Entries this day: Dream Plan_for_today report-from-the-zapatista-international-encounter where-were-you-that-summer-of-2001

Dream

1:34pm JST Monday 26 February 2007 (day 13487)

One of my students started talking to another teacher during our scheduled lesson. At first I wasn't worried, but then it went on, and when I looked over, they were protecting me (and anyone else) from listening in, though I noted they were talking about gang violence with guns and such. As in they were in a gang about to perform such violence.

I grabbed the guy into the center of the room and called him on it; basically told him I don't care who he talks to, but I need to know if he expects to talk to me again; a little courtesy would be courteous.

He apologized and then I sent him away, but he was hesitant to go; slow at collecting his stuff, and then wanted to take a "shower" in the sink, and then something else, and I was like, "you're just wasting time," and he started to come on to me sexually, and I was like, "I'm going to start punching you,"

and I woke myself up when I jerked my fist to punch him.

Plan for today

1:11pm JST Monday 26 February 2007 (day 13487)

After reading how to use Subversion for backup, I am headed to work; I'm debating bringing my computer. Thinking no at first, but now thinking yes.

Juno will join my men's group today; we are having an open meeting.

report from the zapatista international encounter

##23:07 Monday 26 February 2007

hello all...

It has been quite some time since I sent out a report from my time here in Chiapas. I have been working with Frayba, a human rights organization that sends internationals into Zapatista and other indigenous communities to do peace observing work, documenting any threats or actions against the communities by paramilitaries as well as any movement by the Mexican military. It has been an incredible experience and I am hoping to spend two more weeks in a community before I begin the long road home. I was also fortunate to be able to atten the International Zapatista Encounter that was held at the beginning of this month. I have included my report back from that event below. In the middle of February I will be returning to Oaxaca briefly to say goodbye to some folks and learning about the latest developments in the struggle. I will then be back in the Northwest for a couple weeks before flying to Sweden.

I am hoping to do at least one public slide show report back in Olympia in early March. If anyone would like to help out in coordinating or publicizing that event or if anyone has further ideas of opportunities for me to share stories from the Oaxaca struggle, please let me know. Although Even though the movement has been in hiding and happening behind the scenes now due to the severe governmental repression, I have truly been re-energized by the people of Oaxaca and want to share that with my limited time in the states. The creativity and diversity of tactics, widespread nature of the mobilization and the creation of an alternative governing structure are incredibly inspiring not to mention Oaxaca needs the eyes and solidarity work of the international community now as much as ever.

As my trip is wrapping up I want to thank you all for listening to stories from my travels and from all the exciting movement building going on here in Mexico.

with love... rochelle

Unbreakable Dignity: Report from the Zapatista International Encounter

Prior to the Zapatista uprising, for generations, the 700,000 indigenous people of Chiapas have lived in oblivion. From the perspective of the global economy, being neither large consumers or producers, they have been ignored and simply in the way. The endless appetite of the global economy has resulted in, according to Subcomandante Marcos (leader of the Zapatista Army), "the destruction of our land, our culture, our collective way of working, the destruction of our women, the lack of appreciation for our elders, and the merchandising of our youth. All of this, including the lack of maintenance of our educational system and the social security system is for the benefit of the grand capital extranjero [foreigner]." On New Years Day 1994, the first day NAFTA took effect, the Zapatista National Liberation Army rose up and took over municipalities throughout Chiapas, birthing a movement which today continues not only to resist the theft of their resources but is also creating alternative autonomous governing bodies, schools, clinics, cooperatives and means of communication. On December 29th to January 2nd the Zapatistas invited internationals from around the world to come together for an Encounter between the Zapatistas and the people of the World. The invitation stated "At this encounter the Zapatista communities will speak on the experiences we have had these past years with our autonomous governments; the challenges and problems that we have faced constructing this anti-capitalist project and we will try to, with humility and respect, to respond, speak and exchange, and above all, share our errors and stumbling, and also our modest achievements."

Haves and the Have Nots

The gathering took place in Oventic, one of the five caracoles (municipal seats) of the 32 Zapatista municipalities. On the way to the gathering, driving through the rural villages one can clearly see that very little money is making it to these communities. Federal and state government policies have benefited the foreign investors that exploit resource rich Chiapas and in turn line the pockets of the politicians and Mexican elite. With this setup, the indigenous people are losing land and many have been forced to migrate to the North, relocate to the urban centers or work on large agribusiness farms to provide low wage labor. Racism from the government is also clearly at work in Chiapas as shown in the poverty statistics. In a community where the indigenous population is less than 10 percent, 18 percent of the people are at or below the poverty line; for municipalities where the indigenous population is between 10 and 40 percent, 46 percent of the people are poor; and for those where the indigenous make up more than 70 percent of the population, over 80 percent are poor. The majority of the Zapatistas are Mayan Indians who live in wood slat and mud houses with dirt floors and do not have running water even though Chiapas provides close to 90% of the water consumed by the rest of Mexico.

Encounter Begins

Recognizing the reality most of the Zapatistas live in it is clear where the fuel came from to ignite this struggle, and yet with access to so few resources it is hard to imagine what alternatives they could be capable of creating. On the first day of the encounter thousands of Zapatistas who attended the conference set up stick structures covered in black plastic sheeting to sleep in for the duration of the encounter. In sharp contrast, the 2,000 internationals from 44 countries began to set up fancy tents. The structure of the encounter included a series of workshops providing updates on the progress of the autonomous governments, schools, health care systems, and cooperatives in each caracoles as well as the struggles for land and for equality for women. I could feel such strong unity and pride in the Zapatistas who attended the encounter and it was an incredible experience to sit with them as the leaders they selected laid out their accomplishments throughout the workshops.

The tactics of the Zapatistas have been extremely diverse throughout the thirteen year struggle from the initial armed uprising and government negotiations to the creation of the autonomous communities. The Mexican government response has been fairly consistent and limited to the use of force and intimidation mixed with rhetoric and promises never fulfilled. Even within this climate, much has been accomplished as in achieving autonomy as highlighted by the workshops. As one of the representatives explained "Because we can not change the world we struggle so that the world will not change us." Reports from three of the workshops are included below.

Autonomous Education

From the internationally recognized health clinics to the primary and secondary schools, many of the communities are receiving services they never received from the government, often with support of NGOs and internationals. The Zapatista educational promoters, who are chosen by their communities to develop schools and train teachers from within the community, explained that the government schools their children used to attend were staffed mostly by teachers from the city who spoke only Spanish. "The government schools discriminated against the indigenous culture, language and traditions of our youth. They did not respond to our realities in the villages. They prepared our kids for the city, not to stay in our communities." Many parents decided to pull their students out of the government schools with the hopes of creating autonomous schools that "teach liberation, not domination" and "the value of being not having." Schools have been constructed in all five of the caracoles and many recently celebrated the graduation of their first class. Although the teachers are not paid the community provides them with food. Each region also expressed a lack of resources to train future promoters and to build new schools. Their eyes lit up as they shared the largest dream of one day establishing an autonomous university.

Autonomous Governments

The representatives of the caracoles are selected through their community for a three year term. They can not run again to give all opportunity for leadership and to prevent people from becoming disconnected from the community and power hungry. They too do not receive payment but the community also provides them with food. Initially when the government councils were first created they were male dominated but today there are 6 women and 7 men. Although clearly they have the capacity to govern themselves, the representatives explained that they have faced many challenges with few resources and villages with great need. The leaders stressed the huge contrast between themselves and the bad governments, those who run the state and country. For example, unlike the corrupt justice system throughout Mexico, the caracol representatives deal with conflicts by first attempting to find a solution through dialogue and compromise and if no compromise is reached the one who is found wrong must complete work to benefit the community, like the construction of a bridge. Repeatedly the representatives stressed that they "lead by obeying" and "propose not impose" with "humility and no self promotion."

Struggle for Land

Due to armed uprising in 1994 many wealthy landowners abandoned their land. The Zapatistas have reclaimed much of this land to work collectively to sustain their communities. "The land belong to those who work it" and "to sell the land, would be to sell our mother." Each region faces different struggles over land. The threat of losing land remains strong and paramilitary activity continues with intimidation and even the murder of Zapatista community members. Currently in the Aguazul region the government is attempting to force a Zapatista community off the land by the creation of an ecotourist destination, which will also allow the government to exploit water reserves and other resources. Also the implementation of neoliberal programs by the government, such as PROCEDE, also work to destroy the possibility of collectively worked lands. "Today we are living a global offense of exploitation, of being kicked off our lands, and of a development of politics that will destroy us. The only way to confront this is by struggling for the impossible, or in other words, the necessary," explains Sergio Rodriguez from the Zapatista Rebeldía magazine. The lands that they have recuperated are farmed organically without the use of genetically modified seed. Agro-ecology promoters have recently been selected to educate themselves and then their community on sustainability practices.

Life of Resistance

On January 1st at close to 2a.m. in the morning, Subcomandante Marcos and many members of the Zapatista National Liberation Army arrived to celebrate the thirteenth anniversary of the rebellion. The cultural event lasted for hours with music and dance. In the indigenous language of Tzotzil, Marcos stated "What we have learned on the road of our struggle is that we could not win unless we united with the people who struggle everywhere." The Zapatistas need the support of internationals to achieve their goals in the face of an system that continuously tries to eliminate them. As they establish stronger and stronger concrete alternatives their threat to the system grows. The eyes of internationals are critical in preventing the human rights abuses the Mexican government is notorious for. We have a long way to go to cross the cultural barriers necessary to provide the ultimate solidarity but on the last night looking through the mist out on to the basketball court where thousands of internationals and Zapatistas were dancing together to traditional music, it felt possible. As I watched the dancers, many in their early twenties, I realized that the rebellion began for many of these Zapatistas when they were less than ten years old, they have truly lived a life of resistance. Throughout the length of the encounter I was struck by their humble spirit mixed with the depth of their accomplishments, not only the autonomous governments, schools, clinics, radio stations, coffee and craft collectives but also the incredible wealth of beauty in their vision and their unity.

where were you that summer of 2001

##23:04 Monday 26 February 2007

This is the kind of info that was floating around before the war in Iraq that everyone ignored and/or discounted, yet now wished they had not.  This article is damn well-documented too.  if you doubt what he is saying, just click on the links to go directly to the whitehouse website with the quotes he is referencing.  Every American in the country should be _required_ to read this.  People who still have Bush/Cheney'04 stickers on their cars should be forced to read this until it sinks in. here's the teaser...

**This is why the entire debate about the Iraq "surge" is as much a sideshow as Britney's scalp. More troops in Baghdad are irrelevant to what's going down in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The surge supporters who accuse the Iraq war's critics of emboldening the enemy are trying to deflect attention from their own complicity in losing a bigger battle: the one against the enemy that actually did attack us on 9/11. Who lost Iraq? is but a distraction from the more damning question, Who is losing the war on terrorism? **

Here is the whole thing...

https://select.nytimes.com/2007/02/25/opinion/25rich.html

February 25, 2007

Op-Ed Columnist

Where Were You That Summer of 2001?

By FRANK RICH

"UNITED 93," Hollywood's highly praised but indifferently attended 9/11 docudrama, will be only a blip on tonight's Oscar telecast. The ratings rise of "24" has stalled as audiences defect from the downer of terrorists to the supernatural uplift of "Heroes." Cable surfers have tuned out Iraq for a war with laughs: the battle over Anna Nicole's decomposing corpse . Set this cultural backdrop against last week's terrifying but little-heeded front-page Times account of American "intelligence and counterterrorism officials" leaking urgent warnings about Al Qaeda's comeback, and ask yourself: Haven't we been here before?

If so, that would be the summer of 2001, when America pigged out on a 24/7 buffet of Gary Condit and shark attacks . The intelligence and counterterrorism officials back then were privately sounding urgent warnings like those in last week's Times, culminating in the President's Daily Brief titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S ." The system "was blinking red," as the C.I.A. chief George Tenet would later tell the 9/11 commission. But no one, from the White House on down, wanted to hear it.

The White House doesn't want to hear it now, either. That's why terrorism experts are trying to get its attention by going public, and not just through The Times. Michael Scheuer, the former head of the C.I.A. bin Laden unit, told MSNBC's Keith Olbermann last week that the Taliban and Al Qaeda, having regrouped in Afghanistan and Pakistan, "are going to detonate a nuclear device inside the United States" (the real United States, that is, not the fictional stand-in where this same scenario can be found on "24"). Al Qaeda is "on the march" rather than on the run, the Georgetown University and West Point terrorism expert Bruce Hoffman told Congress. Tony Blair is pulling troops out of Iraq not because Basra is calm enough to be entrusted to Iraqi forces — it's "not ready for transition," according to the Pentagon's last report — but to shift some British resources to the losing battle against the resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan.

This is why the entire debate about the Iraq "surge" is as much a sideshow as Britney's scalp. More troops in Baghdad are irrelevant to what's going down in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The surge supporters who accuse the Iraq war's critics of emboldening the enemy are trying to deflect attention from their own complicity in losing a bigger battle: the one against the enemy that actually did attack us on 9/11. Who lost Iraq? is but a distraction from the more damning question, Who is losing the war on terrorism?

The record so far suggests that this White House has done so twice. The first defeat, of course, began in early December 2001, when we lost Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora . The public would not learn about that failure until April 2002 (when it was uncovered by The Washington Post), but it's revealing that the administration started its bait-and-switch trick to relocate the enemy in Iraq just as bin Laden slipped away. It was on Dec. 9, 2001, that Dick Cheney first floated the idea on "Meet the Press" that Saddam had something to do with 9/11 . It was "pretty well confirmed," he said (though it was not), that bin Laden's operative Mohamed Atta had met with an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague months before Atta flew a hijacked plane into the World Trade Center.

In the Scooter Libby trial, Mr. Cheney's former communications aide, Catherine Martin, said that delivering a message on "Meet the Press" was " a tactic we often used." No kidding. That mention of the nonexistent Prague meeting was the first of five times that the vice president would imply an Iraq-Qaeda collaboration on that NBC show before the war began in March 2003. This bogus innuendo was an essential tool for selling the war precisely because we had lost bin Laden in Afghanistan. If we could fight Al Qaeda by going to war in Iraq instead, the administration could claim it didn't matter where bin Laden was. (Mr. Bush pointedly stopped mentioning him altogether in public.)

The president now says his government never hyped any 9/11-Iraq links. "Nobody has ever suggested that the attacks of September the 11th were ordered by Iraq," he said last August after finally conceding that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. In fact everyone in the administration insinuated it constantly, including him. Mr. Bush told of "high-level" Iraq-Qaeda contacts "that go back a decade" in the same notorious October 2002 speech that gave us Saddam's imminent mushroom clouds. So effective was this propaganda that by 2003 some 44 percent of Americans believed (incorrectly) that the 9/11 hijackers had been Iraqis; only 3 percent had seen an Iraq link right after 9/11.

Though the nonexistent connection was even more specious than the nonexistent nuclear W.M.D., Mr. Bush still leans on it today even while denying that he does so. He has to. His litanies that we are "on the offense" by pursuing the war in Iraq and "fighting terrorists over there, so that we don't have to fight them here" depend on the premise that we went into that country in the first place to vanquish Al Qaeda and that it is still the "central front" in the war on terror. In January's State of the Union address hawking the so-called surge, Mr. Bush did it again, warning that to leave Iraq "would be to ignore the lessons of September the 11th and invite tragedy."

But now more than ever, the opposite is true. It is precisely by pouring still more of our finite military and intelligence resources down the drain in Iraq that we are tragically ignoring the lessons of 9/11. Instead of showing resolve, as Mr. Bush supposes, his botch of the Iraq war has revealed American weakness. Our catastrophic occupation spawned terrorists in a country where they didn't used to be, and to pretend that Iraq is now their central front only adds to the disaster. As Mr. Scheuer, the former C.I.A. official, reiterated last week: "Al Qaeda is in Afghanistan and Pakistan. If you want to address the threat to America, that's where it is." It's typical of Mr. Bush's self-righteousness, however, that he would rather punt on that threat than own up to a mistake.

That mistake — dropping the ball on Al Qaeda — was compounded last fall when Mr. Bush committed his second major blunder in the war on terror. The occasion was the September revelation that our supposed ally, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, president of Pakistan, had negotiated a "truce" with the Taliban in North Waziristan, a tribal region in his country at the Afghanistan border. This truce was actually a retreat by Pakistan, which even released Qaeda prisoners in its custody. Yet the Bush White House denied any of this was happening. "This deal is not at all with the Taliban," the president said, claiming that "this is against the Taliban, actually." When Dana Priest and Ann Scott Tyson of The Washington Post reported that same month that the bin Laden trail was "stone cold" and had been since Mr. Bush diverted special operations troops from that hunt to Iraq in 2003, the White House branded the story flat wrong. "We're on the hunt," Mr. Bush said . "We'll get him."

Far from getting him or any of his top operatives dead or alive, the president has sat idly by, showering praise on General Musharraf while Taliban attacks from Pakistan into Afghanistan have increased threefold . As The Times reported last week, now both bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, are believed to be "steadily building an operations hub" in North Waziristan. We know that last year's London plot to bomb airliners, like the bus-and-subway bombings of 2005, was not just the work of home-grown jihadists in Britain, but also of Qaeda operatives. Some of the would-be bombers were trained in Qaeda's Pakistan camps much as their 9/11 predecessors had been trained in Afghanistan.

All of this was already going on when Mr. Bush said just before the election that " absolutely, we're winning" and that "Al Qaeda is on the run." What's changed in the few months since his lie is that even more American troops are tied down in Iraq, that even more lethal weapons are being used against them, that even more of the coalition of the unwilling are fleeing, and that even more Americans are tuning out both the administration and the war they voted down in November to savor a referendum that at least offers tangible results, "American Idol."

Yet Mr. Bush still denies reality. Ten days ago he told the American Enterprise Institute that "the Taliban have been driven from power" and proposed that America help stabilize the Pakistan border by setting up "Reconstruction Opportunity Zones" (remember that " Gulf Opportunity Zone" he promised after Katrina?) to "give residents the chance to export locally made products to the United States, duty-free." In other words, let's fight terrorism not by shifting America's focus from Iraq to the central front, but by shopping for Taliban souvenirs!

Five years after 9/11, the terrorists would seem to have us just where they want us — asleep — even as the system is blinking red once again.