Archives

The War on Libya – There Was No Evidence

TIPNIS: A Libyan test method? | TIPNIS: ¿Un ensayo del método libio?

 This article was originally written in Spanish. The original version follows below our translation – admin

“I was Quechua born. I learned Spanish at 9 years old. I lived in a peasant community, 40 km afar of the nearest road. Without electric power, without engines, schools or medical centers. To reach the “punta carretera” (the nearest village where I attended basic school), we needed to travel a day and a half on foot, after the mules. We slept over mud, under the trees, covering ourselves with plastic sheets so full of holes. My father, when he was a child, had to travel afoot 7 days, behind the mules, to reach the school: he never finished his education.”

By Ollantay Itzamná
10/10/11

In the complex Bolivian order of things, so full of revolutionary histories, the TIPNIS case is and will be a valuable lesson for people with revolutionary creed, but too close to Sisyphus’ myth for their own good. When a 21st century world in despair was looking in hope the Bolivian process, as a referent for possible structural transformations, we stumbled upon the noisy TIPNIS case. As a result, Bolivian idea-lacking oligarchy breathed again, and conscience and political beliefs from promoting Bolivians is under a hard test.

The TIPNIS case is not a environmental or indigenous joke: it’s an rehearsal for validating the Libyan method’s effectiveness. The Territorio Indígena Parque Nacional Isiboro-Sécure (TIPNIS) is 12.363 square kilometers (4,773.381 square miles), and belongs to the Beni and Cochabamba departments, 300 kilometers from Brazil’s frontier. This territory, still virgin land, has no roads, electric power or facilities of any kind: it is the home for poor indigenous tribes, just two steps ahead of primitive times: moxeño, yuracaré and chimán. That, and some “colonization” communities. In order to include isolated parts of territory, President Evo Morales is working in ambitious road-construction projects. One of those projects, connecting the plateau and valleys with Amazonian Bolivia, goes straight thru TIPNIS. In the present day, you need three days of travel (900 km) in order to go from Beni to Cochabamba. With the new road, traveling through TIPNIS, distance would be 300 km shorter. This road project is shattering not just Morales’ government, but also the hopeful change process in Bolivia. It can look funny: a poor country, without enough roads, is fighting angrily against a road project in the middle of TIPNIS. What’s the matter with the bold Bolivia, the rainbow warriors’ one?

The meaning of living without roads

I was Quechua born. I learned Spanish at 9 years old. I lived in a peasant community, 40 km afar of the nearest road. Without electric power, without engines, schools or medical centers. To reach the “punta carretera” (the nearest village where I attended basic school), we needed to travel a day and a half on foot, after the mules. We slept over mud, under the trees, covering ourselves with plastic sheets so full of holes. My father, when he was a child, had to travel afoot 7 days, behind the mules, to reach the school: he never finished his education. At this moment of time, road is nearer, it conquered tropical jungle, and it’s 3 hours away from my parents’ home. Last time I visited my old parents, I sadly saw from the van I was riding on a lazy bear, no very scared by engine sound. You can’t imagine all the contradictions suggested by that scene. To be honest, without that blessed road, I would never learned to write, and I would never know the miseries and the greatness of the modern world. My mother, isolated, would surely die due to her heart troubles. But despite that, the road is still troubling me. Especially now that I am an urban indigenous, and my Earth identity. But, do I have the right to negate my nephews and other people the chance of experience modern times? For us, indigenous, the road is a matter of life and death. The rest is just silly stories.

Are we prepared to avoid modern times?

When I hear and read the arguments against the TIPNIS road, I wonder if environmental and indigenous advocates know firsthand how is life when you’re isolated and poor. ¿Do they know what is living without electrical power, schools, hospitals, computer or freezers? I do not defend Earth or indigenous people. I am Earth and indigenous at the same time, and I long for life. I don’t want the isolation that kills silence for no one. But I am not a defender of the modern times killing our surroundings, our people or committing suicide. My ancestors lived for thousands of years interacting with Mother Earth. Without agriculture, without settings, without cattle, without roads, without Industrial Revolution, mankind would not exist. At least, not with the “comfort” we already have. Good life, as a lifestyle, for indigenous people, isn’t opposed to modern times! Why people excluded from Movimiento Al Socialismo (Movement For Socialism, MAS), ex-Morales’ government agents like Raúl Prada, Alejandro Almaraz, Lino Vilca, Román Loayza and others, now that don’t receive a pay from Evo’s “tyrant” government, want to behead the President? Rest of road and petroleum exploitations, when they were on the rule: weren’t so harmful for Mother Earth and financed by Brazilian empire, as they claim now? Why modern and urban indigenous, used to fly by plane, want to keep their kin isolated and poor? If we negate roads to TIPNIS people, we must do it too for the rest of indigenous and mixed races, forbidding motorways and airports. Do they will agree on that? Once you’re in top of the ladder of modern times, is easy to burn bridges behind us, while rest of people wants also their share of “modernity”, even this is bad for Mother Earth.

It was no then, it is yes now?

Why landowners that treated indigenous people as beasts of burden and little more than animals, now with TIPNIS behave as the great defenders of native people and Mother Earth? Last thing wasn’t a pagan heresy for them? Take them the tractors, airports, planes, more harmful for Mother Earth than the TIPNIS road, and let’s see if they still want to defend environment. Free my native sisters from being maids and servants, and check later if the “ladies” still defend the “exotic natives in their natural state”.

Let’s find who’s paying the NGO behind the repressed VII Indigenous March to La Paz city, supporting TIPNIS. You’ll be surprised that Ford or Rockefeller foundations are behind. Why? Make a guess on how many air miles did people claiming now about environment and indigenous. Maybe them are spending more time in airports and luxury hotels than at TIPNIS, who will finance them? Why private mass media, who loathed and despised natives, now raise their ratings speaking about the noble TIPNIS natives and their valiant march? Maybe the brutal and long neo-liberal night wasn’t cruel with natives and Mother Earth?

Those media, and the journalists working for them, now indigenous partidaries, called us natives in the past “green beak animals (for chewing coca leaves) blocking the economy and the advancing of the country”. Is this due to ecological faith, or economical need? Do you remember Morales, fighting the global monetary system, denouncing projects avid to monetize water, air and international commerce on Earth? The global financial system, now wounded, does not forgive people trying to get fresh financing at its back. Global financial system needs to devour all the common goods (natural resources) from Bolivia for breathing, but Morales and the process he’s leading are an obstacle!

TIPNIS, a rehearsal of Libyan method?

Likewise, to Gadafi, Morales, Chávez, Correa and other people not prone to kneel, will get a taste of the Libyan method: break revolution from the inside, with the people who’s inside. In Bolivian case, what’s better than the own natives that “defend” TIPNIS and “Mother Earth”. Unfinished histories of Bolivian revolutions are full of treacherous and quick “comrades”, maybe they died without knowing they were undermining the revolution they were fighting for. In TIPNIS case, the defense of native people and Mother Earth is not at the stake. The game is about the validation of the Libyan method on its preparing phase, and the burial of the long-awaited social change in Bolivia, the one our ancestors and peers gave their lives for. Both us and them know these changes aren’t at the next corner. We know change is something that will benefit our future generations. But central government errors, and our own hunger about “eating” the future now, are making contradictions in the process much deeper, and who knows if they’ll reach a destructive limit. I honestly think that TIPNIS road projects needs to be informed, and listen to people’s vote.

Repression against indigenous march in September must be investigated, and the liable persons must be sanctioned. In the same manner, media who published wrong information about casualties and missing persons must get the same treatment. Government, for the sake of truth, must investigate and apply the law over the institutions, characters and financial firms behind the TIPNIS case. It is important for us, as a nation, never be slaves of dire urges, or mass media climate. Bolivia is now a process. Economical and material changes will delay, but they will arrive someday. What has been on the work for seven centuries can’t be upturned in a decade.

http://www.aporrea.org/tiburon/a131500.html

TIPNIS: ¿Un ensayo del método libio?

Por: Ollantay Itzamná
Fecha de publicación: 10/10/11

En el prolijo sendero boliviano, de innumerables historias revolucionarias inclusas, el caso TIPNIS es y será un hito aleccionador para un pueblo de vocación revolucionaria pero preso del presagio del mito de Sísifo. Nada menos cuando el desesperado mundo del siglo XXI miraba con esperanzas al actual proceso boliviano como el referente de transformaciones estructurales posibles, apareció en el camino el bullicioso caso TIPNIS que no sólo oxigenó a la convaleciente (en ideas) oligarquía boliviana, sino que tantea el grado y la profundidad de la conciencia y convicción política de las y los bolivianos promotores y baluartes del proceso.

El caso TIPNIS no es ninguna inocentada ambientalista o indigenista, es un ensayo para la revalidación de la eficacia del método libio. El Territorio Indígena Parque Nacional Isiboro-Sécure (TIPNIS), mide 12 363 km² (1.236 296 hectáreas) Pertenece a los departamentos de Beni y Cochabamba. A 300 kilómetros de la frontera con Brasil. En este territorio, básicamente virgen, carente de vías de comunicación, electricidad y otras facilidades, conviven en condiciones de empobrecimiento y precariedad primitiva, y no en bucólica armonía con la naturaleza, los pueblos indígenas: moxeño, yuracaré y chimán. Además, están varias comunidades de “colonizadores”. Con el objetivo de articular las zonas aisladas del territorio nacional, el gobierno de Evo Morales, emprende ambiciosos proyectos camineros. Uno de éstos, para articular a las poblaciones del altiplano y valles con la Amazonía de Bolivia, pasa por TIPNIS. Actualmente, para ir de Beni a Cochabamba, se requiere 3 días de viaje (900 km). Con la nueva carretera, que pasaría por TIPNIS, la distancia se acortaría a 300 km.Este proyecto caminero es lo que está sacudiendo, no al gobierno de Morales, sino al soñado y esperanzado proceso de cambio boliviano. Aunque parezca jocoso: un país empobrecido y sin carreteras suficientes, ahora, se encuentra en pie de lucha contra un proyecto caminero que cruza por TIPNIS. ¿Qué pasa con esa Bolivia aguerrida y promisoria de los guerreros del arco iris?

Lo que significa vivir en el aislamiento caminero

Yo, soy indígena quechua. Aprendí el español a los 9 años. Viví en una comunidad campesina, a 40 km. de la punta carretera. Sin electricidad, sin motores, sin centros educativos, ni postas médicas. Para llegar a la punta carretera (poblado municipal más próximo donde hice la primaria), necesitábamos viajar un día y medio a pie, y detrás de las mulas. Dormíamos sobre el fango, bajo los árboles, tapados con plásticos agujereados. Mi padre, cuando fue niño, tuvo que viajar a pie 7 días, detrás de las mulas, para llegar a su escuela que jamás concluyó. Actualmente, la carretera avanzó, rompiendo la selva semitropical, y se encuentra a 3 horas de la casa de mis padres. La última vez que fui a visitar a mis ancianos padres en la comunidad, con pesar vi, desde el camión en que me transportaba, en medio de la selva frondosa, surcada por la carretera, a un oso perezoso que huía con dificultad del ruido del motor por el barranco dejado por el tractor. No imaginan las contradicciones que me generó aquel cuadro.Para serles honesto, quien suscribe, sin aquella bendita carretera jamás hubiera aprendido a escribir, mucho menos conocido las grandezas y las miserias de la modernidad, patrimonio de la humanidad. Mi madre aislada ya hubiera fallecido por sus complicaciones cardíacas. Pero no crean. Aquella carretera me sigue generando contradicciones. Especialmente ahora que soy indígena urbano, y por mi identidad Tierra. Pero, ¿con qué derecho podría yo privarles a mis sobrinos u otros de la posibilidad de conocer la modernidad? Para nosotros indígenas, la carretera es cuestión de vida o muerte. El resto es romance.

¿Estamos dispuestos a renunciar a la modernidad?

Cuando escucho y leo los argumentos en contra del tramo carretero que cruza TIPNIS, me pregunto si las y los ambientalistas e indigenistas conocen en carne propia lo que es vivir aislado y en permanente precariedad. ¿Sabrán lo que es vivir sin energía eléctrica, sin escuela, sin hospitales, sin computadora, sin refrigeradora? Yo no defiendo a la Tierra, ni a los indígenas. Yo soy tierra e indígena al mismo tiempo, pero con vocación a la vida. Yo no deseo para nadie el aislamiento que mata en el silencio. Pero, tampoco promuevo el modernismo ecocida, etnocida y suicida. Mis ancestros han convivido por miles de años incursionando e interactuando con la Madre Tierra. Sin agricultura, sin asentamientos, sin ganados, sin carreteras, sin la revolución industrial no existiría la humanidad. No por lo menos con las “comodidades” actuales. ¡El Buen Vivir, como un estilo de vida, para nosotros/as indígenas, no es excluyente con los beneficios de la modernidad!¿Por qué será que justamente los raleados (expulsados) del Movimientos al Socialismo (MAS) y ex funcionarios del gobierno de Morales, como Raúl Prada, Alejandro Almaraz, Lino Vilca, Román Loayza y otros, ahora que ya no reciben sueldo del gobierno “tirano” de Evo, se empecinan en descabezar a Morales? Las otras carreteras y proyectos petroleros, mientras ellos eran funcionarios, ¿no eran acaso de igual devastador de la Madre Tierra y financiados por el “subimperio” brasilero que ahora denuncian? ¿Por qué será que indígenas modernos/urbanos, que no se niegan a los viajes en avión, ahora, quieren mantener en el aislamiento y empobrecimiento a otros indígenas? Si les negamos la carretera a los y las indígenas del TIPNIS, retiremos también las carreteras y los aeropuertos a todos los indígenas y mestizos ambientalistas, ¿será que estarían de acuerdo? Una vez arriba y accedido a la modernidad, es fácil patear la escalera por la que accedimos, mientras hay pueblo enteros que también aspiran a la “modernidad perversa” con la salud de la Madre Tierra.

¿Por qué será que antes no, ahora, sí?

¿Por qué será los patrones que siempre nos mantuvieron a las y los indígenas como sus bestias de carga, y nos tratan como a la última especie de la fauna silvestre, ahora, con en el caso TIPNIS se constituyen en abanderados defensores de pueblos indígenas y de la Madre Tierra? ¿Acaso, para ellos, esto último no era una herejía pagana? Quitémosle los tractores, aeropuertos y aviones que dañan mucho más que la carretera por TIPNIS a la Madre Tierra, haber si la “convicción” ambientalista persiste en ellos. Liberemos a mis hermanas indígenas de la servidumbre doméstica, haber si las señoras “de blanco” salen a defender a “exóticos indígenas en estado natural”.

Averigüemos quiénes financian a las ONGs que están detrás de la reprimida VIII marcha indígena hacia la ciudad de La Paz en defensa del TIPNIS. Para sorpresa de Ud. fundaciones de petroleras como Ford, Rockefeller y otros están detrás. ¿Por qué será? Averigüe Ud. las millas aéreas recorridas por las y los ambientalistas que ahora escriben y hacen huelgas en defensa del estado natural de indígenas. Quizás ellos y ellas viven más en los aeropuertos y hoteles full aire acondicionado que en el TIPNIS postergado, ¿quién los financiará? ¿Por qué será los medios de información empresarial, que antes sentía asco y vergüenza por las y los indígenas, ahora, hacen rating con nobles y primitivos indígenas del TIPNIS en marcha sacrificada? ¿Acaso la brutal y larga noche neoliberal no fue cruel y mortal con indígenas y la Madre Tierra?

Pero, estos medios de información, y muchos de sus actuales columnistas, ahora indigenistas y ambientalista, nos trataban a los indígenas en protestas “de animales de pico verde (por masticar la hoja de coca) sentados a los bordes de los caminos que bloquean la modernidad y la economía del país”. ¿Será esto una conversión ecológica, o una conveniencia económica?¿Recuerda Ud. a Morales, insubordinado al sistema financiero mundial, denunciando los proyectos de mercantilización del agua, aire y el comercio internacional de la tierra? Este sistema financiero mundial, que ahora desfallece, no perdona a insubordinados en su intento de abastecerse de activos financieros frescos. ¡El sistema financiero mundial necesita devorar todos los bienes comunes (recursos naturales) de Bolivia para oxigenarse, pero Morales y el proceso que encabeza son un obstáculo!

TIPNIS, ¿un ensayo del método libio?

En este sentido, a Gadafi, Morales, Chávez, Correa y a muchos otros insumisos, se les aplicará el método libio: quebrar la revolución desde adentro y con los de adentro. En el caso boliviano, qué mejor con los mismos indígenas “defendiendo” TIPNIS y a la “Madre Tierra”. Las historias inconclusas de las revoluciones bolivianas están empedradas de traiciones de revolucionarios maximalistas e inmediatistas que quizás murieron sin darse cuenta que minaban la revolución por la que lucharon.En el caso TIPNIS, no está en juego la defensa de los pueblos indígenas y la Madre Tierra. Lo que está en juego es la revalidación del método libio en su fase preparatoria y el entierro del añorado proceso de cambio boliviano por el que nuestros ancestros y coetáneos ofrendaron sus vidas. Ellos y nosotros sabíamos y sabemos que los cambios no estaban a la vuelta de la esquina. Sabemos que el cambio es un proceso que beneficiará, en buena medida, a las futuras generaciones. Pero, las equivocaciones del gobierno central, y nuestro espíritu inmediatista de querer comernos el futuro promisorio ya, están ahondando las contradicciones creativas del proceso hasta el límite de convertirlas en destructivas.Considero que para proseguir con el proyecto carretero por TIPNIS se debe informar y someterlo a la voluntad popular.

Se debe investigar y sancionar a los responsables de la represión contra la marcha indígena el 25 de septiembre pasado. De la misma manera, se debe investigar y sancionar a los medios que desinformaron a la población sobre muertos y desaparecidos en aquella refriega. El gobierno, por la salud del proceso, debe investigar y sancionar a las organizaciones, personajes y financieras que están detrás de la movida TIPNIS. Es importante que como pueblo no seamos presos del inmediatismo, ni del coyunturalismo mediático. Bolivia, ahora, es un proceso. Los cambios materiales/económicos demorarán, pero vendrán. Lo que se ha afianzado en 7 siglos no se puede revertir en una década.

http://www.aporrea.org/tiburon/a131500.html

BOLIBYA? | Obama: Libya is the International Model [Including Recent Article by Author Juan Carlos Zambrana]

Obama: Libya is the International Model

The world is lucky that NATO cannot intervene for the use of tear gas … because if they could, they no doubt would in the case of Bolivia. Home of the world’s most vast reserves of lithium in a country rich with natural resources.

According to the article/report below written by author of Juan Carlos Zambrana (Secret of State), it looks like some in the U.S. are hoping for such an outcome.

Barack Obama speaking at the United Nations Assembly via Washington Times:

Almost six months to the day after he committed U.S. troops to aid Libya’s rebels, President Obama on Tuesday declared his policy a success and told the United Nations its strategy of collective sanctions, military protection and humanitarian assistance saved thousands of lives, ousted a bad regime and should serve as a model for future world hot spots.

“This is how the international community should work in the 21st century — more nations bearing the responsibility and costs of meeting global challenges,” Mr. Obama said. “Indeed, it is the very purpose of this United Nations. So every nation represented here today can take pride in the innocent lives we saved and in helping Libyans reclaim their country. It was the right thing to do.”

To read how Al-Jazeera was instrumental for the NATO war on Libya read the recent article “Al-Jazeera and the Triumph of Televised Propaganda” (“the height of duplicity was reached when a replica of the Green Square and Bab-el-Azizia was built in the studios of Al-Jazeera in Doha, where footage of false images was shot portraying pro-US “insurgents” entering Tripoli”).

On a side note, it is critical to note that only ALBA countries spoke out against the NATO war on Libya in which 50,000 people thus far have been killed.

Sector loyal to the opposition used the conflict of the Tipnis to protest in the U.S., insults Evo Morales and call to intervene the country

Cambio,  October 05, 2011

by Juan Carlos Zambrana Marchetti

According to a report by journalist Juan Carlos Zambrana Marchetti, Washington, United States, a small group of people staged a singular protest near the White House. “They called the invasion of Bolivia with signs and photos included, captioned” Mubarak, Gaddafi and the following is Morales” he said.

WASHINGTON, US

On Saturday, October 1, someone mentioned that there was on Internet a call for a protest of Bolivian residents the next day, in front of the White House, in defense of the Tipnis. It seemed curious to me, and I decided to find out what it was about. I found several announcements, but one of them especially caught my attention. It called not only to protest against the building of the road, but also to observe a minute of silence for the “dead” and “disappeared” among the indigenous people resulting from the repression of the government of president Evo Morales.

Discredit Bolivia and Evo

The next day, my wife and I decided to go by the place, and saw a pitiful spectacle. Approximately 16 people, rather distanced from one another, walked in a circle of about 15 yards in diameter, from the center of which a man with a megaphone defamed Bolivian president Evo Morales.

Rounding out the scene of the burial of the Tipnis, or of the dead at the Tipnis, was Death itself, dressed in green and white with a sign that said “Evo murderer.” “They believe blindly in the disinformation,” I thought, because maybe they did not know that there had been not a single shot in the breaking up of the march, far less any deaths.

The issue of the Tipnis seemed to go unnoticed by the protestors, who were more focused on insulting president Morales, calling him a drug trafficker for wanting to build what they called “the cocaine highway.” Also, a dictator, supposedly for wanting to destroy democracy by holding “political prisoners,” without mentioning the common crimes with which their leaders are charged in Bolivia, their economic crimes against the Bolivian state, the charges of terrorism and armed uprising due to which a large part of the old Cruzan elite turned themselves into refugees rather than runaways from justice.

They called for the invasion of Bolivia

They also asked for an invasion of Bolivia, with signs and photos included, captioned “Mubarak, Gaddafi, and Morales is next. No more dictators!” By means of such violence they demanded democracy in Bolivia, accusing the OAS and the UN of having sold out to Morales’ government by not having responded to their obviously unfounded complaints.

As a last resort, they protested in front of the White House in an effort to bolster, in the name of the Bolivian people, the interventionist pressures that the Republican extreme Right maintains against the Obama administration.

“This does not even remotely represent Bolivia,” I commented, seeing familiar faces among the protestors. “Nor the Bolivian community in Virginia,” added my wife, Elena Abolnik

Small group

The group of participants was reduced to political opponents of Evo Morales and to the Cruzans organized around the now-dissolved Pro-Santa Cruz Committee of Virginia and the present Cruzan Carnival and Day of Tradition.

Curiously, the Cruzans present there were not even a fair representation of Santa Cruz, far less of the Bolivian people. Elena and I knew that for sure, for, as we both are Cruzans and members of pro-Bolivia organizations, we knew other Cruzans and Bolivians who understand clearly the value of the process of change in our country.

It occurred to Elena that maybe they did not know, with the exception of the organizers, what they were doing in belittling Bolivia in that way. “Could be,” I answered, but we left, commenting that what was expressed in the protest followed the talking points that the Bolivian opposition uses when it comes to Washington to ask for intervention in Bolivia, based on the common interest to do so that is shared by their Republican peers.

The same thing was said to the Republican leadership at the Capitol, on November 17, 2010, by Luis Nuñez, speaking for the Cruzans, and by Victor Hugo Velasco, for the indigenous people.

These were two apocryphal representations that reflected the new political alliance of the opposition to Morales, which pretends a connection between the conservative ideology of the extreme Right and the indigenous people, who have become an influential electorate.

Still, the protest did not take place by chance. It represented something, and what I could recognize was the inconsistency of the cause of the Bolivian opposition, a few people saying outrageous things in the name of the Bolivian people. Yelling, or rather insulting, frustrated by becoming ever more isolated in their political-religious fundamentalism in the face of an overwhelming majority of Bolivians who understand perfectly the fairness of the process of change.

It behooves them to reflect on the consequences that similar attitudes had for the country in the past. The mining oligarchy, which asked for intervention against Busch and Villarroel, made possible the looting of the tin ore and the massacre of miners. The calls for interventionism against Torres led to the dictatorship of Banzer and the death of many Bolivians. The complaints against Lidia Geiler produced the bloody narco-state of Luis Garcia Meza, and the ones against Hernan Siles Suazo brought the neoliberalism that within two decades turned the country over to transnational corporations until only the leftovers remained.

Bolivian image damaged

It also behooves them to make an act of contrition for the damage that is being done to the image of the Bolivian community in Washington, DC by opposition politicians who, ever since they arrived in the United States, have gained a following among some people; protected behind organizations with cultural purposes, they have flooded community residents with political propaganda, constantly and systematically spreading disinformation generated from Bolivia.

Very often, our actions have unanticipated consequences, for which we are forever responsible, even if we do not understand this clearly for some time. We all have the right to dissent and to express ourselves, but it is extremely dangerous to promote political-military intervention against the land where we were born.

Filmed footage of the protest:

For more updates on Bolivia including a wealth of information not disclosed in mainstream media follow the website: www.juancarloszambrana.com

+++

Sector afín a la oposición usa el conflicto del Tipnis en EEUU, insulta a Evo y pide intervenir el país

Juan Carlos Zambrana Marchetti

WASHINGTON, EEUU

El sábado 1 octubre me comentaron que circulaba en Internet una convocatoria para el día siguiente a una protesta de residents bolivianos frente a la Casa Blanca en defensa del Tipnis. Me pareció curioso, por lo que decidí averiguar de qué se trataba. Encontré varias convocatorias, pero una de ellas me llamó la atención en particular. Convocaba no sólo a protestar contra la construcción de la carretera, sino también a guardar un minuto de silencio por los “muertos” y “desaparecidos” entre los indígenas a causa de la represión del gobierno del presidente Evo Morales.

Desprestigian a Bolivia y a Evo

Al día siguiente decidimos con mi esposa dar una vuelta por el lugar y el espectáculo que vimos fue lamentable.

Aproximadamente, 16 personas, bastante distanciadas unas de otras, caminaban formando un círculo de unos doce metros de diámetro, desde cuyo centro un hombre con un megáfono difamaba al presidente boliviano Evo Morales.

Completaba la escena del entierro del Tipnis, o de los muertos del Tipnis, la mismísima muerte, vestida de verde y blanco con un letrero

que decía Evo asesino.

Le creen ciegamente a la desinformación, pensé, porque quizá no sabían que no hubo un solo disparo en la disolución de la marcha y mucho

menos muertos.

La problemática del Tipnis parecía pasar desapercibida por los manifestantes, más concentrados en insultar al presidente Morales de narcotraficante por querer construir lo que llamaron “la carretera de la cocaína”.

También de dictador, supuestamente por destruir la democracia al tener “presos políticos”, sin mencionar los delitos comunes por los que sus

líderes están imputados en Bolivia, sus crímenes económicos contra el Estado boliviano, los cargos de terrorismo y alzamiento armado por los

cuales gran parte de la vieja élite cruceña se convirtió en refugiada antes que en prófuga de la justicia.

Pidieron la invasión a Bolivia

Pedían además la invasión a Bolivia con carteles y fotos incluidas que decían ‘Mubarak, Gadafi y el siguiente es Morales’ ¡No más dictadores!’. A través de esa violencia, exigían democracia en Bolivia acusando a la OEA y a las Naciones Unidas de vendidos al gobierno de

Morales por no haber atendido sus quejas, obviamente infundadas.

Como último recurso, protestaban ante la Casa Blanca en un intento de apuntalar, a nombre del pueblo boliviano, la presión intervencionista que realiza contra la administración Obama la extrema derecha republicana.

“Estos no representan ni remotamente a Bolivia”, comenté al ver caras conocidas entre los manifestantes. “Tampoco a la comunidad boliviana en Virginia”, añadió mi esposa Elena Abolnik.

Reducido grupo

El grupo de participantes se reducía a los opositores políticos de Evo Morales y a los cruceños que se aglutinaban en torno al disuelto Comité pro Santa Cruz de Virginia, y ahora al carnaval cruceño y el Día de la Tradición.

Curiosamente ni los cruceños allí presentes eran una justa representación de Santa Cruz, mucho menos del pueblo boliviano. Elena y yo lo sabíamos, a ciencia cierta, porque siendo ambos cruceños y miembros de organizaciones pro Bolivia conocíamos también a otros cruceños y bolivianos que entienden claramente el valor del proceso de cambio en nuestro país.

A Elena se le ocurrió pensar que quizá ellos no sabían, a excepción de los organizadores, lo que hacían al desprestigiar de ese modo a Bolivia. Puede ser, le respondí, pero nos retiramos comentando que lo expresado en la protesta seguía la línea del discurso de la oposición boliviana cuando viene a Washington a pedir intervención en Bolivia, apoyada en el interés común que tiene en hacerlo su similar republicana.

Lo mismo dijeron en el Capitolio el 17 de noviembre de 2010, ante la cúpula republicana, Luis Nuñez, hablando en nombre de los cruceños, y Víctor Hugo Velasco, en nombre de los indígenas.

Dos representaciones apócrifas que reflejaban la nueva alianza política de la oposición a Morales para fingir alguna conexión entre la ideología conservadora de extrema derecha y los indígenas ahora convertidos en influyente electorado.

Sin embargo, la protesta no estaba ahí por casualidad. Era representativa de algo y lo que logré admitir que reflejaba era la inconsistencia de la causa opositora en Bolivia, unos pocos hablando barbaridades en nombre del pueblo boliviano. Gritando, mejor dicho insultando ante la frustración de quedarse cada vez más aislados en su fundamentalismo político-religioso, ante una mayoría abrumadora de bolivianos que entiende perfectamente la justicia del proceso de cambio.

Quizá les convendría reflexionar sobre las consecuencias que tuvieron para el país similares actitudes en el pasado. La oligarquía minera, que pedía intervención contra Busch y Villarroel, hizo posible el saqueo del estaño y las masacres de mineros. Los pedidos de intervencionismo contra Torres ocasionaron la dictadura de Banzer y la muerte de muchos bolivianos. Las quejas contra Lidia Gueiler produjeron el sangriento narco-Estado de Luis García Meza, y aquellas contra Hernán Siles Suazo produjeron el neoliberalismo que en dos décadas entregó el país a las transnacionales hasta dejarlo en

despojos.

Imagen boliviana dañada

También les convendría hacer un acto de contrición con respecto al daño que se le está haciendo a la imagen de la comunidad Boliviana en Washington DC., de parte de los políticos de oposición que desde su llegada a Estados Unidos han logrado la adhesión de algunas personas, las cuales parapetadas detrás de organizaciones con fines culturales los han inundado con propaganda política en forma constante y sistemática, propagando la desinformación que generan desde Bolivia.

Muy frecuentemente, nuestros actos tienen efectos impensados, de los cuales somos por siempre responsables, aunque por algún tiempo no podamos entenderlo claramente. Todos tenemos derecho a disentir y a expresarnos, pero es extremadamente peligroso promover la intervención político-militar a la tierra que nos vio nacer.

Romero: Contraloría no observó contrato de la vía

+++

SANTA CRUZ

ABI

El Ministro de la Presidencia, Carlos Romero, informó ayer que el segundo informe de la Contraloría sobre el contrato de construcción de la carretera entre Villa Tunari y San Ignacio de Moxos, suscrito por el Gobierno y la empresa brasileña OAS, no tiene observaciones.

“Entregamos a los medios de comunicación este segundo informe de la Contraloría del Estado para despejar dudas sobre el contrato para la construcción de la carretera”, aclaró.

En relación al diálogo con la dirigencia de la Asamblea del Pueblo Guaraní (APG), Romero afirmó que las reuniones fueron solicitadas por su principal dirigente, Celso Padilla, con lo que desmintió que se haya producido una división en ese sector.

El ministro Romero también se refirió a la hospitalización del dirigente de la APG en la clínica Incor de esta ciudad.

“Sobre los sucesos que impulsaron la internación del señor Padilla, primero tenemos que conocer un informe médico, porque estaba en un hotel de Rurrenabaque y se internó un día antes de la reunión Gobierno-APG”, dijo.

A su vez, la Federación Única de Trabajadores Campesinos de Santa Cruz (FUTCSCZ) pidió el lunes a los indígenas marchistas reflexionar sobre la importancia de la carretera que unirá a Villa Tunari y San Ignacio de Moxos y cumplir con los compromisos del Pacto de Unidad.

El máximo dirigente de la FUTCSCZ, José Luis Chungara, manifestó que “la pelea no es contra de los hermanos indígenas, es contra los derechistas que en este momento quieren aprovecharse de un movimiento”.

“Agregó que es necesario “articular el bloque de oriente y del occidente entre los campesinos y los hermanos indígenas para impedir ser utilizados por los grupos de derecha”.

“Los que antes agredían a los campesinos e indígenas, hoy pretenden acercarse y mostrarse como sus salvadores”, enfatizó.

EL DATO

Ministro de la Presidencia entregó a los medios de comunicación ayer en Santa Cruz una copia del informe de la Contraloría sobre el contrato para la construcción de la carretera San Ignacio de Moxos-Villa Tunari. La oposición, entre ellos el líder del MSM, Juan Del Granado, denunció supuestas irregularidades del contrato con la constructora brasileña OAS.

División: el ministro de la Presidencia, Carlos Romero, negó que en el interior de la Asamblea del Pueblo Guaraní exista división, como se especuló.

Unidad: el dirigente de la Federación Sindical Única de Trabajadores Campesinos de Santa Cruz, José Luis Chungara, pidió el lunes a los dirigentes de la Confederación de Indígenas del Oriente Boliviano (Cidob) que respeten el Pacto de Unidad.

Ver más temas relacionados

* Sector afín a la oposición usa el conflicto del Tipnis en EEUU, insulta a Evo y pide intervenir el país

El sábado 1 octubre me comentaron que circulaba en Internet una convocatoria para el día siguiente a una protesta de residentes bolivianos frente a la Casa Blanca en defensa del Tipnis. Me pareció

* El diálogo abrirá el proceso de la consulta

La viceministra de Medio Ambiente, Biodiversidad, Cambio Climático y Desarrollo Forestal, Cinthya

* Morales: Las comunidades del Tipnis quieren carretera

El presidente Evo Morales, en entrevista en la red ATB la noche del lunes, aseguró que los habitantes del Territorio Indígena y Parque Nacional Isiboro Sécure (Tipnis) quieren que se construya la carretera

* Silva: La CPE no impone la consulta

El ex diputado y actual concejal paceño Jorge Silva explicó ayer que la construcción de una carretera

* García: El MSM está en campaña de desprestigio del Gobierno

El vicepresidente Álvaro García Linera denunció ayer que el jefe del Movimiento Sin Miedo (MSM), Juan Del Granado, encara una campaña de desinformación para dañar la imagen del Gobierno.

* Agresión e insultos a campesinos en La Paz son actos racistas, dice director

Los insultos y agresiones que se presentaron en la marcha campesina de La Paz responden a conductas racistas consolidadas desde la época colonial, manifestó el director de Lucha Contra el

* Vocal asegura que calendario electoral tuvo un avance del 90%

La vocal del Tribunal Supremo Electoral (TSE) Dina Chuquimia informó ayer que el avance del trabajo

http://www.cambio.bo/noticia.php?fecha=2011-10-05&idn=55849

Whether Media or NGOs – The Funding of Silence is Destroying Us

“When truth is replaced by silence, the silence is a lie.”

The strange silencing of liberal America – by John Pilger

7 July 2011

How does political censorship work in liberal societies? When my film, ‘Year Zero: the Silent Death of Cambodia’, was banned in the United States in 1980, the broadcaster PBS cut all contact. Negotiations were ended abruptly; phone calls were not returned. Something had happened. But what? ‘Year Zero’ had already alerted much of the world to the horrors of Pol Pot, but it also investigated the critical role of the Nixon administration in the tyrant’s rise to power and the devastation of Cambodia.

Six months later, a PBS official told me, “This wasn’t censorship. We’re into difficult political days in Washington. Your film would have given us problems with the Reagan administration. Sorry.”

In Britain, the long war in Northern Ireland spawned a similar, deniable censorship. The journalist Liz Curtis compiled a list of more than 50 television films in Britain that were never shown or indefinitely delayed. The word “ban” was rarely used, and those responsible would invariably insist they believed in free speech.

The Lannan Foundation in Santa Fe, New Mexico, believes in free speech. The foundation’s website says it is “dedicated to cultural freedom, diversity and creativity”. Authors, film-makers, poets make their way to a sanctum of liberalism bankrolled by the billionaire Patrick Lannan in the tradition of Rockefeller and Ford.

Lannan also awards “grants” to America’s liberal media, such as Free Speech TV, the Foundation for National Progress (publisher of the magazine Mother Jones), the Nation Institute and the TV and radio programme Democracy Now! In Britain, Lannan has been a supporter of the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism, of which I am one of the judges. In 2008, Patrick Lannan personally supported the presidential campaign of Barack Obama. According to the Santa Fe New Mexican, he is “devoted” to Obama.

On 15 June, I was due in Santa Fe, having been invited to share a platform with the distinguished American journalist David Barsamian. The foundation was also to host the US premiere of my new film, ‘The War You Don’t See’, which investigates the false image-making of war-makers, especially Obama.

I was about to leave for Santa Fe when I received an email from the Lannan official organising my visit. The tone was incredulous. “Something has come up,” she wrote. Patrick Lannan had called her and ordered all my events to be cancelled. “I have no idea what this is all about,” she wrote.

Baffled, I asked that the premiere of my film be allowed to go ahead as the US distribution largely depended on it. She repeated that “all” my events were cancelled, “and this includes the screening of your film”. On the Lannan website “cancelled” appeared across a picture of me. There was no explanation. None of my phone calls were returned, nor subsequent emails answered. A Kafka world of not-knowing descended.

The silence lasted a week until, under pressure from local media, the Foundation put out a brief statement that too few tickets had been sold to make my visit “viable” and that “the Foundation regrets that the reason for the cancellation was not explained to Mr. Pilger or to the public at the time the decision was made”. Doubts were cast by a robust editorial in the Santa Fe New Mexican. The paper, which has long played a prominent role in promoting Lannan events, disclosed that my visit had been cancelled before the main advertising and previews were published. A full-page interview with me had to be hurriedly pulled. “Pilger and Barsamian could have expected closer to a packed 820-seat Lensic [arts centre].”

The manager of The Screen, the Santa Fe cinema that had been rented for the premiere, was called late at night and told to kill all his online promotion for my film, but took it upon himself to re-schedule the film for 23 June. It was a sell-out, with many people turned away. The idea that there was no public interest was demonstrably not true.

Theories? There are many, but nothing is proven. For me, it is all reminiscent of the long shadows cast during the Cold War. “Something is going to surface,” said Barsamian. “They can’t keep the lid on this.”

My talk on 15 June was to have been about the collusion of American liberalism in a permanent state of war and the demise of cherished freedoms, such as the right to call government to account. In the United States, as in Britain, serious dissent – free speech – has been substantially criminalised. Obama, the black liberal, the PC exemplar, the marketing dream is as much a warmonger as George W. Bush. His score is six wars. Never in US history has a president prosecuted as many whistle-blowers; yet this truth-telling, this exercise of true citizenship, is at the heart of America’s constitutional first amendment. Obama’s greatest achievement is having seduced, co-opted and silenced much of liberal opinion in the United States, including the anti-war movement.

The reaction to the Lannan ban has been illuminating. The brave, like the great whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, were appalled and said so. Similarly, many ordinary Americans called into radio stations and have written to me, recognising a symptom of far greater suppression. But some exalted liberal voices have been affronted that I dared whisper the word, censorship, about such a beacon of “cultural freedom”. The embarrassment of those who wish to point both ways is palpable. Others have pulled down the shutters and said nothing. Given their patron’s ruthless show of power, it is understandable. For them, the Russian dissident poet Yevgeny Yevtushenko once wrote, “When truth is replaced by silence, the silence is a lie.”

http://www.johnpilger.com/articles/the-strange-silencing-of-liberal-america

Whose Side Is the United Nations On?

07.02.2012

Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey

Pravda.Ru

Whose side is the UNO on?. 46553.jpeg

After reading the statement on Syria by UN SG Ban Ki-Moon, the notion arises that far from being impartial, the United Nations Organization is in fact two organisms – one, a humanitarian institution to pull the wool over our eyes and the other, to pander to the geo-political caprices of its master, in whose house it is a guest and a hostage.

If the United Nations Secretary-General were totally impartial, if the UN Secretary-general respected his position and the institution he represents, there would be as many declarations from him denouncing the war crimes and breaches of international law by the FUKUS-Axis (France, UK, US and Israel) as there are deriding their enemies, as was the case against Libya, as is the case against Syria.

However, as one may have expected, this is not the case. His constant rebuttals and accusations against the Government of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya rang loud and clear, as it tried to defend itself and its people against murderous gangs of FUKUS-Axis backed thugs – torturers, murderers, rapists, racists, arsonists, looters, thieves, sodomists and serial sexual abusers.

However, where was he when the FUKUS-Axis was strafing the Libyan water supply, to “break the backs” of the civilians and deprive families with babies of drinking and bathing water, in the North African mid-Summer? Where was he when the FUKUS-Axis was placing special troops on the ground, despite the terms of the UNSC Resolutions 1970 and 1973 governing the crisis stating clearly there was to be no arming of either side, a total arms embargo on Libya and no boots on the ground?

Where was he when the FUKUS-Axis strafed civilian buildings from 30,000 feet, where was he when the FUKUS-Axis murdered the Gaddafi grandchildren, where was he when the FUKUS-Axis targeted civilian structures with military hardware, where was he when the FUKUS-Axis backed terrorists slit the throats of Negroes in the streets, where was he when they performed acts of ethnic cleansing?