Why Chavez won – by Lisa Sullivan, US citizen living in Venezuela

Lisa Sullivan, October 8, 2012

A few days before the elections, a friend from the states wrote me: “Hi Lisa, all the main stream media down here has Chavez losing and ready to die. Can you give me a more accurate update on the elections?”

My inbox began to fill up with similar inquiries, many from people who I had met when leading delegations here to Venezuela, my home of 27 years. They were confused, wondering why Chavez was going to lose, die, or steal the elections, or all of the above. Those were, after all, the only stories to be found, countered by that of the great white hope in the form of a young, skinny opponent (the adjectives repeated ad nausea by the media describe opposition candidate Capriles).

Where, my friends asked, was all that enthusiasm and spirit they had seen here, the one that had transformed this nation into the least unequal spot in all of Latin America, where free university education, health care and cheap food led to Venezuelans rating themselves as the happiest people on the continent? Had Venezuelans suddenly dropped the most significant political project in Latin America of the past 50 years to suddenly opt for skinniness and youth?

Even NPR set the stage for Venezuelan elections to a backdrop of doom and gloom, as friends notified me in a rush, listening to the Diane Rehm show. For busy and exhausted US citizens just trying to survive via the longest work hours on the planet, they only had time for small sound bites about Venezuela, or any global issue. And these sound bites painted a picture of Venezuela in shades of grey, kind of like those last tottering days of the Soviet empire. Into this scene, rides – or jogs – the youthful skinny Mr. Good to finally chase out the old (age 58) and solidly built Mr. Bad, according to Ms. Rehm and company.

How, then, then to explain yesterday’s street scenes? The ones showing colorfully attired and jubilant Venezuelans standing patiently in huge lines at polling centers, sharing laughs and empanadas with fellow line-mates, indifferent of political loyalties. On the cameras, everyone looked so happy in those long lines, certainly that must mean that they were all voting against Chavez, that evil cancer-ridden old chunky socialist dictator.

But even worse, how to explain the RESULTS? How to explain how this cruel “strongman” had won robustly with more than 54% of the vote, 10% more than his opponent. Or, that there was a record 81% voter turnout? Well, it must be ……….fraud. That was the other scenario the mainstream media had constantly dangled. But wait, in a few minutes the opposition candidate was on televions himself, accepting defeat, acknowledging the decision of the Venezuelan people and absolute legitimacy of the electoral system. Wasn’t it only Jimmy Carter who was allowed an occasional sound bite that spoke positively about the Venezuelan electoral system (the very best of the dozens his Carter Center has monitored). Wait, this just isn’t going as planned.

So, why? Well, without delving into the messy deep part of that question (think: Iraq and weapons of mass destruction), maybe let’s just touch on some of the easier reasons. In spite of the fact that there were 12,000 journalists in Venezuela covering the elections last night, only a handful of them seemed to venture far from their 5-star hotels to take a look around the barrios and small rural towns where most Venezuelans actually live. Like I do. Perhaps if they poked around there for a half hour or so, they might discover what’s behind all this love for this madman.

How about, for a start, free health care, and right in your local community? Well, if you don’t believe those red-shirted socialist Venezuelans occasionally shown on tv pumping their fists at rallies, try listening to a gringa. A few weeks ago, I returned to Venezuela after a long set of travels interspersed with minor surgery. By the time my flight touched ground at the Maiquetia airport, my head was pounding and my vision blurring.

The next morning my companero Ledys took me to the local government health post, or, CDI, similar to those found in almost every Venezuelan community. As I stumbled in, the waters parted and soon I was on a gurney with young Cuban and Venezuelan doctors patiently asking me many questions and examining me. Realizing I was having a reaction to the pain medication that I took for the first time on the plane, I was sent home with new meds and a smile, never interchanging a single id or form of any payment. Within a few hours I was helping friends dig a vegetable garden. What a contrast to the series of medical appointments I had just undergone in the US, where the first words at a doctor’s office were never “good morning” but, “your insurance card and id”.

But the next day Ledys and I were back at the CDI, albeit in opposite roles. This time is was he with the pain, a raging one, in his lower right abdomen. Ledys was certain that the “socialist” arepas we had eaten the previous day had laid havoc to his gut, as he gulped several down, taking advantage of their rock bottom price. The doctors thought otherwise, especially after doing emergency lab work. The next thing I knew, the same social worker who had helped us the previous day was strolling him by wheelchair into an ambulance and sending me off with a kiss and assurance that we were in capable hands. Within minutes, we arrived at a four-story brand new building in the heart of Petare, one of the most populous and poorest sectors of the country, but I felt that I was back in Washington, in a state-of-the-art hospital.

But no, this was definitely Venezuela, as I discerned when no id was requested, the only information requested being name and age of patient. By late evening, orderlies called me to the hospital ward where I found Ledys looking happy and pain free after three hours of surgery to rid him of his appendix and hernia (they threw in the second surgery since he was already opened up.) Two days later we were sent home, with meds and follow up instruction. Total bill: $0.

If free health care isn’t enough reason to explain Venezuela’s election results, maybe you can look to the faces of the young people who were jumping up and down last night in front of the presidential palace. For some odd reason, they just didn’t buy the charm of that young skinny candidate, in spite of the fact that he even wore his lucky shoes yesterday (the press just loved that touch). Maybe the reason for their unadulterated joy was the lack of two words in their vocabulary: student loans.

I found that out when recently I hosted a dialogue been university students from the US and Venezuela at a cultural center that Ledys and I started in the sprawling barrios of Barquisimeto. When I saw the quizzical look on the faces of the Venezuelans as I attempted to translate the term student loans – which the US students were explaining were their main stumbling block to a hopeful future – I realized it wasn’t a question of translation, but of opposing realities. When we began to build this center twenty years ago, we only had two young at the center who had made it to college. Now, among this group of 15 Venezuelan musicians, all between ages 17-20, and all hailing from these barrios, every single one of them was studying at the university. Tuition was free and some even had scholarships to cover food and transportation. Student loans?

As Ledys and I anxiously awaiting the results last night I was getting text messages from my comadre Erika, a young mother of six, and my neighbor. Erika treats every recent election (and there have been many of them, over 10 in the past decade or so) as a matter of life and death, waiting anxiously with heart-in-hand outside the one polling station in our little town of Palo Verde, the one school building there. When I arrived in this community 15 years ago, the school was just a grade school. In the past ten years, it has doubled in size, and now also functions as a high school by day, on weekends as a free government university, and evenings, as one of the tens of thousands of “mission” schools, run by the government.

Erika grew up having to pick coffee instead of going to school. Three years ago she got her grade school degree from the mission school, and is now well on her way to a high school degree. She is thinking of what to study at the university level, maybe social work. She often repeats to me: “”comadre, notice how Chavez always says, WE the poor. He is one of us”.

Erika lives in a hand fashioned home of bahereque (waddle and daub) like mine, snuggled in a small community at the end of the town. More than half of the thirty or so homes in our neighborhood are brand new, sporting the before unheard-of indoor bathrooms and kitchens, all tiled in a lovely sea green. Erika was part of the community council that helped with the census that determined which families most needed the new homes (mostly, those that squished several nuclear families together under one roof). Others had more need as she acknowledged, so she helped with the process, but remained with her old home.

Funds for 16 homes were dispersed by the government, but the community council managed the funds well enough to build 17 homes. The instant that the election results were announced Erika called me with joy and tears in her voice: “comadre, we won!”.

I confess, I also felt tears stream down my face. I was holding my computer to the television screen so that my daughter back in Virginia could see the results via skype at the moment they were announced. Her tears joined mine. She remembers all too well growing up in the pre-Bolivarian Venezuela. The one where her friends in the barrio could barely scrape enough to eat, where some had parents who died of lack of health care, where none ever dreamed of going to college. That’s the Venezuela before, the one that the mainstream press never bothers to mention, the Venezuela that led Latin America for the deepest plunge into poverty in the 15 years preceding Chavez. The Venezuela directed by the IMF and World Bank, two of the main buddies the lucky-shoed candidate promised to usher in again.

After the results, the television screens turned to the scene outside the presidential palace. Did the US mainstream press bother to show that scene? It was utterly electric. Seas of red-shirted Venezuelans had been waiting for hours for results, and now the moment was theirs as Chavez stepped out onto “the balcony of the people”. As crowd and president intoned the national anthem together the look of sheer joy on the faces of so many Venezuelans, a nation that saw my children grow and flourish and learn to become caring people in love with justice, I let my own tears flow.

“Chavez is the people” is the phrase heard over and over here. To those back in the states, how could you possibly understand, there is no real coverage of what happens in Venezuela in the mainsteam media. But to watch that scene, that utter connection, you would also sense that each of these people felt that who they are was being uplifted at that moment : their absolutely dignity, their unalienable right to healthcare, education, housing, food and above all, a sense that they have the power to determine the direction of their own country All of this was lifted as high as the stars last night.

The electricity built as Chavez held high above the crowd the sword of Simon Bolivar. The one mismatch for me and Chavez has always been his military persona, and as a life-time peace activist, the image of a sword isn’t exactly what does it for me, even one gleaming like this in gold and diamonds. But the chant of the crowd as he raised the sword is one that I have heard over and over again in my recent travels to the length and breadth of this Latin America, a continent that I have lived in and loved for the past 35 years: “alerta, alerta, alerta que camina, la espada de Bolivar por America Latina” (Alert: The sword of Bolivar is walking throughout Latin America.)

As Chavez held up the sword, he and the crowd swayed as they spoke and cheered that real independence was finally coming to Latin America, a continent increasingly configuring itself as one: UNASUR, ALBA, CELAC, all variations of Bolivar’s dream. The independence that Bolivar won from Spain, via a sword, was now being won again, from a colonizer that took over no sooner than Spaniards had departed: my country.

But this time the sword was indicative of a new form of battle: democracy. The massive enthusiastic and peaceful turnout at Venezuelan polls yesterday is the real story of Venezuelan elections. The fact that deep social change is happening in Venezuela and throughout Latin America, via a ballot box and not bullets, is what I celebrate.

In my travels as Latin America coordinator for the School of the Americas Watch, I have heard too many stories of atrocities, murders, rapes, disappearances, torture at the hands of dictators that we in the US trained and supported. And I don’t just mean in the 60’s and 70’s. I mean in the 2010’s, like in Honduras, where human rights leaders, peasants and journalists are being murdered right now, today, because of our support for an illegal coup to unseat a president who dared to invite his population to dream the dreams of dignity that flowed in the streets last night, the dreams of Morazan, Central America’s Bolivar.

One final note. There are actually lots of journalists who do take the time to seek out and write about the real story. They are not to be found in the mainstream press, but they can be found in organizations such as CEPR, the Real News, Venezuelanalysis, the Americas Program, Upside Down World, and many many more. My saludos to them this morning, how we need you and thank you for rolling up your sleeves, with meager or no budgets, and working late into the night to report the truth. From Venezuela, from the heart of the Bolivarian dream for Latin America, gracias!

Posted in Coup d'état | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Why Chavez won – by Lisa Sullivan, US citizen living in Venezuela

Venezuela elections


Chavez won with 8,044,106 votes, or 55.11%  to Capriles’ 6,461,612 (44.27%) for a difference of 1,582,494 votes, or almost 11%. Chavez also won in 21 states and the Capital District (Caracas), and lost to Capriles in Merida (Capriles is governor of Merida) and Tachira states,. Chaves won in Zulia and Carabobo where there are currently opposition governors.


Although 11% is a huge lead by Western standards, compared to the 2006 presidentials (when Chavez got 62.9% of the vote, and Manuel Rosales 36.9%; a difference of 26%) it’s quite narrow when it comes to state elections in December. The popularity of local personalities can overshadow the politics they stand for.


Due to high voter turnout of 81%, both sides received a record number of votes, but the opposition’s 6.5 million was a good 20-50% more than what has been its standard 4 to 5 million over the last 13 years.


The Chavista vote of 8 million was also significantly higher than its standard 6 or so million in elections, an increase of 33%.

80.9% of Venezuelans voluntarily voted yesterday; a historic record for Venezuela and a remarkable number compared to voluntary elections in other parts of the world. In the 2006 Venezuelan presidential elections, 75% turned out to vote.


Venezuelans, like all South Americans, feel very strongly about the democracies they have created, they were not a gift, they had to fight for them against US supported dictators or Germany supported dictator in the case of Paraguay. So when there is a danger of another American stooge becoming installed people react by going to vote in increasing numbers.


Those fears intensified when they saw the entire Western controlled international media supporting Capriles – they could read daily the defamations and disinformations spread by Western media for the benefit of their lesser educated parts of their populations. This all indicated that another “parliamentarian coup in Honduras or Paraguay style” was in the making. Even The Guardian in UK run an article series that predicted the demise of Chavez. The Guardian interpreted statistics in a way that painted a picture of Venezuela that made Greece look like heaven on earth.


This kind of “creative journalism” makes a point of excluding facts, so let me give you some:


When Chavez became president in 1999 he inherited a legacy of endless US-supported dictatorships resulting in an economy where hardly anyone could write or read, no schools, no healthcare, poverty, the poorest country in South America. A few wealthy oligarchs shared the oil revenue with US-based oil companies, the people had nothing.


Today all can read and write, an excellent healthcare system that is free for all, the minimum wage of US$700 is the highest in South America. Chavez nationalised oil and spends the revenue for the benefit of the people. Doctors and teachers from Cuba provide these services in exchange for oil. Students study in Cuba to replace them in the long run.

Universities are being established, tuition is free and graduates stay in the country and replace Cubans.


That’s the reason why Chavez survived the US-lead coup against him in 2002 and the people reelected him in 2006 and again this Sunday.


In contrast, Capriles focused his campaign on ending support of and solidarity with other South American countries – a concept of selfishness alienating South American mentality.



Venezuela is building a participatory democracy, and people’s understanding and concern for democracy is high. The powers invested in the president are limited. Important legistation and executive rest with the states governed by parliaments and a governor.


For example, oligarchs have a tendency to take the advise of foreign NGOs that carry “freedom and democracy” in their names to take their land out of food production. So Chavez seeks to confiscate that land and give it to cooperatives for organic food production. This confiscation is subject to a legal process determined by the states. This legal process varies in lenths and outcome, often resulting in unrests as the people have a limited understanding of and for that process. Western media reports this as human rights violations. Venezuela has to import 70% of its food and that percentage is growing.


So the state elections in December are decisive, Chavez can only continue with his reforms successfully if his supporters can win all states. The opposition will be encouraged by the 44% they gained on Sunday.


Also, in a number of states, although they lost, the result was close enough that with a strong campaign, or a bad candidate representing the Chavistas, the opposition would have a chance. Those states include Capital District, Amazonas, Anzoategui, Bolivar, Carabobo, Lara, Nueva Esparta, and Zulia, as well as the two states where Capriles won.


So there is plenty of potential and opportunity for outside interests to interfere. Perhaps The Guardian will start a new article series.

Posted in Coup d'état | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Venezuela elections

Fukushima Health Survey of Children

Fukushima Health Survey 21.7.2012

After examining more than 38,000 children from the area, doctors found that more than 13,000 have cysts or nodules as large as 5 millimeters on their thyroids, the Sixth Report of Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey states.

In comparison, a 2001 analysis by the Japan Thyroid Association found no nodules in children in the city of Nagasaki, which suffered a nuclear attack in August of 1945, and only 0.8 per cent had cysts on their thyroids.
“Yes, 35.8 per cent of children in the study have lumps or cysts, but this is not the same as cancer,” says Naomi Takagi, an associate professor at Fukushima University Medical School Hospital, which administered the tests.

“This is an early test, and we will only see the effects of radiation exposure after four or five years” she added.

” Children who were under 18 when the nuclear disaster struck last year will be subject to continuous thyroid examinations every two years until they reach 20 years of age, and after that, every five years for the rest of their lives.” That’s the official line of the Fukushima Prefecture which gives no indication as to how many children that is. No statement available regards testing these cysts for cancerous cells.

No statement is available for other areas that had significant radioactive downfall.

Posted in Fukushima | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Fukushima Health Survey of Children

Coup in Paraguay by Rio Tinto

As evidence of the perpetrators of the coup in Paraguay emerges I’ll be presenting them one by one.

Rio Tinto Alcan (RTA), the Canadian mining company, has been after a deal in Paraguay for three years.

RTA propses to invest $3,500 million ($3.5bn) to built an aluminum plant. RTA requires a subsidy of $14,000 million ($14bn). This subsidy consists of a 500Kv power line and a price of $60 per Mv for 30 years for which Paraguay currently has to pay $150-$200/Mv. The plant consumes about 50% of the entire electricity consumption of Paraguay.

The deposed president Lugo had rejected this deal on grounds of environmental concerns and the fact that a country with a budget of $5bn cannot pay subsidies of $14bn without having to borrow this on the international financial markets, paying interest and going bust as a result. Currently Paraguay has a balanced budget (slight surplus even) and no debt.

Today, Monday 16th July 2012, the usurper and de facto president Franco has announced the deal with RTA, presented as the largest inward investment the country has ever had.
Job creation is minimal, less than 0.1% of the working population.

These figures indicate that the 39 senators approving the deal were well paid, the same 39 out of 45 that impeached Lugo. If and when Lugo returns this deal will be declared void, if he does not Paraguay is bankrupt and will have to reverse Lugo’s social programmes including a free healthcare system for all, so Paraguayans no longer have to go to Argentina for free operations and treatments.

A delegation of members of the European Parliament has arrived today. They have been discussing the situation with Lugo, details of who these members are are on Lugo’s website: http://paraguayresiste.com/lugo-explica-el-golpe-a-los-europarlamentarios

These members are all from parties that are not in power in Europe.

Posted in Coup d'état | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Coup in Paraguay by Rio Tinto

Friday 13th Donate your Newborn

If you want to get rid of a newborn in Germany you simple drop it in a Baby Hatch or Babyklappe as it is called in German.

These are hole-in-the-wall facilities just like cash machines. Open hatch – drop in newborn – close hatch and walk away – cannot be opened from the outside once weight is placed in the hatch.

Organizations that operate baby hatches include medical clinics, social welfare organizations and private associations.

The Sternipark organization in Hamburg, for example, promotes its counseling services and baby hatches under the motto, “No questions, no witnesses, no police.”

Sternipark has become something of a market leader within the German baby hatch scene. Sternipark opened the country’s first baby hatch in April 2000, on Goethestrasse in Hamburg.

Germany’s tabloids also do their bit. Bild, for example, runs baby pictures and headlines such as “Sweet little Ida found lying in the baby hatch,” about children reportedly left at Sternipark’s facilities. The organization, one article reads, is “looking for loving adoptive parents” if the birth mothers don’t get in touch. The article is followed by a toll-free number.

SPIEGEL reports: At the office of the Fulda branch of the Catholic Women’s Welfare Service (SKF), which operates under the auspices of social services organization Caritas, Gisela Buhl defends the concept of baby hatches. Buhl believes there should be more baby hatches — at least one in every sizable German city.

Baby Hatches

Baby hatch operators chose not to release their data. As a result, no one in Germany knows precisely how many children have been placed in baby hatches in the past 12 years, or what became of them afterward. There are about hundred operational baby hatches, nobody knows the exact number.

German medical equipment manufacturers recognize a tremendous export potential for baby hatches “Made in Germany” due to changing economic conditions worldwide.

Baby hatches do not require German government export guarantees to sell them as the return on investment happens quickly – one newborn dropped in and passed on to waiting adoptive parents – and you are in profit already – or have generated the revenue for your “Not-for-Profit” entity to pay generous wages and expenses.

Naturally the “Vatican approved” model costs a bit more, so does the “revolver type” with six chambers – but all are economically viable. Some spit out a twenty Euro/Pound/Dollar note after you’ve shut the hatch – this covers travel expenses, so women no longer have to kill and dump newborns.

While Greece, Portugal and Spain offer an obvious potential now that Greece has elected the same old government according to Germany’s wishes and Spain treats fertility of 50% youth unemployment with austerity, the most promissing potential may be in the UK. Here we have masses of home owners sitting on neagtive equity struggling to pay mortgages and leasing rates for their Mercedes and BMWs.

Richard Branson seems to have spotted this potential. His Virgin Care has a contract with NHS Surrey to provide GBP 500m worth of health services and GBP 130m worth with NHS Devon to run social care services for children and young people. Where the NHS fails to see potential Virgin Care may fill this gap, for humanitarian reasons of course, I assume, arguably.

British society evolves, becoming Sophisticated Humanitarian Educated European People, S.H.E.E.P.

SHEEP understand the needs of banks, industrial conglomerates and politicians.
SHEEP understand their place in society, they understand a newborn to become a burden, child benefit – kindergarten – school – police – courts – prison – unemployment benefits – healthcare – funerals, all costs to the state that reduces the state’s credit ratings and increases interest rates.

The English language will evolve, “did you keep it or hatch it?”, “did you Virgin-hatch, BUPA-hatch, or charity-hatch?”, an opportunity for brand-development. A common answer will be “…will hatch this one, haven’t decided on the brand yet, but may keep the next one if house prices and City bonuses are up again”. I’ve covered this issue in my book “2012/20 Capitalism Endgame”.

Also developing countries offer a vast potential. Take Paraguay for example, after the US government/Monsanto lead coup which is still in progress, spraying of Monsanto’s Round Up will intensify increasing the number of deformations – so the market for baby hatches increases.

Briefly about the status of the coup in Paraguay:
– Mercosur and Unasur have suspended membership of Py and recalled their ambassadors.
– The US, Canada and EU are reaping the benefits of their actions, naturally they have not recalled their ambassadors and make sure the media is keeping a blackout.

Effectively democracy in Py has sunk to UK-levels:
– No elected head of state
– No elected Upper House
– A Lower House regarded by the ruling class as tool to control the masses, and perceived by the people as representation.

Posted in True or False | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Friday 13th Donate your Newborn

Coup in Paraguay various authors statement

Written by Various Authors
Friday, 06 July 2012 09:14
The undersigning organizations, collectives and individuals working towards a coordinated initiative of popular resistance from and with the peoples of Paraguay clearly and unequivocally declare:

We believe it to be an urgent priority to accompany and support the Frente Unido para la Defensa de la Democracia (United Front for the Defence of Democracy or FDD) and the expressed desires of the people of Paraguay to develop and implement their agenda of autonomous resistance to the occupation through the recent Coup d’Etat.

We join our autonomous resistance with theirs. We call on those who share the same desire and commitment to join with us, sign on to this letter (email:pblosencamino@gmail.com or pueblosencamino@yahoo.com), and consolidate the popular resistance and solidarity that is required to speak in unison from Paraguay.

We declare that:

1. Fernando Lugo is the President of Paraguay, elected by a people out of a desire for spaces and opportunities to transform their society from the bottom up and reorient it toward freedom and justice. Lugo was overthrown in a Coup d’Etat that was carefully planned and carried out by and for transnational capital. (1)

2. Paraguay and its people are victims of their enormous natural wealth, and the fact that they are situated in an area of strategic importance for the accumulation of capital through continental megaprojects: El Chaco. The northern half of the country borders Argentina, Brazil and Bolivia and is also an enormously important region for the production of biofuels and energy through the use of transgenic soy (2), the construction of hydroelectric dams,  and exploitation of minerals by large mining companies through projects driven by the government of Canada(3).

Add to that the issue of water privatization: with the Paraná, Paraguay, Uruguay and Tieté rivers all slated for transformation into the Paraná-Paraguay (4) waterway, of the IIRSA regional infrastructure project, beyond generating enormous construction contracts for infrastructure, and tax exemptions to grantees for their administration and exploitation, will permit the extraction of resources and trade among five countries (including Uruguay) and the world, 24 hours-a-day, 365 days- a-year. The region covers and provides direct access to the Guaraní aquifer, the greatest reservoir of fresh water on the planet (5).

3. In Paraguay, 85% of the land is owned by 2.5% of the population (6). Indigenous peoples and landless peasants constitute a threat to large megaprojects. Permanent displacement of peoples requires war and terror. With this reasoning, and with the desire to take the region and its resources, the capitalist system fabricates pretexts for militarization, such as wars against narcotrafficking and terror. The Southern Command of the US Military has established the enormous Mariscal Estigarribia base (7) (FOL (8)) in the geographic heart of this strategically important region.

This base has the capacity for 16,000 military personnel, all guaranteed immunity for violations of human rights and/or other abuses. Not far from this military base, near the Bolivian border, lie 40,000 hectares of land acquired by former US President George W. Bush, and another enormous property owned by his father, former President George H. W. Bush(9). From bases like these throughout the continent, a vast machinery of war and terror at the service of transnational capital is imposed through blood and fire; it was constructed in Colombia, exported to Mexico, Honduras, Bolivia, Chile, Venezuela and the rest of the continent under the name of “Democratic Security” in the shadow of former Colombian president Álvaro Uribe Vélez (10) and his mafias of military and paramilitary groups coordinated by the Southern Command. This machinery generates war and terror in Paraguay as mechanisms for provoking instability. The most recent of these actions, the massacre of 11 landless peasants and 6 police officers, served as preconceived pretext for the destruction of the Fernando Lugo presidency. Previous false accusations and the imposition of a State of Siege by the government served to authorize the functioning of the US base in Paraguayan territory. Planned massacres are right out of the textbooks and Plan Colombia. This same machinery is already installed throughout the continent. Where will the next coup take place?

4. We already know who overthrew Fernando Lugo and why (11). El Chaco and Paraguay cannot be allowed to belong to this country nor its people; they have been bound for occupation and extraction by multinationals through megaprojects and terror financed with public resources. The coup in Paraguay, like similar ones throughout Latin America, was carried out by and for multinationals and their partners among the local elites. In this particular case, Monsanto, Cargill, Syngenta and Río Tinto are at the helm. Fernando Lugo broke the agreement that permitted the establishment of the Mariscal Estigarribia base in 2009 and was key in UNASUR’s rejection and condemnation of the 7 US military bases in Colombia (12). The coup constitutes a tactical stage in the imposition of “Free Trade” as the delivery of strategic territories to the multinationals.

5. Terror, propaganda and corporate policies function in such a way as to displace people and clear territories and countries for the dismantlement and destruction of peoples – our memory, our consciousness, and our resistance. Moreover, they consolidate corporate blocks in the advancement of strategic business based on total war, and markets based on lies serve to recruit people to kill one another.

6. The transnational coup in Paraguay is the same coup that overthrew Manuel Zelaya in Honduras with only some local adaptations – from the massacre pretext carried out by the perpetrators of the coup, followed by the illegitimate legal charges against president Lugo, to be followed by the farce that includes:

— a process to impose and recognize an illegitimate government and president;

— the immediate adoption of legislation and policies that favor the interests of the coup perpetrators and agribusiness;

– a hypocritical and empty discourse on the part of the governments that serve transnational capital, including that from the US, Canada and the “Pacific Alliance” (Mexico, Colombia, Peru and Chile) as well as Honduras, Guatemala, Costa Rica and Panama.

One thing is absolutely clear: all of these countries supported the coup; they knew about it, they helped prepare for it through the direction of the Southern Command, the US government and the elites that serve the transnational corporations.

7. Paraguay is being passed into the hands of transnational corporate power. Agribusiness and large-scale mining in particular require, among other things, slave labor, territories to exploit and to clear of people, censorship and the complete subservience of the populace through violence and the systematic elimination of rights and freedoms. Paraguay is one more stage in the total imposition of this process. The occupation forces that have already invaded Colombia, Mexico,

Honduras and Haiti now occupy Paraguay. What has happened in Paraguay is a move forward towards a global fascist occupation for accumulation.

8. The elimination of social and popular movements and processes is underway. Censorship and propaganda are already being imposed. Terror and repression are being deepened. The machinery that already implemented the “Colombia Model” is now applying its specific objectives to eliminate, one by one, all structures and forms of resistance. We see forced disappearances, torture, threats, and massacres, elaborate public accusations, criminalization of social protests, the buying off of leaders, and infiltration and cooptation of processes.

9. Capital and the Right have transformed their weaknesses into strengths (13). While losing elections, they have strategically used their machinery to pressure governments to get what they want. Every concession allows them to access space and retake power within established structures, fomenting and taking advantage of the frustrations of betrayed peoples. To win over the people and then govern for the Right generates weakness of the state and a sense of deception among citizens. The Right delivers its greatest blow at precisely the moment in which a government that could not govern with and for the people is weakest. A progressive government that plays dumb while it cooperates fully with the Right walks directly into the path of a coup for capital. These are hard lessons for peoples and those who govern: one can never talk the talk of revolution while walking the walk of extractives capital. Capital wins when condescending governments recklessly provide their stamp of approval for their projects. We, the people, lose.

10. This regime becomes even stronger when leftist parties, unions, NGOs, and social and popular organizations find accommodation within the system, engage in competition amongst them, and fight to maintain nothing more than their own privileges and places, their own benefits. This is worse when the same institutions carry this out in the name of resistance. The result is a loss of prestige, credibility and confidence that parallels the purchase of those who have a tag price. One way or another, the regime wins, and popular causes lose.

11. The coup in Honduras provides lessons for popular resistance in Paraguay: the coup conspirators calculate and include in their plans our reaction; they impose on us the character and meaning of our own struggle. They must, at any cost, stop our resistance to transnational capital and its interests. Inside the country, the people articulate a common face of resistance in coordinating mobilizations and actions. Outside of the country, we inundate ourselves with communiqués, news, analysis, denouncements and texts. Accompaniment and support is organized on the ground. The coup conspirators repress, implement propaganda, and wait. We get tired. Resistance wanes. Messages fill inboxes, bore, have no effect, and remain as drafts, unsent. Resistance achieves no objectives and loses strategic meaning, concrete vision, and falls under the weight of the repressor. Terror, on the other hand, is imposed and takes its strategic objective: transforming a struggle of popular resistance to capital into a struggle for human rights. Without strategic capacity, those on the ground become disarticulated, solidarity is debilitated, and actions that demonstrate our presence are smothered.

We Demand:

1. That Fernando Lugo and the legitimate government be re-established and that it once again take the path of the popular mandate it was elected to walk.

2. That the coup conspirators, led by Federico Franco and at the service of military and paramilitary apparatuses of terror serving the interest of transnational corporations, be isolated, removed from power, and brought to justice in such a way as to expose all those responsible for the criminal act committed against the people of Paraguay and democracy in the Americas. Franco is but a face for a structure that ought not to continue acting in hiding and with guaranteed impunity.

3. That the governments of the continent reject the coup in no uncertain terms and that they act immediately, coherently, and in a collective and in unified manner. For example, the legitimacy of UNASUR is not granted by the peoples of Latin America – neither in principle nor otherwise; such legitimacy must be gained through concrete and practical actions. We do not demand speeches or energetic declarations, we demand actions that defy the coup conspirators, expose the architecture of power and corporate interests directing them, and do everything necessary to treat them as the criminals they are, returning to Paraguay (and all of Latin America) its territories, sovereignty, and processes towards democracy that its peoples had managed to gain. We do not and will not accept, never again, middle- of-the-road calculations that cover up lies, accommodate posturing and “practical” conveniences, such as what happened with the illegitimate Lobo government in Honduras, who they ended up recognizing and legitimizing.

4. That solidarity among the peoples of Latin America be not subordinate to the policies of the States. Governments of the peoples govern by obeying the mandates and solidarity among those peoples. If agribusiness, extraction, and speculative corporate and financial capital dictate policies in the entire continent, there is no point in believing in governments that defend those interests. To reject the coup in Paraguay requires the weaving of popular agendas from below, from and with the people in each country and throughout the entire continent.

We Recognize:

1. The Frente unido para la Defensa de la Democracia (FDD) as the articulated effort of resistance already established within Paraguay and that which brings together all popular sectors.

2. The urgency in supporting the FDD and other legitimate efforts of coordinated and popular collective resistance in the urgent development of an agenda or strategic plan of popular resistance, with contextual analysis and clear objectives. This agenda will be indispensible for internal resistance in Paraguay as much as for international solidarity and mobilization.

3. The need to establish FDDs in the entire continent and weave together mechanisms for strategic planning and organizing among the peoples.

4. The dire need to act in a preventive way, from below, with peoples and organizations in each country, to stop the repression and occupation of totalitarian capital. A coup is one of many strategies of occupation that are being imposed. It is not enough to defend democracy in Paraguay. It is also necessary to organize resistance to the fascist occupation of capital in every territory and throughout the continent. To resist the coup in Paraguay is to resist the Conga project in Peru, rise up against large-scale mining, defend water, and oppose “free trade” and agribusiness, militarization, propaganda, repression, and the criminalization of social and popular struggle and war. Wherever nature and labor are handed over for the accumulation of capital, we will rise up in resistance. Wherever they impose war, we will rise up for life. Wherever they deny our rights and freedoms to bestow more privileges on themselves, it is a threat and an attack. The coup in Paraguay is against all peoples.

5. That they have plans that are being implemented everywhere. They have hierarchical structures that concentrate above, amongst groups of transnational elites, strategic capacity and clarity of objectives, and the means to carry them out. Paraguay makes clear the presence and power of this structure.

6. That each of us together, the peoples of Latin America – those who oppose the power of transnational capital and its accomplices, administrators and representatives, beyond differentiating ourselves from them and recognizing in their actions their interests – need our own agendas and strategies so as to strengthen our own capacities and to recognize and not lose sight of our objectives. We must learn to resist and transform reality in favour of life all along the way of our resistance. Either we construct an America of the peoples or we submit to the empire of capital. Today, we urgently need to support the people of Paraguay in their actions of strategic and effective resistance to the coup and to capital. The people decide it that way.

7. That an agenda of struggle and resistance from Paraguay will orient us in our solidarity efforts and, gives us strength, and bring us together adding our efforts at the right time, finding each other and attaining results, so that we may in the process learn and teach how to resist and defend all that is ours and collective. If we lack our own agenda, we will be subjected to theirs. We must consolidate our agenda and make it our path.

Our call:

At this moment of pain and anger, result of the coup in Paraguay, we must focus and prioritize our capabilities: from our diversity to supporting and articulating a strategic agenda of resistance and solidarity with the people. With all our creative power, affection and solidarity we commit to do whatever be necessary, whatever is within our power, to carry out the goals and objectives from and with the people. They [the corporate powers] have the memory of their crimes, which they use against us; we have our memory to resist and make the world our own not for the purposes of greed and plunder but for justice and freedom in harmony with Mother Earth.

Together in resistance against the occupation and with the people of Paraguay.

All causes of the people and of life are our own!

“Never again an America without the People”

Nuestra America, June 27, 2012



1.         Polomosca

2.         Pueblos en Camino

3.         Tejido de Comunicación y de Relaciones Externas para la Verdad y la Vida-ACIN, Cxab Wala Kiwe, Cauca, Colombia

4.         Rete Italiana de Solidarietá Colombia Vive!

5.         Alianza Social Continental

6.         Movimiento 14 de Junio de los Corteros de Caña del Valle del Cauca, Colombia

7.         Comunidad Pueblos Originarios de Awyayala, Rafaela, Santa Fe, Argentina

8.         Colectivo Utopía Puebla. México

9.         Universidad de la Tierra en Puebla. México

10.      Frente de Pueblos en Defensa de la Tierra y Agua Morelos-Puebla-Tlaxcala. México

11.      COLACOT, Confederación Latinoamericana de Cooperativas y Mutuales de Trabajadores. Venezuela

12.      FENTAP, Federación Nacional de Trabajadores de Agua Potable del Perú

13.      CAOI, Confederación Andina de Organizaciones Indígenas

14.      The Polaris Institute

15.      Unión Campesina Panameña. UCP

16.      Comité Nacional de Amistad y Solidaridad con la Republica Bolivariana de Venezuela de Colombia, Junta Directiva Nacional. COMASOLVE

17.      Colombia Vive, Massachussetts. EEUU

18.      Comisión Justicia Solidaridad y Paz Colombia CRC

19.      Alternatives, Montreal. Canadá

20.      Federación Democrática Internacional de Mujeres para América Latina y el Caribe

21.      Comunidad Ecuménica Martin Luther King. Chile

22.      (CSMM), Centro de Documentación en Derechos Humanos “Segundo Montes Mozo S.J.”  Ecuador

23.      APCS, Agencia Popular de Comunicación Suramericana. Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Perú y Uruguay

24.      Unión Solidaria de Comunidades (USC) del Pueblo Diaguita Cacano. Santiago del Estero, Argentina

25.      Vivero Comunitario Wichan Ranquen, Río Cuarto, Córdoba. Argentina

26.      FAPI. Federación por la Autodeterminación de los Pueblos Indígenas. Paraguay

27.      Fundación Abril, Cochabamba. Bolivia

28.      Organización de Inquilinos de Cochabamba, Cochabamba. Bolivia

29.      Movimiento Evita de Santiago del Estero. Argentina



1.         Manuel Rozental, Tejedor movimientos indígenas y populares, Brasil.

2.         Pancho Castro, Periodista, Colombia

3.         Carlos Vidales, Escritor, poeta, académico y activista colombiano. Estocolmo, Suecia

4.         Carlos Jiménez, Activista y artista colombiano. España

5.         María Cepeda Castro, Activista colombiana, Hungría

6.         Justin Podur, Activista, periodista, profesor Universidad de York, Canadá

7.         Vilma Almendra, Indígena del Pueblo Nasa

8.         Marcela Olivera, Cochabamba, Bolivia

9.         Adriana Marquisio, Comisión Nacional en Defensa del Agua y la Vida. Uruguay

10.      Hugo Blanco Galdos, dirigente indígena, campesino y popular, Perú

11.      Aldo Zanchetta, Italia

12.      Francesco Moscato, Académico América Latina, Italia

13.      Francesco Biagi – Colectivo Rebeldía Pisa, Italia

14.      Carlos Mejia Cortes, concejal, Eckernfoerde, Alemania

15.      Sergio Tischler, Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla- BUAP, México

16.      Cecilia Zeledón, Apoyo Zapatista, México

17.      Alberto Acosta, ex-presidente, Asamblea Constituyente de Ecuador

18.      Rafael Gutiérrez, Poeta, crítico y Director Revista de la Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala

19.      Venancio Guerrero, Militante del PSOL y Tribunal Popular. Brasil y Movimiento Libres del Sur. Chile

20.      José Cruz, Colectivo MadreSelva, Guatemala

21.      Rafael Sandoval, sociólogo, Guadalajara, México

22.      Silvia Trujillo, socióloga, Guatemala

23.      Mario López, BUAP, Puebla, México

24.      Ulises Castro Conde, doctorante de Sociología, BUAP, México

25.      Luis Pedro Taracena, historiador guatemalteco

26.      Oscar Soto, Profesor Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, Universidad Iberoaméricana, campus Puebla, México

27.      Anna Turriani, Brasil

28.      Alba Teresa Higuera, España

29.      Godofredo Aguillón, Académico, Universidad de El Salvador

30.      Ana Esther Ceceña, Observatorio Latinoamericano de Geopolítica, UNAM, México

31.      Simona V. Yagenova, FLACS0-Guatemala

32.      Mario Castañeda, historiador y sociólogo guatemalteco

33.      Lars Stubbe, Universidad de Kassel, Alemania

34.      María Alejandra Privado Catalán. BUAP, Puebla, México

35.      Fernando Matamoros, Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, BUAP

36.      Julio Donis, politólogo guatemalteco

37.      Agustín Reyes, Dirigente campesino colombiano, Canadá

38.      Simona Fraudatario, Rete Italiana de Soliedarietá Colmbia Vive! Tribunal de los Pueblos “Lelio Basso”, Italia

39.      Gaia Capogna, Italia

40.      Monica del Pilar Uribe Marín, periodista colombiana, The Prisma, Inglaterra

41.      Carlos Orantes, psicólogo y sociólogo guatemalteco

42.      Gilberto López y Rivas, Profesor-Investigador, Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia Centro Regional Morelos

43.      Yan López, historiador guatemalteco

44.      Arturo Taracena, historiador guatemalteco

45.      Carlos Figueroa Ibarra, Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, BUAP

46.      Francisco Gómez, Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, BUAP

47.      Alfonso Galileo García Vela, doctorante sociología, Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, BUAP

48.      Oliver Hernández Lara, doctorante sociología, Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, BUAP

49.      Octavio H. Moreno, doctorante sociología, Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, BUAP

50.      Raquel Gutiérrez Aguilar, Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, BUAP

51.      Jairo González, activista y dirigente colombiano,  Alemania

52.      Lorena Martínez Zavala, socióloga mexicana

53.      Raúl Zepeda López, sociólogo guatemalteco

54.      Mina Lorena Navarro, Universidad Autónoma de México- UNAM

55.      Alfredo Duarte  Corte, doctorante sociología,  Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, BUAP

56.      Ernesto Godoy, Instituto de Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, BUAP

57.      Liza Aceves, Facultad de Economía, BUAP

58.      Jorge Andrade Roca, músico, BUAP

59.      Michael Otuathail, Canadá

60.      Elvio Raffaello Martini, Italia

61.      Nadia Ranieri, Italia

62.      Andrea Semplici, Italia

63.      Francesca Casafina, Italia

64.      Pablo Mamani Ramírez, Estudios Latinoamericanos, UNAM-México

65.      Oscar Olivera Foronda, Cochabamba,  Bolivia

66.      Carla Mariani, activista por los Derechos Humanos, Terni, Italia

67.      Raúl Zibechi, Militante, activista y escritor, Uruguay

68.      Darío Azellini, Alemania

69.      Néstor López, Argentina

70.      Michelle Ciricillo, Italia

71.      Fabio Marcelli, Jurista internacional, dirigente Asociación Internacional Juristas Demócratas y Asociación Europea de Juristas para la Democracia y los Derechos Humanos en el Mundo

72.      Maya Piedra. México

73.      Mónica Montalvo. México

74.      Diego Rojas Romero. Colombia

75.      María Yolanda Vera. Argentina

76.      Claudia E. Clavijo Guevara. España

77.      Jacobo Vargas-Foronda, Jurista y Sociólogo guatemalteco

78.      Lucia Villaruel, Programa Cambio Climático y Plurinacionalidad Fundación Pachamama. Ecuador

79.      Rosa Elva Zúñiga López, Educadora Popular. México

80.      Tania Jamardo Faillace, Activista Social y Periodista. Brasil

81.      Ángel Canovas Morán, Pedagogo Social. Santiago del Estero, Argentina

82.      Eric Meyer. Suiza/México

83.      Marco Antonio Velázquez Navarrete, Red Mexicana de Acción frente al Libre Comercio (RMALC). México

84.      María Cecilia Sánchez. Escritora y Psicóloga. Colombia

85.      Afrânio Boppré, Secretário de Relações Internacionais PSOL. Brasil

86.      Pamela Calito Guerrero Venancio, Militante. Guatemala

87.      Roger Herrera, Informativo Eco Urbano

88.      Gustavo Guzmán Castillo, Educador Social. España

89.      Hernán Ouviña, Sociólogo. Argentina

90.      Blanca Cordero, Cooordinadora del Posgrado de Sociología, BUAP. México

91.      Fernando Limón, Ecosur. México

92.      Anibal Quijano. Perú

93.      Erika Muñoz Villarreal, Centro de Estudios Kumanday, Colombia

94.      Daniel Mathews, Programa de Doctorado Universidad de Concepción, Chile

95.      León Moraria, escritor, Mérida. Venezuela

96.      Dennis Herrarte, Guatemala

97.      Carolina Ortiz Fernández, Profesora UNMSM. Perú

98.      Roberto Lay Ruiz. Perú

99.      Danilo Quijano. Perú

100.    Nicolás Cruz Tineo, Director  Ejecutivo IDEAC, República Dominicana

101.    Mario Bladimir Monroy Gómez, Instituto Intercultural Ñöñho, A.C. México

102.    Juan Humberto Botzoc Che. Guatemala

103.    José Leopoldo Sánchez Niño, Bogotá. Colombia

104.    Rosalba Zambrano Velasco, Universidad Iberoamericana, Puebla. México

105.    Diana Castillo M. Colombia

106.    Julio Cerén, Toronto. Canadá

107.    Luca Brogioni. Firenze, Italia

108.    Marco Della Pina, Università di Pisa. Italia

109.    Alfonso Cotera Fretel. Perú

110.    Francisco Verano, Presidente COLACOT. Venezuela

111.    Montserrat Ponsa, Periodista. Fundación Cultura de Paz. España

112.    Willybaldo Montero Chura

113.    Javier Arjona, Prensa indígena. México

114.    Maximo Ba Tiul. Sociólogo. Guatemala

115.    Katia Valenzuela F. Socióloga, Facultad de Cs. Sociales, Universidad de  Concepción. Chile

116.    María Concepción Reyes Pazos, Silvia, Cauca. Colombia.

117.    Cristian Zúñiga. Colombia

118.    Beatriz Suárez. Lima, Perú

119.    Luis Isarra Delgado. Secretario General de la FENTAP. Perú

120.    Nuvia Martínez. Colombia

121.    Olga Lucia Álvarez. Colombia

122.    Giulia Poscetti. Italia

123.    Myrna Eligia Torres Rivas. Centroamericana

124.    Salima Cure, Antropóloga UN. Colombia

125.    Guillermo Valero, Artista y Ecologista. Colombia

126.    J. Uriel Aréchiga Viramontes, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana- Iztapalapa (UAM-I). México

127.    Carolina Landaida Sivori, Socióloga Universidad de Concepción. Chile

128.    Rubén Darío Pardo, Docente Universidad del Quindío. Colombia

129.    Fernando Arellano Ortiz, Periodista. Colombia

130.    Beverly Bell, Other Worlds. US

131.    Ana Zambrano, Directora Colombia Vive, Massachussetts. EEUU

132.    Aivun  Nuvia. Colombia

133.    Sheila Gruner, Activista y Profesora de la Universidad de Algoma. Canadá

134.    Jeff Conant, Global Justice Ecology Project. EEUU

135.    Ben Dangl, Activista y Periodista, Upsidedown World. EEUU

136.    David Alberto Duque Negro. Colombia

137.    Aura Catherine Carvajal Jojoa, Docente. Colombia

138.    Oscar Sandoval. Honduras

139.    Kate Hodgson, Abogada. Islas Británicas

140.    Rachel Waller, Abogada. Londres. Reino Unido

141.    Marcela Escribano, Alternatives, Montreal. Canadá

142.    Alberto Arroyo Picard,   Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana. México

143.    Pilar Castilla, Trabajadora de la Educación, G. Alvear, Mza. Argentina

144.    Hildebrando Vélez G. Universidad del Valle. Colombia

145.    Edgardo Lander. Venezuela

146.    Inés Izaguirre, Socióloga, docente e Investigadora, UBA y co-vicepresidenta APDH. Argentina

147.    Rick Arnold. Canadá

148.    José Seoane, Profesor e Investigador Universidad de Buenos Aires y GEAL. Argentina

149.    Miguel Monserrat, Copresidente de la Asamblea Permanente por los Derechos Humanos-APDH. Argentina

150.    Dolores Jarquin. Otro Mundo es Posible. Nicaragua

151.    Alicia Herbón, Secretaria de Educación de la Mesa Directiva de la Asamblea Permanente por los Derechos Humanos.  Buenos Aires. Argentina.

152.    Liliana Seró, Posadas, Misiones. Argentina

153.    Leandro Daniel Barsottelli, Neuquén-Neuquén. Argentina

154.    Alicia Fernández Gómez. Estado Español

155.    María Maneiro, Socióloga. Argentina

156.    Gong-U, Gang, Izquierda Autonomista. Corea del Sur

157.    Katherine Vargas, Universidad Pedagógica Nacional. Colombia

158.    María Laura Ramognino. Argentina

159.    Jorge P. Colmán, Coordinador General, Agencia Popular de Comunicación Suramericana-APCS. Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Perú y Uruguay

160.    Lilia Mabel Sánchez, Buenos Aires, Argentina

161.    Julia Martínez Herrera, Argentina

162.    Reinaldo Ledesma. Sociólogo. Santiago del Estero, Argentina

163.    Atariy Santiago, USC Pueblo Diaguita Cacano. Argentina

164.    Mónica Palferro, USC Pueblo Diaguita Cacano, Miembro del Consejo Educativo Autónomo de Pueblos Indígenas CEAPI, Argentina

165.    Alicia Jardel, Profesora. Bélgica

166.    Mirta Pereira, Asesora FAPI. Paraguay

167.    Natalia Laura Campilongo. Argentina

168.    Chantal Godfroid. Bélgica

169.    Raúl F Lorenzo, Diputado Provincial, Vice Presidente 2° Cámara de Diputados de Santiago del Estero, Miembro de la Mesa Nacional del Movimiento Evita. Argentina

170.    Mauricio Acosta Rangel. Colombia

171.    Camilo Aguilera Toro, Universidad del Valle, Cali. Colombia

172.    Francisco Pérez Esteban, Secretario de Derechos Humanos y Solidaridad de IZQUIERDA UNIDA DE ESPAÑA

Posted in Coup d'état | Comments Off on Coup in Paraguay various authors statement

Coup update

Asuncion, Paraguay, 26.06.2012 03:00h

Ex bishop Fernando Lugo, democratically elected president of Paraguay, was impeached on Friday 22.6.12 and ousted two hours later at 18:30h.
ManifestationThis is a coup d’état directed by the USA supported by Germany, UK and Spain.

The constitution of Paraguay states that an impeached president must be given 18 days to prepare his defence for an impeachment hearing at the senate. Hence the constitution was violated.

The foreign ministers of most South American states left Rio when they heard about the impeachment and headed for Asuncion. They unanimously declared that this is a coup, a new form of institutional coup. By Saturday morning all South American governments, including the right wing government of Chile, had declared that this is a coup and they will not recognize this new government. They withdrew their ambassadors.

In contrast the USA used its Canadian poodle to declare that the new government is legitimate. Spain made a similar statement in Pentagonese – the rest of Europe remains silent as of tonight. Excluded from the “rest of Europe” is Germany of course, their minister for development, Dirk Niebel, arrived in Asuncion hours before the impeachment was announced. He was the first to shake hands with the new dictator, de facto president Federico Franco, and declared that the impeachment was a “normal process in compliance with the constitution”. He offered economic assistance to the full ability of Germany. (meaning that the arms deals that Lugo rejected can now be signed).

We can learn from this that Angela Merkel has a crystal ball that tells when “economic opportunities arise”, it can even predict that the highest court of Paraguay will rule a day later that the constitution can be suspended in an emergency situation that threatens the security of the country. Hence Dirk Niebel used the same words in interviews given to the media (abc.com.py, ultimahora.com.py, etc) that the high court would use a day later.
None of this was reported in Germany or anywhere in Europe – but well covered throughout South America.

Should this ever become an issue in Germany I’m positive Merkel will blame the Paraguayans for not sticking to the protocol as instructed: first you make the court ruling, then you impeach. This will satisfy the informational needs of the German public – and of the rest of Europe.

Before we go into details of why and how the culprits have staged this coup let’s look at some background info about Paraguay:

a. some 400.000 sqkm in size, about 10% larger than Germany. The Paraguay river splits the country into a populated east (40%) and an unpopulated west, the Chaco (60%).

b. population was 6 million in 2008 when president Lugo got elected. Only about 150.000 live in the Chaco. The largest colony there are the Menonites, a pacifistic religious group originating from Germany, some 30.000 settled there in the 1930s. They farm some 500.000 hectares, all organically for religious believes. They enjoy complete autonomy – no taxes, military service or any kind of restrictions. I have based my model for Permaculture Paraguay, a sustainable society to be created, http://infoholix.net/category.php?mId=111 on their form of autonomy.

c. a further 2 million lived in exile in Argentina, Spain and USA. How many of these have returned since is unknown.

d. Paraguay gained its independence from Spain in 1811. The war against the trialliance of Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay followed 1865-70. This reduced the population to one third but Paraguay remained independent. Repopulation added a broad mix of nationalities over the next century. Germans founded Oberneuland, Nuevo Germania, Hagenau, Brits Nuevo Londres, Italians Nuevo Italia, Japanese La Colmena, …. and many more.

Noteworthy is the fact that those Germans running away from Hitler came in the thirties and the wanted Nazies that could not be found anywhere arrived after WWII.

These Europeans and Asians add up to about one million people, the indigenous Guarani are 5 million. Guarani is also the official language and the name of the currency. Guarani means human in Guarani.

e. The dictator Alfredo Stroesser (Austrian origin) and his Colorado party ruled Paraguay ’til 1989. His Colorado party continued to rule ’til 2008 extending the dictatorship to 61 years, the longest in South America.
For ineffable reasons Paraguayans are proud of the fact that their dictatorship was the only one in South America not installed by the USA but supported by Germany.

f. A British style “first past the post” system ensured that 20% of votes are enough to obtain all seats. The remaining parties share the remaining 80%, the Radical Liberals are in second position with 15%.

In 2008 the Radical Liberals and eight further small parties nominated Fernando Lugo, known as the catholic bishop of the poor, as their mutual candidate. Lugo was elected president with 41%. All seats but two, however, were gained by Colorado as the smaller parties did not put up a mutual candidate in constituencies, but each presented its own – a fairly brainless endeavor.

Lugo was inaugurated 15.8.2008 for a five year term. A second term is not permitted by the constitution.

g. On 5.9.2008 the first coup attempt was launched. A leaked document from the US embassy acknowledged the new government in detail. The army stayed loyal to Lugo and the coup was suffocated in a gentlemen like fashion. Vice president Federico Franco was supposed to become the new president, the very same Franco who is de facto president now. Two years later this document was published by Wikileaks, (note: in conjunction with US activities in Ecudor which enabled Correa, the democratically elected president of Ecuador, to squash the coup against him – a possible reason why Assange chose to apply for asylum there).

h. Economy: Py is the world’s 4th largest producer of soy, Genetically Modified soy, controlled by Monsanto. Some 350 oligarchs produce it. They employ private militias amounting to about 20-25,000 men lead by mercenaries from US and UK but also South Americans trained by the School of the Americas in US. In comparison the Py army has 13,000 men and the Policia National 9,000. The Policia National did the dirty work under the dictatorship, the army is fairly clean – most unusual for South America.

i. An average farm has 2,000ha (5,000acres). Estancias start at 20,000ha. Traditionally oligarchs would have a few hundred hectares under fruit and vegetables, the rest is jungle.
Somewhere on that land live peasants growing their own, they provide the man-power for the oligarch’s farming activity. Yields are roughly $200 – $500 per hectare. So oligarchs make plenty of cash and are rich in land. The price for a hectare ranges from $500 to $2,000 depending on location.

Now enter Monsanto and GM-soy. The yield is $6,000/ha and costs for mechanized farming are $3,000/ha, leaving $3,000 to the oligarch. Consequently the entire 20,000ha get put under soy – the fines for deforestation paid with a smile – the peasants are no longer needed and get removed.

Then you expand your growing area: spray your small neighbors with Monsonato’s Round-up. It kills everything, Paraguayans call it “mata todo”. Nothing will grow on this land now but Monsanto’s soy. No fruit, no vegetable, no flower and no bee survives. Peasants become ill, very ill, – miscarriages and birth defects – they abandon their land or sell it cheaply to the oligarch. (soy-hectare now trading at $7,000)

These peasants are called the “sin terras”, the landless. They fill the slums around Asuncion – some 100,000 or so. They elected Lugo who promissed to remedy the situation. (see listings under “Organics” on infoholix.net)

Under capitalistic principles this is all perfectly ok. The owner has the right to grow whatever generates the highest profit. He depreciates the land over 7 to 10 years, the soil is completely ruined by then, not even Monsanto’s soy is viable then. So he needs to retain profits and buy more land – an infinite source. The ecological damage is collateral damage to be paid for by society.

j. Near Mariscal Estigarriba, in the Chaco, in reach of the borders to Bolivia and Argentina is a huge US military base – landing strip for the biggest planes and housing for 16,000 troops.(G W Bush owns 40,000ha next to it) Lugo refused to extend the military cooperation agreement and kicked all US troops out of Py.

Obama needs it now – he can’t wait for the end of Lugo’s term as president in August 2013.
Obama needs it now – that’s the reason for the coup now.

The coup required the cooperation of all senators – those on the payroll of the US, Germany, Spain and UK – 39 out of 45 senators.

I shall detail what Obama needs this base so urgently for now and what the Europeans get out of it. I post updates on my blog: infoholix.net/blog.

On Tuesday: Mercosur meeting in Argentina.
On Wednesday: OAS meeting in Peru.

Lugo will attend both as the ligitimate president of Py. Franco is not invited.

Lugo has put up a website: paraguayresiste.com
– shows a funny video: cutting off power to TV Publica after Lugo made a surprise announcement on this public tv channel,
– the BBC reported 200 demonstrators: try to spot them among the thousands – don’t know how many thousands – there are no official figures – I was there, felt like the same crowd that was at his inauguration which was reported as 250,000.


Posted in Coup d'état | Comments Off on Coup update

Coup d’état

There is a coup d’état in progress which took years to prepare. It’s execution commenced 15th June 2012 and has entered a decisive phase as I write this, the night of 22/23rd June 2012.

There is still a news blackout in US and Europe and the bit that is reported is a distortion of facts that belittles the significance of the event. When it is finally presented in an orchestrated media exercise you will decide what to believe or if it’s worth taking notice of it at all.

How do you make this decision?

For a start let’s look at decision making processes System 1 and 2 as defined by:

Daniel Kahneman, 78, is an Israeli-American psychologist specializing in the psychology of judgment and decision-making as well as behavioral economics. He is currently a senior scholar and emeritus professor at Princeton University. In 2002, Kahneman was awarded the Nobel prize in economics for his work on prospect theory, which helps explain the role biases play in decision-making. In 2011, he published a summary of much of his research in “Thinking, Fast and Slow,”. Below are extracts of an interview that took place in May 2012.

“Psychologists distinguish between a “System 1” and a “System 2,” which control our actions. System 1 represents what we may call intuition. It tirelessly provides us with quick impressions, intentions and feelings. System 2, on the other hand, represents reason, self-control and intelligence.

System 2 is the one who believes that it’s making the decisions. But in reality, most of the time, System 1 is acting on its own, without your being aware of it. It’s System 1 that decides whether you like a person, which thoughts or associations come to mind, and what you feel about something. All of this happens automatically. You can’t help it, and yet you often base your decisions on it.

System 1 can never be switched off. You can’t stop it from doing its thing. System 2, on the other hand, is lazy and only becomes active when necessary. Slow, deliberate thinking is hard work. It consumes chemical resources in the brain, and people usually don’t like that. It’s accompanied by physical arousal, increasing heart rate and blood pressure, activated sweat glands and dilated pupils.

The pupil normally fluctuates in size, mostly depending on incoming light. But, when you give someone a mental task, it widens and remains surprisingly stable — a strange circumstance that proved to be very useful to us. In fact, the pupils reflect the extent of mental effort in an incredibly precise way. I have never done any work in which the measurement is so precise.

Our intuition works very well for the most part. But it’s interesting to examine where it fails.

It depends on the field. In the stock market, for example, the predictions of experts are practically worthless. Anyone who wants to invest money is better off choosing index funds, which simply follow a certain stock index without any intervention of gifted stock pickers. Year after year, they perform better than 80 percent of the investment funds managed by highly paid specialists. Nevertheless, intuitively, we want to invest our money with somebody who appears to understand, even though the statistical evidence is plain that they are very unlikely to do so. Of course, there are fields in which expertise exists. This depends on two things: whether the domain is inherently predictable, and whether the expert has had sufficient experience to learn the regularities. The world of stock is inherently unpredictable.

A computer will be just as unreliable at predicting stock prices as a human being. And the political situation in 20 years is probably completely unpredictable; the world is simply too complex. However, computer models are good where things are relatively regular. Human judgment is easily influenced by circumstances and moods: Give a radiologist the same X-ray twice, and he’ll often interpret it differently the second time. But with an algorithm, if you give it the same information twice, it will turn out the same answer twice.

The entertainment industry wastes a lot of money on films that don’t work. It shouldn’t be that difficult to develop a program that at least doesn’t do any worse than the intuitive judgments that govern these decisions now.

So-called “evidence-based medicine” is making progress, and it’s based on clear, replicable algorithms. Or take the oil industry. There are strict procedures on deciding whether or not to drill in a specific location. They have a set of questions that they ask, and then they measure. Relying on intuition would be far too error-prone. After all, the risks are high, and there is a lot of money at stake”.

Now you may test your decision making process. This is a summary of a news report taken from my book “2012/20 Capitalism Endgame”:

ITV and BBC report identically: “G4B announced today that one of their drones has executed a surgically clean strike on an Undesirable Element in Aberystwyth, Wales”

You already know that G4B stands for Great for Britain, the world’s largest socio-polit-eco-entity that employs over half the British working population. G4B provides global security in over 150 countries and British-associated territories,
it’s polit devision provides competent ministers, electable parliamentarians and educated voters, it’s financial devision currency and banking systems, – also legal, social and medical systems, – whatever a democracy needs, G4B is the world leading provider.

An independent journalist investigates the Aberystwyth event. He finds that the Undesirable Element, UE, was part of a wedding party of a hundred people or so that also got killed.

The spokes person for G4B points out that the drone surveillance and strike system is driven by impeccable software that identifies UEs and eliminates them at very low cost, a huge saving to the tax payer. One wedding party is an acceptable mortality rate in over 10,000 drone operations per year, far less casualties than caused by traffic accidents, medical malpractice, child starvation and other systems not operated by G4B.

The Prime Minister, nevertheless, orders a parliamentary enquiry as further evidence indicates that there were possibly more UEs and sympathisers in the party in question. The G4B incidence investigation unit is to examine the event, the G4B court to judge, and the G4B appointed chair of the pe to announce the verdict. As the event took place in Wales a Quango has to be formed consisting of no more than fifty members whose remunerations shall be limited to no more than three times a prime minister’s salary. The usual friends and family members of ministers shall be appointed to the Quango.

So how do you react to this piece of news?
Do you apply System 1 or 2?

Is it a matter of collective consciousness that makes us react in the same way – not all of us, but many or most?

Do you really want to know what coup d’état against what democratically elected government is going on at the moment, and which of the democratic state or states you are living in is staging it in your name?

If your answer is yes send me an email to wihaceha at yahoo dot com and I’ll provide you with details not found in any media.

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on Coup d’état

Euro notes with mint sauce Part 7

Let’s take a look at the correlations of government debt, banks and capitalism.

For this purpose I extract from my ebook “2012/20 Capitalism Endgame” which you can order by sending me an email to wihaceha@yahoo.com.
The price is $12.20 or $20.12 or the same figure in any currency.

Here we go:

Governments create debt because they spend more than they receive in taxes. Then all apply the same debt financing mechanism:

The Central Bank lends to commercial banks at 1% interest and these lend to governments at 5% or more. The ECB provided a trillion € for that purpose in November 2011 and March 2012.

This system makes the banks rich without having to do anything. The tax payer pays the interest. Rating agencies determine the credibility of governments which in turn determines the interest rate. Naturally bank deposits of the oligarchy benefit in the same way.

Nobody questions the validity of this system – our collective consciousness does not question it.

When we create awareness we may begin to doubt – and change our collective consciousness.

In that case we’ll create a system that looks like this:

a. The Central Banks lend to commercial banks at 1%.

b. Commercial banks lend to governments at -1%. That’s minus 1%, a negative interest rate that reduces the principal over time to zero.

c. Commercial banks borrow further funds from the Central Banks at 1%, at a ratio of 3 to 1, the Borrowing Ratio, BR. These funds are to be used as loans to commerce, industry and private individuals. A BR of 3 to 1 means 3 to commerce and industry for profit in relation to 1 for the government.

d. Through the BR the Central Banks control the money volume, the money supply, and increase or decrease as the economy requires.

e. Governments no longer pay interest or repay loans – i.e. the tax payer, his children and grand children no longer inherit debts.

f. There is no longer any need for raising taxes at all, neither from the worker nor from the oligarch. Hence all incomes rise and costs for all products and services decline.

g. The flawed concept of “growth” is eliminated as you don’t need inflation to reduce debts.

h. Naturally you have tamed capitalism. Governments no longer need the capital of the capitalist, as a matter of fact nobody needs it. The capital of the oligarch is now in competition to the capital provided by the central bank. The commercial bank will accept deposits at a lower interest rate than that of the central bank only. Hence this capital can only be used to provide commercial loans – it’s original purpose, as all the “financial products” that have caused the world’s financial crisis have been abolished.

i. The oligarch can’t even get rid of his capital through paying taxes – there are no taxes. Donations to governments will be possible, some might even accept donations and reduce borrowing at the “non-hurting” negative interest rate. In that case the Central Bank will have to change BR, adjust interest rates.

j. In essence you need one currency only called money. Different currencies managed through different systems will always become the pray of capitalism as history has shown over and over again.

The above also illustrates the system of Permaculture Paraguay.

Now back to Greece:

As we are not starting from scratch but encounter a situation where a heap of debt has been created that serves the interest of capitalism we need to create an intermediary tool, “Debt Parking and Reduction, DPR”. All debt gets transfered to DPR then dealt with as above. This enables all creditors to write off loans in a slow and compensatable manner.

So how do we tame and abolish capitalism and replace with a sytem that benefits all?

The media and all tools that could encourage a thought process are firmly in the hands of capitalism. Hence the path of argumentation, common sense and logic is not available. Access to our collective consciousness resulting in a change of the way we think and how we perceive the world is possible.

We already experience movements like Occupy and political parties like the Pirates. They all know instinctively that something is wrong, that the world needs to be changed. They may not be able to articulate what is wrong and offer alternatives, but they demonstrate that a change of collective consciousness is happening.

In Part 6 I pointed to Amma, the Hugging Saint, and the connected IAVH and Elizabeth Joyce.  As Amma said “Give me a thousand people and we’ll change the collective consciousness of this world”. You could become one of these thousand, then teach thousands more. The next course is in Doylestown, PA, 16-17 June 2012.

Posted in World Economy + Health | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Euro notes with mint sauce Part 7

Euro notes with mint sauce Part 6

The European Union has a population of some 504 million including 11 million Greek.

The EU has a labor force of some 230 million including 5 million Greek.

The EU has some 14,000 € billion debt including 300 € billion Greek debt.

Given those figures one should think that the 98% are always able to support the 2%.
One should assume that the collective consciousness of a decent and humane society such as the European society would express an unequivocal desire to help the 2% in need of help.

So why are these 2% in need of help?

Greece was governed by a military junta from 1967 to 1974, a junta by the grace of the US.
The US provided unlimited credit. Greece was a country of milk and honey for those who collaborated with the junta. The junta created highly paid jobs in public services. These salaries did not have to be paid from tax revenue as the US paid the bill, a minute fraction of the cost of war in Vietnam.

An oligarchy was generated and rewarded with business licenses, valuable licenses that established closed shop professions with high incomes. When Greece returned to democracy these licenses remained as the foundations of the economy. They can be inherited and traded. For example a taxi license can cost 100,000€ upwards and a truck license 250,000€. Some 140 industry sections are licensed, resulting in an economy that cannot compete and scares off any investor.

The oligarchy established two political parties whose interest was to maintain the status quo, the previously enjoyed privileges. A two party system reminiscent of the systems in all so-called democracies that embrace capitalism. The electorate chooses from two sides of the same coin, the coin is capitalism cloaked as democracy.

This system came to an end in Greece that literally wiped out the two established parties with the elections last week and will be reiterated in the elections in June. The then government will inherit a country with a work force of five million of which above one million is unemployed, above two million drawing public service salaries and less than two million whose tax burden is supposed to pay for all these. On top of all this these less than two million also need to pay close to three million pensions.

It goes without saying that the oligarchy does not pay taxes, this is no different to any other capitalistic country. If threatened by taxes the shipping companies would register under Liberian flags and the oligarchs change residency to offshore islands.

It is estimated that the Greek oligarchs have some 600€ billion of assets out of reach of the future Greek government, this amounts to twice the Greek debt. These billions are deposited with Goldman Sachs and other big banks which in turn buy Greek bonds which yield high interest rates. From an oligarch’s point of view this makes more sense than paying taxes which eliminate the need for Greece to borrow. No government debt means nowhere to invest these tax free billions – governments are the only secure takers of these vast amounts.

Draining a country and enslaving it in debt by feeding the syphoned off capital back into it is a principle of capitalism.

About the principle of the so-called “bailout of Greece”:

The EU pays off loans from banks that Greece is not able to service. This ensures that Greece does not go bankrupt and the banks don’t loose out. The population of Greece does not see a penny of this.

In return for not seeing a penny the population guarantees to repay the remaining 200 € billion of debt. This is supposed to be achieved through “austerity”.

When these conditions were agreed by all benefitting parties (IMF, banks and politicians) they were based on these figures for 2012:

Greece will have a trade deficit of around 30 € billion assuming 40€bn exports and 70€bn imports. About 80% of food is imported hence an appropriate credit line is imperative to prevent starvation.

The government can expect tax revenue of 90€bn at best and expenditure trimmed down to 110€bn or 120€bn if austerity measures are not implemented quick enough. The budget deficit of 20 to 30€bn to be financed through selling state assets estimated to be worth 50€bn. (Note: 1.6€bn have been sold in the past two years and the rest are non competitive entities that nobody has bid a penny for yet).

How Greece should be able to service 200€bn of debt based on those figures remains the secret of the “experts”. These appear to favor shifting a million people from the account “public service salaries” to “unemployment benefits” – then reducing the latter. Populists are of the opinion that the public sector could be reduced by 90% as these are not doing any work anyway and obtained their positions as political favors. A voluntary euthanasia program for pensioners has not been suggested, yet.

No matter what ingenious account shifting you apply you do not change a society that cannot sustain itself to a sustainable one. Hence we go back to square one, what does it take for the affluent 98% to support the less fortunate 2%?

We may look at this issue from a more global perspective:

In 2011 the world economy amounted to $70 trillion, the proportion of the real economy producing goods and services that form the basis for taxation at an average rate of 40 to 50 percent.

The financial service industry amounted to $7,004 trillion (seven thousand and four), this is not taxed. A mathematical genious may be found who can work out what tax rate would be required to replace the taxes imposed on the real economy.

The paradigm of capitalism dictates that any such attempt is blasphemy, persued by those who do not love Israel, the US, EU, Goldman Sachs and all those righteous politicians that have the interests of the public at heart, persued by despicable creatures that need to be labelled “liberal, leftwing and radical” so that the public understands that these are terrorists, economic terrorists.

This paradigm is deeply enshrined in the consciousness of each and every individual creating a collective consciousness. We firmly believe that there is no alternative to taxing the individual who cannot avoid being taxed and letting the oligarch off the hook. We firmly believe that capitalism is a philosophy that complies with nature of man. We love to be capitalists. We love the energies derived from capitalism.

Collective consciousness is subject to change – or is it not?
When energies change consciousness changes.

Amma, the Hugging Saint (amma.org), once said “give me a thousand people and we’ll change the collective consciousness of the world”.

I quote from iavh.net:
“Elizabeth Joyce did not “invent nor create” the information contained within the IAVH teachings and books. The information is translated verbatim from its source, the Universal consciousness, and this energetic information was placed in her body by Ammachi, the Hugging Saint. Elizabeth publicly teaches precisely what she has been given and taught.”
The next IAVH seminar with Elizabeth Joyce is in Doylestown, PA, June 16-17. Seminars in Europe will be held at Amma Centres in autum.

Greece is the cradle of democracy, true democracy, something that none of us has experienced, yet. Current events in Greece may well lead us to experience true democracy, some kind of divine providence seems to have chosen Greece.

In the meantime we have the pleasure to listen to Dave Cameron, prime minister of the UK by grace of the Great British Public, shouting “mint sauce” at Greece, the EU and the Euro. He would certainly benefit from Amma’s energy.

Posted in World Economy + Health | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Euro notes with mint sauce Part 6