­by the El reportero’s news
services

Jaime Morales Carazo

Nicaragua’s vice president said Wednesday he is not planning to comply with a diplomatic deadline to withdraw troops from a border zone with Costa Rica, as tensions flared over a two-century-old territorial dispute. Vice President Jaime Morales Carazo said he rejected the complaints by Costa Rica that Nicaragua was invading its territory – because the territory in dispute belongs to Nicaragua.

Anti-UN protests turn deadly in Haiti

On 15 November, at least one protester was shot dead by a UN peacekeeper following protests against the UN stabilization mission (Minustah) in the cities of Cap-Haitien and Hinche. The growing national antipathy to the UN puts a major questionmark against the international community’s plans to hold presidential and legislative elections in Haiti on 28 November. The UN, with its 8,940 troops and 4,391 police officers is supposed to ensure that the elections are at least peaceful. Even before the killing, the elections were problematic because of the cholera epidemic, which has killed almost 1,000 people, and the authorities’ failure to make ­much progress on rebuilding after the earthquake which demolished most of the country’s infrastructure on 12 January.

Cuba and Venezuela head in divergent directions

Cuba and Venezuela are moving in opposite directions. Venezuela’s President Hugo Chávez visited Cuba this week to celebrate the tenth anniversary of the special partnership signed by the two countries. Cuba’s President Raúl Castro took advantage of this historic occasion to announce that the Partido Comunista de Cuba (PCC) would hold its long-anticipated congress in April 2011, nine years later than scheduled, to set out the future direction of the Revolution. Castro presented Chávez with a copy of a key document that will be discussed at the congress: it advocates widening the private sector and attracting foreign investment without renouncing socialism. The irony was unmistakable: Chávez is curbing the private sector, discouraging foreign investment, in the name of socialism.

Costa Rica – no longer the exception to the rule?

Costa Rica faces an “unprecedented crisis of delinquency”. The country once hailed as the exception to the rule in Central America should be seen “in the mirror of Mexico, as [the country] could well be heading down a similar route.” These were the warnings President Laura Chinchilla chose to issue to her people on the anniversary of Costa Rican independence on 15 September. The following day, the country’s unprecedented inclusion on the US State Department’s annual drugs black list shocked local and foreign observers alike, prompting questions as to whether there was no longer any substance to Costa Rica’s traditional reputation as an oasis of peace and social equality in a region otherwise afflicted by violence and poverty.

Brazil sabre-rattles over weak dollar

Throughout the past month, Brazil’s minister of fi nance, Guido Mantega, has made increasingly fi erce criticisms of US economic policy and the developing ‘global currency war’. After the US Federal Reserve Board’s decision to print another US$600bn of cash, commentators fear that there will be a showdown between the US and the world’s emerging economies, led by Brazil and China, at the forthcoming G-20 meeting in Seoul, South Korea, on Nov. 11-12.

­First person account – name omitted

I have an incident to share that occurred late Friday afternoon, November 12, 2010, around 5:15 in the Dayton International Airport.

I realize the publishing this publically on the internet puts me into a delicate situation, given that I am a high profile blogger and author. This is a difficult incident to share, but it needs to be said…Because I will not be a silent victim.

I will share the facts of the incident in as a matter of fact manner as I can.

I checked into my flight and had a boarding pass printed that included “plus infant.” My baby and I were flying from Dayton, OH, to San Antonio, TX, so I could run in the San Antonio Half Marathon.

I was taking my baby along because he is still breastfeeding for part of the day.

I entered the security line, removed the special formula that I had with me for the baby, as well as my quart size baggie with my other liquids. I went through the x-ray machine and metal detector, carrying the baby, with no incident.

Because I was traveling with baby formula, I knew to expect that they would test it with the paper circles for explosives.

The TSA agent took all of my belongings over to the table in the center of the explosive screening tables.

She asked me, “Are you aware of the NEW policies for carrying liquids through security that were instated 4 years ago?” (capitalized to show the emphasis that she placed on that word.)

I replied, “Yes, I fly with him every several weeks.”

She scanned the formula, then turned to me and said, “Remove your shoes and stand on that black mat for a patdown.”

I said, “OK, what do I do with the baby?”

“You cannot be holding him.” (I am traveling alone.)

So I placed him into his stroller. She instructed me, “Spread your feet apart and hold your arms out to the side.” I obliged.

She patted my left arm, my right arm, my upper back and my lower back.

She then said, “I need to reach in and feel along the inside of your waistband.”

She felt along my waistline, moved behind me, then proceeded to feel both of my buttocks. She reached from behind in the middle of my buttocks towards my vagina area.

She did not tell me that she was going to touch my buttocks, or reach forward to my vagina area.

She then moved in front of my and touched the top and underneath portions of both of my breasts. She did not tell me that she was going to touch my breasts.

She then felt around my waist. She then moved to the bottoms of my legs.

She then felt my inner thighs and my vagina area, touching both of my labia.

She did not tell me that she was going to touch my vagina area or my labia.

She then told me that I could put my shoes on and I asked if I could pick up the baby, she replied Yes.

She then moved back to my belongings to fi nish scanning them with the paper discs for explosives. When she fi nished she said I was free to go.

I stood there holding my baby in shock. I did not move for almost a minute.

I stood there, an American citizen, a mom traveling with a baby with special needs formula, sexually assaulted by a government official. I began shaking and felt completely violated, abused and assaulted by the TSA agent. I shook for several hours, and woke up the next day shaking.

Here is why I was sexually assaulted. She never told me the new body search policy. She never told me that she was going to touch my private parts. She never told me when or where she was going to touch me. She did not inform me that a private screening was available. She did not inform me of my rights that were a part of these new enhanced patdown procedures.

When I booked my ticket, I was given no information that the TSA had changed their wand and unintrusive patdown procedures to “enhanced” patdown procedures that involved the touching of all parts of your body, including breasts and vagina on women and testicles and penis on men. I was not informed by any signs on the front side of security about the new procedures. I had not seen any media coverage about the issue, so I had no idea that this was a new government sanctioned policy.

Another important piece in this story, the Dayton airport does not have the new body scanners. I was not given any other search options. It was enhanced patdown, or nothing. (And I would have opted for the body scanner, if I were going to be subject to a sexual assault.)

I asked to speak to a supervisor immediately. I had a very unpleasant conversation with him that lasted 20 minutes. I moved to the back of the security area, made a few phone calls, including to my lawyer. He did some quick research, and learned that I had indeed been sexually assaulted because she did not follow the SOP (standard operating procedure) for the new search.

During our fi rst conversation, the TSA acting manager of the shift told me that the TSA agent who sexually assaulted me was supposed to inform me about the new search procedure and tell me when and where she was going to touch me. He also apologized on behalf of himself and on behalf of the agent who sexually assaulted me. I was not allowed to speak to the agent who sexually assaulted me, nor did the acting manager provide me with her name. (I did not have the presence of mind to look at her nameplate, as I was in shock.)

I also spoke with the Dayton police, the Dayton airport police, and left a message for the TSA manager for the Dayton airport.

I intend to request the TSA to arrange for counseling services to be provided to me, so I can deal with the aftermath of the sexual assault that took place, caused by the specifi c touching actions and failure to inform me of the policies by the TSA agent.

I am speaking out against the TSA and share my sexual assault case to ensure that this does not happen to anyone else, anywhere.

I will not be a silent victim of sexual assault by a TSA agent. Total Sexual Assault.

I am calling for immediate change to this new enhanced body patdown search.

I am calling for the TSA agent who sexually assaulted me to be fi red.

I am calling for you, a fellow American, to stand up against these new enhanced full body patdown search procedures of the TSA.

Please note: I do plan on fl ying back to Ohio on Monday, because it will take me too long to drive home from Texas. I do not however intend to fl y again until this search policy of sexual molestation is revoked by the TSA.

I will leave you with this thought: “It is acceptable and encouraged that a TSA government offi cial can do something to an American citizen that US military personnel cannot do to a member of the Taliban.”

*UPDATE: Thank you all for the links and information about where and with whom I can share this. I am continuing to take action.

Please feel free to leave other helpful information you fi nd. I will be turning on comment moderation for the remainder of the day.

by Oliver Adriance

An unidentified supporter of Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law holds a sign. ­The law is currently being reviewed by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. (PHOTO BY OLIVER ADRIANCE)

Protesters showed up en mass to the James R. Browning Courthouse Monday morning, some for, but most against Arizona’s SB 1070 immigration law which is being reviewed by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The law, which was signe­d by the state’s Republican Governor Jan Brewer last April, was quickly challenged by several lawsuits brought on separately by civil rights groups and the Obama administration.

The law would require immigrants to carry papers proving their legal status as a citizen of the United States at all times. According to the law’s “stop, detain and arrest” provision, their citizenship may be checked at any time by an officer who stops them for any other legal reason and suspects they may be in the country illegally.

The court will hear arguments throughout the week, specifically on this provision, and how long an individual may legally be detained while their imigration status is confirmed. Only a day before the law was to take effect, U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton blocked this key provision.

Another issue is whether or not the law would violate or supersede federal laws on immigration enforcement.

Protesters of Arizona’s SB 1070 Immigration Law against SB 1070.: (PHOTO BY OLIVER ADRIANCE)

Critics and protesters have argued that the law will lead to massive cases of racial profiling in the state of Arizona and the harrassment of many of its Latino citizens.

This argument was echoed by a U.N. investigation published Monday which found that migrants are most often the subjects of the harshest cases of racial discrimination and xenophobia. According to MSNBC.com, the author of the study, Githu Muigai, said that “we need to develop systems, structures, and policies in an international legalenvironment in ­which we can address the legitimate concerns of the receiving states while being able to safeguard the fundamental humanity, in my judgment, of the immigrants.” When asked about SB 1070, Muigai was quoted as saying that it “does not respond to minimum human rights standards.”

Supporters of the law say that Gov. Brewer and the rest of Arizona’s legislature, were only trying to compensate for years of failure by the federal government to curb a flood of illegal immigrants crossing the boarder from Mexico. This sentiment was shared by one protester carrying a sigh which read simply “Stop the invasion.”

Another protester said that he has “no problem with immigrants” and that “there’s no reason they can’t come in to this country legally.” Most polls show that nearly 70 percent of Arizona citizens support the law according to an article by The Center for Immigration Studies, an independent, non-profit reserach organization.

Their statistics show that the population of illegal immigrants in Arizona has gone from 330,000 in the year 2000 to well over half a million by 2008.

According to a court spokesperson, there is no timeline for when they will make an offical ruling on SB 1070. Gov. Brewer has stated that she is willing to appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court if the case does not end in her favor. She was present for the hearings but flew back to Arizona in time to oversee the final hours of her successful gubernatorial reelection campaign.

­­

por Mike Adams

Natural News

New research published in the journal Nature reveals that pancreatic cancer takes 20 years to grow to the point where it is diagnosed by conventional medical doctors. This was determined by sequencing the DNA of cancer tumor cells from deceased patients. Because cancer mutations occur in growing tumors at a known rate, scientists were able to map the timing of the development of full-blown pancreatic cancer tumors.

Here’s what the scientists at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute found (and here’s why this matters in a huge way to people interested in healthy living):

* It takes 11.7 years for one mutation in a pancreas cell to grow into a “mature” pancreatic tumor (which might show up on a medical scan).

* It takes another 6.8 yearsfor the pancreatic tumor to

spread and cause tumors to appear in other organs of the body.

In all, it takes about 20 years for a person to grow a cancer tumor and see it spread to the point where their doctor will diagnose them with pancreatic cancer.

In other words, by the time doctors diagnose you with cancer, you’ve already been growing it for two decades. Steer clear of all synthetic chemicals.

Of course, for all this to work, it is VITAL that you avoid all synthetic chemicals: Do not take pharmaceuticals; do not use conventional perfumes, skin lotions, shampoos or other personal care products; do not use conventional laundry detergents (they’re filled with cancer-causing fragrance chemicals); do not use anti-bacterial soaps; do not cook on nonstick cookware; do not drink fl uoride in your water… basically just get all the toxic chemicals out of your house and out of your life. Keep reading Natural-News if you want to learn more about how to do that. We cover these topics on a regular basis. Better yet, subscribe to our free email newsletter and we’ll bring you these news headlines each day (the subscribe box is at the top left of this article).

The bottom line to all this is the GREAT NEWS that you don’t have to grow cancer tumors anymore!

spontaneously, and in theYou can simply decide to stop growing cancer by changing the biochemical environment in which your cells live. Change the environment and you change the results. It’s a simple matter of cause and effect. So remember: Cancer is not random, nor is it genetic. It ­doesn’t appear case of pancreatic cancer, it actually takes two decades to grow it to the point where it gets noticed by cancer doctors!

That means you’ve got 20 years to make a change in your life. Why not start right now? (If you haven’t already…) Fact: Pancreatic survival rates have not changed in the last 40 years. Do you know why? Because conventional medical doctors wait until you’ve been growing cancer for 20 years to tell you that you have cancer. (Seriously. And they think they’re running the most “advanced” medical system in the world.)

Wouldn’t it make more sense to teach patients how to prevent cancer two decades earlier and thereby avoid growing it in the first place?

First of all, to grow a cancer tumor, you need to eat lots of sugar. Liquid sugars are the best (soda, anyone?), but any form of refined sugar will do. You have to eat sugar daily if you really want to support cancer cell division and growth.

Next, you have to be vitamin D deficient for the entire 20 years. That’s because vitamin D halts 77 percent of all cancers (including pancreatic cancer), and when combined with other nutrients like selenium, you can halt even more cancers. (http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html)

If you combine vitamin D and selenium nutrition with other anti-cancer nutrients such as fresh vegetable juice (on a daily basis), omega-3 fatty acids, a wide variety of fresh fruits (including citrus and berries), and even red wine (rich with resveratrol), you will create an internal biological environment in which cancer tumors just can’t grow at all. (http://www.naturalnews.com/023655_I…)

This is especially true if you pursue a more alkaline diet that’s rich in vegetables and green foods rather than acidic substances such as sugar, fried foods and caffeine.

Combine all this with some regular exercise, good sleep, stress reduction habits and strict avoidance of cancer-causing chemicals, and you’ve got a recipe for blocking virtually all tumor growth in your body.

Cancer tumors simply cannot grow in an environment that’s rich in plantbased nutrients and based on healthy, natural living.

by the El Reportero’s news services

Barak Obama

On 19 October, the 50th anniversary of the imposition of the US economic embargo on Cuba, President Barack Obama signalled in a White House press conference with Hispanic media that his government is happy to leave US Cuba relations on the back burner for now.

Obama indicated that Cuba, which h­as recently begun a process that could lead to the release of all the political prisoners on the island and last month announced the biggest shake up of its Communist economy in decades, needed to do more, leaving the ball firmly in Havana’s court. This wait-and-see approach suits Obama right now. US policy towards Cuba is largely dictated by the domestic agenda and with the ruling Democrats heading into congressional elections in which the conservative right-wing faction of the opposition Republican Party is expected to sweep up, now is not the time for politically risky gestures towards the government led by President Raúl Castro. However, the window of opportunity to turn the page on US Cuba relations is closing fast heading into 2011. In all likelihood, the next window will only open in 2012, when Obama (and the Democrats) will be seeking re-election.

Squatter seeks to evict Argentina’s presidential couple from Casa Rosada

He enraged the government of President Cristina Fernández the first time he did it and now he’s at it again. Vice-President Julio Cobos used his position as president of the senate on 14 October to cast the deciding vote in a crucial debate over pensions. Cobos was reviled by the government after performing the same role in July 2008 in a deadlocked vote on agricultural export taxes, which marked the first significant legislative defeat for Fernández or her husband and predecessor Néstor Kirchner in five years. Cobos said he was acting in the national interest, but he had a personal motive: to improve his prospects ahead of next year’s presidential elections. Fernández, who called Cobos a “squatter”, was forced to take the politically unpopular decision of vetoing the law and will need to find another way of courting Argentina’s 5.5m pensioners.

Zetas drug gang founders trained by U.S. Military

The Mexican drug cartel Los Zetas, implicated in a recent massacre of migrant workers, was founded by elite Mexican troops trained by the U.S. military, a former special operations commander told the Qatar-based news network Al Jazeera. Some of the cartel’s founding members were elite Mexican troops trained in the early 1990s by American’s 7th Special Forces Group or “snake eaters” at Ft. Bragg, North Carolina, said Craig Deare, the former special forces commander who is now a professor at the U.S. National Defense University, Al Jazeera reported this week.

“They were given map reading courses, communications, standard special forces training, light to heavy weapons, machine guns and automatic weapons,” Deare said.

The Mexican soldiers who received U.S. training and later formed the Zetas came from the Airmobile Special Forces Group (GAFE), considered an elite division of the Mexican military and created in 1994 to fight the Zapatista rebels, Al Jazeera reported.

Guatemala receives Japanese loan

Guatemala received a $120 million loan from Japan to build roads, the Guatemalan president’’s office announced.

The loan was made official at a meeting between Guatemalan President Alvaro Colom and Japanese Prime Minister Naoto Kan on Friday, during the last day of Colom’s visit to Tokyo.

A press release posted on the Guatemalan government’s website noted the benefit of the new roads, as people will have better access to health services, education and commerce.

The loan will be paid in 25 years, including a seven-year grace period, at an annual interest rate of 1.4 percent.