Tè Tremblé—The Haitian Earth Trembled

By Amy Goodman

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti—Tè tremblé is Haitian Creole for “earthquake.” Its literal translation: “The earth trembled.” After the massive earthquake that devastated Haiti, the stench of death is everywhere. At General Hospital, bodies had been stacked 4 feet high near the morgue. In the community house called Matthew 25, doctors laid out a plastic tablecloth to perform a kitchen-table amputation, aided by headlamps. The injured Haitian man in his 20s might be considered fortunate: He was among the minority of injured people getting medical attention. And, unlike many amputations being performed elsewhere in Haiti, the doctors who arrived Monday were using anesthesia they had brought.

While this grim amputation was happening, an unexpected delivery of food aid arrived. Matthew 25 House typically accommodates 35 guests. Now more than 1,000 are there, camped out in the adjoining soccer field. There has been much reporting on the concerns about possible riots and violence that aid distribution might provoke. We witnessed the polar opposite, because an established community group was empowered to distribute the food. People lined up and got their supplies, leaving undisturbed the difficult surgery being conducted nearby. This has been typical as we’ve traveled through the catastrophe: People with nothing—hungry, thirsty, seeking their loved ones, burying their dead, caring for their injured—have shown fortitude, civility and compassion despite their quiet desperation.

We went to the home of Myriam Merlet, the chief of staff of the Haitian Ministry of Women. She helped draw international attention to the use of rape as a political weapon and worked with playwright and activist Eve Ensler on the V-Day movement to help end violence against women. We found her house, indeed the entire surrounding community, destroyed. “We have just pulled her body out,” they told us Sunday, five days after the earthquake. There is no telling when she died, or whether she might have been rescued. Her sister Eartha brought us to her fresh grave.

We ventured beyond Port-au-Prince, to the earthquake’s epicenter, past Carrefour to Léogâne. A United Nations assessment put the level of destruction in Léogâne at 80 percent to 90 percent of structures destroyed, with no remaining government buildings. On the way, a young man hailed our car, saying: “Please, we see some helicopters overhead, but they don’t stop here. We have no aid. We have no food.”

One man covered in dust was using a mallet to break the cement that had entombed his grandfather. A father nearby had just dug out his 1-year-old baby, dead in his playpen. According to Agence France-Presse, the U.N. warned it cannot “extend their aid operation to outlying areas until security there can be confirmed.” Traveling to Léogâne, we felt no threat; we only saw people in dire need of help. While we were in Léogâne, a missionary helicopter landed, then inexplicably lifted off again, and the crew began hurling loaves of bread to the ground. Young Haitian men grew incensed. One cried, tearing up the rolls and yelling, “We are not dogs for you to throw bones at!”

We spoke with the mayor of Léogâne, Alexis Santos, who seemed almost helpless before the near-total destruction around him. I asked him, in light of the unified front offered by the U.S. government, with President Barack Obama naming former Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush to lead the U.S. response, what he thought about the offer of Jean-Bertrand Aristide—the ousted former president of Haiti—to return to Haiti from exile in South Africa to stand with Haitian President Rene Preval, a united front to help the recovery. Santos, by no means an Aristide supporter, told me he thought it would be a good idea.

Back at Matthew 25 House (named after the biblical verse “Whatever you do for my least brothers and sisters, you do for me”), I spoke with one of the surgeons. Dr. Jennifer Bruny, who flew down with other doctors from Children’s Hospital in Denver, performed the amputation earlier. The nature of the disaster, with thousands of crushing injuries, and the lack of care for so much time make amputation one of the only means available now to save lives. “This amputation should not have been necessary,” she told me. “This could have been easily treated earlier. These people needed help sooner.”

Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.

Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 800 stations in North America. She is the author of “Breaking the Sound Barrier,” recently released in paperback and now a New York Times best-seller.

© 2010 Amy Goodman

Distributed by King Features Syndicate

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/tegrave_trembleacute_--_the_haitian_earth_trembled_20100119/

Let Us Not Become the Evil We Deplore

By Amy Goodman

On Sept. 14, 2001, the U.S. House of Representatives considered House Joint Resolution 64, “To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.” The wounds of 9/11 were raw, and the lust for vengeance seemed universal. The House vote was remarkable, relative to the extreme partisanship now in evidence in Congress, since 420 House members voted in favor of the resolution. More remarkable, though, was the one lone vote in opposition, cast by Barbara Lee of San Francisco. Lee opened her statement on the resolution, “I rise today with a heavy heart, one that is filled with sorrow for the families and loved ones who were killed and injured in New York, Virginia and Pennsylvania.” Her emotions were palpable as she spoke from the House floor.

“September 11 changed the world. Our deepest fears now haunt us. Yet I am convinced that military action will not prevent further acts of international terrorism against the United States. ... We must not rush to judgment. Far too many innocent people have already died. Our country is in mourning. If we rush to launch a counterattack, we run too great a risk that women, children and other noncombatants will be caught in the crossfire.”

The Senate also passed the resolution, 98-0, and sent it on to President George W. Bush. What he did with the authorization, and the Iraq War authorization a year later, has become, arguably, the greatest foreign policy catastrophe in United States history. What President Barack Obama will do with Afghanistan is the question now.

On Oct. 7, the U.S. enters its ninth year of occupation of Afghanistan—equal to the time the United States was involved in World War I, World War II and the Korean War combined. Obama campaigned on his opposition to the war in Iraq, but pledged at the same time to escalate the war in Afghanistan. On his first Friday in office, Commander in Chief Obama’s military fired three Hellfire missiles from an unmanned drone into Pakistan, reportedly killing 22 people, mostly civilians, including women and children. He has increased U.S. troops in Afghanistan by more than 20,000, to a total numbering 61,000. This does not count the private contractors in Afghanistan, who now outnumber the troops. The new U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, is expected to ask for even more troops.

This past August was the deadliest month yet for U.S. troops in Afghanistan, with 51 killed, and 2009 is by far the deadliest year, with 200 U.S. troops killed so far. These statistics don’t count the soldiers who commit suicide after returning home, nor those injured, and certainly don’t include the number of Afghans killed. The attacks also are increasing in sophistication, according to recent reports. So it may be no surprise that more comparisons are now being made between Afghanistan and Vietnam.

When asked about the comparison, Obama recently told The New York Times: “You have to learn lessons from history. On the other hand, each historical moment is different. You never step into the same river twice. And so Afghanistan is not Vietnam. ... The dangers of overreach and not having clear goals and not having strong support from the American people, those are all issues that I think about all the time.”

According to a recent CNN/Opinion Research poll, 57 percent of those asked oppose the U.S. war in Afghanistan, reportedly the highest level of opposition since the war began in 2001. Among those polled, 75 percent of Democrats opposed the war, which might explain statements recently from key congressional Democrats against sending more troops to Afghanistan. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said last Thursday, “I don’t think there’s a great deal of support for sending more troops to Afghanistan in the country or in the Congress,” echoing Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Obama said in his health care speech before the joint session of Congress, “The plan I’m proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years—less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.”

President Lyndon Johnson escalated the war in Vietnam and ultimately decided not to run for re-election. But he also passed Medicare, the revered, single-payer health insurance program for seniors. Barbara Lee presciently compared the invasion of Afghanistan to Vietnam in her speech back in 2001 and closed by quoting the Rev. Nathan Baxter, dean of the National Cathedral: “As we act, let us not become the evil that we deplore.”

Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.

Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 750 stations in North America. She is the co-author of “Standing Up to the Madness: Ordinary Heroes in Extraordinary Times,” recently released in paperback.

A Coup for Lobbyists at the White House

By Amy Goodman

Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, ousted in the middle of the night just over a month ago, enjoys global support for his return, with the exception of the Obama White House. Though Barack Obama first called the Honduran military’s removal of Zelaya a coup, his administration has backpedaled. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton called Zelaya’s attempt to cross the Nicaraguan border into Honduras “reckless.” Could well-placed lobbyists in Washington be forging U.S. foreign policy?

Lanny Davis was special counsel to President Bill Clinton from 1996 to 1998, functioning as lawyer, crisis manager and spokesman through Clinton’s various scandals. Davis has developed a lucrative specialty as a partner at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe, offering a “unique ‘Legal Crisis Communications’ practice,” helping people embroiled in investigations or scandal. According to recent congressional filings, Davis is lobbying for the Honduran chapter of the Latin American Business Council. Zelaya had recently increased the Honduran minimum wage.

Davis testified before Congress on July 10, saying his clients “believe the best chance for a solution is the dialogue between Mr. Zelaya and President [Roberto] Micheletti, mediated by President [Oscar] Arias, that is now ongoing in Costa Rica.” That is, until the Arias sessions resulted in a call for the return of Zelaya. Coup spokesman Cesar Caceres said, “The mediation has been declared a failure.”

Davis continued before Congress, “No one wants bloodshed, and nobody should be inciting violence.” Yet a number of Zelaya supporters have been killed, and there has been a crackdown on independent media, making information hard to obtain.

I reached Zelaya by phone in Nicaragua, near the Honduran border, and asked about Obama’s reluctance to use the word coup. He told me, “Everyone in the world—governments, international organizations, all the lawyers and judges in the world—have called the fact of capturing a president at 5 a.m. without trying him, shooting arms, that’s a coup d’etat. No one doubts that that’s a coup d’etat.”

Bennett Ratcliff, another Clinton White House connection, was a key adviser to the coup leader, Micheletti, during the Costa Rica negotiations. According to Ratcliff’s firm’s bio, he “created TV and radio advertisements for President Bill Clinton’s 1992 and 1996 Presidential campaigns.” Firm partner Melissa Ratcliff “worked as communications strategist for The White House during the Clinton Administration.” Their firm promises “access to key decision makers and influencers.”

With similar anti-Zelaya goals comes lobbyist Roger Noriega, George W. Bush’s assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs and former staff member of Sen. Jesse Helms. Noriega is lobbying on behalf of the Honduran Association of Maquiladoras, owners of low-wage factories that export goods, principally to the U.S.

Both Noriega and Davis represent business interests that benefit from “free trade” with the U.S. Zelaya, elected originally with the support of the Honduran business community, has shifted to more populist policies. He recently joined the emerging Latin American trade bloc ALBA, organized by countries like Venezuela and Bolivia to counter the economic dominance of the United States.

During Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, Davis repeated the charge that Obama would not be capable of handling a crisis “call at 3 a.m.”

In his recent visit to Africa, Obama declared the importance of democracy. Yet here in his own backyard is a genuine coup d’etat that his administration has done little to reverse. Obama will be in Mexico to meet President Felipe Calderon and Prime Minister Stephen Harper of Canada on Aug. 9. Honduras is expected to be on the agenda. The 3 a.m. call has come—who will have Obama’s ear? Democracy, or the special interests’ hired guns, against whom Obama promised change?

Denis Moynihan contributed research to this column.

Amy Goodman is the host of “Democracy Now!,” a daily international TV/radio news hour airing on more than 750 stations in North America. She is the co-author of “Standing Up to the Madness: Ordinary Heroes in Extraordinary Times,” recently released in paperback.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/a_coup_for_lobbyists_at_the_white_house/

Obama’s Military Is Spying on U.S. Peace Groups

By Amy Goodman

Anti-war activists in Olympia, Wash., have exposed Army spying and infiltration of their groups, as well as intelligence gathering by the Air Force, the federal Capitol Police and the Coast Guard.

The infiltration appears to be in direct violation of the Posse Comitatus Act preventing U.S. military deployment for domestic law enforcement and may strengthen congressional demands for a full-scale investigation of U.S. intelligence activities, like the Church Committee hearings of the 1970s.

Brendan Maslauskas Dunn asked the city of Olympia for documents or e-mails about communications between the Olympia police and the military relating to anarchists, Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) or the Industrial Workers of the World (Dunn’s union). Dunn received hundreds of documents. One e-mail contained reference to a “John J. Towery II,” who activists discovered was the same person as their fellow activist “John Jacob.”

Dunn told me: “John Jacob was actually a close friend of mine, so this week has been pretty difficult for me. He said he was an anarchist. He was really interested in SDS. He got involved with Port Militarization Resistance (PMR), with Iraq Vets Against the War. He was a kind person. He was a generous person. So it was really just a shock for me.”

“Jacob” told the activists he was a civilian employed at Fort Lewis Army Base and would share information about base activities that could help the PMR organize rallies and protests against public ports being used for troop and Stryker military vehicle deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan. Since 2006, PMR activists have occasionally engaged in civil disobedience, blocking access to the port.

Larry Hildes, an attorney representing Washington activists, says the U.S. attorney prosecuting the cases against them, Brian Kipnis, specifically instructed the Army not to hand over any information about its intelligence-gathering activities, despite a court order to do so.

Which is why Dunn’s request to Olympia and the documents he obtained are so important.

The military is supposed to be barred from deploying on U.S. soil, or from spying on citizens. Christopher Pyle, now a professor of politics at Mount Holyoke College, was a military intelligence officer. He recalled: “In the 1960s, Army intelligence had 1,500 plainclothes agents [and some would watch] every demonstration of 20 people or more. They had a giant warehouse in Baltimore full of information on the law-abiding activities of American citizens, mainly protest politics.” Pyle later investigated the spying for two congressional committees: “As a result of those investigations, the entire U.S. Army Intelligence Command was abolished, and all of its files were burned. Then the Senate Intelligence Committee wrote the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 to stop the warrantless surveillance of electronic communications.”

Reps. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., Rush Holt, D-N.J., and others are pushing for a new, comprehensive investigation of all U.S. intelligence activities, of the scale of the Church Committee hearings, which exposed widespread spying on and disruption of legal domestic groups, attempts at assassination of foreign heads of state, and more.

Demands mount for information on and accountability for Vice President Dick Cheney’s alleged secret assassination squad, President George W. Bush’s warrantless wiretapping program, and the CIA’s alleged misleading of Congress. But the spying in Olympia occurred well into the Obama administration (and may continue today). President Barack Obama supports retroactive immunity for telecom companies involved in the wiretapping, and has maintained Bush-era reliance on the state secrets privilege. Lee and Holt should take the information uncovered by Brendan Dunn and the Olympia activists and get the investigations started now.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090728_obamas_military_is_spying_on_us_peace_groups/

RECESIÓN EN EE.UU

Con respecto, a una recesión en la mayor economía del mundo en términos individuales (sin tomar en cuenta el bloque europeo), en este momento no parece descabellado, si nos basamos en los precedentes de los últimos meses. Pero sobre todo por las declaraciones prestadas en diversos foros por el ex –presidente de la Reserva Federal de los Estados Unidos Alan Greenspan, quien ocupó dicha posición por casi dos décadas, este personaje conoce a fondo los entretelones de la economía y dijo claramente sin tapujos, que se encontraban en una recesión fruto de los desaciertos e incongruencias de la actual administración.

Así pues, el premio Nóbel del economía año 2001, quien ocupó los cargos de: asesor del ex-presidente Bill Clinton y jefe de economistas del Banco Mundial (B.M), experto que imparte clases en la Universidad de Columbia, el economista estadounidense Joseph Stiglitz, en su artículo de opinión publicado en diciembre del 2007 por la revista Vanity Fair, efectuando un ejercicio de retrospección de la catástrofe que ha representado la administración Bush, evalúa varios elementos: el drama de la invasión a Irak, la vergüenza de las bases militares y/o cárceles de Guantánamo y de Abud Grhabi, la erosión de las libertades civiles, circunstancias que no salen reflejadas en su dimensión por los medios de prensa, no obstante, las repercusiones se hacen sentir día a día por el común de los ciudadanos.

Más adelante continúa, un sistema impositivo que degeneró a favor de los estratos de mayores ingresos, un déficit fiscal que probablemente habría crecido 70% para cuando el presidente Bush deje Washington, una cifra alrededor de $ 850.000.000.000.000, o sea, dinero equivalente a economías ENTERAS tales como: México y Australia.

En particular, remarca la desinversión en áreas como la educación haciéndolos (EE. UU.) quedar en rezago de cara al futuro frente a otras potencias: China y la India, por la falta de ingenieros y científicos.

Y le da una estocada final en la yugular, mostrando los efectos económicos (Bush) como los más insidiosos desde Hoover (considerado como el presidente que agravó la GRAN DEPRESIÓN), ¿complicado revertir ese desastre, no?, y aquí literalmente citó a Stiglitz: “Pero nuestros nietos vivirán y arrastraran las consecuencias económicas del Sr. Bush”, con esta frase vislumbra un panorama con efectos a largo plazo y alto impacto.

Enumero las razones por las cuales EE. UU. esta en recesión:

1) Los proyectos de ley del Congreso con carácter social que comprendían mayores fondos para: asistencia social (Welfare), apoyo infantil (Child Support), asistencia médica (Medicaid), programa de cupones alimenticios (Food Stamp Program), y ayudas escolares para diferentes niveles de educación fueron bloqueados por ser aprobados con una mayoría simple, recordemos que el presidente de EE. UU. tiene la posibilidad de vetar cualquier propuesta sino es aprobada por dos tercios (75%) de ambas cámaras.

2) La confianza del consumidor ha caído a niveles mínimos, según el centro de investigaciones de Conference Board. El índice de confianza del consumidor de febrero del 2008 cayó a 64,5, el nivel más bajo desde marzo del 2003, la situación más preocupante es referente al índice de expectativa, el cual descendió a 47,9 el peor en 34 años, manifiesta la cautela con que la gente del cotidiano ve con gran ansiedad las incertidumbres que tiene que afrontar.

3) En su informe emitido por la Organización de Cooperación y Desarrollo Económico (OCDE), estima que el Producto Interno Bruto (PIB) de EE. UU. será de 0,1 % en primer trimestre, evidentemente marginal, en el segundo trimestre 0%, catastrófico. Técnicamente la recesión queda determinada por dos trimestres con crecimiento negativo o muy leve, ello implica que, solo se sabrá seis meses después que comience.

4) La percepción de la mayoría de los ciudadanos, es que la recesión ya esta galopando por las calles, avenidas, carreteras y parques, así se desprende de las encuestas realizadas por CNN/ Gallup, en que el 74% así lo afirmaron.

5) En el mes de marzo, se perdieron 80.000 puestos de trabajo, de acuerdo con los datos aportados por el Ministerio de Trabajo, Se trata del tercer mes consecutivo de la pérdida de un número importante del empleos, colocando el índice en 5,1 % , 0,3% por encima en comparación con el mes anterior.

6) El dólar marca niveles históricos, aparece diariamente en titulares impresos: New York Times, The Guardian, El País de España. Y no sólo el dólar, también: el petróleo, el oro, los metales y los alimentos (caso Haití). La economía internacional se esta inflando de forma artificial y sus dos síntomas principales son: la devaluación excesiva del dólar y la valorización de los activos que han adquirido características amenazantes.

7) Recortes de las tasas primarias de la Reserva Federal, al inicio de la crisis se situaba en 5,75 % en el 2007 hasta ubicarse actualmente en los últimos días en 2,25 %, sin ocasionar un impacto real. Algunas voces agoreras entre ellas las de CNN especulan que las tasas podrían llegar al 1% en este verano.

8) El presupuesto bi-anual presentado ante el Congreso por el presidente Bush que, incluye unos déficits proyectados para el 2008 y 2009 superiores a $ 400.000.000.000 cada uno. Este pronóstico representa más del doble del déficit del año fiscal 2007, calculado en $ 162.000.000.000, para ser más exactos en el 2008 será de $ 410.000.000.000 (2,9% del PIB) y, en el 2009 de $ 407.000.000.000 (2,7% del PIB), parece que Stiglitz en diciembre no imaginaba esos colosales montos.

9) La inyección de liquidez fresca por parte de la Reserva Federal en coordinación con los Bancos Centrales de: Inglaterra, Suiza y el Europeo, el objetivo según ellos “calmar el nerviosismo de los mercados”, mejor dicho solo están corriendo la arruga de un aluvión que es inminente.

10) El viernes 18 de enero de 2008 con la siguiente frase: “hay sin duda un riesgo de una caída (económica)”, así el presidente George Walker Bush lanzó el “salvavidas económico”, de $ 145.000.000.000, monto que produce hilaridad para la magnitud y el tamaño de la economía estadounidense que el año pasado genero un PIB de $ 13.721.221.000.000. La ayuda consiste en deducciones fiscales que se traduce en el envió de cheques a estadounidenses, con el fin de aumentar el consumo y genere más empleo, y con ello mejore la economía, estiman que cada individuo soltero podría recibir $ 800 y $ 1600 los grupos familiares además de $ 100 adicionales por cada hijo, con ingresos menores a los $ 75.000 anuales.

11) El aumento exponencial de la oferta inmobiliaria generó una masiva oferta hipotecaria, a cientos de miles de personas que no cumplían con los requisitos exigidos por los agentes reguladores. Estas hipotecas fueron usadas por las empresas acreedoras como respaldo en otras operaciones, impulsando a la economía a un crecimiento artificial, trayendo como consecuencia el alza de los precios de las casas y, el impedimento por parte de los deudores de asumir responsabilidades fuera de sus límites.

En conclusión, la deficiente administración Bush en lo: económico, político y asistencia social, se demuestra en los índices de popularidad o impopularidad, depende de la forma que se vea, según encuesta realizada por el The Washington Post y la cadena ABC, su rechazo es únicamente superado por el de los presidentes Richard Nixon y Harry Truman, arrojando como principal preocupación la invasión en Irak.

La aprobación por parte de los estadounidenses ha llegado a sólo el 33% desde que llegó a la Casa Blanca, en 2001, Richard Nixon del 26% en 1974, quien renunció por el caso Watergate y Harry Truman con el 23% debido a la oposición pública contra el conflicto en Corea y la destitución del general Douglas MacArthur, uno de los héroes de la Segunda Guerra Mundial.

Esto ha dado pie para el inicio del surgimiento de un mundo multipolar, en que el poder se encuentre un poco mejor distribuido, en distintos bloques de poder: Brasil, China, India y Rusia responsables de por lo menos el 50% del crecimiento de PIB mundial, el fortalecimiento de las economías emergentes para afrontar los embates financieros en relación a la década de los 80, el renacimiento de más y mejores mecanismos de integración colocando al humanismo por delante, en fin, en todas las crisis brotan oportunidades positivas.

LIC. MANUEL TEMPONI RODRIGUEZ

http://manueltemponi1981.blogspot.com