We are four days of the expected low-27M. Schools have come to label some. I do not catalogaría as such even if it is true that historically the party which wins most votes in the municipal government in the state.
should not fall into the trap of trying to sell us presidential Rajoy and Zapatero with sightseeing tour of the peninsula. The people must not forget that you are voting for their local representative. We must not get carried away by the state promises we hear at meetings.
It is at this point at which a bill must pass four years of government or bad government and bad opposition or opposition. We think if you really have fulfilled the promises we made in 2003 and if instead we only have filled lips honey in the last months.
Do not forget that in municipal elections tend to be ideologies even further than in government. Here are often politicians, their personalities and characters that make the road map of each municipality. There macrocampañas shunned publicity and marketing of big games and get into the projects of the minority parties which are not given the opportunity to demonstrate. And you better value for our towns, cities and autonomous regions.
My choice, as always, active abstention. Abstain because I think it's time to shout NO to the system, corruption, theft NO Law Electoral and popular pry out of institutions. And do not stop working because of politics or fighting over the past four years the previous four, the next four, etc..
When democracy goes to war, what is the rule of law? Active Abstention
The question has a double sense. If the so-called "western democracies" go to war, ie, attack, mean that there is no rule of law. If the law states attacked by foreign entities and the situation is such hostility that should go to war to defend the whole of citizens living in that state then we analyze what are the weaknesses in the legislative foundation which may or may not collapse. Assumption
first. A self-proclaimed democratic country, - not to get into semantic vicissitudes of what is and is not a Democracy - decide to attack another country without first being attacked. What reasons can wield political representatives to attack and continue to uphold the rule of law? Today the answer is very simple: safety. It's easy, have not been attacked but we can not attack attack. The population understands the message clearly and concisely. If the message is disguised half-truths in the press, we have a complete truth for most people who do not stop to analyze the situation. "This situation is compatible with democracy? And with the rule of law? Is it feasible that these indirect and representative democracies in the West are what moves the people's representatives in Parliament who choose - or sometimes not even that, merely reporting on them the rest of Representatives - if you attack or invade a country ? Is concurrent - if it were the case - that the people were in clear majority demonstrating against military attack and their representatives, using the legal mechanisms that are available to them - because them, they have them - obvious attacked? For me the answer is clear and concise: no. Assumption
second and last. A self-proclaimed democratic country is attacked by another. What should you do? First I want to make it clear to me that this assumption is valid if and only if, it is abundantly aware of what the country self-proclaimed champion of democracy and rule of law alleged attacked, but we are in the first course, but we playing on the sale of insecurity. Well, if the country is attacked it must first inform the public, second, make a direct and democratic consultation on what to do, and third and last act binding the outcome of the referendum. That's the only way in which the foundations of the rule of law, freedoms, justice, equality, security, etc. No wobble. Any military attack without the consent and popular force would risk increased levels of security of the entire population of the country attacked the same self-defense. What direct and participatory democracy is slower than indirect? Sure. What in this second scenario might be viable? I think not. But surely sustains and strengthens any action taken by the State address this situation of confrontation with another state.
Imagine that tomorrow Spain is attacked by Morocco - a situation not insignificant, moreover taking into account what has been happening for 30 years in Western Sahara and thinking what would happen when Spain meets, if ever meet, with agreements Madrid ... - around the Mediterranean coast. Imagine so ipso facta Spain gives notice to NATO and attack with the help of American and French troops to Morocco - a situation not negligible considering what happened on the island of Parsley -. Imagine that the English population has no reliable reports of this in 48 hours, all rumors, which contradict the information and other means, etc.. - A situation that we all have this in the context of 11M and 14M -. And finally imagine that people were thrown into the street. That some say NO to attacks that may seem unfair because the situation described above. Others say that yes, that must be attacked to preserve public safety. Others take advantage of the chaos to commit a crime and that are totally outdated FFSS. Is not this situation more unsafe for the general public that no self-defense and control of the situation by the state?
Thus, Democracies and the rule of law appears to be inconsistent in all aspects with military attack. No military strike can or should be moral or ideological justification. No attack will have the support of Human Rights or the Geneva Conventions. Only if there is support of the people in front of a crystal clear situation of necessity defense could be no justification for the attack long before diplomatic avenues are exhausted dialog. I, personally, I see it unnecessary to reach any situation of this nature Should we call things by their name. If we clear that Democracy does not vote your representatives every four years not a rule of law is that which separates the three branches or behind it some laws, if these laws are not fit to democratic principles and human rights, how is it possible to call this state, rule of law? And when the people in the West is clear about where you are and be clear that decision-making power in this democracy has sold you will not need us to press questions like When democracy goes to war, what is the rule of law ? instead we must start asking questions like: what I can do to build in this place in vivo which rule of law, a democracy? What I can do to build this democracy in other places where other people live? And once people have the ability to ask these questions begin to answer them. And will then begin to act to change, to change the isms governing the world today and build a fairer, nobler, healthier, more democratic, more humane, more just, more independent and to ensure our freedoms . When constructing this force need not be popular even talk of war. I hope.
Remember when you were told in school that we were all equal before the law? Remember when you said that in democracy we all have an equal voice and vote? If you remember and never asked if it was true today, you'll get a nasty surprise. And in the English State is as good as the vote of an Andalusian, that of a Madrid, or that of a Catalan. One of the bases at which to sustain a democracy for its citizens, "the election of political representatives of the same", is neither equitable nor horizontal. Let me explain.
The Organic Law on General Electortal establishing a provincial constituency organization, that is, the total of 350 seats currently in Congress will be formed according to different individual members leaving each of the provinces - including the towns of Ceuta and Melilla -. Although the allocation of seats per province is established in proportion to its inhabitants, now explain how to actually making this law is first to encourage the major parties (PSOE and PP), second to nationalists in the majority and Finally steal votes to UI and other minor parties.
First let's see how it is more expensive to get seats according to which region you belong, this list provides that "costs" (the votes) to get a congressman by province:
How can a seat in Seville cost 10 times more than one in Teruel? Do the citizens Seville pay taxes 10 times lower than those of Teruel?
But now let's see, really, in that it affects the poor distribution of the ridings in the outcome of general elections. We are going to avail ourselves of the results of the elections of 2000 :
Final result with the current Electoral Act where 1 vote is not equal to 1 person:
Party Votes Percent PP Seats 10,321,178 44.52% 183 PSOE-progr. 7,918,752 34.16% 125 CIU 970,421 4.19% 15 UI 1,263,043 5.45% 8 EAJ-PNV 353,953 1.53% 7 CC 248,261 1.07% 4 BNG 306,268 1.32% 3 PA 206,255 0.89% 1 ERC 194,715 0.84% \u200b\u200b 1 IC-V 119,290 0.51% 1 EA 100,742 0.43% 1 TA 75,356 0.33% 1 Gil 72,162 0.31% 0 GREEN 70,906 0.31% 0 -Block Green 58,551 0.25% 0 UV 57,830 0.25% 0 UPL 41,690 0.18% 0 Final result whether the Act respond to the democratic principle of one vote equal to 1 person:
PP 158 seats (25 fewer than it won: 183) PSOE 125 (4 under) IU 19 (11 seats more than they actually did) CiU 15 (will stay the same, with the same seats they won) PNV 5 (2 under) BNG 5 (2 more) CC 4 (will stay the same)
(Other minority parties, such as UV or the Greens, have managed to gain representation in parliament with one seat)
To see it is no coincidence, we'll see what happens if we use data from 2004 :
final results to the Electoral Law force where 1 vote is not equal to 1 person:
final result if Act respond to the democratic principle of one vote equal to 1 person: PSOE ---> 147 esc. (17 less) -----> PP 129 esc. (19 less) CIU ----> 11 esc. (1 more) ERC ----> 9 esc. (1 more) PNV ----> 6 esc. (1 less) IU -----> 17 esc. (12 more) CC -----> 3 esc. (Same)
...
As we see, in the years 2000/2004 PP and PSOE get an average of 33 more seats than they really belong to them, while IU has 12 seats less than they really belong to them if they fulfill the maximum of one vote equal to a person, sir ealmente this Democracy to be representative of all citizens as equals. This translated into real world means that a vote for IU in Teruel Jaén León or worth less than justice at Guantanamo. Means that the two major political parties were able to leave all tied up and well tied during the "Transitional" means that the nationalist parties have an unreal power because, although the number of seats actually it does not vary significantly with the theft of votes to IU greatly favors them above all in those days after elections in which some have that agree with each other so that they can govern thanks to the favors of others.
And that is why - among other things, you do not believe that my vote would be for centuries an I and U - which we have no fight to appeal to active abstention, the fight out of the polls - because this way is found not leave us - to show people that we have reason to think that the English government is teetering on a basis of just little, little fair, and very undemocratic. And such is the wobble of this state of law "? I have the firm conviction that only need to blow a little harder for it to fall, and truly, we create a society based on rules that draws on positive rather than negative values \u200b\u200bfor our @ s hij @ s, a society where youth have room for the view - anyone younger than 45 years in the English State, 75% of people voted on this Constitution - Constitution we have inherited from a fascist regime. We can and must change the system before it cmabie us to us, and ... What better way to give them a good slap in the face of reason in the election?
can be reduced to two ideas that exist in Euskadi, though much reduced and I am speaking only of what each one wants to be Euskadi.
The idea that there is a right of self-determination and of itself be recognized.
Everyone is free to have the idea you want, everything is very nice ... no freedom of thought ... anyone put in jail for having ideas that are ... they say.
The fact is that at the end of this whole democratic free thinking should be clear that there is only one idea that can be carried out because the other is illegal, is prohibited ... does not matter any more or less than what your idea is the recognition self-determination, always get their way that your idea is non-recognition, play it safe ... with marked cards, play with the security that the ban against his idea, they can say they are more if you want to say because it is also forbidden to hold referendums to see how many of each idea.
If someone who is self-determination by the rebels against this ... those of non-self can safely say that they feel attacked in their ideas and turn over the tables reminding everyone is free to think whatever they want and to respect his thinking ... he is good because it respects the idea of Yes self-determination ... the other is wrong because they are angry with her idea of \u200b\u200bnot self-determination.
First: Do not upset the idea of \u200b\u200bself-determination but not the ban on the opposite idea.
Second fucks Nooooo! not going to respect that everyone has the idea of \u200b\u200bthe autoderminación Yes when you play with the security that is prohibited and you're 2 or 200 .... always carry out your idea and never the opposite. Children
miosss ... think a bit about all this before you start talking about democracy, respect for ideas, freedom ... aaaaamen
- The PP has constitutional challenges to the Statute of Catalonia.
- By the number of conservative and progressive judges (very interesting this that judges are politicized as root) would vote tie, tiebreak President, progressive.
- Pérez Tremps, Judge Progressive, is challenged by their peers at the request of the PP. So the Conservatives win the vote and the statute could be declared unconstitutional.
- If Perez resigns Tremps may appoint another Judge Progressive and again be voting against the resources. The PP says that " Government will not dare to force the resignation of Trains ".
Is this what the fuck is it? What country, a democratic, can give a situation in which:
- a people, in this case Catalan freely choose their representatives. - 90% of the representative who has chosen the people are in favor of a law, in this case a Statute of Autonomy. This statute was approved. - representatives of the remaining 10% claim that the ICC Statute not approved by hook or by crook. They use the courts for a political decision. - when the courts seems to prove them right, get involved in the legal process to challenge to a judge, and get it!, and are thrown up his hands to his head if the judge resigns.
We return to the charge in Buffet Libre. Is that the guests you walk out there but do not let your recipes animais, I expect more participation, do not be vaguetes or vaguetas.
Al plate.
Today I bring an issue in recent polls of the CIS has uploaded some steps on the levels of concern of the citizens of the English State. Terrorism. In particular terror ETA exerted on the Basque people and other English towns.
As you know the March 23, 2006 ETA declared a "permanent ceasefire" to boost the output of the Basque conflict through dialogue. From then until now there have been many events that have complicated the peace process, the mediated solution by both the English State, as part of ETA and by the nationalist world.
The December 30th happening than anyone expected, a new criminal action of ETA, 200 kilos of explosive collapse of the T4 zone and carried with it two people. Two immigrants ecuatarianos. The Government assumes broken the peace process. Batasuna says the process is not broken. The different mechanisms government begin to take steps through the court against the world pdoer nationalist and ETA prisoners. In Parliament, all parties agree PP least a new consensus against ETA.
With all this cocktail of condiments, what menu we prepare to reach the end of violence?
I have it very clear. Give him a chance for peace in Euskadi. The only option is dialogue, the recent history of the peoples who have been in a situation similar to Euskadi should teach us the way: Northern Ireland and Montenegro should teach. No dialog will never be peace. Even with the dirty war against ETA in the 80 exemplified by the GAL, nor anti-democratic laws of the PP, nor with the recent prosecution orchestrated by the Government is over and end the violence. Euskadi because there is a problem of violence by violence, but a problem of determining an issue of ideas. And ideas or are killed or are imprisoned. Outlaw
matches outlaw youth organizations, increasing penalties, ETA prisoners away from their homes, criminalizing the dialogue between politicians is not the road.
sniping necks, flying cars, business sabotage, threats and restricting to politics is not the road.
Sitting at a table, put everyone's ideas on a platter, and keep the best choice for SI Basque people is the solution. And in this dialogue, how they should reach agreement?
I have it very clear. Just enforce the law. First of all, the return of Basque prisoners. Only 40 ETA prisoners are in jails Basque. And be jailed close to home is usually a right that recognize the laws of this State. Second, one need only observe dozens of UN resolutions which recognize the right of self-determination of peoples, that is, given the option to the Basque people want to choose that path.
and everything else, is to continue as it began 50 years ago. I repeat: we must give peace a chance.
The machine of U.S. foreign policy has been lubricated by imperatives that can be summarized as follows:
Building a world safe for U.S. corporations;
promote financial resources for domestic defense contractors who have contributed generously to members of Congress;
prevent the emergence of any society capable of representing a successful example of an alternative to the capitalist model;
extend political and economic hegemony over the widest area possible, as befits the "great power."
All this in the name of a supposed moral crusade against international communist conspiracy were convinced that the supporters of the Cold War and that convinced the American people, and in fact, evil or not never existed. U.S.
really serious interventions conducted in over seventy countries in this period, most notably including:
China, 1945-1949 : The civil war intervened on the side of Chiang Kai-Shek against the communists, even though they had been close U.S. allies during the war. The U.S. used defeated Japanese soldiers to fight on their side but the Communists forced Chiang to flee to Taiwan in 1949.
Philippines, 1945-1953 : U.S. military forces fighting against leftist forces Huks, while they still faced the Japanese invaders. After the war, the U.S. continues to fight against the Huks, the track and install a number of allied leaders in office, culminating with the dictator Ferdinand Marcos.
South Korea, 1945-1953 : After WWII, the United States suppressed popular progressive forces favoring the conservatives who had collaborated with the Japanese. This leads to a long era of corruption and brutal dictatorships.
Italy, 1947-1948 : United States interferes in the elections to prevent the Communist Party comes to power legally with the stated purpose of "saving democracy" in Italy. The communists lost. In the following decades, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), along with corporate America continues to intervene in the Italian elections to block the "specter haunting Europe."
Greece, 1947-1949 : The civil war involved in taking the side of the neo-fascists against the Greek left which had fought the Nazis courageously. The neo-fascists won and established a highly brutal regime, for which the CIA created a new internal security agency, which for a long time, worked on putting into practice all the shares of secret police around the world, including torture systematic.
Albania, 1949-1953 USA and England trying unsuccessfully to topple the communist government and install a new pro-Western made up of monarchists and collaborators with the Nazis and Italian Fascists.
Germany, 1950's : The CIA began a broad campaign against eastern Germany. This was one of the factors that influenced the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961.
Viet Nam, 1950-1973 : After twenty-three and more than a million dead U.S. withdrew its military forces from Viet Nam Most people think that America lost the war, but destroying the heart of Viet Nam and poisoning the land and gene pools for generations, Washington actually achieved its main goal, preventing what could have been a good development option for Asia.
Iran, 1953 : Prime Minister Mossadegh was defeated in a joint operation between the U.S. and England. Mossadegh had been elected by a large majority in parliament but made the big mistake of heading a movement to nationalize a British oil company, the only oil company operating in Iran. The coup restored the Shah to absolute power, ushering in a period of repression and torture that lasts for twenty years in the property is restored foreign oil industry and issued to Britons and Americans 40 percent, respectively, and other nations the remaining 20 percent.
British Guiana / Guyana, 1953-1964 : For eleven years, two of the oldest democracies in the world, Britain and the United States go far to prevent a democratically elected leader take his place. Cheddi Jagan tried to remain neutral and independent. He was elected three times, though they have left their government policies were not revolutionary. It was however a marked man to represent the greatest threat to Washington: the construction of a society that could serve as an alternative to the capitalist model. Using various tactics the United States and England Jagan finally expelled in 1964. John F. Kennedy gave the order directly.
Guatemala, 1953-1990's : A coup organized by the CIA overthrew the democratic and progressive government of Jacobo Arbenz giving way to forty years of death squads, torture, disappearances, mass executions and unimaginable cruelty with a balance of over one hundred thousand victims. Arguably, one of the most inhuman chapters in the history of the twentieth century. Arbenz nationalized the United Fruit Company which had close ties with the elite of American power. In support of the coup, Washington declared that Guatemala was on the verge of falling under the sway of the Soviets, when in fact the Russians had so little interest in the country that even diplomatic relations with it. The real problem from the perspective of Washington, as well as with the United Fruit, was the danger of an extension of Guatemala's social democracy to other countries in the region.
Cambodia, 1955-1973 : After many years of hostility toward his regime, which included assassination plots and the infamous "letter bombs" Secret Nixon / Kissinger in 1969-1970, Washington finally overthrew Sihanouk in a coup in 1970. This was just what was needed to bring to Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge forces to take over the scene. Five years of missing U.S. bombing of Cambodia's traditional economy.
U.S. military said the Pol Pot and diplomatically over its subsequent defeats with Viet Nam
Middle East, 1956-1958 : United States twice attempted to overthrow the Syrian government, made a show of force in the Mediterranean to intimidate movements opposed to governments that held in Lebanon and Jordan, installing fourteen thousand troops in Lebanon, and conspired to overthrow or assassinate Nasser in Egypt for his disturbing nationalism.
Indonesia, 1957-1958 : Sukarno, like Nasser, was the third-class leader in the United States could not be understood. He took seriously the neutrality of the Cold War, traveling to the Soviet Union and China (although the White House.) He nationalized many private holdings of the Netherlands, former colonial power, and refused to deal harshly with the Indonesian Communist Party to move into a legal and peaceful means and recorded impressive electoral gains. The CIA began to join forces with officials military dissidents waging a comprehensive war against the government.
Cuba, 1959 to date : Fidel Castro coming to power in early 1959. A meeting of the National Security Council of the United States on March 10 included in its agenda the possibility of "another government in power in Cuba." Followed forty years of attacks, bombings, military invasions and embargoes open.
Congo / Zaire, 1960-1965 : In June 1960, with independence from Belgium, Patrice Lumumba became prime minister of Congo. However, as Belgium maintained its huge mining in the province of Katanga, and prominent Eisenhower administration officials had financial ties to the business, the day of the celebration of independence Lumumba, compared with foreign dignitaries who accompanied him, he called for economic and political liberation of the nation and gave an account of the injustices committed by the white owners of the country against the native population.
Eleven days later, Katanga province seceded, in September, Lumumba was dismissed by the president instigated by the United States in January 1961 and was killed by an express request of Dwight Eisenhower. Several years of civil conflict and chaos and the rise to power Mobutu Sese Seko, a man who was not unknown to the CIA. Mobutu has ruled the country for over thirty years, with levels of corruption and cruelty that hit even his own advisers to the CIA. Zaire's population lived in abject poverty despite the immense natural wealth, while Mobutu is a billionaire.
Brazil, 1961-1964 : President Joao Goulart adopted an independent stance in foreign policy by establishing relations with socialist countries and opposing sanctions against Cuba. His administration passed a law limiting the amount of profits repatriated by multinationals; nationalized a subsidiary of ITT, promoted economic and social reforms. In 1964 he was overthrown by a military coup in the United States had deep coverage and involvement.
During the next fifteen years all the characteristics of military dictatorships in Latin America met were instituted: Congress was dissolved, the political opposition was reduced to its virtual extinction, habeas corpus was suspended for "political crimes" is legally prohibited criticism of the President, the unions were intervened by the government, the growing protests were submitted by police and military forces fired at crowds, peasants' homes were burned, priests were brutalized ... disappearances, death squads, an impressive degree of depravity in the practice of torture.
Dominican Republic, 1963-1966 : In February 1963, Juan Bosch became the first democratically elected president in the Dominican Republic since 1924. Bosch
proposed land reform, low-rent housing, modest nationalization of business and foreign investment to the country did not explode too, and other policies that were part of a program of social change. Quantity
Congressional and U.S. officials expressed dissatisfaction with Bosch's plans, as well as its position of independence from the United States. Land reform and nationalization were very sensitive issues in Washington.
In September the military boots marched and Bosch is expelled. Nineteen months later, an attempted uprising to restore Bosch to power bringing him into exile. Twenty-three thousand U.S. troops sent to crush it.
Chile, 1964-1973 : Salvador Allende was the worst possible scenario for the imperialism of Washington. The only thing worse than a Marxist in power was a elected Marxist in power democratically, honoring the Constitution and became increasingly popular.
After sabotaging Allende's electoral endeavor in 1964, and failing in the same attempt in 1970, the CIA and the rest of American foreign policy machine left no stone unturned in their effort to destabilize the government of Allende in the next three years, with particular emphasis on promoting military hostility. Finally in September 1973 the military overthrew the Allende government killing in the process.
closed the country to the outside for a week when tanks rolled through the streets and soldiers knocked down the doors, the stadium rang with the sounds of the performances and bodies piled up along the streets and floated in the river, the torture centers were booming, the subversive books were burning in the fires, the soldiers tore the Pants women shouting "In Chile women wear dresses!" the poor returned to their natural state. In the end, more than three thousand people were executed, thousands more tortured and disappeared.
Greece 1964-1974: The military coup took place in April 1967, just two days before the national election campaign since it seemed clear that lead to George Papandreou back to the post of prime minister. Papandreou was elected in February 1964 for no overall majority of modern electoral history in Greece. The successful machinations to knock it down immediately initiated a joint effort of the Royal Court, the Greek military and the U.S. military and CIA operatives stationed in Greece. The 1967 coup was followed immediately by the traditional martial law, censorship, arrests, beatings, torture and murder, with a total of eight thousand victims in the first month.
torture was no doubt which indelibly marked the seven-year nightmare in Greece. James Becket, an American attorney sent to Greece by Amnesty International, wrote in December 1969 that "a conservative estimate at least two thousand" the number of people tortured, usually of the most gruesome and often using equipment provided by the United States.
Indonesia, 1965 : A complex series of events, including an alleged coup attempt, a counter and maybe a backlash against, with the U.S. hand printed at various points, resulted in the departure power of Sukarno and his replacement by a military junta headed by General Suharto. The slaughter that began immediately was hailed by the New York Times as "one of the most brutal mass killings of modern political history. "The estimated number of dead for a few years went from half a million to more than one million.
after it was learned that the U.S. embassy had prepared lists of" communist agents "from the highest level to the operators of neighborhood, reaching the five thousand names, and handed them to the army that was dedicated to hunt and kill.
East Timor, 1975 to present : In December 1975 Indonesia invaded East Timor , located at the eastern end of the archipelago, and whose independence from Portugal him out of his control. The invasion was made a day after President Gerald Ford and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger came out of Indonesia, not without giving Suharto permission to use American weapons, according to U.S. law, can not be used for aggression. Indonesia was the most valuable tool for the U.S. in Southeast Asia.
Amnesty International estimated that in 1989, with the aim of forcibly annexing East Timor, Indonesian troops killed two hundred thousand people in a population of between six hundred and seven hundred thousand. United States strongly supported the claims of Indonesia to East Timor (unlike the United Nations and the European Union European), minimizing a scandalous massacre of dimensions and providing at the same time for Indonesia to all equipment and training required to perform the operation.
Nicaragua, 1978-1979 : The Sandinistas overthrew the Somoza dictatorship in 1978. Under President Carter, attempts to sabotage took diplomatic and economic forms. Under Reagan, the violence was the method chosen. For eight terrible years the people of Nicaragua were under attack from the contras, an armed group near Washington, formed from Somoza's vicious National Guard and some of its advocates. It was a total war intended to destroy gradually all economic and social programs of government schools and hospitals burning, kidnapping, torturing, laying mines and bombing violently. These were "freedom fighters" by Ronald Reagan. There would be no revolution in Nicaragua.
Granada, 1979-1984 : What would the most powerful nation in the world to invade a country of one hundred and ten thousand inhabitants? Maurice Bishop and his followers had taken power in 1979 coup, and though his policies were not as revolutionary as those of Castro, Washington kept his fear of "another Cuba," particularly when public appearances by the Grenadian leaders were received enthusiasm in other countries in the region.
The U.S. destabilization tactics against the Bishop government began after the coup and continued until 1983. The U.S. invasion in October 1983 met minimal resistance if the United States suffered one hundred thirty-five casualties dead and wounded. Granada was also victimized four and eighty-four Cubans, mainly construction workers.
In late 1984, in a highly questionable election was won by a man supported by the Reagan administration. A year later, the human rights organization Council Hemispheric Affairs reported that the new police force trained by U.S. and Granada counterinsurgency forces had been marked by their brutality, arbitrary arrests and abuse of authority and the erosion of civil rights.
In April 1989 the government published a list of over eighty books that prohibit the import. Four months later, the prime minister dissolved Parliament.
Afghanistan, 1979-1992 : Everyone knows about the unbelievable repression of women in Afghanistan, carried out by Islamic fundamentalists, even before the Taliban. But how many know that during the seventies and eighties most of Afghanistan had a government in charge of putting this incredibly backward nation in the twentieth century, including the establishment of equal rights for women? What happened, however, is that the U.S. injected billions of dollars in a terrible war against this government, simply because he had supported the Soviet Union. Before this, the operations of the CIA deliberately encouraged the probability of a Soviet intervention, which was what happened. In the end the U.S. won and women, and the rest of the people of Afghanistan, lost. More than a million dead, three million the disabled, five million refugees, in total, about half of the population.
El Salvador, 1980-1992 : In 1980 the opposition took up arms and began the civil war.
Officially, the presence of U.S. military forces was limited to training, but in reality the military and CIA personnel played a more important role. About twenty Americans died or were injured in airplane or helicopter crashes while flying over combat areas on reconnaissance missions and there are many evidences on the involvement of U.S. forces directly in the field of battle. The war officially ended in 1992: seventy-five thousand civilians dead and the U.S. treasury emptied six billion dollars. Significant social changes were largely frustrated. A handful of the country still possessed rich, the poor continued as usual and had to keep dissidents harassed by death squads of the extreme right.
Libya, 1981-1989 : Libya refused to be an ally of Washington state in the Middle East. U.S. planes shot down two Libyan planes in what Libya considered airspace. They also bombarded the country killing at least forty people including was Qaddafi's daughter. There were several assassination attempts against him, to bring him down operations, a massive disinformation campaign, economic sanctions and Libya's guilt, without any clear evidence, by the bomb planted on Pan Am flight 103.
Haiti, 1987-1994 : United States held the Duvalier family dictatorship for thirty years, when he opposed the reformist priest Jean Bertrand Aristide. Meanwhile, the CIA worked closely with death squads, torturers and traffickers in drugs. Having delayed his return for more than two years, Washington finally had its military restore Aristide to Of course, but only after forcing the priest to ensure that no benefit on the poor at the expense of the rich and not oppose the free market economy. This meant that Haiti would continue to assembly plant for the Western Hemisphere and workers continue receiving literally starvation wages.
Panama, 1989 : In December 1989, a large residential neighborhood in Panama City was destroyed and fifteen thousand people were left homeless. After several days of confrontation with Panamanian forces the official toll was about five hundred dead, supported by United States and the new Panamanian government US-installed. Other sources, with no less evidence, insisted that thousands had died and had about three thousand wounded Americans twenty-three dead three hundred twenty-four injured.
Manuel Noriega was a U.S. ally and informant for years while it was useful. But turn it on was not the only motive for the attack. Bush wanted to send a clear message to the Nicaraguans, who had scheduled their elections two months later, that would be his ruin if reelected the Sandinistas. Bush also wanted to turn some military muscle to illustrate to Congress on the need to list a large combat force (For broad war scenario), even after the very recent dissolution of the "Soviet threat." The official explanation of the plunder perpetrated by the Americans was that Noriega was a drug trafficker, which Washington had known for years and never bothered.
Iraq, 1990's : Relentless bombing for more than forty days and nights to one of the most advanced nations of the Middle East, devastating its ancient and modern capital city, one hundred seventy-seven million pounds of bombs falling on the people of Iraq, the most concentrated aerial onslaught in the history of world uranium weapons incinerating discharging the people, causing cancer; explosion stores chemical-biological weapons and oil fields, poisoning the atmosphere to a degree perhaps never matched anywhere else, deliberately burying soldiers alive, infrastructure destroyed, with terrible repercussions on health ; permanent sanctions until today multiplying the health problems around one million children and more adults died from these causes today.
Iraq was the strongest military power in the Arab world. Noam Chomsky wrote: "The dominant line in the doctrine of U.S. foreign policy since the forties was that the vast and unparalleled energy resources of the Gulf region were effectively dominated by the United States and its allies and, crucially, that no independent indigenous force could have a substantial influence on the management of production and the price of oil. "
Yugoslavia, 1999 USA is bombing the country back to a preindustrial era. I would like to convince the world that its intervention is motivated only "humanitarian." Perhaps the history of U.S. interventions counted up to help us decide on the credibility of this statement.
I guess all you saw on TV or in print have read multitude of situations that fit the title of the post, but .. . Have you thought about it?
this article is that goal, which all reflect on the causes and consequences of these violent attitudes in the educational setting.
first clarify that I speak from the context in the state where I live, not sure if the other countries to pass these things or not, but this place is a good place for users in other countries they discuss reality. In Latin America, for example, I contrasted the Internet there are frequent fights among students, yet I've seen videos where Latino immigrants were stunned to come to Spain and see how his teammates faced the teacher ...
In my limited experience, and my contact with the scene of Education I can say that cases of violence occur in 95% Secondary Stage, and more rarely in the last year of primary school. In BA only. For Alcara colleagues from different countries we are talking of children between 12 and 16. Factors
consider to be reckoned with in the school:
1) Number and age of pupils. In Spain it is common in schools that taught educational classes for children from age 6 to 16 or even 18. Does this bring us? Well as you may have would buy for children, their elders, are a reflection mentors, and if a child is 8 years in school as his brother of 14 leaves or smoke pellets coverings on the playground, because he will want to imitate . Therefore, the separation of stages in the centers would UNF actor to be reckoned with.
2) Teachers. In my view, poor training among teachers to meet the new challenges of this society. Challenges such as the integration of immigrants, drug use, the sexism, secularism ... etc ... are too high for dle part most veteran teachers. You only have to talk to the kids to see how many teachers do not know their function in class ...
factors to take into account outside the school as such:
1) Laws. Since the death of Franco and the establishment of the LOGSE has been either too changes in legislation. The LOGSE was widely criticized in its practical aspect, that is, in theory, its aims and means, were perfect, but in practice has seen some of these objetvios not have been reinvested. From there a need for change, the PP raises the LOCE, with its model-based Quality and the European Excellence Model, a law of scientific, business, elitist, antilaicista ... in short, and friends see it, a mierdapinchaunpalo. PSOE again, and this law is applied in some autonomous communities, in other half, in other anything, and ale, new law ... very similar to the logs, but taking more account of the new theories of quality improvement from a practical standpoint. We'll see how it goes, but these bumps legislative can not be good for eld evelopment of students within the school, which is ultimately where it will be.
2) Company. Well, leave it open because it would write a thousand things, just to mention factors that I believe are due to consider: television, video games, family, social awareness, consciousness of effort, Administration, ...
What do you think? As you see, to me, boy or girl in any case not guilty. It's as easy, and cynical, thinking that a child is to blame for their attitude, let's face it, analyze, and try to improve.
January 3: 12:00. Plaza Mayor of Salamanca. They say it's the most beautiful Plaza Mayor in Spain, designed by the best man, a symbol of a city that boasts cultured and erudite, cradle university. College bars filled with laughter and song. January 3. 12:00. Plaza Mayor of Salamanca. Concentration in rejection of the latest attack by ETA. About 1,000 Salamanca, police said. Between 300 and 400, according to my eyes. The Permanent Secretaries of the AVT begins his speech. It may or may not be what you say, but this is a Democracy? And the silence and the applause is the only sound that fills the Plaza Mayor in Salamanca, so beautiful it so cultured it. To a crowd bursts into speech.
The war dead of 36 are also victims of terrorism.
Reactions? "Of those who say focus to repudiate hatred and without reason?
Cries of murderers, remember pushing Paracuellos and a slap. The police must intervene so that the two sides in Spain 70 years after a lien is not hosts. Insults, careers, lack of respect. This is Spain. This is MY COUNTRY, MY LAND, MY DEAR SPAIN. A Spain that is still divided in two, a Spain incapza to mourn their dead in peace without importance of the side where they are. A Spain qye see meet to sue for peace and insulting to the contrary. A Spain that has not been given much cde we're all on the same side. Diego Armando and Carlos does anyone apart from your families, I really miss? Diego Armando and Carlos at what kind of country kind of country you came that I killed?
All. Left and right. All the same purpose. Create hate, discussion, divide, separate. And families mourning their ETA muertos.Y toasting with champagne, 'because their bombs, is dividing his dictatorship without which nobody seems to care. What is the difference between ETA and lso that today, in my eyes have been glued? What would we do with a gun in his hand? Peace who can claim when it is unable to respect the opposite?
Spain is going to hell, to the civil war. Much internet, high in fiber optics, much Alonso, many European Union and we like 30 years ago. Congratulations.
I'm sure everyone s you are informed either by print or TV or by the argument of the last two weekends in Alcorcón, but ... Have you stopped to think about the causes of the clashes between youths and young Latin American English?
I am sure that you have been bombarded with information that you have hardly digested the information will have swallowed - as usual - and after the embarrassment of half-truths, which are the worst of lies, on our way.
in Alcorcón, as in many population centers urban character of the state there is a global problem of racial confrontation, no. The problem is that small groups of people affinity cultural occasionally, are formed into gangs fighting to have the power to certain areas of the city. The problem comes when these gangs do not want to integrate with other groups, but faced. Looking to have your choice of power. Lack of education. The system ends. The Freethinker dies.
not think it's a racial problem exclusively from the press is as neo-Nazi groups want to see the population, mostly younger. Do not be fooled. The immigrant is your friend, your enemy are those people who for economic interests political or want to see immigrants as that person different from you, with fewer rights, and who comes to steal or your wallet or your work.
So from the kitchen of Free Buffet wants to raise a cry is loud and clear against racism, integration and peaceful coexistence. Because despite everything, and I say very bad intentions yet, we're still people.
Buffet Libre. The trays are overflowing. We have everything we want and how you want. Of course, we must be very careful not to cause choking, because often the greed breaks the sack.
This blog stems from the need to find a place where we can discuss those issues that are of interest to tod @ s, always with respect for the other users of the blog and do not tolerate any racist comments, sexist, or contempt against any group . If you do not like fish, eat meat, but let those who eat fish if they want to.
So you have the doors open to read and comment provided when you are sure to ACPET these minimal rules of coexistence that we have at Buffet Libre. You can write your comments in the entries or send an article to place it on the cover.
