Monday, September 9, 2024
Home Blog Page 232

Concern at UN for slow probe into Berta Cáceres asesination

by the El Reportero’s wire servises

UN Special Rapporteur for the situation of human-rights activists, Michel Forst, expressed concern today about the little progress in the investigations into the assassination of Honduran leader Berta Cáceres.

In a communique, the expert reacted to the recent announcement of the disappearance of the original file of the case of the activist of the environment, the rights of indigenous people and countryside workers, assassinated in March, this year, in the Central American country.

The theft of the file is a proof of the vulnerability of the Honduran legal system and in that reference, shows the problem of law that perpetuates impunity in Honduras: incapacity or lack of will from the authorities to investigate and punish for serious violations of human rights, he warned.

Russia strengthens trade ties with Latin America

Despite the economic crisis due to the fall of the raw materials prices, including oil, Russia conducts a gradual strengthening of trade links with Latin America.
Sergei Nosov, deputy director of the Asia, Africa and Latin America Office at the Russian Ministry of Economic Development, said that Russia expects a rise in commercial links with Latin America in 2017.

Sergei Nosov stated that in 2015 began a fall in prices due to the effects of the crisis, after reaching USD 70 billion in trade in 2013.

Brazil, Mexico, Ecuador, Argentina and Paraguay represent 74 percent of the total volume of trade between Russia and Latin America, Nosov said.

At the same time, Brazil, Mexico, Peru, Venezuela and Ecuador are the Latin American countries with higher imports from Russia, while again Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Argentina and Chile record the highest number of exports to Russia.

The main Russian exports to Latin America include fertilizers (39 percent) and metals (17), while the main imports from Latin America include meat products (28 percent) and fruits (17).

Colombian president wins the Nobel peace prize

The Colombian president, Juan Manuel Santos, has won the Nobel peace prize for his work on a peace deal that was voted down in a referendum this week.

Santos and the leader of the Farc rebel group, Rodrigo Londoño, known as Timochenko, were both considered leading contenders for the prize after signing the peace deal last month to end 52 years of war.

But their chances seemed to have been dealt a fatal blow by the referendum last Sunday in which a narrow majority of 50.2 to 49.8 – a difference of fewer than 54,000 votes out of almost 13m cast – rejected the plan.

The Norwegian Nobel committee said it hoped the prize would encourage all parties to continue working towards peace.

Green Party came to SF to campaign and to support District 11 candidate Francisco Herrera

Compiled by El Reportero’s staff

The Green Party President candidate Jill Stein came to SF to support candidacy for Francisco Herrera for Supervisor for District 11. The event took take place at The Chapel 777 Valencia, SF, on Oct. 6.

ZOPPÉ – an Italian Family Circus

The Zoppé Circus brings an all new show for its 9th year to Redwood City, called  “Ricominciare” (ree-koh-min-CHAR-ay) meaning recommence, begin again and restart. This fresh new show will host an amazing lineup of performers featuring La Tarumba Equestrians who fuse Circus with Theatre, Music and the Equestrian arts.

Additionally, 5th Generation Circus performer Denisse Santos from Mexico brings an exciting flying trapeze show to the tent, while Ring Master Raoul Gomiero from Italy pulls the audience into the emotions of the show for an exciting new wild ride this year while juggler Liam Halstead wows the audience with his amazing feats.

Oct. 7-23, 2016, Matinee & Evening Showtimes, at the beautiful Red Morton Park in Redwood City. Tickets and info at: http://www.redwoodcity.org/zoppe

East Oakland organization shines spotlight on multigenerational leadership

Communities United for Restorative Youth Justice (CURYJ) is pleased to announce the winners of the first ever Courage Awards. The Courage Awards honors leaders in the community that have made vital contributions towards justice for systems impacted youth and their families. The four awards are named in honor of elders and ancestors who have left behind a legacy of movement building and healing in their field.

2016 Courage Award Winners

Robert Castro to receive the Jimmy Simmons & Chuy Ortiz Spiritual Warrior Award in recognition of his commitment to healing individuals and communities who have experienced the most harm and offering spiritual leadership as guidance in movement building.

Dignidad Rebelde to receive the Piri Thomas & Suzie Dod Thomas Cultural Activist Award in recognition of their commitment to using their art towards cultural activism and movement building.

Mireya Smith-Mojica and Juan “Oso” Cervantes to receive the Betita Martinez Young Warrior Rising Award in recognition of their personal accomplishments and their leadership and determination to inspire their peers and surrounding community to fight for the rights of young people.
 
Arthur “Tha” League to receive the Ronald Elder Freeman Freedom Award in recognition of his life-long commitment to movement building in the Black Liberation struggle and the empowerment of formerly incarcerated people.

The Courage Awards will be held on Oct. 13, 2016 at 5:30 p.m. in the Snow Building, at the Oakland Zoo. Tickets are available online or by calling Tamaya Garcia at (510) 842-9365 x709.

Heritage from Chinese province of Guizhou exhibited in Mexico

by the El Reportero’s news services

Embroidered dresses, silver jewelry, wooden masks and designs on paper cut will be enjoyed in the exhibition Memorias de las Manos. Esplendor y colorido del patrimonio from Guizhou, opened today in Mexico City.

The exhibition gathers more than 100 objects from the Guizhou province, located on the plateau of Yunnan-Guizhou, in southwestern China, where 17 out of the 55 ethnic minorities are settled, including the Miao, Dong, Yi, Shui and Bouyei.

Curator Silvia Seligson said that the exhibition seeks to show the treasures of the work done by these communities that work with skillful hands and create artworks full of symbols, instead of sole crafts.

This exhibition is included in the celebrations for the Year of Cultural Exchange China-Latin America and the Caribbean.

As it is such a large collection the exhibition will be split and two months later the artworks will be changed.

There will be another exhibition at the Antiguo Colegio de San Ildefonso, called Obras maestras del Museo Nacional de Arte de China.

Juan Gabriel will be honored by big-name artists en los “Latin American Music Awards

Ecuador will host in October the 3rd Meeting of Historians of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of our America (ALBA) on the historic role of Afrodescendants in the construction of American States as a central topic.

In the event, to be held in this capital under the slogan: Diaspore, Culture and Conformation of the American States from the Africanity, will be attended by representatives of 24 countries, 12 in quality of official delegates and the same number as guests, indicated a press release published by the Ministry of Culture and Heritage.

The meeting will promote spaces of international dialogue on the importance of afrodescendants and the institutionalization of the International Decade of Afrodescendants 2015-2024 in Latin America.

According to the information, the objective of the forum is to contribute to generate public policies of affirmative action for the recognition, justice and development.

The Third Meeting of ALBA Historians in Quito as a commitment of the Ecuadorian government assumed during the 6th Meeting of High Authorities of Culture of ALBA countries, held in September 2015 in Havana.

In that meeting, the Minister of Culture and Heritage of Ecuador also proposed the topic of the Afrodescendants Decade as center of the exchange.

The agenda of the meeting consists in eight worktables about the topics: public policies, social indicators, construction of national states and intercultural relations, Afrodescendant women and panAfricanism.

Locos por Juana premiers new Se Fue La Luz

Locos por Juana premieres the official video for their new single Se Fue La Luz (The Light’s Went Out) featuring ChocQuibTown on Billboard.

The video, directed by French Produccion (ChocQuibTown, Zion y Lenox, Rakim, Arcange), one of the most respected video directors in the Latin industry, reflects the strengths and cultural influences of both groups. It was filmed in a historic neighborhood of Baranquilla called El Barrio Abajo, famous for being the main attraction for visitors and the cultural Mecca for partying. Today it has been somewhat forgotten and the video pays respect to its rich history.

Washington has essentially declared war on Russia

090128-N-0696M-200 President of the United States Barack Obama, flanked by Gen. Norton Schwartz, U.S. Air Force chief of staff; Gen. George W. Casey, U.S. Army chief of staff; U.S. Marine Gen. James E. Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and U.S. Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, addresses the media during his first visit to the Pentagon since becoming commander-in-chief, Jan. 28, 2009. Obama and Vice President Joe Biden met with Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates and all the service chiefs getting their inputs on the way ahead in Afghanistan and Iraq. (DoD photo by Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Chad J. McNeeley/Released)

by Martin Berger

Nobel Peace Prize laureate, US President Barack Obama has been steadfastly pursuing a policy of armed interventions and conflicts across the globe longer and more extensively than any other president in recent US history. Now he’s sounding an advance against Russia, paying no heed to the fact that it may result in world war followed promptly by mutual nuclear annihilation.

One could hardly make a compelling argument how else one can explain the statement made by spokesperson for the US State Department, Rear Admiral John F. Kirby, other than a direct declaration of war. The statement reads as follows:

The consequences are that the civil war will continue in Syria, that extremists and extremists groups will continue to exploit the vacuums that are there in Syria to expand their operations, which will include, no question, attacks against Russian interests, perhaps even Russian cities, and Russia will continue to send troops home in body bags, and they will continue to lose resources – even, perhaps, more aircraft…

The very same modus operandi was employed a quarter of a century ago to take down the Soviet Union. In the late 1980’s America decided it was in a position to catch the “evil empire” in an Afghan trap through the support it would provide armed terrorists that have now transformed themselves into “moderate terrorists,” including Al-Qaeda. In the 1980’s, Washington took advantage of Saudi wealth and Pakistan’s secret service. That’s how the so-called Afghan resistance was born, enjoying Pakistani logistical support and streams of “fresh recruits” from all across the Middle East.

The former US Secretary of State and now a presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, openly declared back in 2012 that it was a great idea from her point of view:
“When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, we had this brilliant idea that we are going to come to Pakistan and create a force of Mujahideen, equip them with stinger missiles and everything else to go after the Soviets inside the Afghanistan. And we were successful, the Soviets left Afghanistan, and then we said “Great! Goodbye “, leaving these trained people who where fanatical in Afghanistan and Pakistan, leaving them well armed, creating a mess…”

What Hillary forgot to mention, however, is the fact that the Mujaheddin movement in Afghanistan was a “breeding ground” for Al-Qaeda assets. Al-Qaeda was and still is directly controlled by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to promote a process of Middle Eastern destabilization, providing US military contractors with an excuse to invade state, after state, after state.

It’s the very same scenario that the White House wants to repeat now in Syria. It’s no wonder it allowed the violent bombardment of Syrian soldiers on 17 September, since it was made in a bid to spare the lives of Jabhat al-Nusra militants who would have had a hard time otherwise storming their positions. It should be recalled that in September 2015, the former head of the CIA, David Petraeus, one of the godfathers of US guerrilla warfare, urged the White House to “fight” ISIS side-by-side with Jabhat al-Nusra.

After six years of perpetual war the conflict in Syria is not nearly as “civil” as one would like to believe, it is a conflict entirely driven externally, not internally. Syria has become a sort of a Gordian knot, a place where the interests of Russia, China, EU, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the US have been impossibly tangled up.

At this stage, Washington is completely incapable of discussing any serious political settlement in Syria, since it regards any peace process in this war-torn country as the harbinger of Moscow’s, Beijing’s and Tehran’s continuous presence in the region and the moving forward of several energy routes that will give these states influence and wealth in the region well into the future, all of which means there will be no place for the West’s “avid defenders of democracy” at the table.

That is why the United States objected so vigorously to the release of the Russian-American cease-fire agreement details to the public and kept the discussion of the agreement as far away from the UN as it possibly could, out of fear there could be a UN resolution adopted that would make it mandatory to comply with.

That is also why, while keeping in mind its master-plan, Washington has used Syrian territory to start the largest indirect war in modern history to pursue its consequential transformation in a direct armed confrontation with Russia. A total of 80 states are fighting both directly and indirectly in Syria. It is no accident that on May 23, 2003, instead of gathering Iraqi forces into a single large unit, the US occupation administration disbanded the Iraqi army, creating pre-conditions for the rise of ISIS. In January 2012, in the midst of the Syrian civil war, the CIA created a “branch” of Al Qaeda in Syria – the notorious Jabhat al-Nusra. It’s no secret that the militants of this terrorist group at different points of time were treated in hospitals in Turkey and Israel – both faithful satellite-states of Washington. These steps were followed with the approval of the Turkish military’s invasion of Syria, which was launched on Aug. 20.

To create preconditions for an open armed conflict with Russia, Washington has launched a massive propaganda campaign, aimed at discrediting Moscow at every juncture. It’s enough to remember the so-called “doping scandal” and the “revelations” that Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko made about the alleged presence of more than 30,000 Russian soldiers and hundreds of tanks in eastern Ukraine. And no matter how ridiculous and unfounded such allegations may be, Washington would still repeat them, as if it had no means to track a couple hundreds tanks anywhere on the face of the Earth and then provide irrefutable evidence of it to the public. Moreover, we hear repeated accusations about Moscow’s alleged involvement in the downing of the Malaysian Boeing MH-17 over Donbass and many others. And the list goes on. Looking at all these steps, one can’t help but remember the genius of Nazi propaganda – Joseph Goebbels – who swayed public perception with the continuous repetition of transparent lies up to and including the day of the Nazi invasion of Russia.

Police killings won’t stop

NOTE FROM THE EDITOR

Dear readers:

In the US, police killing has become a custom as never seen before, while the population is being brainwashed by the mainstream media and public relation firms to make the people believe that is justifiable in order to keep order. In this article below, Police killings won’t stop, Chris Hedges takes us to the real root of the problem and why he’s right.

Police killings won’t stop

by Chris Hedges

The corporate state, no matter how many protests take place in American cities over the murder of unarmed citizens, will put no restraints on the police or the organs of security and surveillance. It will not protect the victims of state violence. It will continue to grant broader powers and greater resources to militarized police departments and internal security forces such as Homeland Security. Force, along with the systems of indoctrination and propaganda, is the last prop that keeps the corporate elites in power. These elites will do nothing to diminish the mechanisms necessary for their control. 

The corporate state, by pillaging the nation, has destroyed capitalism’s traditional forms of social control. The population is integrated into a capitalist democracy by decent wages and employment opportunities, labor unions, mass-produced consumer products, a modest say in governance, mechanisms for marginal reform, pensions, affordable health care, a judiciary that is not utterly subservient to the elites and corporate power, the possibility for social, political and economic advancement, good public education, arts funding and a public broadcasting system that gives a platform to those who are not in service to the elites. These elements make possible the common good, or at least the perception of the common good.

Global capitalism, however, is not concerned with the cohesion of the nation-state. The relentless quest for profit trumps internal stability. Everything and everyone is pillaged and harvested for profit. Democracy is a mirage, a useful fiction to keep the population passive and compliant. Propaganda, including entertainment and spectacle, and coercion through state-administered surveillance and violence are the primary tools of governance. This is why, despite years of egregious police violence, there is no effective reform.

Propaganda is not solely about instilling an opinion. It is also about appropriating the aspirations of the citizenry into the vocabulary of the power elite. The Clintons and Barack Obama built their careers mastering this duplicity. They speak in words that reflect the concerns of the citizenry, while pushing through programs and legislation that mock those concerns. This has been especially true in the long campaign to curb excessive police force. The liberal elites preach “tolerance” and “professionalism” and promote “diversity.” But they do not challenge the structural racism and economic exploitation that are the causes of our crisis. They treat the abuses of corporate oppression as if they were minor administrative defects rather than essential components of corporate power.

Naomi Murakawa in her book The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America documents how the series of “reforms” enacted to professionalize police departments resulted in placing more money and resources into the hands of the police, giving them greater power to act with impunity and expanding legally sanctioned violence. All penal reform, from President Harry Truman’s 1947 Committee on Civil Rights report to the Safe Streets Act of 1968 to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 to contemporary calls for more professionalization, have, she notes, only made things worse.

The fiction used to justify expanded police powers, a fiction perpetrated by Democratic politicians such as Bill Clinton and Obama, is that a modernized police will make possible a just and post-racial America. White supremacy, racism and corporate exploitation, however, are built into the economic model of neoliberalism and our system of “inverted totalitarianism.” A discussion about police violence has to include a discussion of corporate power. Police violence is one of the primary pillars that allow the corporate elites to retain power. That violence will end only when the rule of these elites ends. 

The calls for more training and professionalization, the hiring of minority police officers, the use of body and dash cameras, improving procedures for due process, creating citizen review boards, even the reading of Miranda rights, have done nothing to halt the indiscriminate use of lethal violence and abuse of constitutional rights by the police and courts. Reforms have served only to bureaucratize, professionalize and legalize state abuse and murder. Innocent men and women may no longer be lynched on a tree, but they are lynched on death row and in the streets of New York, Baltimore, Ferguson, Charlotte and dozens of other cities. They are lynched for the reasons poor black people have always been lynched—to create a reign of terror that serves as an effective form of social control.

The wreckage left behind by deindustrialization created a dilemma for the corporate state. The vast pools of “surplus” or “redundant” labor in our former manufacturing centers meant the old forms of social control had disappeared. The corporate state needed harsher mechanisms to subjugate a population it condemned as human refuse. Those on probation and parole or in jails or prisons grew from 780,000 in 1965 to 7 million in 2010. The kinds of federal crimes punishable by death leaped from one in 1974 to 66 in 1994, thanks to the Clinton administration. The lengths of prison sentences tripled and quadrupled. Laws were passed to turn inner-city communities into miniature police states. This had nothing to do with crime.

State-administered violence is all that lies between the corporate state and widespread unrest. The power elites know it. They also know that as this unrest begins to define the white underclass, the legal and physical shackles perfected for poor people of color can easily be expanded. Rights in America have become privileges. And the corporate state has created legal mechanisms, including the loss of our right to privacy, to remove these privileges the instant it feels threatened.

Liberals’ rhetoric of compassion is as destructive as conservatives’ call for law and order. The liberal stances are patronizing. They reduce structural and economic oppression to personal and psychological problems, as if we can solve police murder by training and empowering “good” people, supporting families or rewriting regulations. As long as our discussion of police violence ignores the social functions of police and prisons, the elites have nothing to fear. The police, in the end, are not the problem. They, like the military, are the foot soldiers for the corporate leviathan.

The corporate state needs to create the illusion that the courts and the police are impartial and just. Once this illusion is cemented into the public consciousness, victims can be blamed for their oppression. Institutionalized murder becomes acceptable. Police violence becomes part of the cost of keeping us safe. The oppressed have no legitimacy or voice.

The corporate state is interested only in fostering these illusions. Reforms will be, as they have been in the past, cosmetic. What advances have we made since police murdered Michael Brown two years ago in Ferguson? Have the some 200 civilian review boards across the country, most of them toothless and ineffectual, prevented police from gunning down people in our streets or brought the killers to justice? Police have killed over 700 people this year. The illusions of reform are used to alter public consciousness rather than the machinery of corporate power. These illusions are created to reassure us that those that are arrested, beaten, killed or sent away to prison for decades deserve their fate. Yes, the state may admit, there is an abuse committed here or an injustice committed there, but the system itself, the state insists, is fundamentally fair and just. This is a lie the elites go to tremendous lengths to disseminate. 

The corporate state is counting on counterviolence against police, which is inevitable, and further acts of domestic terrorism, which also are inevitable. Acts of violence directed against the state are used by the organs of state propaganda, including the corporate press, to foster a culture of fear, to deify the police and to demonize the oppressed in our inner cities and in the Middle East. All criticism of excessive state violence, once these illusions dominate the society, will be condemned as disloyal and unpatriotic. The corporate state, until it is destroyed, will do what it is designed to do—kill with impunity.

Internal ‘clock’ makes some people age faster and die younger

Study could explain why even with healthy lifestyles some people die younger than others, and raises future possibility of extending the human lifespan

by Hannah Devlin

Scientists have found the most definitive evidence yet that some people are destined to age quicker and die younger than others – regardless of their lifestyle.
The findings could explain the seemingly random and unfair way that death is sometimes dealt out, and raise the intriguing future possibility of being able to extend the natural human lifespan.

“You get people who are vegan, sleep 10 hours a day, have a low-stress job, and still end up dying young,” said Steve Horvath, a biostatistician who led the research at the University of California, Los Angeles. “We’ve shown some people have a faster innate ageing rate.”

A higher biological age, regardless of actual age, was consistently linked to an earlier death, the study found. For the 5 percent of the population who age fastest, this translated to a roughly 50 percent greater than average risk of death at any age.

Intriguingly, the biological changes linked to ageing are potentially reversible, raising the prospect of future treatments that could arrest the ageing process and extend the human lifespan.

“The great hope is that we find anti-ageing interventions that would slow your innate ageing rate,” said Horvath. “This is an important milestone to realizing this dream.”

Horvath’s ageing “clock” relies on measuring subtle chemical changes, in which methyl compounds attach or detach from the genome without altering the underlying code of our DNA.

His team previously found that methyl levels at 353 specific sites on the genome rise and fall according to a very specific pattern as we age – and that the pattern is consistent across the population. The latest study, based on an analysis of blood samples from 13,000 people, showed that some people are propelled along life’s biological tramlines much quicker than others – regardless of lifestyle.

“We see people aged 20 who are fast agers and we look at them 20 years later and they are still fast agers,” said Horvath. “The big picture here is that this is an innate process.”

The scientists found that known health indicators, such as smoking, blood pressure and weight, were still more valuable in predicting life expectancy in the 2,700 participants who had died since the study began, but that their underlying aging rate also had a significant effect.

In a fictional example, the scientists compare two 60-year-old men, Peter, whose ageing rate ranks in the top 5 percent and Joe, whose rate is in the slowest 5 percent. If both are smokers and have stressful jobs, Peter is given a 75 percent chance of dying in the next 10 years compared to a 46 percent chance for Joe.

This is not the first time that scientists have observed so-called epigenetic changes to the genome with age, but previously these were put down to wear-and-tear brought about by environmental factors, rather than indicating the ticking of an internal biological clock.

Wolf Reik, a professor of epigenetics at the University of Cambridge who was not involved in the work, said: “It now looks like you get a clock given to you when you’re young. It gets wound up and the pace it’s ticking at is dictated by this epigenetic machinery.”

“I’m sure insurance companies are already quite interested in this kind of thing,” he added.

Horvath said he has no plans to market the test, which costs around $300 per sample in his lab, but admits he has run his own blood through the analysis.

“I’m currently 48 and the test indicated I was 5 years older, which I wasn’t too pleased about,” he said, but adds that for an individual factors like blood pressure and smoking were more decisive. “My innate ageing rate is too fast to become a centenarian, but otherwise I’m not too worried about it.”

The study, published in the journal Aging, suggests that accelerated ageing rather than simply a riskier lifestyle could explain why men die younger. Even by the age of five, Horvath said, the different speeds of aging between genders was apparent and by the age of 40 a biological age gap of 1-2 years opens up. “Women always age a little bit more slowly than men,” he said. “It’s not lifestyle it’s this innate ageing process that favors women.”

Younger voters don’t trust candidates or the system

(And thus too willing to give up their own power)

by Mark Trahant

Will young people vote in 2016? And, more important, at least for our purposes, how about the younger generation of American Indians and Alaska Natives?
Let’s explore the first question.

Younger voters are perplexing. They are, or should be, the largest group voters, some 75 million. And the data shows they are far more likely to vote for Democrats than other generations. Except there is an “except.” Young voters are less likely to vote.

In 2008 they were a key constituent bloc helping to elect Barack Obama as President of the United States. In fact, in 2004, 2006, and 2008 young voters were the majority of Democratic party votes; the most supportive group. And, according to Pew Research, in 2008 some two-thirds of those under 30 voted for Barack Obama “making the disparity between young voters and other age groups larger than in any presidential election since exit polling began in 1972.”

But after 2008, well, not so much.

A report by the Census Bureau on voting patterns said: “In 2012, the voting population 45 years of age and over increased, while the number of voters 18 through 44 years old decreased. Between 1996 and 2008, there was only a single example of an age group showing a decrease in net voting from one presidential election to the next, yet in 2012 significant decreases occurred for two age groups. Younger voters 18 through 29 years of age reported a net voting decrease of about 1.8 million, while voters between the ages of 30 through 44 reported a decrease of about 1.7 million.” The bottom line: A decrease of 1.9 million voters between the ages of 30- through 44-year-olds in 2012.

The data backs up the idea that young people were excited by Obama’s first presidential campaign. He changed the conversation. But then the hard slog of politics, the fights with Congress, the slow pace of change, and so many compromises by Obama turned off younger voters. That’s a problem that goes beyond any single candidate. How do you convince younger voters that politics and policy are more complicated than an election slogan?

Hillary Clinton has been trying to figure out younger voters. But as The New York Times pointed out this week that’s not so easy. As a group they do not watch television and “they tend not to be motivated by any single, unifying issue, making the job of messaging harder. They are declaring themselves unaffiliated with either party at a rate faster than any other generation. They say the political process and the two-party system are unresponsive to their concerns.”

This is true in Indian country, too. It’s reflected on Facebook where younger American Indian and Alaska Native voters equate Clinton with the establishment and do not understand why Bernie Sanders is no longer an option. For his part, Sanders has campaigned with Clinton. He wrote in The Los Angeles Times: “My supporters and I began a political revolution to transform America. That revolution continues as Hillary Clinton seeks the White House. It will continue after the election. It will continue until we create a government which represents all of us and not just the 1 percent – a government based on the principle of economic, social, racial and environmental justice.”

There are even some younger Native American voters who see Donald Trump as an agent of change and worth the risk (all the while proclaiming support for Standing Rock or calling for more federal action on climate change.)

Part of the problem is that Clinton does not understand the priorities of younger voters. Recent hacked audio conversations between Clinton and high-value donors back in February explain that gap. “There’s just a deep desire to believe that we can have free college, free healthcare, that what we’ve done hasn’t gone far enough, and that we just need to, you know, go as far as, you know, Scandinavia, whatever that means, and half the people don’t know what that means, but it’s something that they deeply feel,” she said according to Politico.

That’s where the Standing Rock story comes into play.

Clinton has been silent about Standing Rock and the Dakota Access Pipeline dispute. The narrative from the camps is that she doesn’t care. I suspect the real issue is that her staff sees this as another pipeline dispute similar to Keystone XL pipeline. She was not eager to weigh in on that issue either. They don’t see this as unique moment in history when all of North America’s indigenous people are speaking with one voice.

Obama worries future presidents will wage perpetual, covert drone war

by Ryan Devereaux,
Alex Emmons
The Intercept

President Obama warns in a new interview of a future in which a U.S. president could engage in perpetual covert wars “all over the world.” But he claims that the accountability and transparency measures he is instituting will make that less likely.

In the interview, with New York Magazine’s Jonathan Chait, Obama expressed agreement with one of the most salient critiques of his drone war, that it risks creating “institutional comfort and inertia with what looks like a pretty antiseptic way of disposing of enemies.”

Obama explained that he had looked at “the way in which the number of drone strikes was going up and the routineness with which, early in my presidency, you were seeing both DOD and CIA and our intelligence teams think about this.”

He continued: “And it troubled me, because I think you could see, over the horizon, a situation in which, without Congress showing much interest in restraining actions with authorizations that were written really broadly, you end up with a president who can carry on perpetual wars all over the world, and a lot of them covert, without any accountability or democratic debate.”

The president expressed a sense of urgency to rein in these powers that seems particularly appropriate given that both candidates for the White House have indicated receptiveness to intensifying the use of military force abroad, with Donald Trump going so far as expressing openness to killing the families of suspected terrorists.

“By the time I leave here, the American people are going to have a better sense of what their president is doing,” Obama said. “Their president is going to have to be more accountable than he or she otherwise would have been. The world, I think, will have a better sense of what we’re trying to do and what we stand for. And I think all of that will serve the American people well in the future.”

But the one existing transparency measure Obama touts as an example in the interview — the administration’s release of its tally on civilian casualties from drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia — was viewed by many in the human rights community as a farce, largely because it pointed to a death toll far lower than outside observer tallies.

The release, made public on the Friday afternoon of Fourth of July weekend, reported that between 64 and 116 civilians were killed during Obama’s two terms. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, by comparison, has estimated that between 492 and 1,077 civilians have been killed by drone strikes during the eight years of Obama’s presidency.

And critical questions about those operations remain unanswered, such as the circumstances that led to the death of Momina Bibi, a 68-year-old Pakistani grandmother killed in an October 2012 airstrike; or the reason for the attack that took the life of Salim bin Ahmed Ali Jaber, an anti-al Qaeda imam in Yemen a month earlier; or the full story of how American forces came to target a wedding convoy, also in Yemen, a year later, killing 12 people.

Those questions remain unanswered, in part because when the administration released the civilian casualty report, it did so without detailing a single specific incident in which the deaths of civilians were confirmed — thus foreclosing any possibility for follow up or public accountability for those operations. (See The Intercept’s series The Drone Papers describing the secret military documents that exposed the inner workings of Obama’s drone wars.)
What’s more, the alarming changes that Obama describes as over the horizon are already here.

“What’s so interesting is that President Obama acknowledges this problem — that future presidents will be empowered to kill globally, and in secret. What he doesn’t acknowledge is how much of a role his administration had in making that a bizarre normal,” Naureen Shah, director of national security and human rights at Amnesty International, told The Intercept.

“There is something so strange about the person who many would say is very responsible for this situation actually acknowledging it and saying he tried to plan for it,” Shah added. “What we’ll be left with from the Obama administration is a far more dangerous precedent of secret, global killings than what we started with.”

From the very beginning of his presidency, Obama tightly embraced legal arguments, including the “state secrets privilege,” to deflect inquiries into the government’s use of lethal force in foreign countries; he fought vigorously for years to keep his rationale for assassinating an American citizen secret; he never explained how the U.S. came to kill that same American citizen’s 16-year-old son; and he has never once forced his premier intelligence agency to publicly answer for the deaths of non-Western civilians — of which there have been many — during an eight-year covert bombing campaign.

In the New York magazine interview, Obama gave human rights groups and “the left” credit for pushing him on issues of transparency in targeted killing — but at the same time indicated they had little impact on his own decisions.

“I’m glad the left pushes me on this,” Obama said. “I’ve said to my staff and I’ve said to my joint chiefs, I’ve said in the Situation Room: I don’t ever want to get to the point where we’re that comfortable with killing. It’s not why I wanted to be president, to kill people.”

Chris Anders of the American Civil Liberties Union said he was not impressed by Obama’s own sense of restraint. “The president has left behind very broad claims of executive authority to order lethal strikes away from traditional battlefields. Even if he’s instituted some processes, and some minor levels of transparency — such as aggregate levels of casualties — it is still a very broad power with almost no meaningful checks on it.”

(This article was edited to fit space).

Obama Worries Future Presidents Will Wage Perpetual, Covert Drone War

Colombian voters reject historic peace accord

by the El Reportero’s wire services

The victory of NO in the referendum on the agreement of peace signed between the Bogota government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia-People’’s Army (guerrilla) is devastating news, declares today’s daily La Jornada.

The Colombian government has been in a violent civil war with the leftist rebel group the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia — better known as FARC — for 52 years. The protracted, bloody civil war has been a national tragedy for Colombia, with FARC’s thousands of kidnappings tearing families apart all over the country.

Despite the slim margin and low attendance to the polls, the negative to the most difficult, consistent and transcendent peace process in that country leaves the impression that the majority of Colombians is in favor of continuing the armed conflict, affirms the editorial of La Jornada.

The rejection to peace accords seems to constitute, also, a slap to the government, international organizations, personalities of the world scenario who supported actively and enthusiastically the negotiations between the Casa de Nariño and the oldest guerrilla organization in America, it says.

It also seems a signal of support to the war and militarist sectors and interests of the South American nation, beginning with former president Alvaro Uriber and the most stubborn sectors of the armed forces and the group of enterprises that for decades have prospered with the security business and the sale of weapons.

The newspaper affirms that the government of president Santos has been put into a position, due to the unexpected result of the referéndum, in a weakened position, while the guerrilla group was put into an indefinite and highly dangerous situation for their members who already had begun to concentrate preparing for their demobilization and handing out their weapons.

One of the main factors which determined this catastrophic result was the publicity campaign intoxicating public opinion by the oligarchic rightwing forces that have as target the demential total annihilation of the FARC or, at least, an unconditional surrender of its troops with no more destination than prison, explains the text.
The editorial argues that, significantly, that propaganda operative had a much greater impact in the big cities, in which most of the voters live and in which the No was majority.

La Jornada alerts that what follows is uncertain. The defeat of the peace side does not mean an automatic resuming of hostilities, but represents a push in that direction, although in strictly legal terms the only linking consequence is that both parts will have to renegotiate peace in different terms.

It also warns of a perspective difficult to realize, due to the enormous difficulties they had to overcome in order to achieve an acceptable document both for government and insurgents and the little time for Santos’ mandate to end.

On the other side, both for FARC and the government they have adopted transcendent peace decisions that cannot be easily reverted. The first approved in assembly its conversion to political force, while the second decreed an end to hostilities.

Even though none of both sides has now a defined and clear legal framework to apply their decisions, it is expected that the fragile truce established in the Havana negotiations, be maintained, concludes the editorial.

ZOPPÉ – an Italian family circus

The Zoppe family began performances Wednesday with their traditional, big top circus in Decatur. Carlo Gentile dips his wife Orlene Gentile after their acrobatic performance. Photo by Gary Cosby Jr. 4/22/09

Compiled by El Reportero’s staff

The Zoppé Circus brings an all new show for its 9th year to Redwood City, called  “Ricominciare” (ree-koh-min-CHAR-ay) meaning recommence, begin again and restart. This fresh new show will host an amazing lineup of performers featuring La Tarumba Equestrians who fuse Circus with Theatre, Music and the Equestrian arts.

Additionally, 5th Generation Circus performer Denisse Santos from Mexico brings an exciting flying trapeze show to the tent, while Ring Master Raoul Gomiero from Italy pulls the audience into the emotions of the show for an exciting new wild ride this year while juggler Liam Halstead wows the audience with his amazing feats.

October 7-23, 2016, Matinee & Evening Showtimes, at the beautiful Red Morton Park in Redwood City. Tickets and info at: http://www.redwoodcity.org/zoppe

Madelina y Los Carpinteros premiering @ Berkeley’s La Peña

Between the South and the North is the La Peña’s debut concert of Madelina y Los Carpinteros and Friends. The group features the soulful voices of Madelina Zayas with Brandon Vance (both Buena Trova Social Club), and multi-instrumentalists (former members of Grupo Raíz) Fernando Feña Torres and Denis Schmidt. Also, Bay Area jewels Ruthie Dineen, Craig Thomas and Brandon Vance.

Special performance by sikuri master and choreographer Luis Valverde and partner Claudia Susana (Valverde dance and former Grupo Anqari), and Tomás Enguidanos on the Andean Mandolina.

Following the tradition of the Nueva Canción and Nueva Trova – movements that came out of The Americas’ liberation struggles to freshly embody the folk roots with an enriched lyricism – this concert will premiere Fernando Torres’ own compositions as well as unique interpretations of music from Puerto Rico to the Andes Mountains (Argentina, Chile, Perú, Venezuela, the Andes Region, Puerto Rico) and the mainland US.

Madelina, Los Carpinteros and friends will be debuting at La Peña. Since its inception 41 years ago, the Berkeley’s venerated hut has become the casa of the nueva trova/nueva canción, where the attentive ear and lovers of the genre can enjoy the musical gems of its originators as well as the work currently developed locally. A not-to-be-missed Fall evening with some soulful and rhythmic picks into the Latin American cancionero, including originals from Fernando Torres and unique interpretations from Osvaldo Torres, Simón Diaz, Rafaél Manríquez, Roy Brown, Juan Antonio Corretjer, Rafael Hernández, Fernando Solanas and Roberto Goyeneche, amongst others.

Friday, Sept. 30, 2016. 8 p.m. $15 adv. $20 dr. At La Peña Cultural Center, 3105 Shattuck Ave. Berkeley. 510-849-2568 Tickets: http://bit.ly/2bCQ1ka.