage to the environment.

Official UN statistics note 16 of the 28 new reactors now being built in the world are in underdeveloped countries.

Stating that nuclear power should not be a monopoly, Malmierca called it unacceptable that some countries are attempting to increase the relevance of the IAEA s verifying role instead of its encouragement of nuclear technology.

The head of the Cuban diplomatic mission descried that, although the Cold War was proclaimed at an end, there exists some 32 thousand nuclear weapons in the world, 12,300 of them ready to be used immediately.

"The only secure and effective way to stop proliferation of these weapons of mass destruction is to eliminate all of them," he said and added that Cuba reaffirms the position of the Non-Aligned Movement that disarmament is of highest priority in the world.

October 30, 2006

Victory in Oaxaca!

[MANY THANKS TO TONI FOR THIS NEWS!]

Mexico's Lower House of Congress has called on Ulises Ruiz to step
down from office.

The Congress Chamber of Deputies voted overwhelmingly in favor of a
motion calling on Ruiz to step down.

PRI members of the Chamber of Deputies failed to support Ruiz, with
most abstaining and few voting against the motion.

At this very moment, confrontations between Riot Police and
Protestors still continue in the streets of Oaxaca.

A Call from the Zapatistas: Oaxaca Is Not Alone

Shut-Down of Roads, Highways and the Media on November 1; General Strike Called for November 20

By the Sixth Commission of the EZLN
The Other Mexico

October 30, 2006

Message from the
CLANDESTINE REVOLUTIONARY INDIGENOUS COMMITTEE-GENERAL COMMAND
of the
ZAPATISTA ARMY OF NATIONAL LIBERATION
MEXICO.

October 30, 2006.

To the people of Mexico:
To the people of the world:
To the Other Campaign in Mexico and the other side of the Rio Grande:
To the entire Sixth International:

Compañeros and compañeras:
Brothers and sisters:

It is now known publicly that yesterday, 29th of October 2006, Vicente Fox’s federal forces attacked the people of Oaxaca and its most legitimate representative, the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO).

Today, the federal troops have assassinated at least 3 people, among them a minor, leaving dozens of wounded, including many women from Oaxaca. Dozens of detainees were illegally transported to military prisons. All this comes in addition to the existing total of deaths, detainees and missing persons since the beginning of the mobilization demanding that Ulises Ruiz step down as Oaxaca’s governor.

The sole objective of the federal attack is to maintain Ulises Ruiz in power and to destroy the popular grassroots organization of the people of Oaxaca.

Oaxaca’s people are resisting. Not one single honest person can remain quiet and unmoved while the entire society, of which the majority are indigenous, is murdered, beaten and jailed.

We, the Zapatistas, will not be silent; we will mobilize to support our brothers, sisters and comrades in Oaxaca.

The EZLN’s Sixth Commission has already consulted the Zapatista leadership and the following has been decided:

First: During whole day of November 1, 2006, the major and minor roads that cross Zapatistas territories in the southwestern state of Chiapas will be closed.

Consequently, we ask that everyone avoid traveling by these roads in Chiapas on this day and that one make the necessary arrangements in order to do so.

Second: through the Sixth Commission, the EZLN has begun making contact and consulting other political and social organizations, groups, collectives and individuals in the Other Campaign, in order to coordinate joint solidarity actions across Mexico, leading to a nationwide shut-down on the 20th of November, 2006.

Third: the EZLN calls out to the Other Campaign in Mexico and north of the Rio Grande, so that these November 1st mobilizations happen wherever possible, completely, partially, at intervals or symbolically shutting down the major artery roads, streets, toll booths, stations, airports and commercial media.

Fourth: The central message that the Zapatistas send and will continue sending is that the people of Oaxaca are not alone: They are not alone!

Ulises Ruiz out of Oaxaca!

Immediate withdrawal of the occupying federal forces from Oaxaca!

Immediate and unconditional freedom for all detainees!

Cancel all arrest warrants!

Punish the murderers!

Justice!
Freedom!
Democracy!

From the North of Mexico.
For the Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee-General Command of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation.
For the EZLN Sixth Commission.

Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos
Mexico, October, 2006.

Translation: Radio Pacheco

APPO denounces rebellion against the police

“Nos desvinculamos de los actos vandálicos que se están haciendo en nombre de la APPO” - César Maeto, vocero de la coordinación provisional de la Asamblea Popular de los Pueblos de Oaxaca

"We disavow the acts of vandalism that are being made in the name of APPO" - César Maeto, spokesperson of the provisional coordination committee of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca

(El Universal, Oct. 29, 2006)

After calling for peaceful resistance to yesterday's violent invasion of Oaxaca City by the Mexican federal police, after calling for the people of the city to not fight against the police (describing such actions as "provocations", as if the police were not the people doing the "provoking"), the leadership of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO in Spanish) denounced acts of "vandalism" (one wonders what they refer to specifically, the burning of police vehicles or the puncturing of their tires?), according to the corporate media webpage El Universal. In one of the APPO leadership's statements, posted on the internet, they claimed that the violent resistance of many people to the police was the work of police infiltrators who are trying to justify the cops' violence against the people (as if the cops needed a justification, as if the violent resistance of the people against the the police raid in June hadn't given life to the current rebellion). ( The above mentioned statement by APPO can be found here: http://codepappo.wordpress.com/2006/10/29/urgente-la-pfp-en-oaxaca )

From June on, rebels in Oaxaca City have used all manner of simple weapons to resist the police. When the federal police invaded yesterday, rebels used slings and slingshots, Molotov firebombs and rocks against the police. This is not a peaceful rebellion. This rebellion is not just APPO or its representatives.

Many "ordinary" people, without connections to the APPO, are in resistace in the streets, with violence, with simple weapons and burning barricades. Calling the rebellion peaceful does not make it so. The violent rebellion of the oppressed is justified by the violent and systematic oppression carried out by the ruling class and their minions.

As the Oaxacan revolutionary anarchist Ricardo Flores Magón said: "Preaching peace is a crime". Peace allows the ruling class to preserve their loot. The President of Mexico declares that there is now peace in the center of Oaxaca City (now that the police have taken it by force, causing more injuries and death). There is peace in the graveyard.

The following reports by James Daria in part describe the rebellious people of Oaxaca acting independently from APPO:

( Chronicle of the Battle of Oaxaca: Stage Three, Day One
http://narconews.com/Issue43/article2259.html )

( Two Days in the Life of Oaxaca's Revolution
http://narconews.com/Issue42/article2021.html )

Solidarity with the rebellion of the oppressed, not with those who represent and attempt to control the rebellion!

Window Smashed at Mexican Consulate in Sacramento

Democracy Now Oaxaca & Brad Will

Mexican Federal Police Invade...But the APPO Still Controls The Heart Of Oaxaca

By Gregory Berger,
Posted on Mon Oct 30th, 2006 at 01:23:03 AM EST

After a full days assault, the thousands of Mexican Federal Police that invaded Oaxaca City today have now occupied the town square and other key parts of the city. But there are many this morning that maintain that the fight is far from over.

At first glance, the Federal Government delivered a victory to the State Government of Oaxaca in its attempt to return control of the State Capital to Governor Ulises Ruiz. Armored tanks slammed through the APPO's barricades and brushed aside the women and children on the streets who had lined up to ask them not to enter their city. At least 50 people have been arrested, but the real number is feared to be much higher. Illegal search and seizures are occurring throughout the city, where Federal police and intelligence agents are hunting for the leadership of the Peoples' Popular Assembly of Oaxaca. (APPO) And, in outrageous coincidence evoking memories of Alexis Benhumea's murder in the town of San Salvador Atenco in May, at least one person is confirmed dead, a 15 year old boy slammed by a tear canister launched by the Federal Preventative Police (PFP).

But most observers on the ground told this correspondent last night that the fight is far from over; Radio Universidad, the voice of the APPO, is back on the air. Three marches are planned for today in the city of Oaxaca. The APPO remains present on every city block in every corner of the city. And despite the government's absurd claim that teachers will be back in classrooms today, members of section 22 of the teachers union made it clear that despite previous announcements, teachers will remain on strike. In fact, teachers from the democratic wing of the teachers’ movements in several states, including Guerrero, Michoacán, Tlaxcala, Morelos, Zacatecas, Oaxaca, Mexico City, and beyond, have vowed to walk out of classes as well. A mega march is planned in Mexico City to insist on the immediate withdrawal of the PFP.

"This is not a defeat." Insisted a host of Radio Universidad. "There are still more of us. They can't win unless they are prepared to put thousands upon thousands of us in jail, or turn the schools into jails. Or perhaps even turn the stadiums into jails, like Pinochet did."

Radio Universidad is currently on air giving instructions to citizens on how to engage in continued resistance.

Prior to yesterday's invasion, many people claimed that a Federal incursion into Oaxaca would not only fail to squash the movement, but would in fact strengthen it. Today, there are many signs that their predictions may well come true. Allies of the APPO took control of the government radio station yesterday in Guelatao, the small town in the mountains two hours from Oaxaca where Benito Juarez was born. From the word on the street, one suspects that today we will learn of many such small victories.

Photos: Oaxaca Being Taken by Police

Oaxaca has been stormed by the federal police. Here are photos from Sunday, Oct 29.



October 29, 2006

The Assassination of Brad Will and the White Owl of Oaxaca

By John Dickie
Special to The Narco News Bulletin

October 29, 2006

A Report from Oaxaca by the British Journalist Who the Radio Declared Dead for an Hour After Brad Was Gunned Down

During the course of our lives, transcendental moments come along, and we are forced to sit up and take notice. Everybody has their moments. We all react differently.

It is difficult to figure out how to begin retelling the story of any one of those moments. Presumably, it is up to each person to do their best to convey the transcendence felt, and for each listener to absorb it as their own.

In this instance, all I can do is begin by telling you that, yesterday, for around a hundred minutes, I was dead.

* * *


Illustration: D.R. 2001 Fly
Sometime between five and five-thirty in the afternoon, yesterday, Friday, October 27, in broad daylight, a White Owl circled above our house. My friend Jonathan watched it from the balcony. I never saw it. Hovering completely still, he said, 50 feet above his head, it had been staring straight at him for several minutes. Yet in the split-second it took him to come into the house, tell me to come out and see it, and step back outside, the White Owl had disappeared. Jonathan was aghast. He felt I wasn’t meant to see it.

As we considered the meaning of it all, my cell-phone rang. It was my friend Diablo, the crime reporter. In other words – I later realized – the Devil was calling me up to remind me of my fate. He immediately asked if I was okay. A foreign journalist had been shot in the city center. Said he thought the guy’s name was Andrés. I didn’t know anyone by that name. “Call Victor,” said Diablo, “he’s down at the scene.”

So I called Victor. It was a bad line. In bad English, he told me the guy’s name was Bradley. Bradley Roland Will. Bullet in the chest. Died on his way to hospital. Worked for Indymedia. Only Jonathan standing next to me could describe my expression when I heard the news. Bradley. It was Bradley. Brad! Brad, who I had met the week before when we coincided at a apprehension of a group of drunken youths who had assaulted a young couple. We had both been filming. It was the first time I had met a foreign journalist since I started filming the uprising in Oaxaca. Of course, we spoke, exchanged details, shared a few jokes, agreed to swap footage, and I set him up with a few people who could suggest where he could film. Real nice guy; a real, nice, honest guy doing his best to record events in this fucked-up situation with the hope of a grabbing few crumbs of attention from the world’s news consumers. Brad, you called me the morning of Friday, October 27, your last day on earth, to ask where you could rent a motorbike. Now, you’re gone. You’re the first foreign casualty since the region was plunged into this living hell. The thirteenth casualty in all. And, sadly, probably the most important of all.

Naturally, my first thought was, “it could have been me.” And, for a while, it was me.

I tell Victor to wait for me at the office, then grab a small digital camera, jump on the bike and head straight down to the scene. As the sun went down, the world grew dark.

I decide to detour to the incident, but it was very hard to get through. The barricades were being reinforced. Trucks had unloaded tons of earth to block the streets at strategic points. I spoke to some APPO people (News-speak: “leftist protesters”; State prosecutor: “urban guerrilla terrorists”), the same people who had tried to keep Brad from passing out after he got shot and had bundled him into the back of a VW bug to take him to a private hospital (he died en route), the same people who set up barricades to protect themselves and their neighborhoods from criminals and paramilitary hitmen who in recent weeks have restarted their drive-by shooting campaign.


D.R. 2006 Latuff
What you will not be told by most media, especially in Mexico, is that the three hitmen that attacked the barricade, where Brad and other journalists were, have been identified as local policemen. They wielded AR-15 rifles and various pistols and fired indiscriminately into the crowd. Brad was probably not targeted (even though state radio (Radio Ciudadania: 99.1 FM – pirate government radio broadcasting from unknown location) is saying Brad “was an armed terrorist, and there is more to this than meets the eye” and “Indymedia is a branch of the APPO”), but he was the unlucky one, hit full in the chest, right in the solar plexus, by a 9mm wide pellet of steel traveling at around 1000 meters per second.

What you probably won’t hear either is that the APPO people do not carry any firearms. Their only weapons are rocks, clubs, molotov cocktails, and the occasional home-made fireworks mortar. To my knowledge, in five months of protests, they haven’t fired a single shot from a firearm. All the casualties have been on the side of the ‘protesters,’ either APPO or teachers. It may well be true that the APPO does have an array of firearms, but have taken a brave political decision not to use them.

Dropping a few names, the APPO lets me through the barricades and I arrive at the neighborhood of El Bajio where Victor was waiting for me. I know a lot of people in the area. A group of local journalists have a dingy office here, in a concrete block that stinks of urine. A police blotter, Noti Roja, run by crime news godfather El Chiricuto, is based upstairs. And, next door, Diablo has a bare spare room with a mattress where I sometimes stay the night. I often come here to hang out, get information, check out any new footage and photos, and have a beer. Chiricuto, Victor, Bermudez, Teo, Zurco, Diablo, Chavez: I have known them all for about three years. And, I’m a tall white guy with a rat-tail, so the whole neighborhood knows me, even if I’ve never spoken to some of them.

When I turn up, at around 7:OOpm, there are about 20 people gathered in the street. Some are crying. As I pull up on the motorbike, I call out to Chiricuto. Seeing me, his face drops. He looks angry. “Yon! Is that you, Yon?!” The others turn to look at me, aghast. I realize they are all drunk. But they look like they have all seen a ghost. In fact, they are staring straight at one. “What do you mean?” I ask. “Fuckin’ Yon, get off the bike!”

I still don’t get it. As I turn off the engine and dismount, Chiricuto approaches slowly. He pinches my arm. “Yon!” he exclaims, wrapping his arms around me.

Teo cries out, totally wasted: “I fuckin’ told you! I told you so! Yon, only I really believed!”

Chiricuto: “Yon, you were dead! We all thought you were dead!” Everybody on the street gathers around, frantically hugging me. Chiricuto is overwhelmed. “My son! My son! He is still alive!” He pulls out the camera and starts clicking away. Everybody wants a picture with the dead guy. People start flooding out of their houses.

Teo: “They said your name on the radio! They said you had been shot and killed! Zurco said he saw your body in the back of a VW bug! You were foaming at the mouth! He has been crying ever since. You need to go and see them! (Referring to the people at the barricade, three blocks away where I had been filming). They all think you are dead.”

Chiricuto comes back with a 5-litre plastic tub of mezcal. “This is for you, you have to pour everyone a drink. It is mezcal for the Dead.” As I start to pour out little shots for everybody, he tells me he had been crying. “There could be ten dead… but not Yon. If Yon goes down, I swear the governor is next.” The wiry little Chiricuto, talking like a revolutionary tiger. I spill a drop of mezcal on the floor before downing the shot, in recognition of my fate. Between crying out to people to come out onto the street, spreading the news and taking photos of us all, Chiricuto goes on: “We were about to go and pick you up from the morgue and were going to hold a wake for you… all of us here… in the centre of the graveyard over there.” We were standing a block from the gates of the city cemetery; the street here is called Caminito al Cielo: “Little path to the sky.”


John Dickie and friends after learning he had not been killed
Photo: D.R. 2006 John Dickie
I had arrived at my own wake. Tears welled up and rolled down my cheek. For them, my one hundred-minute flatline was over.

I celebrated my own resurrection with them for about half an hour. I explained to them that the guy who had been killed was a friend of mine and that I had to take care of a few things. I had a lot on my mind: I had to contact Zurco; I had to find Brad’s body – because I figured I might be the one to identify him – which also meant going to the city morgue – no easy task; I had to contact the embassy – both the US embassy for Brad, and the UK embassy for me. What if my name had gone out over the radio, and the embassy got wind of it and tried to notify my parents? I don’t even want to think about that possibility… But, I had no phone numbers. What I did have with me was that minor miracle called a cell-phone. I fished it out and flicked through the contacts list.

First, I decided to call Pati, a wonderful young girl who stoically manned the roadblock that Zurco was in charge of. Her friend Olga picked up, who I also knew. As soon as I said “it’s me, John”, she flipped out. All she could say was “Yon? is that you, Yon? Yon, is that really you?!” She must have said it twenty times, until all I could do was shout: “Olga, it’s me! It’s me! Calm down! I’m on my way over there!”

I jumped on the bike and headed to the roadblock, which was 300 yards away. As I approached, I noticed the scene felt much more sinister than on previous nights. This time they had assembled around a dozen public buses to block off the ten streets that make up this major intersection. Fires raged all around: burning tires, sofas, telegraph poles. All electric lights were off. I turned off the lights on the bike as I drew closer, a standard practice. They flashed a huge floodlight in my face, shouting, “No hay paso! Date la vuelta!” (“There is no way through, turn around!”).

“It’s me, John!” I shouted back.

“Yon?! Is that you, Yon?!” Olga and Pati screamed like little girls and rushed over to me, hugging and kissing me. “Thank God you are ok! My mum hasn’t stopped crying! We heard on the radio that you had been shot and killed! Zurco said he saw your body in a car!” The rest of the barricade crew ran over. There must have been a hundred people circled around me. They hugged me and shook my hand and patted me on the back. One old lady wouldn’t let go of my arm. The big man Zurco came over and crushed me with a big hug. His wife was in tears. I was overwhelmed. All I could say was, “Gracias, gracias, I’m fine, I’m fine. I’ve been at home. It was a friend who was killed, not me. I knew him a bit.” They asked me about Brad and I told them what I knew. They thought about his family and hoped that the USA would now apply pressure on the Mexican government to resolve the situation here. “Now, the governor really has to go,” said some. And, today, Saturday, federal forces are again gathering at the airport military base, arriving in six massive troop transport planes.

Wrenching myself away, apologizing and saying I had to take care of some things for Brad, I walked to the end of the block and pulled my phone out again. First, I called Daniela at the Anglo-Mexican foundation in Mexico City, who I knew had close ties to the British embassy. “Just tell them that if they hear that I’m dead, it’s not true.” She also gave me a US embassy emergency number, which I dialed after hanging up.

Some embassy operator guy answered. “My name is John Dickie, I am a British journalist in Oaxaca and I’m calling because an American journalist was just shot and killed here.” The guy’s tone of voice immediately pissed me off.

“Who do you work for?”
“What does it matter who I work for? ITN, for fuck’s sake.”
“So, who do you want to talk to?”
“You tell me, man! Whoever the fuck you think I should talk to about a dead American journalist!”

Robert Zimmerman, the deputy head of the press office, came on the line. He was more helpful. I told him the story and gave him Brad’s full name. They had not received word yet.

“There is no authority in Oaxaca right now,” I said, “so you probably won’t hear anything. I am sending you the word.” He was skeptical because I hadn’t seen the body. Fair point. But I had spoken to witnesses and had seen the photos already.

“I’m on the way to the morgue. Call me in half an hour.”


Vigil for Brad Will at the Mexican Consulate in NYC
Photo: D.R. 2006 Paul DiRienzos and Joan Moossy
Then I called the US consul in Oaxaca – an aloof prick – and left a message. Then I called another friend who knew Brad, to accompany me to the morgue. Victor and Bermudez, two local journalist friends, also came. We left the roadblock in a convoy of motorcycles. This wasn’t too clever considering paramilitary hitmen ride around on motorbikes, so the APPO is very wary of groups of bikers. Plus, we were going to have to negotiate our way through the city center. Victor led us along a safe route. We did not see a single car.

Arriving at the morgue, where I know some of the staff, we went over to greet the head forensic doctor – they call him Dr. Muerte. He let us in to see Brad; I won’t describe the operating theater. Once inside, standing next to the cold stone slab, which I had so often filmed for a documentary the year before, I was now faced with a body I had known in life; every crime journalist’s worst nightmare. I nodded gently. It was, indeed, Bradley Roland Will. His brown eyes were wide open, staring straight through me, into infinity. His chest was sown up, but the bullet hole was obvious. I didn’t linger. Dr. Death put his arm around my shoulder and escorted me outside, where he showed me the two 9mm bullet tips he had removed from Brad’s chest. I wondered why he had them in the pocket of his white coat.

Outside, Brad’s roomates, an Indymedia colleague, a Spanish photographer, and a Human Rights worker, were gathered. We all spoke for a while. They had been with Brad at the time. A pick-up truck had burst through a barricade and several men had opened fire on the “protesters.” Brad had been at the front of the pack, hit from around 30 metres away. They had also been fired on from rooftops. The gunmen have since been identified from press photographs and video stills as local police, and have supposedly been handed over to the ‘authorities.’ The shooters hadn’t covered their faces; in Oaxaca, when you are the law, impunity is a sport.

The morgue people told us they could not do an official identification without Brad’s passport and the consul present. We decided his roommate would take care of it in the morning.

At around midnight, we rode again through the night streets, back to the barricade. I stayed up for another couple of hours at the roadblock before heading down the street to Diablo’s spare room. Before going to bed, Chiricuto and I watched the news. Televisa showed uncut footage of the shootings and of Brad’s death. It was gruesome to watch. But the most gruesome part was listening to the presenter saying the shots were fired by “neighbors” who are tired of the conflict and who have turned against the APPO. In Mexico, the extent of political influence is unbounded.

Sixteen hours after the White Owl appeared, I stood on the balcony with Jonathan, and we recalled a local saying:

“Cuando la lechuza vuela, El indio muere.”

“When the White Owl flies, the Indian dies.”

The White Owl had appeared at exactly the time of Brad’s death. No doubt we would never see it again. Because there was no White Owl, and now there is one less Indian in the world of the living.


Vigil for Brad Will at the Mexican Consulate in NYC
Photo: D.R. 2006 Paul DiRienzos and Joan Moossy
As for Brad and me, our destinies divided. I stayed here. He was called back.

At least it looks like Bradley Roland Will’s death may help bring an end to this conflict, because, after five months of complete apathy, the federal government looks like it has been moved to act, finally sending in the federal police to restore public security. Did George W. have a quiet word with Fox? Probably. And for helping set off this chain of events, Brad and his family can be proud. However, whether a sudden federal incursion will solve the problem remains to be seen. Tomorrow we might know. The APPO won’t move until the governor is removed from office. But the everyday folk of Oaxaca deserve to at least be allowed to live in a secure environment, regardless of their allegiance. What is certain is that the rotten apple that is local government culture in southern Mexico needs to be ripped clean from its throat. It will doubtlessly take several generations.

Finally, the question has to be asked: does a gringo always have to die for the world to act?

Statement Regarding the Events of October 27th, 2006 in Oaxaca

Civil society organizations, human rights centers, community authorities, and citizen participants in the national meeting for follow-up of the recommendations of the United Nations Special Rapportuer for Indigenous Peoples held in Mexico City the 27th and 28th of October, 2006 declare the following with respect to the current situation in Oaxaca, Mexico:

• Acts that took place yesterday in Oaxaca revealed the grave situation for human rights, the suspension of constitutional guarantees and the vulnerability of citizens. At this time there are 4 confirmed deaths as well as a numerous injuries (approximately 30).

• The non-governance in the state of Oaxaca is more evident today than ever. The government response in this case thus far has been repression and systematic violation of human rights under the pretext of enforcement of rule of law, with the use of public force on all three levels, local, state and federal.

• The situation in Oaxaca is a historic problem of accumulated human rights violations against the population. The demands of social organizations, unions, municipalities and non-government organizations have been repressed throughout the last two administrations of state and federal government. The violent and repressive action against the teachers union and the attempted expulsion on June 14th of this year, mobilized the society behind one clear demand: the dismissal from office of Ulises Ruiz Ortiz, the governor of Oaxaca. This situation unleashed unprecedented repression expressed in illegal detentions of leaders, armed attacks against peaceful protests, criminalization of social movements, and ultimately, the presence of the armed forces in Oaxacan territory.

Given the situation:

FIRST: We hold the Governor ULISES RUIZ and his CABINET directly responsible for the assassinations and violent acts that occurred yesterday the 27th of October and the aggressions leading to these events since the 14th of June of this year. This is based on the lack of capacity to govern and bring a solution to the conflict, and the irresponsible manor with which Governor ULISES RUIZ continues to grip his power, refusing to resign or solicit formal permission to be relieved of his duties, as a signal of political civility for the distension of the conflict. On the contrary he has initiated systematic repression through the use of state-sponsored mercenary groups and paramilitaries.

SECOND: We also hold responsible the government of Vicente Fox for his omission in exercising his legal faculties and for not recognizing a political and social conflict that goes beyond the characterization of local and of labor union demands. The government of Vicente Fox also refused to take into their own hands an open and pluralistic dialogue process that would leave aside interests of political parties and the politically powerful in Mexico. His responsibility is further increased by the fact that early on in the conflict he had resources to meet initial demands of the teachers union and chose not to.

The Secretary of the Interior is equally responsible for the grave situation in Oaxaca for his tepidness and double discourse which have prolonged the solution with nonviable and confusing proposals not based on consensus. This actions play into the marriage between Ulises Ruiz and the political party Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), due to the proximity of the arrival to power of next President of Mexico, Felipe Calderon.

THIRD: We hold responsible the Senate of the Republic of Mexico. Prioritizing their interests for power and interests of the political parties, the Senators backed the state powers in Oaxaca, despite the fact that they themselves recognized an absence of authority. This decision lead to increased violence in the state of Oaxaca by state-sponsored armed groups.

Based on the above:

1. We demand that Ulises Ruiz leave office immediately as a measure for the distension of the conflict, which would allow for the beginning of a profound and integrated social process of changes in the state of Oaxaca.

2. We reject the use of public force as a path for solutions, as it in no way guarantees the reestablishment of the rule of law.

3. We demand the implementation of a plan for the security of the people and reactivation of the economy that would allow citizens to return to their activities.

4. We make and URGENT APPEAL to international and national human rights organizations to
be present in the vigilance, observation, documentation, monitoring and denouncement of human rights violations in this difficult moment for Oaxaca, most importantly that their presence help stop the lose of human lives and repression of the social movement.

5. We call on society to get involved, be informed regarding the developing events happening in Oaxaca and that they express their solidarity.

6. We call on the media to fulfill its commitment to the truth, impartiality, and to publish in a responsible manor this overall situation.

7. We inform that this group of organizations will meet today with the representative of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Mexico and with the United Nations Special Rapportuer for Indigenous Peoples to express our concern and urge them to take immediate measures regarding the acts that have occurred in Oaxaca.

Finally we express our desire that Oaxaca be a source of hope for all inhabitants of Mexico.

Memories of B


I met B in 1998 at the treesit at Fall Creek. A bunch of us had decided to make a stand defending a rare stand of low-elevation old-growth forest just southeast of Eugene. The first treesit was named Happy, and my friend Free was the first treesitter there. (Free is now serving a 23-year sentence at Oregon State Penitentiary). The second treesit to go up was Comfrey, a helicopter cargo net dangling 200 feet up in the canopy of the giant Doug firs and hemlocks in Unit 26. B was the next semi-permanent resident, nestled into that big hammock in the sky.

The first time I'd ever climbed into an actual sit (I'd climbed trees out there before any treesits were installed), it took me 45 huffing puffing minutes to get up there. When I reached the net, a furry bespectacled face reached over the edge to haul me in. "I'm B... welcome to Comfrey." "You mean "Bee" as in Bumble?" "Nope, just "B". I climbed in and took in my surroundings. The forest canopy is like twilight all day, with rare specks of sunshine filtering through the thick evergreen needles. A grey jay perched two feet away on the edge of the net and squawked for a meal. "They're the thieves of this forest... gotta keep your food sealed up tight," B told me. He gave me the Treesitting 101 intensive... how to connect your safety line, how to use the shit bucket without unhooking your safety, how to transfer food and cargo on the pulley lines to the other sits. His energy was frenetic and determined... he kept ambling around the net and small "bathroom" platform adjusting lines and securing supplies with near-manic intensity. He was rail thin, one of those skinny, energetic people that eat all day to maintain a metabolism that resents such things as quiet and sleep. He offered to teach me how to venture out on the rope walkways connecting the sits, but I declined, not sure if I was ready to dangle on ropes without even the illusory safety of a solid tree to make me feel a sense of structure in all that green-tinged void. I remember accepting a peanut butter sandwich from his grungy treesap covered hand while he told me he'd come from New York City where he'd been working with Steal This Radio on the Lower East Side.

B was killed... murdered... yesterday in Oaxaca, Mexico while covering the story of paramilitaries sent in to break up the blockade and strike. He'd been working with NYC Indymedia to provide the coverage of the brewing intensity and violence there that the mainstream US press had steadfastly ignored. He was shot in the chest as he was filming the PRIistas firing at the crowd.

The last time I saw him was about 4 years ago. He and his girlfriend showed up at our house, which was a frequent stop on the activist circuit. I remember it had been a summer of near-constant road weary travelers needing a place to crash between here and there, and B and his partner pushed the limits of our hospitality camped out in our dining room for two weeks. I can't remember what they were working on, where they were going next... only that they were in constant motion... travel gear strewn all over the place, bags of gorp spilling out on the table, on the phone hours and hours of the day. They tried to hop out on a train, and showed back up that evening, his partner in a leg brace having missed the deck on the fly.

The sad but poetic irony of B's murder is that his goal of shining a spotlight on the atrocities in Oaxaca are now being covered in the mainstream media. It often takes the death of a white American acitivist for these things to happen. This irony would not be lost on B, who I can imagine saying something like, "Oh, so NOW you wanna pay attention? Fuckers."

There has been a tragic streak in the lives of many who have done a stint at the Fall Creek treesit. We call it "The Fall Creek Curse", and it is not a stretch to say the curse is real. Since the demise of the active campaign, we have lost a dozen or so people to various dramatic exits... mostly suicides. Leaps from bridges and buildings, hangings and hari-kari, suicide by train... and then the less-than-autonomous methods like rape and murder, falls from trees, and now B... suicide? or murder? Some would say B's crazy wild risky streak was near suicidal. Wherever shit was going down, B was in the middle of it.

And now, those of us who knew him in that context are scattered to the winds. I'm sure there will be a memorial for him in the city. I plan to go out to Fall Creek and sit under Comfrey and Grover, on the ground where my mother's ashes are scattered, and do my remembering there.

Brazilian president way ahead

By LARRY ROHTER
New York Times
RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL

Da Silva is not affected by scandal going into runoff

Rebuked at the polls four weeks ago because of voter irritation with a corruption scandal and his unwillingness to answer questions about it, Brazil's president, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, heads into a runoff vote today with a lead that every poll suggests is insurmountable.

A win would guarantee him another four years in office.

A final round of public opinion surveys published Friday shows da Silva, a former factory worker and labor leader, defeating his opponent, Geraldo Alckmin of the Brazilian Social Democratic Party, by at least 60 percent to 40 percent. More than 125 million Brazilians are registered for the runoff vote, which is required because da Silva fell just short of a majority in the first round of balloting Oct. 1.

"Everything indicates that this is going to be a resounding, unquestionable victory for Lula, despite all the scandals," said Jairo Nicolau, a political science professor at Candido Mendes University, using da Silva's nickname. Nicolau said that if the polls are right, da Silva will duplicate the landslide victory that carried him into office in 2002.

Alckmin, a 53-year-old physician and former governor of Sao Paulo, Brazil's richest and most populous state, was able to force a second round largely because of a late-breaking political scandal. In mid-September, the police apprehended operatives of da Silva's left-wing Workers Party as they were about to pay $792,000 in cash for a dossier they apparently hoped would incriminate Alckmin's camp in a notorious corruption scheme.

Da Silva has denied any involvement in the skulduggery, which forced the resignation of his campaign manager.

Da Silva has been able to pull away from Alckmin, in part, by labeling him a one-note candidate who spoke more of corruption than of his own plans.

October 28, 2006

Mexico's Fox Gambles on a Crackdown

by TIM PADGETT WITH DOLLY MASCAREÑAS/MEXICO CITY

Analysis: The Federal government sends in troops to quell the turmoil in Oaxaca. But with tensions at an all-time high following summer's contested election, that's a risky move

Mexico's months-long political crisis took a precarious turn Saturday when President Vicente Fox sent special federal forces into the impoverished and violence-torn southern state of Oaxaca, after an American journalist and a local teacher were killed there on Friday.

As Federal paramilitary police were flown into Oaxaca City, the state's capital, Mexicans worried over whether Fox's action would restore calm or simply fuel the social polarization exacerbated by last summer's hotly contested presidential election. "We've been held hostage here by radical groups," Freddy Alcantar, a Oaxaca hotelier told TIME by phone Saturday morning. "Finally the President is imposing the rule of law." But a protester who called himself only Florentino, representing the leftist Popular Assemby of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO), told TIME that until Governor Ulises Ruiz resigns, he and other militants — who are believed by many to have the backing of a small-scale Oaxaca guerrilla force from the 1990s that reappeared in the summer — would "reinforce our barricades and call in help from the mountains, valleys and coasts."

The American, Brad Will, 36, a journalist with the New York-based Indymedia, was shot in the abdomen in a rough neighborhood of Oaxaca City. Will had been filming an armed clash between protesters and pro-government men tearing down street barricades. In a statement, U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Tony Garza said, "Mr. Will's senseless death, of course, underscores the critical need for a return to lawfulness and order in Oaxaca." But he also warned both sides in the Oaxaca violence that "an attack on one journalist is an attack on all who believe that freedom of the press lies at the heart of any civilized society."

Fox, who leaves office on December 1, had hoped to avoid intervening in Oaxaca, in line with his preference for restraining the central government's traditionally heavy-handed control of Mexico's states. He was also mindful of the fact that ever since the 1968 Tlatelolco massacre in Mexico City — when federal troops killed hundreds of pro-democracy demonstrators — sending in the troops touches a raw nerve in Mexico.

Ruiz — of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) ousted by Fox six years ago, although both allied with Fox's party against the challenge of the leftist Democratic Revolution Party (PRD) — gave no indication Saturday whether he would stay put in office now that Fox has exerted control in the state. Ruiz's troubles began when Oaxaca's poorly paid teachers went on strike last June, accusing Ruiz of authoritarian rule and neglect of the poor and indigenous citizens. Their walkout became more strident and violent as more radical forces — including the APPO — joined in to call attention to Mexico's sharp and growing social divide between haves and have-nots. (Mexico has a dozen billionaires, but about half of its population lives in poverty.) By summer's end, after almost 10 people had been killed, Oaxaca's celebrated colonial downtown was a graffiti-smeared grid of smoldering barricades.

The Oaxaca conflict was also fueled by the crisis over the July presidential election, in which conservative Felipe Calderon of Fox's National Action Party (PAN) defeated the PRD's Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador by less than 1% of the vote. Lopez Obrador cried fraud, and tens of thousands of his backers occupied Mexico City's main plaza and thoroughfare for months in protest. But in recent weeks the Mexico City demonstrations had died down, and last week even the Oaxaca teachers seemed ready to go back to work.

But groups such as the APPO stuck to their insistence that Ruiz resign and call new elections, which could see a PRD candidate elected. Their continued defiance, according to witnesses, brought pro-Ruiz thugs into the streets on Friday and resulted in the shootouts that killed Will and a Oaxaca teacher and injured four other people.

Civic leaders like Alcantar hope that the Federal forces can tamp down the violence and restore peaceful dialogue. "We have to get our institutions working together again for real economic development and real jobs," Alcantar conceded, reflecting on the root causes of the conflict. As Calderon gets set to take office December 1, that's the challenge not only for Oaxaca, but for all of Mexico.

Federal Police Authorized to Enter Oaxaca

By Nancy Davies, Commentary from Oaxaca

A Day Of Killings While Teachers Negotiate in Mexico City

President Vicente Fox, through his Secretary of Internal Affairs Carlos Abascal, has authorized the entry of the Federal Preventive Police (PFP in its Spanish initials) into Oaxaca, in direct response to the events of October 27 in Oaxaca. Following a declaration by the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO) to launch an all-out work stoppage and boycott to force the hand of governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz (known as “URO”), Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) supporters, both police and private individuals, assaulted the population in several different areas of the city on Friday. The result, according to the Radio Universidad, was four dead, thirty wounded. The dead have now been identified as Emilio Alonso Fabián, Bradley Will and Eudocia Olivera Díaz. The fourth reported death, of Esteban Zurita López, is at the center of accusations by both sides of the conflict, with each blaming the other.

Airplanes full of PFP officers and riot gear have already arrived, with the police now gathered at a nearby military base, reports the national daily El Universal.


Photo: D.R. 2006 Nancy Davies
My analysis is that if the PFP enter the city by day, a negotiated exit is open for the APPO, possibly implying the removal URO from office. If they come by night, they’re likely coming to dislodge by force the resistance lodged in the zocalo (central city plaza) and barricades. URO precipitated the intervention by his attacks. The question is, does the PAN party of Fox and Calderón want to maintain URO as a sop to the PRI, or has URO become so costly that the PAN may choose to dump him? If so, URO’s setting up of the APPO backfires.

The state assembly of the local teachers’ union, Section 22, called on URO to resign before November 30 and to guarantee the physical safety of teachers returning to work, pay salaries in arrears, release political prisoners, and retract arrest warrants for the leaders of both the APPO and Section 22, among other demands. These demands were part of the decision of the teachers’ vote to return to the schools, scheduled tentatively for October 30.

While Section 22 spokesperson Enrique Rueda Pacheco was in Mexico City talking with Interior Secretary Carlos Abascal about the conditions for a phased-in regional opening of schools, the attacks began in Oaxaca. The problem for URO of course was that returning to the classrooms did not imply lifting the APPO’s occupation of the city center, nor the return of government buildings to the government. The teachers’ voting to return also included the condition that they would continue their struggle to oust URO.

Meanwhile, URO refused to resign or take a leave of absence. During the teachers’ assembly meeting, shooting and bus burning went on outside the Hotel Magisterio, where the meeting took place.

On Friday morning, the day scheduled for the onset of the big anti-URO strike, I walked up the north-south street close to my house. The newly constructed small neighborhood barricade consisted of three men, six women, a snarl of barbed wire, a banner, and a barrel. On the main road, traffic was light and getter lighter. In the middle of Niños Heroes Street, a woman held an umbrella against the sun with one hand and with the other tossed aside the rocks that impeded traffic in front of her shop. When she reached the sidewalk where I was watching, she snarled, “Ya basta! That’s enough of these blockades!” It appeared she not did not understand that, no more than 300 meters behind her, two busses were being maneuvered into position for a complete blockade of the avenue.

The peaceful appearance of this shut-down was brief. By the time I returned home the radio told a different story. URO had been sighted in Santa Lucia, and people were reminded not to overreact.

By mid-day on Friday, a mechanic, Gerardo Sanchez, was abducted by two plain-clothes men and one woman in a vehicle near the El Rosario Bridge, and driven to Tlocolula where the prison is located. His abductors were later identified as state ministerial police.


Photo: D.R. 2006 El Universal
The operation resembles what happened to Pablo Garcia García on October 1 (Garcia, a student, was beaten, tortured and released). Earlier reports claimed that Gerardo Sanchez had been abducted in Tlocolula. The report said that two lawyers and the PRI mayor were complicit. A call went out for the people of Tlocolula to take over the municipal building. Crowds gathered and that situation remains unclear.

During the afternoon three other teachers were abducted and taken to the city prison, where another shootout occurred. Emilio Alonzo Fabián, a 42-year-old teacher from Loxicha in the Pochutla region, was shot and killed when he ran with others to intercept a car identified as one of those used by the police.

Attacks continued throughout the afternoon in San Antonio de la Cal, in the La Experimental neighborhood, where the Oaxaca state prosecutor’s office is located; in Santa Lucía del Camino; and in Santa María Coyotepec.

Three people were dead before the 11 o’clock news came on. During the Oaxaca segment of TV Azteca news, URO announced firmly that four were dead but that the shooting was done by the APPO, while his police were all in their barracks. Photographs and videos emerged later revealing the shooters as members of the ministerial police. URO was interviewed via phone by TV Azteca, which was simultaneously showing people with sticks in their hands running away from what could be heard as gunshots. In the video clip, they were carrying the body of Brad Will, a U.S. Indymedia reporter, who was killed during the afternoon in Santa Lucía del Camino during a confrontation with ministerial police. Along with him, a photographer from Milenio was shot in the foot. Santa Lucia del Camino is now in the hands of the PRI.

In Santa Maria Coyotepec twenty-four people were wounded by 11 p.m. in an attack on the people at a barricade. According to citizens who were present at the time, the victims were shot by police in plain clothes, and thrown into prison with no medical treatment.

During this same long day, Enrique Rueda Pacheco was in Mexico City negotiating a return to classes with Carlos Abascal. When he called the radio station about ten o’clock, he didn’t seem too angry, but the others who followed him on the radio were stronger in their outrage. The kindest thing said about Rueda was, that “he’s young, he’s a politician.” Joel Castillo, the state’s PRI interior secretary, was named on Radio Plantón as being behind the attacks. “The conditions to go back to classes don’t exist,” said one spokesperson for the teachers.

At noon on Saturday, October 28, we are waiting for the entrance of the PFP. The announcers on Radio Universidad are saying neither the barri

Fox seeks to end Mexican unrest

[Oh, he'll try to end it alright...this is horrible!]

Mexican President Vincente Fox has ordered security forces to quell violence in Oaxaca in the south.

Three people, including a US journalist, were killed in clashes between masked gunmen and leftist protesters on Friday.

At least six people have been killed since the unrest began in May when striking teachers and left-wing groups occupied the town centre.

Protesters accuse state Governor Ulises Ruiz of abuse of power.

They say they will not back down until he is ousted.

Gunfire erupted apparently after armed men tried to remove a blockade set up by protesters.

A series of prolonged shoot-outs followed but it was not clear who fired first.

The Oaxaca People's Popular Assembly, which is leading the protests, accused off-duty local policemen of carrying out the shootings.

The dead journalist has been named as Will Bradley Roland, a cameraman working with the independent news group Indymedia.

'No peaceful way out'

Mr Fox's office said in a statement that federal police would arrive in the southern city during Saturday. It was not clear how many were being sent.

The president had resisted sending forces to the region for five months, for fear of involving them in the violent confrontations.

But the BBC's Duncan Kennedy in Mexico City says the latest violence appears to have left him little choice but to intervene.

Thousands of schools have been closed since the strike began in May, leaving 1.3 million children out of school.

The teachers staged the walk-out, demanding higher pay and better working conditions.

After police attacked one of their demonstrations in June, they extended their demands to include a call for the resignation of Gov Ruiz. The teachers were joined in their protest by left-wing groups.

This week, striking teachers voted to return to classes but many protesters say they will not back down until Gov Ruiz is removed from office.

Critics accuse him of corruption and repressive tactics against dissenters, whose roadblocks have driven tourism from the city and hurt business.

Last week, Mexico's Senate decided by a 74-31 vote that the state government had not ceased to function, a condition necessary to remove a governor from office.

But the Senate recognised that conditions of "ungovernability" existed in the state and criticised Mr Ruiz for failing to bring months of violent protests to an end.

President Vicente Fox has vowed to end the conflict before he leaves office on 1 December but negotiations to find a peaceful way out have so far failed.

More on William Bradley Roland

PRESS RELEASE
For Immediate Release
October 28, 2006, 12:40 a.m. Contact:
Beka Economopoulos, (917) 202-5479
Brandon Jourdan, (646) 342-8169
Eric Laursen, (917) 806-6452

WILLIAM BRADLEY ROLAND, U.S. JOURNALIST/CAMERMAN, KILLED BY OAXACA PARAMILITARIES ? KILLER ID'D - ACTIONS BEING PLANNED IN U.S.

William Bradley Roland, aka Brad Will, a U.S. journalist and camerman, was shot and killed yesterday in Oaxaca, Mexico, by paramiliaries affiliated with the PRI, the former Mexican ruling party. Will was in Oaxaca covering the continued resistance of teachers and other workers against the PRI-controlled government of the State of Oaxaca. According to reports from New York City Independent Media Center and La Jornada, Will, 36, was shot at the Santa Lucia Barricade from a distance of 30-40 meters in the pit of the stomach by plainclothes paramilitaries and died while enroute to the Red Cross.

Centro de Medias Libres (http://vientos.info/cml) in Mexico City reports that from Will's recovered videiotapes, they have identified his killer as a paramilitary named Pedro Carmona, ex-president of Felipe Carrillo Puerto de Santa Lucia del Camino, a colonia in Oaxaca.

At last report, Will was one of five people who died in the last day, along with 17 wounded, as paramilitaries and federal police poured in to retake the city, according to Centro de Medias Libres. The city had been in the hands of the workers for five months. Will is the first American to be killed in the months-long confrontation. A longtime journalist and activist, he covered land occupations in the Pacific Northwest of the U.S., direct actions and rebellions in Argentina and Ecuador, land occupations in Brazil, and anti-privatization struggles in Bolivia. He was a much-beloved figure in the global justice movement in the U.S. and leaves behind many grieving friends.

Friends of Brad in the U.S. will be calling actions in the next day to demand that the U.S. State Department press the Mexican government to investigate Brad's murder and address the terroristic regime that made it possible. Additionally, they will press for solidarity in the U.S. with the Mexican movement for social justice that Brad gave his life to document in Oaxaca.

From: thesyllabus.blogspot.com

well, the nicaragua bill to ban all abortions, bar none, was passed unanimously in the legislature. it'll probably be signed into law soon. i am really upset that this is what reality is like.

this blogger has a disturbing take on it. her analysis chalks this up to using religion as a cover for plain old misogyny -- which sounds about right -- but also throws in something i'd never thought of, or even heard of:
I don't believe for a moment that people in Nicaragua are so pious as to need to have a theocratic government in place. It's more like this is the way they defend the institutional mysogyny that allowed them to laugh-off one of the biggest scandals to come out of the underbelly of the Sandinista revolution : Zoilamérica Narváez, stepdaughter of Daniel Ortega, the former sandinista president of Nicaragua, accused him of making her his sexual slave from the age of 11.
narvaez alleges that ortega abused and intimidated her sexually for years. leftist leaders in the country, and in the region, have said little to nothing about it. that's the spirit of emancipation for you. it's distressing, and so is ortega's strong support for the abortion ban, which appears to be in the service of his electoral interests; but i guess finally i'm also not surprised. i've done a little reading about the sandinista movement and the revolution years and it seems that women contributed a great deal to the fsln, in both support and combat positions, and in return were excluded from the leadership and were told time and again that "women's issues" were not an immediate concern, were a distraction from the revolution, were divisive or counterproductive for solidarity within the movement, and would be dealt with after the revolution had succeeded. women were fine to have along as long as they wanted to help, but their interests did not count in party decisionmaking. this may have been because the leadership genuinely were willing to step over anybody to reach their political goals, or it could be that the narrow-minded definition of "the goals of the revolution" were simply an excuse for continuing the sexism. the sandinistas are certainly not alone in this; this has happened in lots of leftist revolutionary movements. we should not make the mistake of assuming that all those who fight for equality mean the same thing.

in the same vein, i often see liberal boys and anarchist boys get a free pass on their misogyny, or give themselves one, because they "really care" about progressive politics. this happens a ton in high school and even college but of course the interwubs is filled with assholes too, and it's hard to know if they are prevalent in the general population as well. if you follow Democratic political blogs, you might know about one called DailyKos, considered one of the biggest players in the "netroots" and run by a guy who does campaign consulting for Democrats. i saw the exact same dynamic play out there, repeatedly, when Kos essentially told readers concerned with women's rights in politics or with sexism on the blog itself to go fuck themselves because he "[didn't] care" about dissenting opinions (i find it hard to believe he acts that way professionally) and thought the "bitching" was the same kind of "divisive" shit that loses elections for liberals. i had to paraphrase most of it because i can't remember all the details, but that was the sentiment.

anyway, i just wanted to update the abortion ban post, but while i'm at it i think i'll reiterate: we shouldn't make the mistake of assuming that all those who fight for equality mean the same thing. fighting class oppression is worthy and brave; but if you have to use sexism to assert your masculinity in this fight, your fight is wrong. fighting sex and gender oppression is worthy and brave; but if you argue that allowing the "feminine vote" will help counter the "pauperism, ignorance and degradation" of immigrants and former slaves*, your fight is wrong. fighting racism is worthy and brave; but if you resort to religious scapegoating to prove it's not you who is the enemy, your fight is wrong. and so on. i strongly believe that feminism, at its best, impels us to care about the rights of all people, and to stand against all kinds of oppression.

liberation is not a zero-sum game. i wish people would think on this more often. when we treat it like a zero-sum game, we end up politicking against one another for social advantage and polarizing potential allies, instead of supporting one another in opposition to all oppression. it's truly sad to me that members of all groups seem to want someone left underneath them to shit on, or alternately feel they need to shit on someone to get ahead.

*which one group of women's suffragists did do, i read, after being disappointed by their abolitionist allies' supporting the fourteenth and fifteenth amendment's giving the franchise to blacks and not to women. those words were elizabeth cady stanton's. she and susan b. anthony had both been close with abolitionist men like frederick douglass and took the decision quite bitterly. by the same token, of course, their abolition-movement friends had sold them out, too, accepting the feminists' help but not reciprocating in the clutch. same story.

Brad Will, New York Documentary Filmmaker and Indymedia Reporter, Assassinated by Pro-Government Gunshot in Oaxaca While Reporting the Story


Photographer Oswaldo Ramirez of the Daily Milenio Wounded in Attack by Shooters for Ulises Ruiz Ortiz in Santa Lucia El Camino
By Al Giordano

The Other Journalism with the Other Campaign in Chihuahua

October 27, 2006

Brad Will, 36, a documentary filmmaker and reporter for Indymedia in New York, Bolivia and Brazil, died today of a gunshot to the chest when pro-government attackers opened fire on a barricade in the neighborhood of Santa Lucia El Camino, on the outskirts of Oaxaca, Mexico. He died with his video camera in his hands.


Brad Will in Chetumal, Quintana Roo
Photo: D.R. 2006 Narco News
Brad went to Oaxaca in early October to document the story that Commercial Media simulators like Rebecca Romero of Associated Press distort instead of report: the story of a people sick and tired of repression and injustice, who take back the government that rightfully is theirs. In that context, his assassination is also a consequence of what happens when independent media must do the work that Big Media fails to do: to tell the truth. My friend and colleague since 1996 when we labored together at 88.7 FM Steal This Radio on New York’s Lower East Side, I bumped into him again in Bolivia in 2004 during a public reception held by the Narco News School of Authentic Journalism, and again on the Yucatán peninsula last January where he came to cover the beginnings of the Zapatista Other Campaign – Brad died to bring the authentic story to the world.

Brad went to Oaxaca in early October knowing, assuming and sharing the risks of reporting the story. His final published article, on October 17, titled “Death in Oaxaca,” reported the assassination of Alejandro García Hernández on the barricades set up by the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO, in its Spanish initials). Brad wrote:

“…went walking back from alejandros barricade with a group of supporters who came from an outlying district a half hour away—went walking with angry folk on their way to the morgue—went inside and saw him—havent seen too many bodies in my life—eats you up—a stack of nameless corpes in the corner—about the number who had died—no refrigeration—the smell—they had to open his skull to pull the bullet out—walked back with him and his people

“…and now alejandro waits in the zocalo—like the others at their plantones—hes waiting for an impasse, a change, an exit, a way forward, a way out, a solution—waiting for the earth to shift and open—waiting for november when he can sit with his loved ones on the day of the dead and share food and drink and a song—waiting for the plaza to turn itself over to him and burst—he will only wait until morning but tonight he is waiting for the governor and his lot to never come back—one more death—one more martyr in a dirty war—one more time to cry and hurt—one more time to know power and its ugly head—one more bullet cracks the night—one more night at the barricades—some keep the fires—others curl up and sleep—but all of them are with him as he rests one last night at his watch…”


Brad Will’s Assassins
Photo: D.R. 2006 El Universal
Last September 26, Brad, on his way to Mexico, wrote me:

“hey al
it brad from nyc—it would be great to get yr narco contacts in oaxaca—i am headed there and want to connect with as many folks as posible—are you in df?—i should be stopping though there and it would be great
to go out for a drink
solid
brad”

Knowing of Brad’s hard luck covering other stories (he had been beaten by police in New York and in Brazil doing this important but dangerous work), his difficulty with the Spanish language, and of the greater risk for independent reporters who haven’t been embedded over time (and thus known by the people) in Oaxaca, I pleaded with him not to go, to instead go to Atenco and report on the story there of the arrival of Zapatista comandantes:

“Our Oaxaca team is firmly embedded. There are a chingo of other internacionales roaming around there looking for the big story, but the situation is very delicate, the APPO doesn’t trust anyone it hasn’t known for years, and they keep telling me not to send newcomers, because the situation is so fucking tense… If you are coming to Mexico, I would much more recommend your hanging around DF-Atenco and reporting that story which is about to begin. The APPO is (understandably) very distrustful of people it doesn’t already know. And we have enough hands on deck there to continue breaking the story. But what is about to happen in Atenco-DF needs more hands on deck.”

Brad replied that same night, undeterred:

“hey
thanks for the quick get back—i have a hd professional camera—i have heard reports about the level of distrust in oax and it is disconcerting—i think i will still go—i wont tell them you sent me and i am open to other suggestions on how to spend my time—i dont know what is happening in atenco in the coming days—i may connect with la otra capitulo dos somewhere along the way—great to hear from you—do you have a cell / phone number?
solidaridad
b rad”

I was not surprised that he decided to go to Oaxaca anyway. Brad had always taken risks: whether riding freight train box cars across the North American plain, or bunkering in his Fifth Street squat in 1996 when police and the wrecking ball invaded, his life had been one of courage. I gave him my cell phone number in case of emergency. He wrote back on October 7, three weeks ago:

“hey al
brad here—thanks for the contacts and info—i landed in df feeling
pretty ill and then came straight to oax and am plugged in—if you want to share your contacts down here it would be very helpful—i think I will stay down here for a month—nancy said you had a contact with a human rights lawyer who might help journalists not get deported – please help me with that information as well—i know you are busy and look forward to seeing more of your work
peace
b rad”

In those emails are the words of a valiant compañero who, knowing full well that this story could be his last, decided to share the risks with the people whose cause he reported.

Also sharing the risks today in Santa Lucia El Camino, Oaxaca was photographer Oswaldo Ramírez of the daily Milenio, wounded by gunfire. It was Milenio reporter Diego Osorio who confirmed the news of Brad’s death at 4:30 this afternoon. He also said that in another corner of the city, outside the state prosecutor’s office, gunmen fired at other APPO members, that three were wounded, and that one schoolteacher is reported dead, but was unable so far to confirm that report.

Photo: D.R. 2006 El Universal
Brad Will was known and liked throughout the hemisphere, and in its media centers from New York to Sao Paulo to Mexico City. Tonight his body lies in the same Oaxaca morgue he visited and wrote about last week. He will not go silently into the long night of repression that the illegitimate governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz, President Vicente Fox and his illegitimate successor Felipe Calderon have created in Oaxaca, and, indeed, in so much of Mexico. It was inevitable that soon an international reporter would join the growing list of the assassinated under the repressive regimes of Mexico (others had already been raped and beaten in Atenco, only to be deported from the country last May). Tonight it was Brad, doing the responsible and urgent work, video camera in hand, of breaking the Commercial Media blockade.

Speaking at a public meeting of the Other Campaign in Buaiscobe, Sonora, when the news came in about Brad’s death, Zapatista Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos, upon receiving a briefing of the day’s events in Oaxaca, told the public and the press:

“We know that they killed at least one person. This person that they killed was from the alternative media that are here with us. He didn’t work for the big television news companies and didn’t receive pay. He is like the people who came here with us on the bus, who are carrying the voices of the people from below so that they would be known. Because we already know that the television news companies and newspapers only concern themselves with governmental affairs. And this person was a compañero of the Other Campaign. He also traveled various parts of the country with us, and he was with us when we were in Yucatán, taking photos and video of what was happening there. And they shot him and he died. It appears that there is another person dead. The government doesn’t want to take responsibility for what happened. Now they tell us that all of the people of Oaxaca are mobilizing. They aren’t afraid. They are mobilizing to take to the streets and protest this injustice. We are issuing a call to all of the Other Campaign at the national level and to compañeros and compañeras in other countries to unite and to demand justice for this dead compañero. We are making this call especially to all of the alternative media, and free media here in Mexico and in all the world.”

Tonight, from the Oaxaca City Morgue, Brad Will shouts “Ya Basta!” – Enough Already! – to the death and suffering imposed (as Brad, a thoughtful and serious anarchist, understood) by an economic system, the capitalist system. His death will be avenged when that system is destroyed. And Brad Will’s ultimate sacrifice exposes the Mexican regime for the brutal authoritarian violence that the Commercial Media hides from the world, and thus speeds the day that justice will come from below and sweep out the regimes of pain and repression that system requires. Brad gave his life tonight so that you and I could know the truth. We owe him to act upon it, and to share the risks that he took. Goodbye, old friend. Your sacrifice will not be in vain.

Update, 10:30 p.m. Oaxaca: The Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO) has confirmed that schoolteacher Emilio Alfonso Fabián has died from three bullet wounds after an attack by shooters for Ulises Ruiz Ortiz outside the state government palace.

Kristin Bricker reported for this story from Sonora
*
More:

"Death in Oaxaca" - Last Published Communique from Anarchist Companero Brad Will

Mexico, Oaxaca, New, York City Indymedia journalist Bradley Will killed by statwe forces

Federal Police and Paramilitaries Enter Oaxaca City: NYC Indymedia Journalist Killed

Mexico City reports that from Will's recovered videiotapes, they have identified his killer
as a paramilitary named Pedro Carmona, ex-president of Felipe Carrillo
Puerto de Santa Lucia del Camino, a colonia in Oaxaca.


October 27, 2006

Ex-dictator Pinochet ordered arrested in Chile

SANTIAGO, Chile

A judge on Friday ordered the arrest of former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet for crimes related to a secret detention center used in the years following his 1973 coup, court sources said.

Judge Alejandro Solis ordered the arrest of Pinochet for 36 cases of kidnap, one of homicide and for 23 cases of torture at the Villa Grimaldi, a political detention center run by Pinochet's secret police where thousands of people were tortured between 1974 and 1977.

The sources said Pinochet would be placed under house arrest at his home on Monday.

Pinochet was under house arrest for seven weeks last year, before being released on bail, on charges related to the disappearance and presumed death of three leftists during his 17-year rule.

Mexico May Be Forced To Privatize Oil

Even as popular pressure grows around Latin America for a stronger state hand in developing natural resources such as oil and gas, Mexico's president-elect Felipe Calderón may be forced to consider putting more power in private hands.

The country's flagship oil company Pemex, has been a point of pride since the industry was wrenched from foreign hands and nationalized in 1938. Its revenues alone cover one-third of Mexico's budget.

But prosperity from years of record oil prices has allowed Mexico to postpone what most agree are much-needed reforms. And now, as production at Pemex's top oil field declines, pressure to find new fields is mounting. But industry analysts say Mexico's constitutional restriction on foreign direct investment will hamstring costly exploration efforts, and possibly disrupt the flow of oil, 80 percent of which heads to the US.

Indeed, with his fragile political mandate, Mr. Calderón may find that oil becomes the issue that will define his presidency.

"This is an important first battle," says Benito Nacif, a political scientist at the Center for Research and Teaching in Economics (CRTE), a Mexico City think tank. "In the industry sector, there is a consensus that this reform is necessary, that you have to open it up [to the private sector]. The question is: 'Will [Calderón] be able to build sufficient [political] consensus?'"

Many industry analysts had hoped that outgoing President Vicente Fox would be able to push through energy-sector reforms to open up Pemex to more private direct investment, in order to boost exploration and production.

Mexico is the second-biggest supplier of oil to the US, favored because of its proximity and relative political stability.

In the end, Mr. Fox didn't push through a consitutional change, largely because trying to privative Pemex, even partially, is so politically unpopular.

Also, when Fox came to office in 2000, capacity at Cantarell, the world's second-largest field and Mexico's most important, was not in question. The complex, located in southern Gulf waters, actually increased production during Fox's term, peaking in 2004 with 2.1 million barrels a day.

But since then, production has been dropping off at Cantarell. David Shields, an independent energy expert in Mexico City, says production declined by 10 percent in the first six months of 2006. He contends that Pemex is in much worse shape than is publicly expressed. "Pemex says everything is great," he says. "But [Cantarell] is going to run out, and they [in the long-term] don't have other things to replace it."

Earlier this month, the state monopoly announced that crude output from another offshore field, Ku-Maloob-Zaap, was expected to double in 2009. That, Pemex officials said at a press conference, would help maintain oil production at an average 3.2 million barrels a day, and offset losses from Cantarell.

George Baker, an energy analyst at the consulting firm Energia.com in Houston, says he is not surprised by Pemex's announcement. "Pemex has a way of making magic," he says. Still, he says that potential finds in the Gulf of Mexico, similar to Chevron's recent announcement of a big discovery in US waters, are currently out of reach because Pemex does not have the technical know-how or money to undertake such exploration. The issues have been here all along, says Baker, but now that Cantarell is facing declines, "the slope downward is slipperier."

US oil firms watching closely

Experts say that American companies are watching oil production in Mexico, but because of politics, cannot interfere by pushing for more foreign participation. If the US needed to purchase oil from more-distant countries, additional transportation costs would be passed onto the consumer, Baker says.

So far, Calderón has reiterated that he will not consider private direct investment. "There will be deliberations that we Mexicans will have in Congress to find the means by which Pemex can access the probable reserves, particularly in the deep waters of the Gulf of Mexico," he said at a September press conference. "But, for now, I will be very respectful of national legislation on the matter, which doesn't permit foreign investment in petroleum extraction...."

More...

The Atenco, Oaxaca and Zapatista Rebels Unite in Public for the First Time

by Greg Berger

October 27, 2006
Narco News

At the Scene of the Atenco Massacre of May 3 - 4, the Mexican Left Shows its Willingness to Forge Alliances and Defy the State

Only six short months ago, the town of Texcoco, in Mexico State, was made infamous throughout Mexico and the world as the place where one of the worst police massacres in recent Mexican history began. Today the town of Texcoco is making history yet again, but this time as the site of an historic encounter of representatives from three of the Mexican left's most significant political movements: The Other Campaign of the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN), the Peoples' Front in Defense of the Land (FPDT) from San Salvador Atenco, and the Popular Assembly of the People of Oaxaca (APPO), comprised of teachers and social movements from Oaxaca. On Friday, the three organizations pledged mutual support to fight for the liberation of political prisoners and to create a united front against municipal, state and federal authorities.

With less than a month and a half to go before the controversial inauguration of rightwing President-Elect Felipe Calderon, today's encounter in Texcoco underscores the strength and willingness of the Mexican left to forge alliances and to defy the political establishment in the battle for Mexico's social and political destiny in years to come.

As has been reported extensively in these pages, on May 3, a holy day in Mexico, flower vendors selling their goods attempted to set up shop outside of Texcoco's municipal market. After police tried to prevent them from setting up shop, they were joined by the People's Front in Defense of the Land (FPDT) from nearby San Salvador Atenco. Farmers from Atenco gained international recognition in 2002 when they successfully stopped construction of an international airport that would have been built over more than half of the town's land. Since that time they have provided tactical and moral support to dozens of social movements throughout the country.

Local, state, and federal police were dispatched to arrest the flower vendors and their companeros from the FPDT. Not content with the arrest of the FPDT's leaders, the following day authorities sent thousands of police to the town of Atenco itself to systematically raid houses, beating and arresting hundreds of people as they went. By the end of May 4th, two young men were fatally shot by police, 209 people were arrested, and 47 women detainees were raped or sexually assaulted by their captors. The Atenco massacre has been widely seen by observers as an attempt by government forces to settle scores with the Atenco rebels, whose successful defiance of the airport project humiliated President Vicente Fox in the world arena. It is also likely that the Atenco attack was meant to discourage communities from supporting the EZLN's Other Campaign (the FPDT from Atenco are ardent supporters of the Other Campaign and served as Subcomandate Marcos' bodyguards during a May 1 march in Mexico City) and also to bolster the "fear vote" against center-left candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador in favor of the rightwing Felipe Calderon. In September, Felipe Calderon was named victor of the July 2 Presidential Elections, despite widespread evidence of fraud and a refusal by electoral authorities to recount ballots.

But despite these developments, today's events in Texcoco clearly demonstrate that the Mexican left, far from defeated, is today better poised than ever to organize, collaborate, and forge effective alliances. At approximately 2 p.m. today at the entrance to the University of Chapingo, farmers from Atenco and other members of the FPDT greeted a contingent from the APPO's Mexico City encampment. After 145 days, the APPO continues its civil occupation of the city center of Oaxaca to demand the resignation of corrupt governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz. The Ruiz administration has become notorious for widespread human rights abuses throughout the state. And in what appeared to many to be an attempt by Oaxacan authorities to replicate the Atenco attacks, Oaxacan state police attempted to dislodge the teachers' strike from the center of the state's capital city on June 14.

However, striking teachers repelled police and in the days following indigenous communities and social movements joined with the teachers to form the APPO. The APPO has taken control of the center of Oaxaca's capital city and is now maintaining a permanent encampment outside of the Senate building in Mexico City where 21 people are in the midst of a hunger strike. Like the FPDT, many members of the APPO remain imprisoned. At least nine APPO members have been murdered in recent months. Today in Texcoco, members of the two organizations appeared at a public demonstration for the first time.

Soon after the historic encounter, the two contingents along with nearly a thousand supporters began a march from the entrance of the University of Chapingo to the center of the town of Texcoco. Armed with their trademark machetes, the FPDT chanted slogans demanding not only the release of their own political prisoners, but also the release of the APPO's jailed companeros, and demanding that the disgraced Oaxaca Governor resign. Members of the APPO reciprocated, chanting "Atenco, amigo! Oaxaca esta¡ contigo!" (Atenco, friend! Oaxaca is with you!) The march came to a halt in front of the Texcoco town hall, where demonstrators blocked the street for 30 minutes and reminded Mayor Nazario Gutierrez Martinez that the fight for the release of Atenco's political prisoners is far from over.

Members of the APPO spray-painted "Oaxaca and Atenco: united against bad government" on the sidewalk in front of the mayor's office. Members from the APPO then addressed the crowd to deliver an official message to the people of Atenco and Texcoco:

"Today, the APPO declares its solidarity with our brothers from Atenco and together we denounce the criminal policies of Vicente Fox." said the official message. "The APPO will continue onward and here we want to tell all the murderers in the government that you will have to build thousands and thousands of jails to house all of the people of Oaxaca, because you aren't going to be able to shut us up. You are not going to be able to stop this movement because we are filled with new life thanks to the people of Atenco."

As the march prepared to continue towards Texcoco's town square, they were joined by indigenous EZLN comandantes Grabiela, Zebedeo, and Miriam. The three rebel commanders from Chiapas arrived in central Mexico earlier this month and have vowed to stay in Mexico City until all of the political prisoners from Atenco are released. Following in the footsteps of Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos - who is now known as Delegate Zero as he tours through Mexico to organize the Other Campaign - Grabiela, Zebedeo, and Miriam now go by the names Delegate One, Two and Three, respectively. They will soon be followed by other Zapatista comandantes-turned-delegates who will be dispatched throughout the nation.

Upon arrival in the Texcoco town square, the Zapatista delegates addressed their companeros from Atenco, the APPO and to the rest of the crowd.

Grabiela, Delegate One, began. "We are going to struggle together with you all. Together we will support each other and exchange our ways of organizing and our direction, so that we can all struggle together here. The same things happened in our towns as with you. They arrested our companeros and mistreated them. But look, I am here with you and we are going to struggle together with you all."

Miriam, the comandanta now known as Delegate Three, then made reference to Javier Cortes and Alexis Benhumea. Javier Cortes was shot on May 3 as police attempted to enter the town of Atenco. Although state officials initially claimed that he was killed by a firecracker shot by members of the FPDT, it was later proven that the bullet which pierced Javier's body was consistent with the type of bullet used by police on the scene. Alexis Benhumea, an adherent to the Zapatista Other Campaign, was in Atenco on May 3 to show solidarity with the town of Atenco. He was mortally wounded when police shot him in the head with a tear gas canister. Had police allowed free entrance and exit to and from the town of Atenco on May 3 and 4, he would have been brought to a hospital where is life may have been saved. Instead he languished for hours in a house in Atenco until he was smuggled out to a hospital the next day. He died after spending nearly a month in a hospital bed.

"We ask for justice for our murdered companeros," declared Delegate Three, "Alexis and Javier may be dead, but they aren't dead to us because their blood will always remain a part of our history. We also demand the release of our companeros and companeras prisoners from San Salvador Atenco. And also the release of all the political prisoners in our country."

Following the demonstration, members of the FPDT showed a video to the crowd - shot on May 2, one day before the Atenco massacre - of negotiations between the Texcoco flower vendors, farmers from Atenco, and Texcoco authorities. In the video, town government representatives clearly state that until a settlement is reached, police force will not be used to evict the flower vendors. According to FPDT members, the video helps prove that the May 3 eviction was part of a deliberate plot to provoke and ambush the FPDT and the town of Atenco.

Meanwhile, the APPO will hold an assembly in Oaxaca on Sunday to determine its next steps. Delegate Zero continues to organize the Other Campaign in Mexico's border states as Delegates One, Two and Three remain in Mexico City. The FPDT is planning new actions for the following week which have yet to be revealed to the general public. Meanwhile, the transition team of President-Elect Felipe Calderon is pressuring the Fox administration to squash these social movements before Calderon takes office.

Nothing would indicate that there is any real or remote possibility of this happening. All signs indicate, in fact, that these movements are getting stronger and increasingly relying on mutual support and unified action.

Oct 27: Call for Solidarity Actions With the People of Oaxaca!

by Anarchist in Oaxaca

Oct 27: Call for Solidarity Actions With the People of Oaxaca!

International solidarity requested
The struggle in Oaxaca, which began in May with a teachers' strike, for the ousting of Ulises Ruiz Ortiz, the dissolution of state power, and the official formation of a popular assembly continues. It's been met with severe repression, in the form of harassment, threats, arrests, attacks, and murders. The teachers (as of this writing) continue to refuse to return to classes, and the people of Oaxaca continue the encampments and barricades. They will do so until the demands are met. It seems likely that the scales will tip soon, given the recent events and decisions. There is the very real possibility that sometime soon, state threats of force to destroy the movement will come to fruition. Despite the repression, despite the Senators' decision to uphold Ruiz's authority, and despite the manipulations from the top of the teachers' union, the people of Oaxaca refuse to let this struggle die and refuse to let the dream of true freedom whither away. They will fight until they win, and many are willing (and expect) to die in the process.

APPO and its member groups are calling for a day of international solidarity this Friday, October 27. Do whatever you can to show your support for the struggle in Oaxaca! The people in Oaxaca are calling for a day of international solidarity actions, in whatever form that may take, that contribute to the global fight for dignity and justice. Raise public awareness in your neighborhood through teach-ins, leafleting, et cetera. Hold solidarity rallies and marches. Demonstrate outside a nearby Mexican consulate (or the embassy itself). Barricade intersections. And tell others about what you are doing so that the Oaxaqueños can know that they are not alone! Anything you can do is desired by people in Oaxaca, who want the struggle in Oaxaca to be known everywhere. Here in Oaxaca, this day will, among other things, mean a full day of guarding the barricades, adding more barricades and reinforcing those already constructed, including those which typically come down for the day. It's possible that it could be a brutal day, and lead to an increase in the ongoing repression. The people of Oaxaca need your support!

This call is being sent out by anarchist members of Pittsburgh Organizing Group (POG) who are currently in Oaxaca. Information on their activities is available at: http://www.organizepittsburgh.org/index.php?page=statements/oaxaca

October 26, 2006

Building a wall around US a 'huge error': Mexican president-elect

OTTAWA

The United States committed a "huge error" in choosing to build a wall between itself and its southern neighbor, Mexico's president-elect Felipe Calderon said during a state visit to Canada, comparing it with the Berlin Wall.

"The wall will not solve any problem. Humanity made a huge mistake by building the Berlin Wall, and I believe that today the United States is committing a grave error in building the wall on our border," he said.

US President George W. Bush on Thursday signed into law a bill authorizing construction of a 1,100-kilometer (700-mile) fence along a third of the US border with Mexico.

Some 1.2 billion dollars in funding were earmarked for the fence, in a bid to stanch the steady flow of illegal immigrants into the United States.

Calderon said the fence would be expensive to US taxpayers and lead to more Mexican deaths. Some 400 Mexicans died trying to cross the border last year, he noted.

Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he accepts US concerns about a safe and secure border, but added: "We obviously caution against things that can cause unnecessary barriers, not just to trade, but to the ordinary exchange of tourism and social relationships between our countries."

Educate yourself and take action!

[The same assholes who participated in Iran-Contra un Reagan, are in our government right NOW...If they're messing in Nicaragua's upcoming election, just imagine what they're doing to our election system]

In November of 2006 Nicaraguans will go to the polls to vote for their president and deputies of the National Assembly. There has been and will be much activity on the part of the US government to assure that the Nicaraguan elections are "fair and democratic." But what does that really mean?

As the US spokesperson in Nicaragua, US Ambassador Paul Trivelli has stated many times, the US “will establish cordial relationships with any administration that is elected democratically …that has a reasonable economic policy and is ready to cooperate with us.”

The present administration has made it clear that a government that is cooperating with the US will do the following: (1) support CAFTA and other free trade policies, (2) participate in all the US requests concerning the war on terrorism, (3) ensure that the Nicaraguan national police receive training that blurs the time-honored distinction between civilian policing and military action, and (4) not maintain friendly diplomatic relationships with either Cuba or Venezuela.

Click here for more information.

List of interventions by the United States government in Nicaragua's democratic process!

The repeated interventionist statements by successive US ambassadors since 2004 have crossed the line between diplomacy and intervention in Nicaragua's internal affairs. When a US ambassador threatens non-cooperation with a freely elected government that does not have what the US government considers sensible economic policies or does not wish to surrender control of its military to the US’s interpretation of “security,” Nicaraguans think not of aid cut offs, but of US-sponsored armed conflict because that was their recent experience during the 1980s when the United States government organized, funded, armed and trained a counter-revolutionary army to attempt to overthrow the Nicaraguan government. That revolutionary government put in place a democratic constitution and, when voted out of office in the 1990 elections, turned power over to the winning coalition, thus marking the first peaceful turn-over of power to an opposing political party in Nicaragua's history.

Click here for more information.

“The First Thing We Need to Do is to Know One Another and Find Agreement”

By Subcomandante Insurgente Marcos
October 25, 2006

Compañeros, compañeras, good afternoon. I am going to say part of my message right now and the rest at the public meeting. But first I want to say thanks because you have received us very well. Right away, one can tell when he is being recieved by people who have indigenous blood; they give the best of what they have. Sometimes it is all they have, but they are taking good care of us.

Look, I want to tell you about these people who came here with us, because I am the only one here from the EZLN. This, our first trip, is so that we can get to know you. After this, more compañeros and compañeras, those who are our bosses, will follow. That is why I, a subcomandante, have come out – because those comandantes and comandantas, both men and women commanders, have ordered me to do so.

Therefore, it’s agreed on by the compañeros here that I am going to tell their story. They are of other organizations, from other groups and collectives, but now we have come together and have said, “Here is the problem.” The problem is that there are rich and there are poor. The poor, who are the workers, can only obtain justice if they organize and struggle to change the whole country, not just the government.

So, we organized ourselves and said, “let’s go around the whole country, but let’s not talk to the politicians.” Because we’ve already had talks, as our compañero Carlos stated. We’ve already talked, and we’ve made the same trips that you are talking about today. So, what are we going to do? We are going to talk to those who are practically destitute, so that they can tell us of their struggle. Because, if they don’t, it is going to appear that Mexico is just what Fox says it is; that “everything is just fine, and all of the little Indians are doing just great,” and all of the stupid things that he and Xóchitl Gálvez say.

We said no, let the people speak for themselves. We are not going to pitch the story like the politicians do. Instead, we are going to let the people talk, and we are going to listen. “Okay, right on,” they said, “let’s go for it.” So we organized, we put a little money together, and we went to Baja California. We went to San Quintín, where our compañeros, who are also in the struggle, asked for a way to talk to other compañeros and compañeras from San Quintín. And now we have arrived.

So, there are some compañeros and compañeras here with cameras and microphones, with which they are recording. They are not from Televisa, or TV Azteca, or any of the big newspapers. They are what we call the alternative media, because they don’t sell out. What they are doing is taking your word and seeing that it reaches Oaxaca, for example, or to Chiapas, and that it is heard in the United States, in Europe, in Oceania and all places, because, of course, they have their way of doing this.

Just like you know how to work the earth, they know how to work spreading your words. Instead of putting these stories out there to make money – like the big shots who have the big newspapers – they say, “okay, I am going to fight by using what I know how to do, and that is to take the voice of those who are below and carry it far.” And check this out, though you already know this, when we have a problem, we organize well, and then they send us to a politician. Then this guy they send tells us a bunch of garbage, his vocal diarrhea as a compañero puts it. He talks very nicely, but we don’t understand what he is saying because he speaks with very “hard words”, as we say.

So we go home:
How’d it go?
Oh very well because the guy spoke so nice.
So what’d he say?
Well, I don’t know what he said but he talked so pretty!

But if the people from below, albeit with difficulty, start to tell of their own story and of their pain, and an equal in Oaxaca – a Triqui, or a Mixteco, or a Zapoteco – is listening to him, he is going to say “look, these compañeros are of our same blood.” And so will a Maya hear this also and say, “This is the same problem that we have.”

Even then their work is not complete. It is not that they are from EZLN; they are from other organizations and their work is this: that you all spoke and now it will go in their recordings and in their photos. It goes out so that those in other parts of the world can see: these are the people from below. Those speaking are not professionals. Fox isn’t talking, neither is Xóchitl Gálvez. It is they themselves, the people of San Quintín, who are talking.

So, to sum things up a little bit, a compañero said, “This is how they have boxed us in, because we are far away, even from Tijuana.” He is not even talking about Mexico City where one has to come on an airplane and then a boat, and then a highway like we did. But these compañeros, they are going to take your word so that it carries far, so that people will know of the injustice here. Because then a national newspaper and a national magazine will come, so they will know as well.

But the most important thing is that people just like you are going to listen. They can only hear you here, nowhere else. This is because you are not going to be able to go to Yucatan, or to Tamaulipas, or to Ciudad Juárez, or to Michoacán. But your voice will be carried there. Because there are others like you out there saying, as one compañero put it, “Shit, this is really happening to me, ‘Why?’ It’s not fair!”

So that is what we are doing. We are not promising that if Marcos is governor, or if some guy is going to be governor, that everything is going to turn out fine… No, we say that we’re going to see that the word of the people is heard, and that the people from below begin to notice what is hurting them. It’s like when you go to the doctor and he says, ”Okay, what’s wrong with you?“ You are the one who tells him what’s wrong, not your aunt; one tells the doctor what is hurting him on his own. Well, this is what’s hurting our country. The first thing we need to do is to know one another and find agreement amongst ourselves.

I’m going to tell you a little bit of our story. We are Mayas, indigenous of Maya roots. Just as you are called Triquis, or Mixteco, or Zapoteco, we call ourselves Tzeltal, Tzotzil, Chol and Tojolabal. Shit! We’re all so fucked. Before we rose up in arms, we were tossed up in the hills all day, with nothing but rocks. You all know how much work it is when it’s all rocks. It is a pain and the yield is very little. We just barely get a little bit of corn, just enough to make tortillas and pozol, a drink we make from corn. This is our food: tortilla, beans, a few vegetables now and then, and sometimes, if necessary, you can kill a chicken.

Many were run off the good, level land with water by the landowner. The finquero, we called him, and I say “called” because we’ve now run all of them off. And then along came this Salinas de Gortari person, and he says ”okay, that’s all over with.“ Article 27 – put there by my general, General Zapata – which says that the land belongs to he who works it. That’s gone. ”There are no more lands to divide up,“ and besides, he who has land – ejidatario, communal property – now has to sell it. Anyone can buy it, and the bank can take it away from you. Before, they couldn’t do that. The ejidatario was always the owner of the land and no one could take it away from him. Now it is bought and sold.

And who is going to sell it? Well, he who needs, compañeros. And who is going to buy it? Well, he who has the money. When have we ever had money? The only thing we have in abundance is necessity. In every place we have been in this country and this is what we have found: the campesinos are selling their land. That, or they are having it cheated from them somehow.

It’s because you talked to us about all this that it is known everywhere. How many people don’t even talk Castilla (that’s what we call Spanish)? ”Sign here and I will give you a hundred pesos.“ And so you sign, but you don’t know that you are signing over the deed to your ejido. We know that they come and corrupt the ejidal commissionar, or the municipal agent. They invite him in their group, or get him drunk – that is what we say, that we get them in the group, ”embolan“ – and in a little while, he says, ”everyone has signed, now.“ And what? Well the community doesn’t know, the ejidatoario doesn’t know. When he finds out, there isn’t any land. And when he finds out that this land – where he is working now and where his mother and father worked, where his grandparents and great-grandparents worked, and so forth, back before the Spanish arrived – now it isn’t his anymore, he is evicted; they throw him in jail for being on his own land.

And the person who took the land away and got there by cheating is the mayor, the treasurer, the local deputy, the federal legislator, the senator, and even the governor… even the President of Mexico.

This is the story that we are seeing. You were telling us that there are some who have lived here thirty years. I was just counting back the years: first came López Portillo, who started in ’76. Did he change anything for you? And then it was Miguel de la Madrid, and did he change anything? Yes. Things got worse. Then Salinas shows up, and things got even worse. Then Zedillo, even worse. Fox, worse. You think Calderon is going to be any better? We already know he’s not. So, if we know this then we say, ”Shit, let’s wait and see if God wants to send us a man (or a woman) who is fair“ – but no, compañeros, we all know it’s not like that.

When, in the tradition of struggle of the Triqui people, has there been just one person who rose up? It is always the people. It is the same with our people. And we’ve made common cause with the Huicholes, the Nahuatls, with the Purépechas, and with ourselves too, those of Maya roots. Never should one person go out alone, the people should organize and conquer things thus. Look, you’re telling us what they used to do to us. We would walk three or four days just to get on a car of three axles, a thirteen-ton car we called them. Then you pay fifteen to thirty pesos so that they take you to the hospital. If the woman is sick and she can’t speak Spanish because she speaks an indigenous dialect, they won’t let her in. If she is pregnant and about to give birth, she has to give birth in the street; if she is sick, she gets to die in the street.

So, just imagine the story told by someone who says, ”I am sick, so I am going to walk three days, pay thirty pesos to get there and thirty more to get back, just to die there? Better I just die here.“ Do you all understand me? The moment arrives, as this compañera here explained, where the repression makes us afraid. But when you are about to die your fear ends, also. This is what happened in our communities: the moment arrived when it was necessary to decide whether to live, or die like that, or if we were going to die fighting.

We arrived at the conclusion that we might as well die fighting. And we thought, well, okay, let us rise up in arms and attack the rich in their city. Let Mexico take notice of how the indigenous are living. Remember, compañeros, when Salinas de Gortari was around, it looked like there were no indigenous. Maybe someone would talk about them. The only thing mentioned was La India Maria – those are the indigenous they knew about.

No one speaks about the Mixtecos, the Triqui, or Zapoteco, Maya, Tzotzil, Nahuatl and Purépecha. No one speak of them, except when they buy artisans crafts. I’ll tell you about arts and crafts because the astute Comandanta Ramona – who was one of our leaders – was an artesian. She never went to school, and she didn’t speak Spanish. What she did was make bracelets like the ones I have on. And she sold them in the city of San Cristobal de las Casas. In San Cristobal de las Casas, before we had our armed uprising, Indians could not walk on the sidewalks. They had to walk in the street. Because the sidewalk – according to those who gave orders there – was for the other people and not the indigenous.

There was a death in 1993, a year before we arose in arms. And they asked a landowner about it, “Hey, I heard the soldiers killed an indigenous person here,” and who knows what else. And the landowner said, ”Here a chicken’s life is worth more than an Indian’s.“ And the person who said that is now in the PRD and he backed the PRD government. And that is what all of us are going through. I am not telling you anything new, because you all already know, as the compañero here has said.

If you are certain color, or a certain size, or a certain language, they don’t see you, or they see you as something sickening. They wrinkle their nose, like this, even though you can’t tell because of my ski mask, when they are near you. It doesn’t matter to them what your name is, or what you have done, or if you work, or if you’ve studied, or if you have money. You go to a store of the rich the way you look now and, even if you have money, they don’t let you in. They say, “Well, this person won’t be able to pay.” Then they tell you, ”Well, the store is closed.“ Then a big time lady comes in, all blond and white, skinny like they like them these days, and they say, ”come on in, madame,“ even if she doesn’t have the money to pay.

We know, and you all know, that it’s not just the workplace, which are like agricultural villages, but also in the school, the street, when you go to the movie theater, or wherever you go when there is activity; the indigenous are always seen in a bad light.

Okay, I won’t tell you anymore of what happened before we rose up in arms. Though it didn’t turn out like we planned it – because the people didn’t rise up – they could not defeat us. Therefore, what the people told us was that we should look towards having a dialogue. Our compañero Carlos explained what happened: we had our dialogue with the government. Look at this, compañera, we had some of our people killed, we brought millions of people out into the street, and the government betrayed us. What they are going to do is cheat you. They are going to have us going back and forth. And they will probably give a dress to you, and a bottle of booze to the men. The governor is going to have his picture taken with you, and then go away. He isn’t going to change a thing in San Quintín Valley.

If there is a problem in San Quintín Valley, and someone shows up and notices it, the Governor gives the reporter some money so that nothing comes out. This it is so we are not seen and we are not heard. So, we are thinking that now we have done all of this, and still it looks like the people who govern aren’t listening. We know this, so what do we do? Well, we have to overthrow the government, all of it: the mayor, the governor of the state, the president of the republic, the legislators, the senators, and put them all in jail. We will see them robbing each other there, because this is what they do for a living.

And they know that very well. Give me the name of a politician who isn’t rich. And give me the name of an indigenous person who works all day long and is rich. There isn’t one. And what does the politician do? Nothing. And what does the indigenous person do? All day long he is working hard. Why does this one have it all, and this one not have anything? This is what we are asking ourselves. Therefore, we decided, let’s go ask others and see who else wants to struggle. Not with arms, but instead we will get together and agree. Because you all know, if someone organizes in one place and struggles for his rights, the police and army run him over, he is alone.

We already found out about deaths, of people in jail, or that there are disappeared persons. But you can see that that we will get together and we will see the power of all of us joined together. Not just here in San Quintín Valley, and not just in Baja California, but also in all of Mexico. Just indigenous people, as compañero Carlos, who is from the National Indigenous Congress, has already explained, that we and many other indigenous people are in a pacifist struggle. But everyone has his way of doing things; they as people have their method and we respect them, and we have our ways and they respect them. It is not that someone is going to give orders. It is not about giving orders to the Nahuatls or to the Purepechas. No, they decide how things are done for themselves.

Now, imagine brother, that the day comes in which you say, ”I’m going now, I am going to visit my family in Oaxaca,” and you get on a plane. Someone is going to say, “Shit! No way, man. When are we ever going to get on a plane? When will that be?” We are barely starting to fight to see this in the city of San Quintín. If it is a Triqui town, in the valley, it is recognized, because as Carlos explained, that which was demanded in the San Andrés Accords was that every town or people are recognized as such. And so the struggle for them is to make an independent municipality of San Quintín. It is because the Triqui people, or the Mixteco, or the Zapateco – who live in Baja California – have their own rights and their own forms of government, and their government handle their own necessities.

But these governments aren’t going to do that. We know that he who pays the government is rich. You all know that he who pays give the orders. Do you think that they are going to pay the governments – because this is what they do – to see that justice prevails? No, they thrive off injustice. Do you think that they are going to oblige the owner of the businesses here in the valley, or of the ones they have here? Should these businesses have to pay what is fair to the workers? The salary you are paying now is against the law, and besides that, you are cheating because you are saving a shitload of money, and according to our information you have it squirreled away, and we know where. We know you are lying, we know it well.

Well then, compañera, we went to Quintana Roo. We were in Chiapas and we went to Quintana Roo where we found Maya indigenous. And their land had been taken from them. And you know what is there now on their land? A hotel. And did you know they can’t even go inside, even though it’s on their land, even to clean the garden? Not even that. When we went to Yucatan we found some fishermen who were also Maya indigenous. We found them in jail. Why? Because they were fishing for shrimp without a permit. A little boat that is smaller than this room. And then a ship that is two or three times the size of this building, full of shrimp, but belonging to a big businessman, is allowed. They don’t do anything to him, but the two indigenous who are fishing get thrown in jail because they are destroying the environment. These indigenous were here since before the Spanish arrived, 500 years ago, and the environment was not being destroyed. The environment began being destroyed when the capitalist arrived. This is the truth and we all know it.

Wherever it is, it begins to destroy. Our compañero Carlos explained that when there are problems between communities, which of course there are, what is the way we resolve them? Talking, right? When the government gets involved, there are deaths. Is that not so? And a lot of people have to leave their land because when there are clashes between communities, there are deaths. So if you scratch your heads and wonder why they fought, well, they got the agrarian tribunal involved, the Agrarian Reform, or the mayor, or the governor, and this is why they began to fight. Now both sides are screwed.

So, we are telling you this story. We are going to Puebla, compañeros; there are some factories there that make denim pants. You know who owns them? That dirty bastard who goes around nabbing little girls, Karer Nacif, or whatever his name is. And his friend is – what? (Kamel Nacif) Yeah, that guy. If this guy can snatch a little girl he takes her off and does his thing with her. This guy is the owner.

Compañera: the work is fourteen to sixteen hours a day, and only forty-five pesos a day is earned. Forget about them having a union, or a bonus, or loans, or social security. They can’t even go to the bathroom, because the capataz, as they call them – the person you would call the foreman – the capataz tells them, “You’re faking it, you don’t want to work.” So if you go to the bathroom, the capataz has to go with the women to see if she is going to pee or shit. Really. If not, they shut the bathroom and say it’s out of order, that you can’t use it, and you have to hold it all day long or figure out what to do about it. If you’re going to get pregnant, well, forget it, you’re fired. There is nothing to help you so that you can have a good childbirth experience, and then so you can have the child with you a few months before returning to work. There is none of that… just get out because you’re fired.

And if the capataz gets “turned on” by the girl and she doesn’t do him the favor, she’s out of there. We can see that they are exploited as workers, but apart from that they mock them for their ways. Because they are indigenous who came from the mountains, who looked for work, and now they are laborers. They mock them because they are indigenous; for the way they talk, for their color, for their size, and for their bodies. And besides, they exploit them and they fuck them over because they are women. But where else can they go?

So, we began to go to different places; we were just in Sinaloa. We came from Sinaloa and Baja Sur. In Sinaloa there are these fishermen, Teacapán is the name of their community, and nobody knew anything about them until we actually got there. But we didn’t go there to ask for their vote. We went to hear them tell us about their problems. “Well the problem is that they won’t let us fish for shrimp, and that is what we live off of.” When you arrive at the community it is much like this one, but with a bunch of mosquitoes. And how much did we walk? Two or three kilometers when we were leaving and we passed a hotel. But it was very pretty, very clean. So we asked, “Why is he who works a criminal?” Don’t think that they put someone in jail for selling drugs, or because he kills people or robs them. They throw them in jail for working, and if you don’t want to go to jail you have to pay a bribe to the bureaucrat. That’s how it is in Sinaloa, in Teacapán.

Now let’s go farther up, to Dautillo, a neighborhood like this one, where they are fishermen. There is an illegal trash dump that results in a lot of mosquitoes and worms. The majority of people there are little kids who are in the school; we even went to the school with them. They are going to protest to the municipal government asking why they don’t get rid of the trash. And the mayor tells them, “The trash truck has broke down.” So we asked them why the truck broke down when it was time to pick their trash, but it didn’t break down when they picked up the rich man’s trash. It would have been fair if it broke down when it was time to pick up the trash of the rich, it’s not your problem, but instead it’s there to pick up the rich man’s trash. No. When things mess up it’s always when they are dealing with the poor folks.

So a compañero says let’s study in school, because there are scholarships. We went to talk to the students of the University of Sinaloa, and they told us, “It doesn’t matter if we’re busting our asses all day long studying,” it’s a lie that this is public and free. As this compañero explained to us, they ask for donations, but the donations are not voluntary. If you want to take a test, or get into the lab, you have to pay. So, you can get in for free, but if you want to get a passing grade you must pay, or your career is over and you won’t find work.

Well that is what we saw, and they told us:
He’s getting his medical degree.
And what is he doing?
He’s driving a taxi.
But why? Did he study for that?
No, he studied to be a doctor.

And so you are sending off your children to school while there are the doctors driving taxis. Then there is an engineer. What is he doing? Selling tacos. And this other guy who studied pharmaceutical chemistry is now in the U.S. picking cotton, or tomatoes, or whatever is available.

So we said: Who is going to do all of this studying and all that other stuff only to find that there is no work? We jumped over to Baja [California] Sur, in a ship. They didn’t want us on board because they wanted to know, “Who is Marcos?” We made it across anyway, and we got there to Los Cabos, which is the very tip of the peninsula. Shit! There are some really pretty hotels there. They have lights, water, telephone, the internet, a golf course, a swimming pool, all really nice. But where the workers live, there is no drainage. And you know what? They still get charged for it; they get charged for drainage service and yet they don’t have that service.

Now, lets go to La Paz, because I told them I would mention them. A neighborhood, also like this one, with poor people who work the same way: small merchants, street sellers, workers, clerks, and housewives. And the town puts a fucking antenna from IUSACEL, for cell phones, there in the middle of the poor neighborhood. Mind you that this antenna was right beside a person’s house. Fifteen or twenty meters tall, and it makes a terrible racket. Didn’t the hurricane just go through there? Then these kids told us – and don’t think that it’s me that is saying this – a kid took the microphone and said, “we were afraid all night long,” he said, “because it made loud noises like it was going to fall.” So they got their flashlights to see where the tower was going to fall so that they could get out of the way, even though they were little kids. But this woman stands up and she has a cane – she can hardly walk – and she asks, “Where am I going to run to? What you have to do is hope that it falls to the other side, only that my son lives on that side!”

There it is, between them all. They organized and they said, “Get this thing out of here.” The law said that they had to get it out of there. But there it still sits, because the company doesn’t want to take it down. The neighbors are afraid that there is going to be a big windstorm that will make the antenna fall and cause some horrible tragedy. Then it will come out in the papers that those children died, that the women died, that men died because the antenna fell on them. But they are not going to say that they were being sued to get them to take it down. I told them that I would mention the name of the mayor there, he is Castro Cosío, and he is with the PRD. And I told them, wherever I go I am going to tell their story, until they get that antenna out of there. And I am carrying this here to San Quintín.

Okay… We came here because this place is isolated, we went through Santa Rosalia where, compañeros, it is all women who work in the squid harvesting industry. You know who the owners are? Koreans. Though Korea is a long way away they’re ensconced anyway. They fire the workers and the workers told us how they had been working. All day long they were working hard. And you know how they pay them? They pay them centavos (a centavo is one tenth of a penny) for each kilo of squid that they clean. They were calculating it, because they pay them between six and fifty centavos per kilo, thirty centavos per kilo. A kilo of squid in Wal-Mart (that stupid place) is like seventy-five or eighty pesos a kilo.

And who is going to keep the other eighty-nine pesos? The owner. And he gives a little to the mayor and to the governor, and some to Fox, and whoever else helps him to see that he remains unbothered. And the people they fired… did the owner give them severance pay? No, he gave them nothing, compañeros. Did anyone listen to them? Yes, the Other Campaign did. And we put these microphones on the compañeros’ and we couldn’t stop them because no one had spoken about this before. One woman almost went wild and started to name names.

Because each one of us knows that the pain of every place has a name. Who is responsible is not God, nor is it a matter of bad luck. Here the asshole has a name. Like that asshole named Castro Cosío in La Paz, and in every place this kind of person has a name, and we know it. It is the governor who sells out, the treasurer who rips off, the bureaucrat who doesn’t do his job – who has us running back and forth – or the policeman who humiliates us, all of these people.

Therefore, what we are saying is that we need to organize ourselves. But let us no longer fight alone, compañeros. If we are telling you this clearly it is because we have seen all of this, and we say: Everywhere we are traveling we can see there is a fuck load of strength. During the war for independence the indigenous remained the same. And then the Mexican revolution, and we stayed the same. Well, this time it cannot be the same.

If we are going to change things, things must change for the indigenous people. This is why we made an agreement with the National Indigenous Congress. Apart from everyone, as Indian peoples, we have to fight so that the same thing doesn’t happen again. Of course we are going to topple the government, and of course we are going to run the rich off. But what if some other asshole comes in who is going to do the same things to us as they did before? This we can’t agree to. They have to respect us as indigenous, everyone who is such.

That is what we told them, because the day will come here in San Quintín Valley when it will be the Triqui community, and not the San Quintín Valley municipality, or whatever you want to call it. And all of these riches that the other guy is taking away is going to stay with you, and you’re going to say, “Well, this guy is going to be hurting because he is not eating.”

We went to Ixmiquilpan where indigenous who are Ñañhu and Otomies ran off the hotel owner, and now the hotel is property of the community where it is located. It was a very nice hotel, but it belongs to the community and they made it a cooperative. They split up the profits. Compañeros, compañeras: the children get scholarships right through college; they don’t pay a cent, not even for books. Because they make so much that it makes enough for everyone. And before, the owner only made enough for himself. The rest got forty-five, fifty, or one hundred pesos if they were lucky.

We went to other places and heard the matter of salaries, like the instance of the basic food basket that a compañero spoke about earlier. Compañeros, in order to more or less live well, everyday you have to earn 485 pesos. So you have to work, but they have to pay you ten times what they are paying now, because if you pay rent or you get sick you often need more money. And if you are shut in all day long, you are not going to see any television, or go to the movies, or go dancing, none of that.

So, with all of this happening we say again: what we have to do is organize ourselves and get to know each other, so that throughout the country they might know what is happening in San Quintín Valley. But not so Fox hears about it and finds it embarrassing or shameful so that he does something about it, or the governor of Baja California either. It is to see that people who are just like us can say: I am like them, let’s see if we can join them and then we can do what we want to do, struggle, because that is what we know. If we didn’t know how to struggle, the Spanish would have finished us 500 years ago. And they didn’t finish us, because we know how to resist. Now, it is about winning our freedom.

And so, what compañero Carlos is proposing, and what we came to propose as well, is not about someone coming here to give orders. You all organize yourselves, and when you are ready to struggle, we will agree and they will have no choice but to respect us. If you all struggle here, we will support you in other places as well. And if we are struggling in other places, you all will support us there, too.

That is our proposal. Thank you compañeros, thank you compañeras.

October 25, 2006

Oaxaca: Pronuncement of the National Meeting of Civil Organizations

Wednesday, October 25 2006 @ 12:38 PM PD

North AmericaIn the National Meeting of Civil Organizations, celebrated in the city of México from the 20th to the 22th of October in the present year, 81 organizations participated from 23 states of the republic, and we desire to publish the following :

* The grave political and social conflict in which the state of Oaxaca is living descends from at least three decades of injuries to the population of Oaxaca, from whence the violent and reperessive action of the state has brought together the society in a single demand: the rejection of Ulises Ruiz Ortiz as governor of the State. This demand has provoked the illegal arrest of directors, armed attacks on pacific demonstrations, the installation of armed forces on Oaxaca territory, the torture and assassination of sympathizers and members of the popular movement, including the intimidation of personalities such as Maestro Francisco Toledo, whose house was shot at the morning of Saturday, October 21. All these have generated a climate of anxiety and psychological terror in the population during the past four months.
...

Oaxaca Teachers Refuse to Budge, Reject Order from their Own Union Leadership to Return to Classes

Commentary by Nancy Davies, Reporting from Oaxaca

Oaxaca Teachers Refuse to Budge, Reject Order from their Own Union Leadership to Return to Classes

National Senate Refuses to Resolve Oaxaca Stand-Off: APPO Must Find its Own Solutions

Oaxaca, October 22, 2006

Another difficult night in Oaxaca; around 2 a.m. church bells rang furiously, the emergency sound, dogs ran up and down our street barking madly, and rockets exploded. I got out of bed and turned on Radio Universidad, which was reporting on the statewide assembly of Section 22 of the teachers’ union.

At 8 a.m., the radio broadcast an approximation of what happened and the position of Section 22...

First, on October 19, the National Senate of Mexico, voting along party lines, refused to intervene in the Oaxaca crisis. The possibility that the Senate would declare that the government of Oaxaca has “disappeared” came to nothing, leaving the peoples’ and teachers’ social movement – comprised of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO), Section 22 of the national teachers union, Oaxacan communities and civil organizations – to find their own solution to the stalemate that grips the state of Oaxaca.

With 74 votes in favor and 31 against, the Senate accepted on Thursday afternoon the statement of the Internal Governance Commission not to declare a disappearance of powers in Oaxaca and not to proceed with the removal of the governor, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz. The 31 votes against accepting the report were cast by the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), the Labor Party (PT) and the “Convergence” party, while the 74 votes in favor were cast by an alliance of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), National Action (PAN) and “Green Party” (PVEM) legislators.

Meanwhile, during the time frame the senators were “considering” the issue (which in reality involved the formation of an alliance between the PAN and PRI) another teacher was murdered in a drive-by shooting on Wednesday, October 18. The primary school teacher, Pánfilo Hernández Vásquez coming out of an assembly with neighbors in the Jardín neighborhood, was shot twice in the abdomen. His death brings the total of movement murders, of teachers, APPO and indigenous leaders, to eleven since August (including the deaths of three members of the Triqui indigenous group – two men and a twelve-year-old boy – murdered in rural Oaxaca and left off of some versions of the death toll reported in the media).

By radio, the APPO called for citizens to strengthen and reinforce the barricades, maintaining the level of maximum alert decreed the night before. It was reported at the same time that as part of the government plan for “Operation Iron,” the state government of Ulises Ruiz Ortiz (“URO”) has completed renovating the prison in the city of Tlocolula, suggesting that it expects massive detentions of teachers and APPO members. The remodeling involves separating each cell into two, to double the holding size from 200 to 400. However, teachers, students and the APPO openly discuss that many of them will die by government-sponsored activities before they see their half-cell in Tlocolula.

Thousands of people had gone out to the streets on October 19 to show their allegiance to the APPO, which declared that it is preparing for the next phase of the struggle. APPO spokesman Florentino López Martínez announced that the Oaxaca people will continue to seek international support – for example, from the Inter-American Human Rights Commission – to pursue the demand for a declaration of failed government.

The state was in a grim mood, as the teachers’ union returned to its base for another consultation about returning to the classroom. Many teachers viewed themselves as facing a choice between death or continuing to fight. But for the first time, I saw on Saturday a spray-painted wall saying. “Rueda P, you are a traitor to the teachers and to the APPO.” Enrique Rueda Pacheco, the head of the teachers’ union, had announced the return to classes on national television. His declaration was “illegal,” in the sense that no consultation with the base – required under Section 22 principles ¬– had yet taken place. When teachers received their ballots to vote on the future of the strike, the ballot questions asked only when they thought classes should resume; continuing the strike was not offered as an option.

Rumors abound (stoked by the Commercial Media, which has got most everything wrong since the conflict erupted last May) about blocs forming within the movement that may split it, including the splinter teachers’ Central Committee for Struggle (CCL), which is affiliated with the governor’s PRI party and has also called for a return to classes.

The Wide Front for Popular Struggle (FALP, one of the more of important groups that make up the APPO) convened a meeting of the movement and the teachers to call for “the reflection of those forces which many times have acted and continue acting in an irresponsible manner, immature and excessively protagonist, and that many times have carried this movement to the brink, from which it has been difficult to extricate itself.” In a communiqué, the FALP stated: “One has to put above all the general interest and the continuity of the movement; one should not permit the goals of groups, often illusory, chimerical, to change the years of popular struggle in Oaxaca.”

Some teachers marched to Mexico City on foot, camped out and launched a hunger strike in anticipation of the Senate’s vote on the disappearance of powers. In a communication published in Noticias, the encamped teachers, wrote to their compañeros in the rank and file of the Oaxaca teachers’ union: “The first accord of the state assembly on October 18, 2006 which says: the departure of URO is not revocable or negotiable, therefore, the consultation that appears to propose the return to classes, leaves us with the clear idea that within the teachers union there are positions which favor the state, shown by putting dates to this resolution, which squeezes our base for an immediate reply without the opportunity to think if this is the best way to achieve a dignified exit from the conflict that we face today; such an exit was being analyzed by the senators of the republic who, upon seeing the result of the state (teachers) assembly radically altered their decision. Of the 14 members of the Internal Governance Commission in the senate, 11 voted against and only 3 in favor of the disappearance of powers once they confirmed that that this teachers union was inducing their bases to lower the pressure which was being exercised, in place of waiting for the result of this commission as was agreed in the prior State Assembly (of teachers).”

The document goes on to cite the brutal repression of June 14, the ten assassinated companions, the four comrades imprisoned, the 500 kilometers walked to Mexico in the march, and the 21 teachers on hunger strike.

”While we agree there is a commitment to the children and parents, we also consider that the return to classes under present conditions does not guarantee in any way the security and physical safety of all the education workers and of the people organized in the APPO, as was shown in the cowardly assassination of the compañero Pánfilo Hernández Vásquez of the Sector Zimatlán tonight in the Colonia Jardín.”

Those camped in front of the Senate building in Mexico, and the hunger strikers camped out at the downtown Juárez monument, jointly agreed in their document that this is a movement of the rank and file, not of the leaders. Therefore individual teachers have the right to decide to return to classes or not, without subjection to the dates and conditions indicated. Thus Oaxaca waited anxiously for the result of the teachers’ vote. Once again callers to the radio station (now the resurrected Radio Universidad) were weeping, and others with great sadness reminded the teachers that the people have supported them, fed them, and lived with them on the barricades and encampments. Granting that callers are self-selective in support of the APPO, the constant stream of phone calls pleading for the teachers to hold on, was moving.

Many teachers remain committed to the APPO maxim that the departure of URO is not negotiable. In two previous votes, the rank-and-file have vowed to open classes only five days after Ulises Ruiz Ortiz leaves office. On Saturday, October 21, in third consultation vote by the membership of Section 22 across the state since the strike began, initial reports suggested that a majority of the teachers rejected Rueda’s call to return to classes, citing their obligation to honor their dead, as well as their promises to the people and the APPO.

The first result of the teachers’ consultation was received by telephone to Radio Universidad on Saturday. They were read on the air, declaring the vote in favor of continuing the struggle, with no return to classes. The initial vote results announced on Radio Universidad and in Noticias, reported that six of the eight regions had rejected the opening of schools before URO left.
However, when Rueda arrived at the teachers’ assembly, after hours of delay, the vote seemed to have shifted (or to have been shifted by Rueda). Now the vote was to return to classes, with figures like 25,000 in favor of a return, 15,000 against. The fight was on. Radio Universidad called on everybody to go to the teachers’ union hall to protest, with that loud clamor which woke those asleep.

On Sunday morning, the proposition has emerged that another consultation be held, to verify the teachers’ position. The questions for the new consultation are: first, do you agree to open the classrooms, and second, if yes, when? This indicates that Rueda’s ploy did not work.

Meanwhile Oaxaca must cope with its alarms. For example, the town of Villa Alta, in the Sierra Norte, issued a formal complaint on October 16 against the presence of military troops who give no explanation as to as why they are there, and have increased the fear among the people. Many small towns are inhabited only by elderly people who are strong in demanding their rights, but physically incapable of defending them. If conditions are so dictated, they might be living permanently under military control, similar to parts of the state of Chiapas. Furthermore, in addition to the rural towns, many cities are presently held by APPO sympathizers who expelled local PRI politicians and now occupy the government buildings. As the movement goes, so goes their fate.

Another example is the declaration by the human rights group of Oaxaca stating that armed police in civilian clothes were stationed outside the meeting place for the Dialogue for Oaxaca, which has entered the work-table phase. When the participants left the building they were followed by vehicles, which held 18 heavily armed men. This case of intimidation is one of many.

Ulises Ruiz (URO) first declared that he would once again reorganize his cabinet, and based on the teachers’ return to classes, issue a general amnesty. Immediately upon the teachers’ apparent Saturday rejection of resuming classes, he changed his statement to a threat to call in the Federal Preventive Police to clear the encampment and barricades by force. But URO does not control the PFP, the federal government does.

Therefore, once again the embattled state awaits some sort of resolution, now not just the standoff with URO, but also to relieve the exhausted teachers who have no income and bear the brunt of sleeping in the encampments. No way out, no way back, no way to separate the strands of the movement, the teachers, the indigenous, the rural towns, the workers and the citizenry of Oaxaca, appears clear. The only glimmer in the darkness is the creation of more and more APPOs, such as the newly formed assembly in the state of Mexico. As I’m listening to the radio, the strongest mood prevailing is determination to hold on, united if possible.


Banner: Rueda Pacheco, why don't you hold the consulta (vote) in the graves of the fallen compañeros?"

Venezuela to give up UN candidacy for Bolivia: Morales

[There is also this story, which claims the bid to drop out for Bolivia is not true...so we'll see]
*
LA PAZ


Venezuela has agreed to drop out of the hotly contested race for Latin America's open seat on the UN Security Council and asked Bolivia to run in its place, Bolivia's president said Tuesday.

"The comrade (Venezuelan President Hugo) Chavez says that to find a consensus he leaves the candidacy to Bolivia," President Evo Morales said.

US critic Venezuela has battled for the seat against US-backed Guatemala but neither country was able to win the two-thirds majority needed to win the spot after three-dozen polls at the UN General Assembly.

Despite trailing Guatemala in nearly all the votes, Caracas has refused to drop out.
"We are candidates for the Security Council," Morales, one of Chavez's closest allies, said. "Hopefully we will obtain a consensus."

"Last night, Venezuela's ambassador called me first. Then commander Chavez called me and told me that since he was unable to get two-thirds for the Security Council," Caracas was giving up its candidacy for Bolivia, he said.

The General Assembly was scheduled to resume voting on Latin America's non-permanent, open seat on Wednesday.

The United States has campaigned for Guatemala, fearing that the leftist Chavez government would use the seat to be disruptive, routinely oppose US measures and openly attack the United States.

Chavez used an address to the UN General Assembly last month to call US President George W. Bush the "devil" and said the podium still "smelled of sulphur" a day after the US leader had used it.

The Security Council is made up of 15 members, including five veto-wielding permanent members -- China, the United States, France, Britain and Russia -- and 10 non-permanent members, five of which are replaced every year.

October 24, 2006

Ortega could win Nicaragua presidency outright, polls show

Rory Carroll, Latin America correspondent
Tuesday October 24, 2006
The Guardian

· Sandinista leader on track for victory in first round
· Washington warns of economic backlash

Daniel Ortega, the Sandinista leader, has surged ahead in Nicaragua's presidential race, giving him a strong chance of returning to power in next month's election.

Two recent opinion polls put one of Washington's cold war hate figures far enough ahead to clinch victory in the first round on November 5. The prospect has alarmed the Bush administration, which renewed warnings that the small central American country will lose US investment if Mr Ortega, 60, wins.

At carnival-style rallies the former guerrilla leader has told supporters, many of them impoverished farmers, not to be complacent and to vote. "Until the harvest is in you mustn't neglect it," he said.

Mr Ortega's campaign uses pastel pink colours and John Lennon's Give Peace a Chance anthem to signal he has traded Marxist ideology and revolution for centrist moderation and reconciliation.

His running mate is a former spokesman for the Contras, the Ronald Reagan-backed rebels who fought a bloody civil war against the Sandinista government in the 1980s.

A poll by Zogby International gave Mr Ortega 35% support, or a 15-point lead over his nearest rival in a splintered field of five candidates. Another poll put him 17 points in front. To win in the first round a candidate needs 40% of the vote, or 35% with a five-point lead.

Since being defeated in the 1990 election Mr Ortega lost two further bids for the presidency after losing some supporters who said he was an opportunist masking as a champion of the poor. In an apparent bid for the Catholic vote he has backed a bill that would outlaw abortions.

If Mr Ortega does not clinch the first round he will face an uphill battle in the run-off because the fractured opposition could unite around a single candidate, most likely Eduardo Montealegre, a US-educated banker favoured by Mr Bush.

The US commerce secretary, Carlos Gutierrez, said an Ortega victory risks Nicaragua's participation in central America's Cafta trade accord with Washington. The US ambassador to Managua, Paul Trivelli, has been even more outspoken in warning of dire consequences. Election monitors from the Organisation of American States have told the US not to meddle. Venezuela's President Hugo Chávez has also been criticised for sending subsidised oil to Nicaragua to boost his Sandinista ally.

An Ortega presidency would revive Latin America's "pink tide" of leftwing leaders but analysts say that Nicaragua, with just 6 million people and a near destitute economy, is a regional minnow.

"The United States just gets too worked up about Daniel Ortega," Michael Shifter, of the Inter-American Dialogue thinktank, told Cox News Service. "After 1990 a lot of people in Washington thought they wouldn't have to deal with him again, and now the possibility that he might come back is something they can't abide."

Venezuela, China Create $6 Billion Fund to Build Public Works

by Theresa Bradley

Venezuela and China will create a $6 billion joint fund to finance infrastructure development in the South American country, building on agreements made during President Hugo Chavez's trip to Beijing last August.

China will contribute $4 billion to the fund, which will finance housing, telecommunications and highway projects, and help build a heavy cargo railway across Venezuela, the Venezuelan government said in a statement released today.

``This alliance comes to benefit the construction of a multipolar world,'' Venezuelan foreign minister Nicolas Maduro said in the release. Officials are expected to sign a final agreement establishing the fund tonight.

The fund is the latest in a series of accords between China and Venezuela, as President Hugo Chavez moves to decrease the country's reliance on the U.S., which now buys about two-thirds of Venezuelan oil exports.

Venezuela, the world's fifth-largest oil exporter, has boosted sales to China to 154,000 barrels a day, up from 14,000 barrels a day in 2004. China has meanwhile announced plans to pour about $10 billion into Venezuelan energy and infrastructure sectors, as it looks to feed its own soaring domestic energy demand, Chinese state media said.

``Risen Again''

China has ``risen again,'' setting an example for Venezuela and developing countries around the world, Chavez said after representatives from the two countries signed six economic cooperation accords last week in Caracas.

``China is demonstrating that you don't have to be an empire to be grand,'' Chavez said.

The Venezuelan infrastructure fund will include cooperation in health, science and technology sectors between the two countries, Maduro said.

China Development Bank president Chen Yuan is in Caracas today to sign the accord. The bank has financed most of China's largest infrastructure projects, granting 1.6 trillion yuan in loans ($203 billion) to fund more than 4,000 projects since it was founded in 1994, the bank's website states.

China also plans to aid Venezuelan agricultural development, assisting in seed improvement and crop transport, and could help establish an agricultural science academy in Venezuela, Venezuelan state media said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Theresa Bradley in Caracas at tbradley7@bloomberg.net .

October 23, 2006

Panama Looks to Expand Canal

by Will Weissert
PANAMA CITY, Panama

The old shortcut between the seas isn't what it used to be.

Many modern ships are too wide to use the 92-year-old Panama Canal, where traffic is so heavy that vessels still able to squeeze through can face costly delays.

Panamanians were expected Sunday to approve an eight-year, $5.25 billion expansion plan in a referendum. The idea is to build a third set of locks on the Atlantic and Pacific sides, creating a separate lane for larger cargo, cruise and tanker ships while doubling the canal's capacity.

With the future canal in mind, U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt had helped arrange Panama's relatively bloodless independence from Colombia in 1903, and the Americans took over a bankrupt French canal-building effort a year later.

By some accounts more than 25,000 workers died from yellow fever and malaria while building the S-shaped, 80-kilometer channel, which opened on Aug. 15, 1914.

General Omar Torrijos, who took power in a coup in 1968, became a national hero nine years later when he signed a treaty with U.S. President Jimmy Carter to hand control of the waterway to Panama on Dec. 31, 1999.

Now, the largest overhaul in the canal's history is set to happen under his son's watch.


"We consider it a historical coincidence, but a happy one," Lewis Navarro said. "First it was putting the canal in the hands of its rightful owner. Now, after decades of discussion and studies by other administrations, it's up to this government to oversee a necessary expansion."

Without the expansion, the canal will increasingly lose out as shipping traffic finds other routes. Even the Suez Canal is a competitive alternative for the largest ships moving between Asia and the United States east coast, says Maersk Line, the canal's biggest user.

Meanwhile, Nicaragua to the north is enthusiastically pushing its own plan to open an ocean-to-ocean waterway.

"We have to be looking at staying competitive," said Jorge Quijano, the Panama Canal's director of maritime operations. "The only way to do that is to expand what we have."

The Panama Canal now handles 5 percent of world maritime traffic, 68 percent of it to or from the United States.

About 25 of the 37 ships passing through on an average day pay up to $200,000 to reserve a spot in line, which on top of regular tolls pushes the cost of crossing Panama to more than $400,000 for the largest ships, said canal administrator Alberto Aleman Zubieta.

Even a ship that has a reservation waits an average of 16 hours before moving through, and those without reservations wait an average of 28 hours -- delays that cost shippers about $50,000 per day per vessel. And when the canal needs routine maintenance, the delays can grow to six or seven days, with more than 100 ships lining up to get through, Zubieta said.

"Tolls are steep now and the canal is almost maxed out," said Mike Zampa, spokesman for the world's seventh largest shipping company, APL. "You still get through, but there's a reservation system that makes things difficult. They are even using an auction system to sell some slots at much higher rates."

Important Update from Oaxaca

From George Salzman

Friends,

I hate to send out another e-mail distribution only three days after my last one, but I’m afraid the situation in Oaxaca is threatening to become ugly. The newspapers will write about the struggles within the Teachers Union, which look pretty serious right now, but this note is about an overt attempt to frighten a different group of people who were simply engaged in a dialogue. The Urgent Action alert from the Oaxaca Human Rights Network is posted on their website at

http://www.laneta.apc.org/rodh/spip/article.php3?id_article=111 . The translation is mine.

If you spread the word, and the four parties listed get enough e-mails and/or faxes, it may persuade them to think a military attack would be too costly in terms of world opinion. Thanks for whatever you can do.

All best wishes,

George

_______________________________________________

A Crime against the Workshops of the “Dialogue for Oaxaca”

The Oaxaca Human Rights Network has given prompt follow-up to the development and coordination of the workshops of the “DIALOGUE FOR OAXACA” whose purpose is to analyze and propose, by means of consensus, alternatives to the situation we are living in, with the participation of citizens, representatives of various organizations and social sectors, as well as municipal and agricultural authorities of Oaxaca State. This work began on 12 October this year.

As part of these activities various workshops for discussion and analysis are developing, however the state government is undertaking illegal acts of intimidation against the free development of this citizen dialogue.

ACTIONS

On Friday 20 October 2006, in the course of the fourth session of the workshops of “Dialogue for Oaxaca”, taking place in the building of the Pastoral Center of the Diocese, at 702 Garcia Vigil Street, corner of Cosijopi Street, Center, Oaxaca, at about 7:00pm, the participants of the dialogue workshops noticed that the building in which we were meeting was surrounded by heavily armed judicial (now ministerial) and municipal police. They were dressed as civilians, with military haircuts, openly displaying high caliber arms at waist height, some of them wearing bullet-proof jackets. They had three vehicles (one white, one red, both Chevrolets and the other a recent model black van with polarized windows, all of them without license plates). What we succeeded in observing is that in those vehicles there were about 18 police. We also observed at that moment that they were communicating by means of radios and cellular phones that they carried.

Facing that environment, those of us participating in the dialogue workshops chose to leave in groups, some of us heading towards the zócalo [the main square in the center of the city], because that’s where the APPO encampment is. However, en route, some of us noticed that the police vehicles were followin us.

Because of this situation, the Human Rights Network of Oaxaca, as well as different organizations of civil society participating in the Dialogue workshops for Oaxaca:

DEMAND ENERGETICALLY:

That the Mexican State, specifically the Federal Government, guarantee the security of the various parties that are participating in the Dialogues for Oaxaca.

That the Mexican government take actions in order to end the strategically organized harrassment by the Oaxaca State government against the parties participating in the Dialogues for Oaxaca. The State government has been turning upside down our fundamental rights such as freedom to meet, freedom of expression, and above all crimes against our personal liberty.

VICENTE FOX QUESADA PRESIDENTE CONSTITUCIONAL DE MÉXICO FAX. + 55 52 77 23 76, vicente.fox.quesada@presidencia.gob.mx

LIC. CARLOS ABASCAL CARRANZA SECRETARIO DE GOBERNACIÓN FAX + 55 50 93 34 14, cabascal@segob.gob.mx

DR. JOSÉ LUIS SOBERANES PRESIDENTE DE LA COMISIÓN NACIONAL DE DERECHOS HUMANOS FAX + 55 56 81 71 99, correo@cndh.gob.mx

LIC. ULISES RUIZ ORTÍZ GOBERNADOR DEL ESTADO DE OAXACA Fax: + 951 5020530, gobernador@oaxaca.gob.mx

October 22, 2006

Debunking corporate spin from Oaxaca

In Oaxaca, rumors often abound that the more than 2000 barricades that guard the city will soon come down. But this latest piece of corporate propaganda goes beyond this and declares a split in the movement. We want to try to make it clear that this is not true.

Corporate media is often incapable of separating leaders from rank-and-file, and this article is a perfect example of this. Reuda did announce a return to classes, but this decision was not ratified by the base. The results of the statewide consulta will probably not be known until Saturday or even Sunday. The strike is not over until the teachers themselves say it is over.

Debunking corporate spin from Oaxaca
By an anarchist member of Pittsburgh Organizing Group currently in Oaxaca

In Oaxaca, rumors often abound that the more than 2000 barricades that guard the city will soon come down. But this latest piece of corporate propaganda goes beyond this and declares a split in the movement. We want to try to make it clear that this is not true.

Corporate media is often incapable of separating leaders from rank-and-file, and this article is a perfect example of this. Reuda did announce a return to classes, but this decision was not ratified by the base. The results of the statewide consulta will probably not be known until Saturday or even Sunday. The strike is not over until the teachers themselves say it is over.

Much of the anger over the move is coming from members of the movement who are not in Section 22, but there is also frustration from within the teacher's union over Rueda's unilateral announcement. This is the third "return to classes" that Rueda has announced, although the two previous times he said that it was dependent on the results of a consulta.

As for the end of the barricades, they seem to cite only Ruiz's prediction to back this up. Ruiz has been chased out of town (or underground) by the movement and we are supposed to think that he has any incite into the actions of the APPO? His predictable victory in the Senate has given the ousted-in-all-but-name governor too much confidence. From the ground in Oaxaca, I tell my comrades else this: the people at the barricades have no intension of ending them. The unlikely loss of the teachers would be a blow (and understandable considering what they are going through), but it will not stop the barricades, and it will not stop the movement.

Finally, as an indicator of popular opinion, the corporate press talks to a shop owner who is in business near the occupied zocalo. This man has probably lost a lot of business in the last several months because of the movement's inpact on tourism. Many businesses in the city depend on tourism for much of their income, but the service industry close to the zocalo most of all. Even in the poorest state in Mexico, the corporate press thinks that a middle-class businessman with economic interests in the end of the conflict is the best way to decide what "Oaxaca city residents" think.

In short, don't believe the hype. The APPO (and it's members) and the teachers need support. For more information on how you can support the movement in Oaxaca, you can contact POG at pog@mutualaid.org.

Protesters, Teachers Part Ways in Oaxaca

by REBECA ROMERO
OAXACA, Mexico

Radical protesters and teachers who have taken over the city of Oaxaca appeared to be parting ways on Friday after the teachers' leaders agreed to end a strike and return to work.

Embattled Oaxaca state Gov. Ulises Ruiz predicted that the protesters' barricades blocking highways and streets would be taken down within a week.

An end to the strike could weaken the protest camps that dot Oaxaca city. Both the teachers and the Popular Assembly of the People of Oaxaca, or APPO, which is overseeing the protests, planned meetings to analyze their next moves.

Leftists who have taken over private radio stations in Oaxaca broadcast diatribes on Friday calling teachers' union leader Enrique Rueda "a traitor" and a "sellout," after Rueda said on Thursday that the strikers would return to work, even though they didn't achieve their main goal of removing Ruiz from power.

Rueda said the teachers would return out of sense of loyalty to Oaxaca's schoolchildren and solidarity with the people of the state. He did not explain the timing of the decision.

Many leftists remain convinced the protests should continue, even though their last legal recourse _ the Senate _ voted on Thursday that there were no grounds to remove Ruiz from office.

Ruiz appeared convinced that the protest movement, which has set up barricades, taken over government buildings and media outlets and hijacked and burned buses in Oaxaca City, 220 miles southeast of Mexico City, would soon end.

"I think that in the coming days, in the next week, the conflict will be resolved," Ruiz told reporters. "Oaxaca can't go on like this."

Oaxaca city residents welcomed the news of a possible finish to the conflict.

"It's gone on too long," tortilla shop owner Joel Ayala Dominguez said, speaking at his business near the city's main square.

Protesters and teachers had vowed not to consider offers from government negotiators _ including wage raises for teachers, and federal control of the widely distrusted local police _ until Ruiz left office. They accuse him of using fraud to win his 2004 election and of sending armed thugs against protesters.

Since late May, violence related to the strike has cost at least five lives. The federal government has been loath to intervene in the conflict, fearing more bloodshed.

But pressure has been mounting for a rapid solution, because the dispute has scared off tourists and hurt businesses in the state, as well as keeping 1.3 million schoolchildren in Oaxaca out of classes.

Two more Oaxaca communards murdered

Two more members of the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO) have been murdered by supporters of Governor Ruiz, bringing the total to nine.

Gunmen loyal to Governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz have stepped up attacks on those involved in the mobilisations in Oaxaca, killing two members of the APPO, taking the total death toll to 9.

On October 18th, Pánfilo Hernández, a teacher from the Zimatlán sector, was shot three times in the chest from a car as he left a community centre. He died from his wounds at a nearby hospital. An APPO 'mobile brigade' then apprehended a police officer and charged him with the crime, but he was subsequently released.

Four days earlier, Alejandro García Hernández, another member of APPO, was shot dead by a soldier, dressed in civilian clothes, who reportedly shouted "Viva Ulises Ruiz" as he killed the man.

Intimidation is ongoing, with APPO leader Adolfo López Ortega also reporting that he has been followed and filmed by the governor's supporters and also received death threats. Reportedly the men following him were from the CISEN Intelligence Agency, and were driving a car with Mexico City number plates.

The local section of the teachers' union are currently discussing whether to end their strike, which precipitated the uprising in Oaxaca. The union is currently consulting with its membership, with APPO members urging them to continue the struggle, and all determined that Governor Ruiz must go.

Mexico, Oaxaca, interview with Florentino Lopez Martinez (APPO)

We interviewed Florentino Lopez Martinez, the spokesman of APPO on the 7th
of October. APPO stands for Asamblea Popular de los Pueblos de Oaxaca.
Below the interview can be find as questions and answers.

Question 1. What is APPO and how is it organised?
Answer -- APPO was started on June 17th 2006 as a reaction to the eviction. APPO
is an umbrella organisation in which very different organisations are united, such
as labour unions, farmers’ organisations, neighbourhood committees, organisations
of indigenous peoples, women’s groups, regionalgroups, and individuals.
Every organisation has its representative in the central meeting. Decisions are
made based on consensus, so decisions are not based on the majority of votes. APPO
has a programme of basic assumptions and goals, such as aiming for a real democratic
system, and the struggle against capitalism, imperialism and fascism. The
fundamental problem is capitalism; it is because of capitalism that Oaxaca
has such a tiran as governor, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz. APPO wants democracy, in
which everybody can participate. The situation as present is the result of
fascism, which shows that the working class is being repressed.

Question 2. What happens when the first demand of APPO, the resignment of
the governor Ulises Ruiz Ortiz, is complied with?
Answer
Our aim is a more democratic government that listens to the people more
than the current government does. We will continue to fight against
repression and for the advancement of human rights and equality. It
partially resembles ´La Otra Campaña´
of the Zapatistas, but the organisations united in APPO are much more
diverse than those united in ´La Otra Campaña´.

APPO is not part of, or associated with, any political party.
APPO concentrates on a struggle that is broader than only the struggle in
Oaxaca. Together with other organisations in the country we have to get
out onto the streets to counter the current crisis in Mexico. Besides
being a local struggle, it is also a national as well as an international
struggle to change the world.

Question 3. What do you understand by your use of the term ‘ democracy’?
Answer
It is not about having elections every few years, but about the
functioning of the system. In Mexico today, there is a huge difference in
power and wealth. Democracy is not only something political, but also
something economical and social. An example is the fact that TV channels
in Mexico are in the hands of a cartel, a group of people that decide on
the news that the people will see. In Mexico, people have no rights and
people can disappear just like that. There is no equality. In a democracy
in the other hand, everybody is equal and people are protected by the law.

Question 4. How does APPO organise the food, drink and money to keep this
action running for all these months?
Answer
The occupation of the city centre is the only way to be able to change
something. After the eviction on the 14th of June, when the people
reoccupied the city centre, supporters came to bring us food and drink.
This continues to happen up to today. There is much solidarity and help,
also from other parts of Mexico and from abroad, for instance from labour
unions.

Question 5. Many people in Oaxaca have lost their income or jobs because
of the action, which is lasting for 4 months now. How does the APPO deal
with this problem?
Answer
That is the consequence of our action. Also among them, there is much
solidarity. It is a way to build up something. The situation, as it is
now, is not the fault of APPO, but of the governor, Ulises Ruiz Ortiz. The
repression has been going on for years now, and lately the difference
between rich and poor has increased massively. And despite the fact that
the people have little to no income, they support APPO.

Question 6. How do you see the future, for instance what will it be like
in 10 years time?
Answer
The struggle in Oaxaca is a contribution to the global struggle.
Both locally and globally, people are struggling for emancipation, against
repression and for the downfall of the system. We will be able to harvest
the fruits of this struggle in the coming years. The people are taking
their lives into their own hands and are looking for new ways to live.
Ideas of other organisations and struggles have been of influence to both
the struggle in Oaxaca and the basic assumptions of APPO. This is the last
stage of the struggle against capitalism. To be able to exist, we have to
keep struggling against the new forms of repression that neo-liberalism
brings forth. And we have to find new ways ourselves It is a struggle that
is being carried out in the whole of South America. There are the
struggles in Venezuela and in Cuba, the struggles of our migrant brothers
worldwide, the struggle of the poor and of students in France, and the
struggle for land and freedom in Palestine.
It is a global struggle and therefore we have to mobilise globally.
It is the struggle of workers, who are moving into the same direction.

Question 7. Of which organisation within APPO are you a member?
Answer
Of Frente Popular Revolucionario-Oaxaca (a leftist people’s front, active
in all of Mexico, Carla)

Question 8. Is what you say being supported by all the organisations
affiliated with APPO?
Answer
Before the launch of APPO there were of course many ideas within the
individual organisations about building up a new social system and for a
revolution. Now, we work together for a better system of living. There is
only one way to do this.

Question 9. What does APPO consider an example? Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia?
Answer
All organisations that are anti-capitalist and anti-fascist contribute to
the international struggle. There are many ways to build up something, for
instance in Bolivia the struggle against energy multinationals, and the
Zapatistas with the caracoles.
The struggle is very broad, and we have to do our own activities and
struggle together on the international level. Another example is the
struggle that the people in Atenco have carried out against the building
of an airport. By doing actions, the people in Atenco were successful in
stopping this airport being built. Nobody holds the absolute truth about
how the struggle can best be carried out.
The only truth is learning by doing, progressing in the struggle by
carrying out the struggle.

Question 10. What position do women hold within APPO?
Answer
A very important position. From August onwards, there has been a separate
platform for women, Coordinacion de Muyeres. There has been a women’s
rally, for which mobilisation has been massive. Women hold a special
position within APPO.
Among women in Oaxaca, illiteracy rates are even higher than among men.
Many women have had no chance at all. APPO has a special women’s
manifesto. The position of women in indigenous communities is very
different than in other Mexican groups, in indigenous communities there is
less ´machismo´.

Question 11. Could you tell something about yourself?
Answer
My name is Florentino Lopez Martinez. I belong to the Mixteek. The Mixteek
are one of the most ancient ethnical groups in Oaxaca. I come from a
Mixteek village in the surroundings of Oaxaca and also speak the Mixteek
language.

Question 12. Could you tell a bit more about the struggle of indigenous
peoples?
Answer
It is the struggle of the majority of the country. There are many
indigenous peoples, all with their own language. Within APPO many
indigenous peoples are represented. The organisational forms of indigenous
peoples are much more democratic than those of other groups. Therefore
this has been used as a model for APPO. Consensus decision-making is
traditional among the indigenous peoples of Oaxaca. In the central meeting
of APPO we work in this way. All good traditions and customs of the
indigenous peoples are being used in the process of democratisation.

Website: http://www.grassrootsprojects.com
caravan99 at lists.riseup.net

Venezuelan Unemployment Drops 2 Percentage Points from Last Year

by Steven Mather, Venezuelanalysis.com

The Venezuelan unemployment rate dropped two percentage points from 11.5% down to 9.5% between September 2005 and September 2006, the National Institute of Statistics said yesterday.

There are currently 1,175,308 people unemployed in Venezuela, 444,582 less than last year. Of the 444,582 newly employed people 318,355 are employed in the formal sector (official employment rather than street traders and such like who form part of the informal sector) out of which 191,483 are women.

In other economic news, Domingo Maza Zavala, the Director of the Central Bank of Venezuela (BCV), has said he expects the rate of inflation to reach between 14 and 15% by the end of this year. He said that increased public expenditure and increased liquidity, both consequences of the high international oil prices are the main causes of the high level of inflation, “demand keeps rising, particularly the demand for consumable good and food stuffs in particular,” he said.

Many economists have recently argued that the Venezuelan currency the Bolívar is overvalued, fixed as it is at Bs. 2,150 to the dollar. While not disagreeing with the fact the currency is overvalued, Maza Zavala doubted whether a devaluation would solve that fundamental problem.

“This overvaluation problem has always been with our economy. Evidently, there is an inflation rate that hasn’t been brought under control and while inflation persists, the value of the currency will be eroded in terms of internal spending power,” said Maza Zavala.

“If the currency is devalued this becomes more complicated, it will mean inflationary pressures will be unleashed, the cost of imports will be greater, likewise with production costs as imported economic inputs are required and as a consequence inflationary pressure would increase,” he added.

He finished by saying that the he expected inflation to be lower in 2007, at around 10-12%.

The BCV also announced yesterday that Venezuela’s foreign reserves reached $35.367 million last Thursday, an increase of $296 million from the previous week.

Chavez ahead, Opposition Toughens

Caracas
Oct 21

The overwhelming possibilities of victory for Venezuelan president, Hugo Chavez, 45 days before the elections, today led the opposition to radicalize its discourse to subversive actions.

All surveys give Chavez an advantage that would be difficult to turn around by December 3.

Declarations by the main opposition candidate, Manuel Rosales and other spokespersons, blew the alarm in several media that warned of the possibility of an anti-constitutional coup under the pretext of an alleged election fraud.

Rosales, Zulia governor, is considered the crux of the project due to his known support of anti-constitutional actions, such as in the April 2002 attempted coup and his signature affixed to a decree annulling state powers.

Significantly, Rosales who had told reporters in Caracas that if he won he would continue to supply oil to all countries, including Cuba, this week changed his tune to defend the US blockade of the Island.

Venezuelan legislators are warning the population to be aware in case of possible destabilization attempts in coming days.

Parliamentary vice president, Desirée Santos Amaral, called attention to recent actions such as a disruption in La Güiria port in Sucre State that resulted in seven fishermen wounded and a demonstration that tried to reach the Presidential Palace.

It is her belief that some sectors are attempting to take advantage of similar events to mar the election campaign and "foment disturbances and anarchies." It is by those who do not accept their sure defeat on December 3.

President Hugo Chavez denounced attempts to pay off officers of the Armed Forces to create a favorable atmosphere for internal clashes. These would interrupt his nationalist policy of defending the wealth of this South American country, third most important world producer of oil.

He considers that the George W. Bush government is behind these anti-constitutional actions of the Venezuelan opposition that believes subversion is the only way to counteract popular support.

Guatemala-Venezuela competition deadlocked: Guatemala is ready to withdraw

Guatemala is ready to withdraw from the competition for a seat in the UN Security Council and favor a consensus candidate if the stalemate with Venezuela continues, Guatemala's Foreign Minister Gert Rosenthal said as quoted by Efe.

"We will continue fighting. Only when we become absolutely convinced that it is impossible to go on, we will try to meet the representatives of our region and look for another candidate," the diplomat said.

However, the possibility to withdraw is not welcomed by Guatemala. "Being so close to the two thirds of votes, and after making a huge effort, it is not pleasant to see another country ripping the fruits of our campaign. But we are not stubborn either. We are interested in the regional unity."

The election is adjourned until Wednesday 25th
"The election is adjourned until next Wednesday," the president of the United Nation General Assembly announced. The 192 member states gathered for the third time to elect the Latin American country to occupy a seat as a non-permanent member of the United Nation Security Council.

Once again, neither Guatemala nor Venezuela reached the number of votes required. The 35th round of voting ended with 103 votes for Guatemala and 81 for Venezuela.

The break is aimed at celebrating consultations to find a solution to the stalemate. Weariness is apparent in the UN, with many journalists wondering if Venezuela attempts to stretch the vote until next December 3rd -day of presidential elections in the country.

Torrijos for Bigger Panama Canal

Panama
Oct 21

President Martin Torrijos Saturday called for Panamanian people to support the Panama Canal enlargement project, up for referendum next Sunday.

In a TV interview, the governor confirmed that the building of lockgates will boost development in a country where 40 percent of the population lives in poverty.

He assured that oceanic way was always a hope for Panamanians.

"Unfortunately until now we did not have the opportunity of deciding about the Canal and this cost losses in generations of struggle, deaths and sacrifices," he pointed out.

According to the Head of the Government, a Panama Canal enlargement would allow the country to become the center of world trade.

After being asked about the possible benefits of this initiative, he recognized that in the past, the canal did not provide greater contribution to social development.

However, nowadays it earns 50 million dollars a year to be used in favor of the social classes that are in complete poverty.

That"s precisely the main argument of the ones favoring the enlargement, who state that Panama Canal still does not include a social development plan.

Bolivia downplays military agreement with Venezuela

Bolivia’s neighbours should not feel threatened by a proposed military aid package from Venezuela that will be used to set up new bases along its borders, said Defence Minister Walker San Miguel.

Landlocked Bolivia has borders with Brazil, Peru, Chile, Argentina and Paraguay.

The proposed 49 million US dollars loan from Venezuela will help fund a military base near Brazil to fight drug trafficking as well as a base for a battalion of engineers to build roads to an ecological reserve on the Peruvian border, the minister said.

"Our military posts on the borders do not include armaments ... we are a people of peace," San Miguel insisted adding that the loan, which still needs approval by Bolivia’s Congress, would also help build a port managed by Bolivia’s navy to transport oil seeds on the Paraguay and Paraná rivers.

The Conservative opposition to President Evo Morales, and neighbours Chile, Paraguay and Peru, have expressed alarm at the proposed military aid from Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who is using oil money to try to build an anti-U.S. alliance in Latin America and has been repeatedly accused of interfering in the internal affairs of several countries.

San Miguel said Bolivia will spend 12 million US dollars of the Venezuelan aid in the next five years for other new military posts on its borders, but said they were small bases for 20 men to combine immigration, customs, police and army operations.

San Miguel also announced a series of visits by Defence ministers in the region to clear up concerns.

Paraguayan Defence Minister Roberto Gonzalez is due to visit Bolivia this month to inspect the oil seeds port. Peru’s Defence minister is also scheduled to visit to analyze future military agreements.

San Miguel said he would also visit Chile in November to meet with his counterpart there.

He said Chile’s concern over a small military post on the border to protect water resources was overstated. "There is no reciprocal threat in our border with Chile", he underlined.

Bolivia has lost land in several armed conflicts involving Chile, Paraguay and Brazil. In the XIXth century Bolivia lost its sea outlet to Chile during the Pacific war. In the early 1930ies Paraguay defeated Bolivia in the Chaco war and Brazil also grabbed land during another border dispute.

San Miguel pointed out Bolivia has a total of 15 military posts on its borders and said that was a small number compared to its neighbours.

But in spite of Bolivia’s assurances her neighbours are most suspicious and restless with the possibility of having President Chavez troops and equipment in the heart of South America
*

More on this story from the 19th:
Bolivia and Argentina sign strategic accord “Brazil will never lack gas”

October 21, 2006

“Another World Without Borders Is Possible”

by Amber Howard

A Report from the First Annual Southwest Border Social Forum

Last weekend, Ciudad Juárez celebrated the First Annual Southwest Border Social Forum, congregating people from across the United States and Mexico. The Border Social Forum took place at the Central Autonomous University in Ciudad Juarez, the largest city in the State of Chihuahua, Northern Mexico. Students, long-time immigrants rights activists, professors, youth-led alternative media, peace visionaries, indigenous tribes, workers and union organizers, and the curious all met for a three-day conference this 13-15 of October. The uniting theme was: “Another world without borders is possible.”

This forum was organized due to a call for a U.S. Social Forum that arose out of the World Social Forum, which took place this year in Caracas, Venezuela, January 24–29. Since the decision made in Caracas to hold the first US-based forum in June 2007 in Atlanta, Georgia, regional meetings are starting to take place so that different issues can be presented to a national and international audience. Originally planned for early May, the first Southwest Border Social Forum, one of these regional meetings, was delayed until October due to the demonstrations and marches by immigrants and their supporters on and around May 1st, 2006.

The over-arching themes of this much-anticipated forum were “Women, Walls and Water.” Participants joined activities that began on Thursday, October 12th in a march against NAFTA from downtown Ciudad Juárez to the US-Mexico border crossing at the Santa Fe Bridge. People marched denouncing the North American Free Trade Agreement’s effect on the farmers and working-class citizens of Mexico.

A large portion of the marchers included past immigrant laborers known as braceros who participated in the U.S. guest worker program that existed between 1942 and 1964. Many of these people, predominantly men now nearing old age, are still waiting for the Mexican government to pay them the remains of their due earnings. A portion of the workers’ earnings were withheld during their time employed in the fields of the United States and given to the Mexican government with the idea that it would be given back. It is generally recognized that this money has disappeared. One marcher, Javier Romero, who participated in the labor program from 1957-1964 simply declared, “Government, pay us our money.”

After the march, a “Border Reality Tour” was organized to take those interested to experience an in-depth view of the maquiladoras, foreign-owned assembly plants situated in “free trade zones” in Ciudad Juárez. The United States began moving factories over its southern border in 1964 with the Border Industrialization Project (BIP), which would serve as a model for similar zones as neo-liberalism spreads worldwide. This project resulted in the creation of the maquiladoras along Mexico’s northern border, when U.S. manufacturers were invited to move their factories south to take advantage of much lower labor costs. Mexican subsidies encouraged the rapid growth of the industrial parks, and new regulations allowed manufacturers to import duty-free machinery, parts and raw materials.

The presence of the maquiladoras is central to any discussion about Ciudad Juárez, and particularly how this specific border zone has created affluence for some, but led to the exploitation for others. Justin Akers Chacon, a young professor in San Diego and the author of the book, No One Is Illegal, was present during the Southwest Border Forum. He gave a talk that focused on the history of immigration restrictions, the amount of money exchanged annually due to remittances (money immigrant workers in the US send back to home country), the increasing militarization of the border, with such legislation as Operation Gatekeeper, and the recent vote to build a wall along the border.

The weekend was filled with similar meetings that discussed not only the problems and difficulties of the current immigration legislation, but also possible alternative solutions and visions of the future. The climax of the forum was another march that moved, once again, from downtown Ciudad Juárez to the Santa Fe Bridge, this time focusing on “bringing down” the wall that divides the US-Mexico border. Many signs and chants alluded to the “Wall of Death,” or the 700-mile, $9 billion wall, that was proposed to the US Senate in November 2005 by Duncan Hunter, chair of the Armed Services Committee and a California congressman. The fence would be surrounded by a new 100-yard buffer zone and would be studded with twenty-five new official points of entry. Until recently the fence has divided just over eighty miles of the border, where federally enforced barriers and fencing were placed at strategic points, mainly in Texas and California. This is all about to change.

On December 15th, 2005, Rep. Hunter’s amendment was passed in the U.S. House of Representatives. On May 2006, the U.S. Senate approved a bill that included triple-layered vehicle fencing, meaning three different fences, possibly topped with razor wire, that immigrants would have to cross in order to enter the US. Finally on September 29, 2006, by a vote of 80 to 19, the Senate confirmed the House bill authorizing, and partially funding, the possible construction of the 700-mile-long physical fence and barriers along the border.

Many are claiming that the building of this wall is purely a political strategy employed by the Republicans to obtain votes in the upcoming November elections. Others say it is to keep the revolutionary activity in Mexico from spilling onto American soil. Still others see this new border legislation as an attempt to convince United States citizens that their border is “safe.” All the while, corporations, farm owners and others who depend on immigrant labor will continue to take advantage of the economic benefits of exploiting those who do make it across.

Cited in the program of events was the “Action and March to Tear Down the Wall of Death.” The march convened with approximately 1,000 people, mostly conference attendees, to take back the streets of Juárez in protest of this new border-security expansion. During the demonstration traffic was stopped on Juárez Avenue, partially blocking what is known as Paseo del Norte, or the Avenue of the North. One organizer, Nacho Ibarra, stated, “This wall is just going to kill a lot more people because they are building it in the most traversed areas. It will not stop people from crossing, it will only cause them to take more dangerous routes through the desert and more people will die.” Many of the protestors carried signs, banners, and a string of hundreds of white paper crosses with names on them, representing some of those who had died or disappeared in the crossing of the border.

Upon closing, the forum organizers took time on stage to read out declarations or resolutions that had been created over the course of the weekend. Many spoke about organizing other events or protests in the year to come, involving workers’ rights, gender issues and pro-women activities, such as putting a stop to domestic-violence, sexual and reproductive rights, indigenous rights, socialist agendas, alternative media meetings and many other groups looking to create a better future. It was determined that the next Border Social Forum will be held a year from now, this time at Mexico’s southern border with Guatemala. Each year, immigrants from Central and South America try to enter Mexico, with the hope of eventually reaching the United States.

October 20, 2006

Political Affairs: United States interference in Venezuelan elections ongoing

by Joel Wendland

In 2004, Bush tried to impress likely voters who frowned on his long vacations by insisting that he was "working hard."

Since then, it has become perfectly obvious that his work ethic has fallen short on key issues from relief after Hurricane Katrina and producing desired results in the "war on terror," to putting forward viable solutions to the US health care crisis or boosting the stagnating economy.

There has been one issue, however, on which the Bush administration has worked diligently: a long and expensive effort to unseat democratically elected Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

As the December 3 Venezuelan national elections approach ... in which President Chavez is standing for reelection ... the Bush administration (in violation of US and Venezuelan law), is providing financial, diplomatic, and strategic support for Chavez' opponents.

Bush’s timeworn hostility for President Chavez is well known.

Top secret US government documents released through Freedom of Information Act requests show that the administration’s anti-Chavez operations may even pre-date the September 11 terrorist attacks and the launch of the "war on terror."

* According to human rights and international law expert writer Eva Golinger, leaders of the infamous April 2002 coup met with top Bush administration officials at least six months prior.

Golinger, who spoke with Political Affairs from Caracas by telephone, authored the 2005 book 'The Chavez Code: Cracking US Intervention in Venezuela.' Translated into several languages and sold all over the world, 'The Chavez Code' comprehensively revealed the role of the US government, through its military entities, diplomatic channels, and through funding agencies such as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the US Agency for International Development (USAID), in helping to plan and execute the coup. Through its role in meeting with coup leader Pedro Carmona, provision of military equipment, and diplomatic pressure on regional governments to accept the coup as legitimate, the Bush administration played a decisive, multifaceted role in those illegal activities.

Documents Golinger unearthed during the investigation for her book showed that the CIA knew the exact details of the coup plan: stage a mass demonstration of political opponents of the administration, use sections of the Caracas police loyal to the opposition to provoke violence by shooting at the crowds, blame President Chavez for the violence, have military detachments with ties to the US military kidnap him, and then claim he had resigned. US government documents show, Golinger points out, that "part of the conspiracy was convincing the public, the media, and other governments that Chavez was responsible and therefore the coup was justified."

Once this plan was implemented, Carmona seized dictatorial power and by decree dissolved all of Venezuela’s democratic institutions.

Immediately, Venezuelans rejected Carmona and demanded the release of President Chavez. His supporters organized huge demonstrations of hundreds of thousands of people. Chavistas in the military found where he was being held and rescued him. In the days following the coup there was an enormous outpouring of support for Chavez that is impossible to imagine for any US politician.

Once the coup failed and Carmona was turned out, opposition political parties and groups, flush with US funds, planned and carried out an "economic sabotage," as Golinger describes it, that nearly crippled Venezuela’s oil industry. In the Venezuelan and US press, they claimed that workers were protesting President Chavez by refusing to go to work. Venezuela’s right-wing opposition, with the support of US taxpayer money, Bush strategists, and a little-known corporation with strong ties to the Pentagon, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), ironically labeled their action a "strike."

In truth, the managers who ran Venezuela’s oil industry closed down the plants and refineries, locked the workers out, and even destroyed or damaged vital equipment. SAIC technicians, who, according to Golinger, provided and operated the information technology used by Venezuela’s state-owned oil company, PDVSA, aided the sabotage by shutting down computer systems that operated the plants or changing the code to disable them.

"That was actually the area the sabotage took place," Golinger reports. "It was a US company which forms part of the military industrial complex -- anyone can look it up -- they were the ones leading the sabotage efforts."

The sabotage failed as ordinary workers stood up for the government they had chosen and forced the plants to re-open. In both cases -- the coup and the sabotage -- the main leaders were only in rare cases held to account for their crimes. Many fled the country, some to the US where they were welcomed by their patrons in the Bush administration.

After the lockout and sabotage failed in January of 2003, the opposition and the US government turned to even more insidious and dangerous capers, Golinger states. In 2003, Venezuelan authorities uncovered a plot to assassinate President Chavez "involving paramilitaries coming over from Colombia" who had ties "to US Special Forces working in Colombia under Plan Colombia," Golinger says.

Chavez' 25 point lead in the polls indicates a fourth electoral victory.

Under the pretense of controlling drug trafficking, US military personnel "had been using Colombian paramilitaries to conduct command and control operations for some time." According to Golinger’s evidence, Colombian armed groups infiltrated all the way to "the metropolitan area of Caracas, not just the border."

* In all, some 100 Colombian paramilitaries were detained, many of whom were simply deported back to Colombia, while others were tried and imprisoned for their roles in the plot.

Golinger points out that "high-level functionaries in the Colombian government, including President Uribe" admitted to this plot stating that "the paramilitaries and unfortunately some members of Colombia’s intelligence" had been involved.

When these and other terrorist attacks failed to achieve the desired result, opposition groups turned their efforts to a legal mechanism for recalling a president. Ironically, this provision of the Venezuelan Constitution had been authored by a Constituent Assembly called by President Chavez. After a series of illegal attempts to force Chavez out of office, the US-backed political opposition sought to remove him through a procedure adopted by the overwhelming majority of Venezuelans.

For this, the opposition parties again sought and received massive financial and technical aid from the Bush administration and forced a referendum on Chavez' presidency in the summer of 2004. Despite the gobs of cash supposedly provided to "pro-democracy" groups, which in the case of Venezuela always happened to be linked with or supportive of the opposition, the recall campaign failed. Chavez received the highest number of votes any Venezuelan presidential candidate has ever received in an election judged to be fair and free by a consensus of international observers, including a team headed by former US President Jimmy Carter.

After a string of failures dating back to at least late 2001, it became clear that, in Golinger’s words, "the US government underestimated the popularity the Chavez government has but also the strength of the Venezuelan people to resist these types of sabotage and destabilization efforts."

But habitual failure does not seem to deter the Bush administration. In this case, failure has only caused it to sharpen its open hostility towards Venezuela. Again, the money is flowing through the NED and USAID to Chavez' opponents.

According to Golinger, who is about to publish a second book called Bush v. Chavez: Washington’s War on Venezuela, which documents US interference since 2005, the Bush administration is "increasing that interference by providing funding, training, guidance, and other contacts, and other strategically important ways to support the opposition’s presidential campaign here."

* This time Chavez' opponent is Manuel Rosales, who unabashedly signed the Carmona decree in April 2002 dissolving the very democratic institutions he now wants to govern. Rosales’s shady credentials, however, are more insidious than just ties to Carmona and the coup.

According to Golinger, vice presidential candidate Julio Borges is meeting with administration officials later this month in Washington and will be speaking at a forum titled "Can Venezuela Be Saved?" held at the ultra-right American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

According to AEI’s website, the event will be hosted by Roger Noriega, a fellow at AEI and former State Department official, whose deep dislike for Venezuela’s popular president is unmistakably personal. Noriega happens to have been the one who deliberately lied to the US media about Chavez' phony resignation during the 2002 coup. (Noriega’s media ploy, though subsequent White House press statements backed him up, reportedly angered then Secretary of State Colin Powell because Powell himself didn’t believe that Chavez had resigned.)

Noriega is also tied to organizations like USAID and the International Republican Institute which have funneled millions of US taxpayer dollars -- in an era of record budget deficits -- to political parties that oppose President Chavez. Presumably, Borges will be collecting a fat campaign check signed by the US taxpayer.

Aside from tens of millions of US taxpayer dollars financing Chavez' opponents, Golinger also points out that this time around the US role in the campaign amounts to "psychological warfare within Venezuela, but also in the international arena, and in the United States." The goal is "to make people think that Venezuela is a failed or failing state with a dictator, which is how the US government refers to him."

In addition to numerous personal attacks on President Chavez, the Bush administration has intensified its diplomatic maneuvers against Venezuela. One recent example is Bush’s claim that Venezuela has failed to participate adequately in US-led anti-trafficking-in-persons efforts. As a result Bush unilaterally imposed economic sanctions on Venezuela. Golinger describes Bush’s charges as "complete fantasy and fiction, because Venezuela has actually improved their trafficking in persons efforts."

In a related matter not raised by Golinger in this interview, the White House also has accused Venezuela of failing to combat the illegal drug trade and pointed to Venezuela’s expulsion of Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) personnel in 2005 as evidence. This claim, however, was contradicted by State Department findings quietly released almost simultaneously that show Venezuela’s own anti-drug operations have produced better results without assistance from the DEA. The Venezuelan government says that it sent the DEA officials home under suspicion of abusing their privileged status.

US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld also recently accused Venezuela of launching an arms race by purchasing new military equipment. According to Golinger, "just because Venezuela is finally buying some equipment and rifles to replace ones that are more than four decades old, does not imply they are starting an arms race." The administration’s charges are belied by the fact that "Venezuela is not even on the list of the top five countries in this hemisphere in military budgets." With close to $500 billion spent annually on the military, the US is first, followed by "Brazil with about $13 billion, then Mexico, Chile, Colombia, and Argentina," Golinger asserts.

"Yet, Rumsfeld continues to make such declarations to international media, and it gets into the papers in the United States and other countries. The idea, of course, is to provide a perception that Venezuela is a danger," she adds. It is part of the Bush administration’s "ongoing campaign to discredit and to isolate Venezuela from other nations in the region but also around the world."

Though diplomatically this campaign has failed, Golinger regards it as another level of interference in Venezuela’s election. Bush and Rumsfeld’s accusations, as unmerited as they may be, are repeated throughout the US and Venezuelan media. The point of the Bush administration’s accusations is not to prove necessarily that Venezuela poses a real danger, says Golinger, but to convince portions of the Venezuelan population that maybe they would be better off with a president that does not provoke such responses from the US government. Indeed, statements from the US government have been carefully coordinated with opposition political campaigns, which have consistently played on fears of the people Venezuela about these issues.

Despite this level of interference, President Chavez maintains a wide lead in public opinion polls (+/- 25 points) and his supporters expect to turn out voters in record numbers again.

It is time for US taxpayers to call for an end to wasting money on these schemes. People who are honest about supporting real democracy should insist on building bridges and friendship with Venezuela rather than provoking hostility and prolonging ill will.

Let’s face it, telling the truth about other governments and building democracy are among the Bush administration’s weakest points. The US government should respect the choices of the Venezuelan people and their right to determine their own destiny -- just as we expect other countries to respect ours.

Can you imagine the uproar if another government chose to influence the US elections by secretly pumping millions of dollars to one of the parties or candidates?

Imagine how angry you might feel if that government then had the nerve to turn around and claim they were "promoting democracy."

Let’s tell our leaders to set aside political differences and personal grudges and work together with Venezuela for peace and friendship.

From Chiapas to the Zócalo: Popular Uprisings in Mexico

by John Gibler
OaxacaJose Santiago sits in front of the radio station’s guarded door with a box of bread rolls in his lap. To his left, soda crates filled with Molotov cocktails line the wall. To his right two women with a club stretched between them block the door. A 62 year-old elementary school principal in Oaxaca City, Santiago was supposed to retire this year, but when state police brutally repressed a teachers’ strike on June 14, sparking an unprecedented civil uprising from all sectors of society, he thought, "I’d rather jump in."

"I’m ready," he says as he waits to deliver his donation of bread rolls to the teachers camping out behind the barricades that protect the occupied radio station, "even if the army comes in."

Santiago and hundreds of thousands like him have raised their voices and taken to the streets across Mexico during the past year, pushing the boundaries of traditional methods of organizing to carry out creative, high-stakes social protests. Recent social movements in Mexico, including the Zapatistas’ Other Campaign, the teachers’ strike-turned-uprising in Oaxaca, and the post-electoral protests in Mexico City, have together pulled some 3 million people into the streets, captured national and international attention, and raised the bar for civic protest in response to fraud, corruption and repression.

ImageAll three movements, which share both an overlap of rank and file participants and an intricate web of hostile accusations between leaders and pundits, have suffered in varying degrees from government repression and proposed both thick and thin alternatives to the dominant neo-liberal economic policies of the ruling National Action Party (PAN). The Other Campaign is the more elusive and ambitious movement, with heavy emphasis on long-term organizing and a clean break from capitalism and political parties. Meanwhile, the Oaxaca uprising is more muscular, with its weight behind civil disobedience tactics aimed at shutting down the state government and taking over media. The post-electoral fight is the most spectacular, with its goals split between civil disobedience and long-term organizing.

These protest and social movements show that working class Mexicans are not planning to take another 6-year presidential term of cartel market policies lying down. On December 1, Felipe Calderon (PAN), already pursued by protests and accusations of electoral fraud, will assume the presidency with a weak mandate - only to face some of the strongest organized popular resistance in decades.

The Other Campaign Builds from Below

On January 1, 2006, the Zapatista Army of National Liberation (EZLN) initiated the Other Campaign, a call to bridge the struggles of the marginalized and the exploited to abandon political parties and the capitalist economic system they serve. The Other Campaign aspires to a radical transformation of Mexican political life, nothing less than the construction of a grassroots people’s government that would overthrow the political ruling class.

ImageThe Other Campaign is quixotic in the extreme, but not foolhardy. The Zapatista initiative has walked its talk by setting out to spend the next several years building a national organization. They have sent Subcomandamte Marcos on a six-month nationwide listening tour to hear from the underdogs of the Mexican left, and then sent a commission of Zapatista commanders to spend 6-month periods organizing in all 30 states and the federal district of Mexico City, (1).

For four months, as Marcos drove the country’s back roads, the Other Campaign drew participation from indigenous communities, farm-workers, factory workers, sexual diversity groups, women’s organizations, environmentalists, sex workers, intellectuals, artists, anarchist-punk collectives, and street kids. The tour made several daily stops—seven days a week—in rural communities, inner-city slums, and downtown plazas. Marcos often spoke in public to encourage people to join and participate in the Other Campaign, but the backbone of the tour consisted in the hours-long town hall meetings where Marcos—and the motley crew of organization representatives and independent media correspondents who followed him—sat quietly listening to the stories of resistance and autonomous governance projects.

The Other Campaign’s listening tour came to a halt in Mexico City on May 3, when Marcos heard reports of violent police repression of flower vendors in nearby Texcoco, Mexico State. Marcos suspended his activities for that day and called the EZLN to be on red alert.

March in Atenco
Atenco
Early that morning state and local police attempted to force flower vendors from the sidewalks near a market in Texcoco. The People’s Front in Defense of Land from neighboring San Salvador Atenco—a farmers’ organization famous for beating back President Vicente Fox’s plans to appropriate their lands for a new Mexico City airport in 2002—sent a group of some 30 activists to support the flower vendors. As they marched toward the market, police began to detain and beat them with batons. Most escaped and retreated to a nearby house, calling to their colleagues in Atenco for support. In an attempt to force the police to negotiate, the Atenco farmers blocked the federal highway that borders their town. Instead of sending a negotiation committee, the government sent state and federal police to lift the blockade, leading to violent clashes between the farmers and the police that left dozens injured on both sides, and one 14 year-old boy killed by police gunfire.
Atenco
Atenco
The following day, May 4, over 2,000 federal, state and local police raided Atenco at dawn, lifting the highway blockade and brutally beating and detaining 207 people. The scale of police violence on May 4 was shocking. Police went house to house shooting tear gas through windows and dragging sleepy residents out into the streets for beatings. Once loaded into buses and pickup trucks, police drove detainees out into the countryside for torture and further beatings before taking them to jail. Police sexually assaulted—and in some cases raped—45 women (the governmental National Human Rights Commission finally released a recommendation on October 16 stating that police had sexually assaulted "at least 26 women"). Entering in the morning, police fired tear gas grenades at protesters, hitting 20 year-old Ollin Alexis Benhumea in the head. Alexis went into a coma and died a month later. Six months later, no government official has been held responsible, while 47 people are still in jail on trumped up charges.

The day after this brutal smack down Marcos led a march into Atenco where he declared the Other Campaign tour to be indefinitely suspended, promising to remain in Mexico City to help organize to demand the release of the then 207 people in jail. After months of holding marches and maintaining a protest camp outside the jail, members of the Other Campaign decided to continue their tour in October, calling upon a delegation of Zapatista commanders to travel from Chiapas to Mexico City to continue the organizing in Atenco.

Alexis' Mother with Marcos
Alexis' Mother with Marcos
The Other Campaign has been mostly ignored or misunderstood by reports. Indeed, the prospect of overthrowing the government and uprooting capitalism by first touring the country listening to people is truly daunting. What the press has missed however has not been the story of a rebellion in its early embryonic stage, but rather the everyday tales of repression and resistance, of suffering marginalization and building autonomy that the Other Campaign has brought to the surface.

PAN Takes the Elections, Protesters Take Mexico City

While the Other Campaign was winding its way across the southern and central states of Mexico, the presidential campaigns made their own noisy and vitriolic stops across the country. Five candidates ran for president, but the battle between the two frontrunners dominated the headlines and exposed deep class divisions in Mexican society.

Lopez Obrador in Zocalo
Lopez Obrador in Zocalo
Felipe Calderon Hinojosa, of the right-wing PAN and Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador of the center-left Democratic Revolution Party (PRD) took to attacking each other with unrestrained vigor. Calderon, in a word, swift-boated Lopez Obrador, running countless television adds calling him a "danger for Mexico," linking him to Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and images of Hitler. Obrador failed to challenge or respond to these adds for months—when he finally did, Mexico’s federal electoral court ruled them off the air—but the damage had been done and his support in the polls dropped several points.

However, the demonization of Lopez Obrador actually began over a year earlier with an attempt to block his candidacy through accusations that he had violated a court order to stop construction on a hospital access road while serving as mayor of Mexico City. Lopez Obrador mobilized hundreds of thousands of supporters in massive marches and eventually the federal government dropped the charges.

In turn, Lopez Obrador lashed out at Calderon as a representative of the oligarchy that has pillaged Mexico for decades, linking him to past and present corruption scandals. While the cards were stacked against him, Lopez Obrador did make a few political miscalculations that led to further drops in the polls: he let the attack adds go unanswered for months, failed to attend the first debate, where Calderon dominated and attacked him, and he called President Fox "a noisy bird" and told him to "shut up," which—like Howard Dean’s scream—was attacked in the media as "not presidential behavior."

Image
CND Votes
The feeling on the July 2 election day was tense and bitter. Calderon’s supporters used racial epithets to denigrate Lopez Obrador’s supporters. "Abajo con los pinches nacos" ("Down with the f-ing indians") supporters shouted at Calderon’s campaign headquarters, while Lopez Obrador’s supporters shouted slogans about crushing the oligarchy.

Throughout the campaign season, Subcomandante Marcos lashed out at all three major candidates, Calderon, Lopez Obrador, and Roberto Madrazo of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI). Marcos’ critiques of Calderon and Madrazo were equally scathing, but his attacks on Lopez Obrador attracted the most media attention. This led many to believe that Marcos only sought to cut down Lopez Obrador and thus played into the designs of the rightwing.

Marcos’ critique of Lopez Obrador consisted of four parts: the PRD’s past treatment of the Zapatistas, his tenure as mayor of Mexico City, his campaign team, and his welfare reform program. First, his party, the PRD, stabbed the Zapatistas in the back in 2001 by voting for a gutted version of an indigenous rights law that the Zapatistas had advocated for through a national caravan and a speech in Congress. Later, the PRD sent paramilitary groups into Zapatista communities in Chiapas. Second, as mayor of Mexico City, Lopez Obrador catered to the upper class neighborhoods, allowing Mexico’s richest man, Carlos Slim, to buy up countless properties in the city’s historic center. He also repressed social movements, and turned his back when human rights lawyer Digna Ochoa was assassinated in 2001, and Mexico City public defenders—after months of baffling legal incompetence—declared that she had committed suicide. Third, he filled his campaign team with ex-PRI officials who have had their hands in everything from the creation of the North American Free Trade Agreement to brutal acts of repression. Fourth, he promoted a welfare-like program of reforms within the capitalist economic system in Mexico that Marcos accused of being mere band-aids aimed at containing social unrest without challenging the position of the ruling class.

Obrador Supporter
Obrador Supporter
While the stage was set for a tense day of voting, no one expected what was to come. At 11 pm on July 2, Luis Ugalde, the head of the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), was shown in a pre-recorded message saying that the early election results were to close to call and that the IFE would not release them. Ugalde called on all candidates to refrain from declaring victory until the IFE had release the preliminary vote count—both Calderon and Lopez Obrador ignored him and declared victory later that night. Less than a minute after Ugalde’s message ran, confused news broadcasters switched to another pre-recorded message, this time by President Fox praising the "impartiality" and "scientific objectivity" of IFE and calling on Mexicans to sit tight for the results.

What followed was an absurd show of vote counting theatrics that left an irremovable stain on the 2006 elections, (2). By July 3, Lopez Obrador claimed fraud and called for a vote-by-vote recount. His campaign team put together a thousand-page complaint alleging widespread fraud that they submitted to the Federal Electoral Tribunal to support their recount demand. Over the next month Obrador convoked and led three massive marches in Mexico City, each one bigger than the previous. After the third march, on July 31, which some claim pulled nearly 2 million people into the streets, Lopez Obrador called on his supporters to set up camp in the Plaza de la Constitución, or Zócalo, the symbolic core of the nation, and down several major avenues that stretch for miles through downtown Mexico City. Tens of thousands heeded his call.

Throughout August, Obrador camped out with his supporters in the Zócalo holding nightly "informational assemblies" at 7 pm. The Zócalo protest was a strange creature, borne of an uncommon union between a major political party and a genuine grassroots mobilization. Most detractors on the right belittled the conviction of the thousands who filled the protest camps, while most supporters on the left ignored the open wallet and heavy hand of the PRD in the movement. While thousands of people contributed their spectacular creativity to the post-electoral protest movement, the organizing structure never broke free of the top-down control exercised by Lopez Obrador and the PRD, (3).

This dynamic was most poignantly illustrated by the movement’s culmination in the National Democratic Convention (CND). The CND, scheduled for September 16, Mexican Independence Day, was billed grandiloquently as the assembly where Mexico would vote for a "legitimate president" and lay the groundwork for a "government in rebellion." Lopez Obrador and CND organizers proclaimed their intention to fill the Zócalo with a million "delegates" from across the country, set up discussion tables down major avenues and convoke proposals and then vote. As the date approached and the daunting challenge of organizing such a convention hit home, organizers scaled back their projections in interviews and said that the CND would be "symbolic" rather than a true declaration of a government in rebellion, (4).

Zocalo Protest Camp
Zocala Protest Camp
When the day arrived, the CND successfully pulled over a million people into the Zócalo. But the CND differed only cosmetically from the previous mass gatherings in support of Lopez Obrador. People were asked to raise their hands to "vote" on yes or no questions decided by Obrador and his team. The rank and file played no meaningful organizing or participatory role beyond wearing badges around their necks and raising their hands. Moreover, when the massive crowd attempted to make their voice heard, stepping out of the yes-or-no pin, Obrador and his team ignored them. The crowd had been asked to approve the entire leadership of the resistance movement—30 people—in one vote, yes or no. While the list of names including some old-school PRI crooks and completely lacked in ethnic, geographic and—to a lesser extent—sexual diversity, there was one name on the list that had been so sullied by recent scandals that the huge throng of "delegates" began to shout: "Imaz no! Imaz no!" The Master of Ceremonies, Jesusa Rodriguez, paused, waiting for the cries to die down and then moved on. After a few hours, the crowd was released with no homework assignment, and told to come back in six months.

The attitude of the people on the stage with Lopez Obrador was quite discordant with the mood on the street. Those who filled the Zócalo that day had bigger plans than a symbolic "government in resistance." They had concrete ideas they wanted to put into play. But they did not have a way of expressing those ideas to the crowd, and the people on the stage steered clear of the civil resistance tactics being discussed in the crowd.

Cuautemoc Salas, a 40 year-old manual laborer from Iztapalapa, a poor sprawling area of Mexico City, and member of the Valentin Campa Union of infrastructure repair workers said that he was ready to stop paying federal taxes to the "illegitimate government" and to boycott transnational corporations. He proposed using those savings to build cooperatives, develop national production, and eventually create an alternative currency.

Salas believed that the movement would take off and become the spearhead of national resistance to Calderon and his ambitions to privatize much of Mexico’s public sector and many of its protected natural resources.

"This is not a movement of the PRD," he said. "This is a national movement that went beyond the PRD; it is a movement of the people."

Oaxaca Uprising

Several months before the presidential election, on May 22, only three weeks after the brutal crackdown in Atenco and as the electoral campaigns entered into their final lap of epic mudslinging, about 60,000 teachers sat down in Oaxaca City’s touristy central plaza and refused to leave. The teachers strung up tarps from trees and lampposts, built fire pits and improvised kitchens, and installed the transmitter of their pirate radio station, thus constructing a tent city in the heart of Oaxaca.

Image
Barricade in Oaxaca
Section 22 of the National Union of Education Workers, a dissident wing within the famously corrupt national union, has been fighting to improve Oaxaca’s neglected rural schools for 26 years. This past April, they began a campaign to rezone Oaxaca’s slot in the federal budget allotment scheme and thus demand better wages and a higher education budget to provide for school repairs, supplies, lunches, and uniforms. The state government, led by Ulises Ruiz Ortiz of the PRI, also elected under allegations of fraud in 2004, refused to meet with the teachers to discuss their demands. So the teachers went on strike and set up their tent city, something they have done almost every year for the past 26 years, (5).

This year, Ulises Ruiz decided to send 1,000 state police in to break the teachers strike by force. The police raided the tent city just before dawn, unleashing attack dogs, firing tear gas from helicopters hovering over the plaza, and storming the sleeping teachers in riot gear. Police beat scores of people severely with their batons, burnt down the tent city, and decimated their pirate radio equipment.

The teachers and Oaxaca City residents responded in an obviously unanticipated manner. They regrouped and then surrounded the police, fighting with sticks, rocks, and Molotov cocktails. By the early afternoon the teachers had regained the plaza. Within two days they convoked a march of over 400,000 people and formed the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO), grouping the teachers union together with hundreds of local and statewide organizations and newly formed neighborhood associations.

Image
Oaxaca March
The APPO—now calling for Ulises Ruiz’s resignation or ouster as their sole and non-negotiable demand—reinforced the teachers’ protest camp, convoked massive marches, and, starting in late July, initiated a series of civil disobedience tactics aimed at paralyzing the state government and forcing the Senate to intervene. They blocked government office buildings, including the State Legislature and the Governor’s office, painted the entire town with calls for Ulises Ruiz’ ouster, and eventually took over several state and commercial media transmitters. For months Ruiz has been unable to walk freely in Oaxaca City, and not a single uniformed police officer has set foot in central Oaxaca since June 14.

Ulises Ruiz said he would not resign, but that he "remained open to dialogue." The APPO refused to acknowledge Ruiz as governor and had no direct contact with the government until a series of stop-and-start talks with the Minister of the Interior in August and September. The federal government refused to force Ruiz out, Ruiz refused to leave, and the APPO refused to release their grip on Oaxaca City.

Image
March to Mexico City
In August paramilitary gunmen began to open fire on protest marches and encampments, killing seven people and wounding a dozen more by mid October. The APPO has denounced these attacks, used their occupied radio stations to organize people to defend the camps, set up thousands of makeshift barricades at night throughout Oaxaca City, and even apprehended several gunmen and turned them over to federal authorities. In a press conference after a shooting in August, Antonio, one of the APPO’s provisional leaders said that they would "only respond with organization" to paramilitary violence, defying the state government’s attempt to paint the APPO as an "urban guerrilla" movement.

In late September, 4,000 teachers and members of the APPO marched over 250 miles from Oaxaca to Mexico City. Upon their arrival on October 9, they set up a protest camp outside of the Senate and, a week later, began a hunger strike of 21 people.

"This march is an example that our movement is one where people are prepared to make sacrifices, and example of dignity," said Fernando Soberanes, a member of an indigenous teachers coalition founded in 1974, who had walked with the march for all 19 days through four states. He added that the march was also, "a school for the young people in the movement, to teach them that the struggle is no game."

Teachers block Gov't Office
Teachers block Gov't Office
The Senate sent a commission to Oaxaca to analyze the conditions for an effectual dissolution of the state government and was scheduled to vote on the issue on October 17. The threat of a major police or military operation to lift the protest camps has the APPO on red alert and many human rights organizations in Mexico and abroad sending urgent actions calling on the government to avoid repression at all costs.

In the latest case of paramilitary violence against protesters, just days after the Senate commission visited Oaxaca, soldiers in civilian clothes shot at an APPO barricade, killing 41 year-old Alejandro Garcia Hernandez. At 2:30 am on October 14, Hernandez was giving home-brewed coffee to the barricade guards with his wife and son when the soldiers opened fire. A 19 year-old APPO member at the barricade took a bullet in the shoulder when he jumped in front of Henandez’s son who had rushed to his father’s aid. In their escape one of the soldiers, Johnatan Rios, dropped his wallet, spilling and leaving behind on the road his federal identification card and a receipt from the Mexican military bank, (6).

[Note: At 9 pm on October 18, as this article was in the final stage of editing, gunmen shot and killed Panfilo Hernandez, a preschool teacher, as he stepped out of a meeting with other teachers and members of the APPO in the Jardín neighborhood of Oaxaca City.]

Where Will it all Lead?

"We see this as a historic opportunity," said Ernesto Ledesma, director of the Chiapas-based Center for Political Analysis and Social and Economic Research, "the Mexican political system is in crisis."

Image
Barricade in Oaxaca
Ledesma called for the creation of "strategic alliances" across these movements, acknowledging differences, but seeking to use the power of union to confront the weakened legitimacy of the ruling oligarchy.

It is impossible to guess what form the three movements discussed in this article will take over the next 6 years. The post-electoral fight could dissolve or evolve into an anti-privatization front focusing on opposing Calderon. The APPO may break apart or grow stronger after Ulises Ruiz falls from power or the army is brought in to occupy Oaxaca City. The Other Campaign may continue to organize at the grassroots under the radar of the press or ignite a major battle such as the fight to oppose the La Parota dam in Guerrero state. What is certain is that organized social resistance is on the rise in Mexico and will be a source of inspiration for activists across the world.

Pedro, a 45 year-old teacher guarding commandeered big-rig trucks that the APPO protesters use to shut off the highway at night, captured the spirit of many of the everyday citizens who have left their daily routines to join the Other Campaign, the post-electoral fight, or the Oaxaca uprising when he explained to me, "The rich can’t always win."

John Gibler is a Human Rights Fellow at Global Exchange. He took the photos in this article.

Chavez spreads wealth to aid U.N. cause

by Natalie Obiko Pearson

As Venezuela lobbies for a U.N. Security Council seat, President Hugo Chavez has bolstered its chances by spreading petrodollars across the Americas and beyond — extending an airstrip on a Caribbean island, sending emergency food aid to Africa, fixing a rundown hospital in Uruguay.

Chavez's international support will be put to the test on Monday as Venezuela goes up against U.S.-backed Guatemala in a General Assembly vote. At the same time, Chavez is confronting accusations at home that his generosity has been excessive, and has argued it's a modest amount of aid for nations he sees as suffering from U.S. domination.

At Uruguay's Hospital de Clinicas, a state-of-the-art transplant unit is being built with Venezuelan money. The emergency ward's leaky roof and exposed cinderblocks have given way to freshly painted walls, windows in rust-corroded frames are being replaced, and new elevators are on order.

Hospital director Graciela Ubach put a hand over her heart to show her gratitude to Chavez.

"I thank him with my soul," she said. "Honestly, it's been a dream for the country."

The public hospital struggled for funding for years until Venezuela came through with $20 million — half in donations and the other half to be paid off in reciprocal training and other services.

Other Chavez pledges include: $260 million in financing to repave a Jamaican highway and $17 million in upgrades to airports on the Caribbean islands of Antigua and Dominica.

Chavez also came up with $5 million for an Uruguayan tire plant, glass business and leather factory as part of a $400 million flow of aid since March 2005, when Uruguay's leftist President Tabare Vazquez took office, according to the Venezuelan Embassy in Uruguay.

According to the U.S. State Department, which tracks the bulk of foreign aid, $3.3 billion was allocated in financial and development aid to Latin America and the Caribbean for all of 2005 and 2006, including military and anti-narcotics programs. Other estimates, which include aid not tallied by the State Department, put that figure closer to $4 billion.

A consolidated figure for Venezuelan aid is harder to come by, but a review of public pledges by its government suggest Venezuela, with an economy one-ninetieth the size of America's, has offered at least $1.1 billion since the beginning of 2005 in loans, donations and financial aid in the region.

U.S. aid to Jamaica for 2005-2006 is listed as $42 million; the Chavez-financed highway job is six times costlier. The Venezuelan figure of $400 million for Uruguay compares with U.S. aid of $49,000 through the State Department plus an estimated $800,000 in military education and counter-drug assistance. No U.S. money was specifically set aside for Dominica.

In the case of Bolivia, the State Department estimates about $117 million in aid for 2006 compared with $140 million in Venezuelan donations and loans for scholarships and other programs.

Some of the aid involves relatively small sums aimed at highly symbolic targets, such as the tire-making cooperative in Montevideo that was abandoned three years ago by a U.S. company which ran into economic troubles. The factory was restarted with money from Chavez.

"The Venezuela government has given us a big hand," said worker Wilson Tolotti, 57. "We will always be grateful."

Venezuelan bulldozers have already begun clearing land at Dominica's Melville Hall Airport for a longer runway to boost tourism. Under Petrocaribe, a deal bringing Venezuelan oil to needy Caribbean countries, the island has received asphalt, fuel storage tanks, university scholarships and $12 million for housing.

Dominica has supported Venezuela's U.N. bid despite lobbying by Guatemala, and its foreign minister, Charles Savarin, has acknowledged that Venezuela's aid "cannot go unnoticed" as a factor in the decision.

Both Venezuela and Guatemala say they have a majority in the 192-member General Assembly ahead of Monday's poll, but either would need two-thirds to win. If after repeated ballots neither side is able to muster that many votes, the 33-nation Latin American group might decide to put up another candidate.

It's a secret ballot, and countries aren't obliged to make known their preference, though much of the Caribbean and South America — including Uruguay — have voiced support for Venezuela.

U.S. officials, however, have spoken out against Venezuela and lobbied for Guatemala, which has the support of Colombia, apparently most of Central America, Europe and other countries.

The 53 countries in the African group are expected to tilt toward Venezuela, while Asia's 54 nations are said to be split.

Ten of the Security Council's 15 seats are filled by the regional groups for two-year stretches. The other five are occupied by its veto-wielding permanent members: Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States.

Chavez's aid pledges, meanwhile, have come under attack ahead of Venezuela's Dec. 3 presidential vote by opposition candidate Manuel Rosales, who says poor Venezuelans need the money.

Chavez points to government-funded improvements at Venezuela's universities, medical clinics, subsidized food markets and train lines, and insists his foreign aid is aimed at countering the effects of U.S.-inspired capitalism.

Ironically, this aid is bankrolled in large part by oil sales to the United States.

Venezuela also bought or pledged to buy more than $3.6 billion in bonds from Argentina, Ecuador and Bolivia to help them cover deficits. Most of that — $3.5 billion — went to Argentina, helping a leftist ally pay off its World Bank and International Monetary Fund debts. Venezuela then recycles the bonds though its own banks and ends up with a profit that between early last year and July 2006 totaled $200 million.

It's difficult to quantify the value of Chavez's many oil supply agreements under preferential terms to at least 17 countries across the region, including Cuba. Venezuela says it sells the fuel at market prices but offers low-cost financing and accepts partial payment in goods from cows to bananas.

The state oil company even offered an unspecified sum this year to a Brazilian samba group that won first prize in the Rio de Janeiro carnival parade. "It made us very happy and feeling like we are part of the triumph," Chavez said later.

The U.S. is the world's largest overall aid donor, though far less generous than Japan and European countries, given the size of its economy. Venezuela's largesse, meanwhile, goes far beyond the Western Hemisphere.

Last year it gave a total of $3 million in emergency food aid to Burkina Faso, Mauritania and Niger. It pledged to sell oil under preferential terms for London's trademark red buses in return for the leftist-run city's expertise in transport, housing and other areas. It is expanding its program in the United States to provide discounted heating oil to the poor.

Chavez says he's helping to build a "multipolar" world to counter U.S. dominance, lining up allies against what he calls a perpetual threat from Washington. A U.N. Security Council seat would give this ambition a sharp boost.

Oaxaca: Eight Dead: The Blood Flows from the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca

by Luis Hernández Navarro

Eight dead, eight. Almost all of them on one side. In Oaxaca the murdered come from only one side. Blood spills from the Popular Assembly of the Peoples of Oaxaca (APPO), as do those wounded by gunshots, arrested without warrant, the kidnapped and the tortured.

Yet almost nothing happens to those in power. The grief of family members, the rage of compañeros, the neighbors’ fears and the solidarity of countrymen are all ignored up above. Those who are sacrificed are bodies without a name, prisoners without a biography, wounded without memory. They don’t admit it, but the silence of the power over such atrocities suggests that they believe the victims deserved what happened to them.

Where are the people responsible for the murder of teachers, architects, and students? Where are the torturers? What happened to the gunmen that have fired into the crowds? The answer is simple: they are still free, they are still committing crimes, and they live in absolute impunity.

And the authorities? Yes, the police have never been trustworthy in Mexico, much less have they been trustworthy in Oaxaca these days. Dressed as civilians, they have been ordered to attack the rebels. Then the story about the pedestrian that’s faced with the dilemma: having to choose whether to pass by a group of delinquents or by a group of policemen. He chooses to go down the less risky way, towards the delinquents. This story has never been as real as it is in Oaxaca today.

But, isn’t it exaggeration to say that in Oaxaca the deaths come from only one side? Isn’t it true that René Calva, stabbed October 5th, belonged to a current inside the teachers’ union that opposed those that demand the demise of (un-)governor Ulises Ruiz?

That’s right. René Calva was part of a current inside the teachers’ union that is opposed to the leadership of the section 22 of the National Teachers’ Union (SNTE) in Oaxaca. However, nobody believes that his murder was perpetrated by the APPO, since the democratic movement has never murdered anyone. This is not the way the democratic movement resolves its problems, as opposed to the local political class. Plus, the crime was committed immediately after the secretary of the Interior offered to remove the state’s authority over the police and take direct control of them, a possibility that was rejected both by the local Congress and the governor. The fierce media campaign against Ruiz’s opponents that followed the Calva’s murder is an unquestionable indicator of who was benefited by his stabbing.

There are two ways to measure violence in Oaxaca. The “dirty war” against members of the APPO deserves a mere couple of lines in most of the national written press, or a few seconds in the electronic media. The violence of the state government against rebellious citizens is presented as “confrontations”, thus hiding the direct responsibility of the aggressor and comparing the victims with the assailants. A few hours later everything is forgotten. The dead disappear and are condemned to oblivion.

From time to time, popular wrath explodes. The irritated crowds pursue those who shoot at them. They stop them, beat them, strip them, tie them up and exhibit them in the public square. It is then that the radio hosts show indignation against the populace and its savagery, and it is then that the secretary of the interior warns that vengeance and popular violence are unacceptable. The images, warnings and sermons condemning the facts go on for days in the newspapers and the media.

On October 14th, Alejandro García Hernández was murdered. As nearly every other person killed in this conflict, he belonged to the APPO. He was killed by a 22 caliber bullet shot by a soldier dressed as a civilian, shouting “Viva Ulises Ruiz!” while he perpetrated the crime. A day later elections were held in Tabasco, a political event that’s crucial for the country’s immediate future and that attracted immense public opinion. The corpse was still fresh when the elections covered up the victim’s blood. However, the macabre message of those that ordered the killing was left engraved in the barricades: in Oaxaca death has a permit.

The number of widows and orphans of social fighters grow every day. Those who have lost the confidence of the governed are willing to draw a blood bath. If Oaxaca falls, they say, so will Puebla and Veracruz, and who knows, maybe even Felipe Calderón. This is how they blackmail the nation, or, better said, blackmailing the powerful.

Eight dead, eight. It seems that modern bosses haven’t realized that the use of terror hasn’t been effective to stop the struggle. They don’t know that every death they provoke serves as another reason to keep the movement alive. In the popular mind, Ulises Ruiz has already been defeated. The senators better realize this soon. Every new coffin of a rebellious citizen that’s buried in Oaxaca will also be their responsibility, as it will be of the federal government.

October 19, 2006

Latino, Monitor Groups Say Proposed FCC Rules Limit Media Diversity

The FCC is currently reconsidering a number of broadcast ownership rules, including whether a single company should be able to own both a newspaper and television station in the same market. A new study conducted by the Media and Democracy Coalition has concluded that the proposed FCC rule changes would reduce local news coverage and eliminate diverse voices and viewpoints. We speak with National Hispanic Media Coalition President Alex Nogales and Consumer Federation of America Research Director Mark Cooper.

This evening, a town hall meeting on diversity and ownership of the Media will be held here in New York. Federal Communication Commissioners Michael Copps and Jonathan Adelstein will be in attendance as well as community leaders, media representatives and other citizens concerned about media ownership.

The FCC is currently reconsidering a number of broadcast ownership rules, including whether a single company should be able to own both a newspaper and television station in the same market. A new study conducted by the Media and Democracy Coalition has concluded that the proposed FCC rule changes would reduce local news coverage and eliminate diverse voices and viewpoints.

Mark Cooper is the Research Director of the Consumer Federation of America. His organization participated in the study that is being released later today. He joins me from Washington DC. Here in New York I am joined by Alex Nogales, President of the National Hispanic Media Coalition.

* Mark Cooper. Director of Research, Consumer Federation of America.

* Alex Nogales. President of the National Hispanic Media Coalition.

* Video excerpts of public testimony at FCC Hearing in Los Angeles earlier this month.

AMY GOODMAN: Mark Cooper is the research director of the Consumer Federation of America. His organization participated in the study that’s being released today. He joins me in Washington, D.C. Here in New York, we’re joined by Alex Nogales, the president of the National Hispanic Media Coalition. We welcome you both to Democracy Now!

ALEX NOGALES: Thank you.

MARK COOPER: Thank you.

AMY GOODMAN: Mark Cooper, lets begin with you. Release the results of your survey here.

MARK COOPER: Well, even in the largest cities in America, such as Los Angeles and New York, the two you mentioned, we find that there are only a small number of newspapers that get most of the readers, and then there’s a handful of TV stations. If you let those entities merge, which is the central rule at stake here, even in those big markets they become dominated by a couple of firms.

But we’ve also looked at smaller markets all across the country, literally from Alaska to Florida, Maine to California, Michigan to Texas. You look at the state capitals -- which are important local policy arenas, right? -- and you’ll find one dominant newspaper and a couple of TV stations. And so, in those cities what you end up with is almost a one-horse town, where there’s one dominant outlet. And Americans still rely predominantly, for their local news and information, about a school board election, about the police department, they rely predominantly on local TV stations and local newspapers. And so, for the American public who has actually become very much engaged on this issue, as these town hall meetings show and as the proceeding last time showed, for those people, they really do not want, they cannot tolerate this kind of dominance of their local media markets by a single corporation.

AMY GOODMAN: Mark Cooper, how does this fit in with the studies that the FCC squelched, now an investigation underway, two of those studies that people within the FCC have somehow gotten out to the press?

MARK COOPER: Well, what those studies showed -- and they contradicted Chairman Powell's belief that it didn’t matter -- those studies showed that when you allow consolidation of local media markets, when you allow conglomeration across different types of media, although they didn’t study newspapers, you lose diversity, you lose localism. You get less local news, and you get less viewpoints. And, of course, that is the essential policy here, is to promote local information and local diversity. And so, they did a series of studies. They really thought that if they did the research, it would support their proposed rule. And everything they touched -- it’s fascinating -- every time they tried to do any analysis, it contradicted what they were trying to do, and that’s why they trash-canned those studies.

AMY GOODMAN: Just a few weeks ago, the FCC held a public hearing in Los Angeles focusing on media ownership. Julian Do was among those who addressed the hearing. He’s a member of New America Media, the largest collaboration of ethnic news organizations in the country.

JULIAN DO: About ten years ago, Los Angeles, by then, was already one of the most diverse cities in America. Ethnic media programs on electronic media has been pretty dismal. Sure, there were Univision cameras, Channel 34, and Telemundo, 52, and a number of Spanish radios, but the growing population of Asian communities, like Chinese, Korean, Filipino and the Middle Eastern communities, has been -- has a very limited medias presence. There has always been a hunger for news about local communities. But in a place like LA, we are talking about what’s happening not just in a general audience, but also in the African American communities, what’s happening in the Filipino communities and the Guatemalan community, and so forth. Unfortunately, we are not getting that.

Adding more insult to injuries, when big mainstream media decides to do stories on the Cambodian or the El Salvadorans’ communities, the stories tend to be about crimes or tragedies. Ethnic communities have been for years trying to engage mainstream medias about their communities and also our sources of insights for better reporting. Well, with media consolidation, the situation has become worse. Our frustrations, a number of ethnic groups have resorted to satellite programs. However, not all ethnic households could afford the cost of monthly fees, which often [inaudible] about $50 to $100 a month.

Today, I would say, the situation for a major market like LA has somewhat improved, but for some, and not for the others. There are now five public access Spanish-language TV stations: Univision, Telemundo, KWHY, Azteca TV and Televisa. Spanish-language radio also has a big presence in LA with KLVE, KLAX and KRCD and so on. So, Spanish-language media is very well represented in LA. For other ethnic groups, KSCI, Channel 18, has been a unique multicultural TV station, which offer Koreans, Chinese, Vietnamese and Filipino programming. Vietnamese programming has also -- has limited access to airtime on KJLA, Channel 44. There are also Chinese, Korean and Vietnamese programs on multilingual radio network in Pasadena and Orange County. But all in all, given the fact that LA has the minority majority demographics, news program in content have not reflected that. This is not just about fairness, but also on the basis of providing comprehensive news about our society.

About two years ago, we had a panel discussion between mainstream and ethnic medias on how do you cover the city like LA, where the population is so diverse. Oftentimes to the extent of covering news stories among ethnic communities, large broadcast medias tend to focus more on the sensational stories, like tragedies and crimes. The conclusion was that, sure, there is no single media entity today that could provide comprehensive news coverage about diverse cities; however, recent media consolidation has made the situation even worse. And all the panelists agreed that by extending adequate airtime to the growing diverse communities, local news would also be enhanced.

While we have seen a great improvement for Spanish-language media and certain Asian communities, there are groups, such as the Middle Eastern communities and the Southeast Asian communities, like the Filipinos, whose numbers nearly 300,000 in LA, have hardly half-an-hour or no -- zero -- airtime. The Thai, with 70,000, have no TV or radio airtime. And the Cambodians, 50,000, have only two hours, but on cable.

With the limited time left, I want to go straight directly to our recommendations, that we would like to highlight our major points. One, FCC should look into programs to identify very underserved communities to assist them with more airtimes. Media consolidation does affect sustainability of many ethnic broadcast programs, as big media has the advantage of offering economy of scales on one-stop for cheaper and more competitive air rates. And lastly, although there are now many mainstream media broadcast networks offering multilingual programs, there is a big difference when the station is actually owned by a minority operator. It would give the minority broadcast operator a greater chance of being sustainable and also adequate resources to cover issues concerning ethnic communities that are often overlooked or cannot be covered well by large mainstream media. Thank you.

AMY GOODMAN: Julian Do of New America Media, speaking at the FCC hearing in Los Angeles. There were other people there, those who spoke at the hearing from the audience.

AUDIENCE MEMBER 1: The airwaves belong to the people, and I hope you guys decide that the license that you give are a temporary license and they can be taken away when things are not working right. Just think about that. The airwaves are the peoples’, and they are entrusted to the guys that are transmitting, and then it will go away. The second thing, it’s a cultural and educational endeavor, the media. And it’s not more like a business. Those guys were talking the economy of the business. We cannot make business with it, we have to consolidate. If you cannot make business, get out of the business, okay? The third thing, if you go to newspaper stands and you see the difference from different state, every picture in the front page is the same one, just cropped differently. We don't want that to happen to our media.

AUDIENCE MEMBER 2: In 1773, our founders began this country in part by taking an action and throwing a bunch of tea in the Boston Harbor. This was a reaction against a state-sponsored monopoly, the East India Trading Company. It’s not just because this is what our country is about, is taking -- helping the powerless against the powerful, but it’s also what works. California has had recent experience with letting the foxes rule the henhouse, when we allowed energy giants to take over the energy distribution in the state, and the people of California paid dearly for that. We only paid in money and brownouts. The thing that you’re regulating, air -- I mean, it sounds like a thing we need to breathe, and it is, but in fact it’s speech and it’s discourse in this country, and if we allow the foxes to take over that -- and it’s already happened, and you’re suggesting, I think, we should do it more -- it’s quite crazy. If you listen to the people here, there’s no one that said, “Hey, media consolidation, that’s great stuff. Let’s do a lot more of it.”

AUDIENCE MEMBER 3: When I was growing up in Virginia, I didn't even know Latinos existed. Today, living in LA, I am well aware not only that they exist, I’m well aware of their issues and their history. You have done a great job in turning my ignorance around through the media. I also wonder, though, where is the black American? I am a descendant of American slaves. Where is my image? Where are my people’s stories? Where is our reality?

AUDIENCE MEMBER 4: I think we all are in agreement that today U.S. minorities are still underrepresented in the media at large. However, as ironic as it may sound, nowhere this is more true than in the U.S. Spanish TV networks, like Univison and Telemundo. Contrary to public’s perception, for over 40 years Univision and Telemundo have managed to fill their weekly primetime schedules, not with shows that feature U.S. Hispanic actors, but with programs produced offshore in other countries in Latin America. Yes, we are invisible. Univision and Telemundo have gotten away with this precisely because they have never been subject to corporate ownership rules and regulations by the FCC as a network. I urge the FCC to take a closer look at the Spanish networks and Univision and Telemundo and seek remedies to create and foster access and allow the full participation of U.S.-based actors, writers and producers to create original programming in Spanish.

AUDIENCE MEMBER 5: You can either have democracy or you can have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few. You cannot have both. That’s not the paraphrase. And in this case, the wealth refers to our airwaves. It’s an incredible natural treasure -- national treasure, excuse me. And it seems to me the public interest should be balanced on the side of the 300 million of us, rather than the oligarchs and plutarchs and billionaires you can hold in one hand, especially when it comes to a time where our own administration is codifying torture and sanctioning the destruction of the writ of habeas corpus. We need to have more voices in the media to speak about this, rather than less.

AMY GOODMAN: Excerpts of a hearing held two weeks ago in Los Angeles by the FCC. When we come back from break, Alex Nogales will be joining us, president of the National Hispanic Media Coalition, as well as Mark Cooper, to comment. Stay with us.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: As we talk about media consolidation today, we are joined by Mark Cooper, research director of the Consumer Federation of America in Washington. Here in New York, Alex Nogales, president of the National Hispanic Media Coalition, a part of the National Latino Media Council. Alex Nogales, as you listen to these voices from the first FCC hearing -- today at Kaye Theater at Hunter College at 6:00 there will be a town hall meeting on media -- the critical points now in this new round of media consolidation consideration?

ALEX NOGALES: Well, the citizens have to talk, and we’re all talking very strongly across the nation. We’re all saying the same thing, and that is, that we need to be included. And if we’re not going to be included, we need to know why and we need to make the people answerable that are the ones in charge of the FCC, that are the ones in charge of drafting laws that are going to impact all of us.

AMY GOODMAN: How does it specifically affect the Latino population of this country?

ALEX NOGALES: If we are absent or invisible from the airwaves, we will be treated as invisible people, and Latinos are not being treated very well across the nation right now, especially in English-language media. And what you’re having is a high incidence of hate crimes against Latinos, because, you see, we’re all being lumped into this undocumented category, and in this undocumented category no one can tell the difference between one who is documented or undocumented. And so, we’re being blamed for all the ills of the United States. A little bit unfair, but that’s a reality. And so, we need to, in the local news, have ownership over those entities that program that, or we need to be included to in fact give the other side of the coin, say why we are here, say what it is that is affecting our communities, the dynamics that are going on.

AMY GOODMAN: Mark Cooper, how does this round of media consolidation broadcast rules compare to what happened before?

MARK COOPER: Well, this time we’re a lot better prepared in two respects, and I’m going to mention some research that we’ll put in the record on Monday. One, there is a mass movement out there, which grew out of the last round, and it’s clearly in full battle array, so to speak, this time. People are turning up at these public meetings in huge numbers. Comments are flying into the FCC. The second way we are more prepared is we’ve done a lot more research in advance.

And actually, we’ve done some research on minority and gender diversity, and three points are abso