At What Moment is Venezuela in Its Struggle
At What Moment is Venezuela in Its Struggle
By Manuel E. Yepe.
Manuel E. Yepe
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann.
The opposition, for its part, called for a plebiscite for the same first Sunday July 1. However it is illegal because it does not have the endorsement of the CNE, the only body legally authorized to carry out any electoral process in the country. It has a subversive character, and was designed to prevent the electoral process for the Constituent Assembly. Neither in the national constitution nor in any other Venezuelan law is the plebiscite a method of popular consultation.
But at what point is the struggle to consolidate the Bolivarian revolutionary process initiated by Hugo Chávez in the interest of the full assumption by the Venezuelan people of sovereignty over the natural wealth, history and future of that Caribbean and South American nation?
The National Directorate of the Bolivar and Zamora Revolutionary Current (CRBZ) of the Socialist Party [the PSUV: Partido Socialista Unido de Venezuela] in a communiqué made public on July 3 in progress declares that the conflict in Venezuela is at a new level, not because of the will of the revolution, but because it was imposed by the coup plan in progress after two months of unsuccessful coup attempts.
The strategy is drawn up by the US State Department, the US Defense Department’s Southern Command headquartered in Miami and the Venezuelan economic and political right. To date, it has been observed using the deployment of different putschist weapons: the communicational, the psychological, the international, the economic, the institutional, and violence. They have tried and advanced each of them, as part of the fourth generation war, which combines the different forms of war. His greatest weakness has always been the lack of popular support.
It is in the institutional environment in which more work and beat today, betting on eventual fractures in the Chavista block.
Given its lack of popular support, the right has opted to implement several tactics at a time. One is to push the economy to raise prices, shorten and attack points of food supply and transportation in order to deepen the economic difficulties of humble people to push it to plunder.
Another is based on deploying clashes to siege entire cities for several days, leaving behind a trail of death, destruction, looting, fire, terror and other images that hit the social fabric, reports the CRBZ.
The radical aspect of the right-wing war is explained by the despair and the class character of the conflict. They seek desperately to regain political control and to lapse the historical project that is the Bolivarian revolution.
“Faced with this scenario, it is essential to maintain the unity of Chavismo, to defend the revolution not only from the State, but also from the popular protagonism, involving people in the organized protection of institutions, territories, hospitals, food centers. To ensure that doctors, workers, comuneros and neighbors, take care of their spaces so that the right does not destroy what the people have built in the exercise of participatory democracy and safeguard their conquests for so many years.
The other great purpose of Chavismo is to arrive on July 30, having started a process of participation and debate around the National Constituent Assembly. “We must activate assemblies in the territories, recreate politics from the grassroots, listen to criticism, build spaces for exchange that are not only to applaud leaders and repeat the same. That exercise will allow us to call the vote to the majorities on July 30 and have better conditions to face the next steps. “
Chavismo proposes to provide urgent answers to the material demands of people: gas, price stabilization, supply, drugs. And not from an electoral perspective, but from the imperative need to respond to needs that multiply in the territories and that are breeding ground for discontent, abstention and depoliticization.
“We are in a decisive month,” the Chavistas reckon, “the right, by US design, will do everything possible to attempt its final assault. The revolution has the strength to resist and keep moving forward. It is necessary to use all those forces, in particular that of the protagonism of the people “.
July 17, 2017.
My Visit to the United States Embassy
My Visit to the U.S. Embassy or, My Stonewall Against the Blockade
By Francisco Rodriguez Cruz [from his blog] June 28, 2017
The closest thing I’ve ever seen of the United States was at a vantage point in Cuba from where we can see –quite far away– the unwanted Guantánamo Naval Base, in the eastern part of our country. I also got a bit close when I visited Canada, many years ago. Well, and from Mexico, not that long ago. That is, from the two bordering nations, although I did not cross the border. But this time I have stepped –technically speaking– on US territory, on my first visit to the Embassy of the world empire, here in Havana.
Since I do not have other clothes with phrases in English, I used this discreet T-shirt that says UNBLOCK CUBA
The motive was noble, though; and the results were positive. I was invited –as one in a small group of ten people whom the Embassy identifies as activists for the rights of the LGBTI community– to participate, this June 28, in a worldwide interactive electronic chat on thr occasion of the Gay Pride Month.
I found it a pleasant surprise that, in times like these, the State Department organized a panel on “Perspectives and voices to face hate crimes”. There were two interesting panelists and a moderator who were in New York and Washington. It may be a good sign that President Trump cannot turn back everything that the American people have already conquered.
Beberly Tillery, executive director of the New York Project against Violence, and Brett Parson, who oversees the Special Links Division of the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, responded to questions from activists, officials and other participants who had been invited to the United States embassies in Chile, Canada, Tunisia, Malawi, and Ecuador, among other countries.
To our delight, this exchange –that lasted just over an hour and a quarter– included one of the many questions we had sent from Havana.
On closing, there was a brief summary where there seemed to be consensus on the similarity of many of the episodes of discrimination, violence and homophobic and trans-phobic crimes suffered by LGBTIQ people in the world. This included in the nations that have advanced the most in public policies and specific legislation on the topic.
For this reason, several participants pointed out the importance of maintaining a more fluid exchange of good practices between and within civil society and government institutions like the police.
In particular, I reiterated my old idea that the coincidences between Cuba’s and the United States’ policies in relation to the fight against homophobia and trans-phobia could be one of the means of rapprochement. Of course, with the proviso that the current administration rectifies its current backward standing, and there is an eventual rescue of the process of normalization of relations that President Obama began.
So far, this was a summary of the content of the meeting. Now, I’ll add a little bit of folklore, with my most personal expressions and impressions.
On the way out, I hurriedly took this selfie, because it is not allowed to bring in cameras or cell phones.
I cannot deny that I was curious to see the place; to nose around the environment of that building so mysterious and emblematic in our history and city. A building that the majority of the Cuban people only see from outside, mostly when we march along the Malecon or rally at the Anti-Imperialist Tribunal to protest against successive US governments.
Therefore, to keep the tradition, I thought it would be OK to take part in the dialogue, but also to make a statement –even more so if this time we were remembering the disturbances of Stonewall: an act of rebellion by definition. And so I found a nice red pullover –special for the occasion– with the phrase #UNBLOCK CUBA. This was an initiative that some compatriots present welcomed.
I must acknowledge the politeness and professionalism of the diplomats who received us: Messrs. Derek Wright, Political Secretary, and Justen A. Thomas, First Secretary with the Press and Culture Office. They courteously ignored my T-shirt. I was left with the concern that –maybe because of it– a group photo was not taken. I had been so looking forward to have them pose by my side!
I was also a bit disappointed, because in that place –where I thought I would enjoy fantastic air conditioning– full of that freedom of expression they keep throwing at us, I was not allowed to bring in my cell phone or my digital camera. And they also made a number of suggestions on what to say or not about this encounter in our blogs and social media network profiles. By the way, I did not understand very well what they said, and for that reason, I may unintentionally fail to comply.
But since I’m a law-abiding person – even if it is US law– I give you my word that I tried to behave as best as possible, even when, at the door, a security guard –apparently not very patient with my awkwardness trying to empty all my pockets– asked me if it was the first time I’d been to the place. I smiled at him and said, “It shows, doesn’t it!”
A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann.
From Machistas to Anti-Homophic Vigilantes
From Machistas to Anti-Homophobic Vigilantes
By Manuel E. Yepe
http://manuelyepe.wordpress.com/
Exclusive to the daily POR ESTO! of Mérida, Mexico.
Political organizations and religious institutions of all kinds, tones, and colors have tried to legislate about what have been (or are) the most appropriate “carnal relations.”
An investigative work on homosexuality in several countries, by University of New Mexico professor emeritus of sociology, Nelson Valdés, states that the Bolsheviks in Russia criminalized homosexuality for a short time in 1922. But it has been a general rule that both communists, socialists and capitalist parties always avoid defining guidelines on sexual orientation.
Valdés points out that in the United States, the change came just on December 6, 2011, when US foreign policy manifested itself in defense of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender “rights” in some countries of the world. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton then announced a global LGBT policy, although she acknowledged that she was talking about this subject “knowing that my country’s record on human rights for homosexuals is far from adequate.”
Until 2003, it was a crime in the United States to be LGBT. Many homosexuals in the United States suffered violence and harassment. For some – among them many young people – harassment and exclusion continue to be daily realities. “Hence, as in all nations, we have a lot of work to do to protect human rights in our country,” Secretary of State Clinton said in a December 2011 statement.
His new international policy promised to open the borders of the United States to give aid and protection to the LGBT refugees and asylum seekers … as long as they came from those countries of which Washington demands regime change.
Practically, the United States had only added one more pretext for its intrusion into the internal affairs of those countries that defied American power.
Shortly afterward, in the mid-1970s, the media “influenced” by Washington within their own nation and around the world unleashed a great campaign on the alleged discrimination against homosexuals in Cuba.
Simultaneously, a media crusade was initiated to demonstrate that “the roots of homophobia in Cuba were in the revolution of Fidel Castro and the new Cuban communist leadership.” In 2000, the Cuban leader admitted his personal responsibility for not having promptly corrected the phenomenon, derived from the stubborn policies of years before the revolution.
Until 1973 homosexuality was considered a mental disorder by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and other related professions throughout the hemisphere shared similar attitudes. Homosexuality was considered until very recently a “deviation” and prohibited in the majority of the states of the United States. For its part, Cuba had inherited a macho culture because of long-standing attitudes, both in Spain and in the African cultures that contribute to its national identity.
However, in the last two decades, says Professor Nelson Valdes, the changes on issues of sexual identity and gender have been extraordinary. The Cuban media has played a systematic and concerted role in the education of the general population. Cinematography has been at the forefront in discussing these issues. In the last 13 years, Cuban television has more explicitly explored issues related to alternative sexual behavior.
The openness to openly gay behavior has not been limited to Havana alone. Homophobia is clearly in decline throughout the island as evidenced by the fact that gay and lesbian candidates are being elected to public office. A well-known foreign observer has pointed out that, in this area, “Cuba is much more liberal than the United States and Europe.”
What remains to be addressed is how it has been possible for a country characterized by such macho tendencies so entrenched in institutions, politicians, and national culture to have changed so much in the relatively short period of half a century and now that homophobia has become the enemy.
Indeed, the mainstream media and political and social leaders in the country have openly attempted to positively influence the population, in which some of the older people have tried to cling to the sexual and gender roles learned before the triumph Of the Cuban revolution.
Valdes highlights as a great achievement that Cubans have overcome the idea that machismo, manhood, and masculinity are the expressions of what defines a revolutionary. But, in my opinion, it is the awareness of the necessity of national unity for the defense of the revolution that has played an essential role in such a transcendental task for the progress of the human condition.
July 6, 2017.
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann.
Trump: Thunders and Traps
Trump: Thunders and Traps
By Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada, Red DH
Ricardo Alarcón
Much has been said and will be said about the grotesque show that took place in Miami on June 16 and the lies and threats against Cuba there pronounced. Trump’s speech, incoherent and clumsy like all of his, made at least two things clear: he will do all he can to harden US policy toward Cuba, canceling the timid steps that his predecessor had taken and [the fact that] the current President is an irremediable liar.
It is customary there in the North to mix politics with spectacle, information with entertainment, even if, as in this case, in terrible taste. For those who look at it from the outside, a good dose of Cartesian doubt is advisable and prudence is necessary to avoid being confused. Especially if it’s about what someone says like the quirky occupant of the White House.
Congresswoman Barbara Lee, a tireless fighter for justice and civil rights, was right to reject Trump’s speech. She stressed the importance of fighting to prevent specific regulations which would translate the presidential directive into mandatory rules that are even more damaging to peoples of the two countries. There, on that very day, there was evident proof of the correctness of her concern.
In his speech, Trump announced that he would issue a new executive order to replace the one already repealed that had guided Obama’s policy in its last two years. There in front of everyone, he added his signature to the document that appears on the official site of the White House, but which nobody read.
What he said does not correspond exactly with what he signed and the latter is what counts, because it has legal force and will guide the conduct of his administration. The contrast is evident, for example, in the case of remittances many Cubans on the island receive from their relatives residing in the United States. According to the speaker in Miami, such remittances would continue and would not be affected.
But right there, in the same act, without hiding, he signed an order that says exactly the opposite. On this issue of remittances, the document entitled “Presidential Memorandum for the Strengthening of The United States Policy towards Cuba,” which Trump signed and which was publicized by the White House. The fine print states that there would be millions of Cubans living on the island who would not be allowed to receive remittances.
In Section III, subsection (D), the definition of “prohibited officials of the Government of Cuba” is now extended to cover not only the leaders of the Cuban State and Government, but its officers and employees, the military and civilian workers of the Armed Forces and the Ministry of the Interior, the cadres of the CTC, of the trade unions, and the Defense Committees of the Revolution. Professor William M. Leogrande estimates that this would be more than one million families.
Trump boasted that he would drop all Obama’s moves and he probably intends to do so.
But he knows that this contradicts the interests and opinions of some business sectors linked to the Republican Party and that is why he hides behind aggressive rhetoric and often undecipherable jargon. With regard to the issue of Cubans and remittances he had no choice but to use his favorite weapon: the lie.
We must now see how they write and apply this new order that seeks to punish the Cuban population as a whole.
Translated and edited by Walter Lippmann.
OSPAAAL Condemnation Declaration
- English
- Español
OSPAAL DECLARATION OF CONDEMNATION
The Organization of Solidarity of the Peoples of Africa, Asia and Latin America (OSPAAAL) expresses its strongest condemnation of the terrorist attacks on Tuesday, June 27, against Venezuelan government facilities such as the Supreme Court of Justice and the Ministry of Popular Power for Internal Relations, Justice and Peace.
This hostile act against democratic institutionality could have very unfortunate consequences for the physical integrity of the people who were inside both headquarters and puts the lives of innocent people at risk.
How is it possible that, in the face of such arrogance and terrorist plans, in collusion with the American intelligence services and the sick Venezuelan opposition, the main means of communication at the service of the interests of imperialism are not now speaking up? Why is it that now, organizations such as the OAS do not raise a concern and remain in absolute silence? How can we understand the double standards of some governments that condemn terrorist acts that take place in the world and do not speak out at this moment?
Every terrorist demonstration deserves the strongest condemnation on the part of the international community struggling for a world of peace. Our region has had this imprint since the Second Summit of CELAC in Havana, and we can not allow any reason to jeopardize the sovereignty, peaceful coexistence between our states and much less to break democratic institutionality in our region. The defense of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace must be a permanent commitment.
This extremist act, as well as all counterrevolutionary actions against Simón Bolívar’s homeland and its eternal leader Hugo Chávez Frías, including the cruelest crimes against sympathizers of the Bolivarian Government. It’s part of the escalation that the most reactionary groups of the Venezuelan opposition to frustrate the Latin American emancipatory process and to force down a government that was anointed by the sovereign will of its people in elections also validated also by international organizations.
The Bolivarian Government has gone through all manner of economic, political, media, conspiracy and diplomatic actions, now faces terrorist actions that constitute a serious danger to the security of the country. It tries, by all means, to provoke military intervention. This is certainly one of the main objectives of the effort to overthrow the constitutional government.
This new escalation, aimed at violating citizen security, has cost the lives of 79 children of the brave Venezuelan people.
OSPAAAL reaffirms the strongest solidarity with the Bolivarian Revolution, its leaders and its people who remain in the struggle and at the same time reject the armed attacks perpetrated against government institutions. Also, there repeated calls for military coups, looting, and violence by opposition sectors with the objective of undermining the civic-military unity in the sister Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.
Once again we reaffirm the commitment that the sister Bolivarian nation will be able to count on us at this difficult stage, convinced that peace and reason will be imposed against the hatred and destabilizing plans of the fascist right.
Stop the pressures!
Stop interfering in the internal affairs of Venezuela!
Long live the civic-military unit!
Long live Peace!
Venezuela is not alone!
For a decisive victory in the National Constituent Assembly, WE WILL WIN!
International Executive Secretariat
Havana, June 30, 2017
CubaNews translation and editing by Walter Lippmann.
DECLARACION DE CONDENA DE LA OSPAAAL
La Organización de Solidaridad de los Pueblos de África, Asia y América Latina (OSPAAAL) manifiesta su más enérgica condena ante los atentados terroristas del pasado martes 27 de junio contra instalaciones gubernamentales venezolanas como el Tribunal Supremo de Justicia y el Ministerio del Poder Popular para las Relaciones Interiores, Justicia y Paz.
Este acto hostil contra la institucionalidad democrática pudo tener consecuencias muy lamentables para la integridad física de las personas que se encontraban en el interior de ambas sedes y pone en riesgo la vida de personas inocentes.
¿Cómo es posible que ante tal arrogancia y planes terroristas, en contubernio con los servicios de inteligencia norteamericanos y la enfermiza oposición venezolana, no se pronuncien ahora los principales medios de comunicación al servicio de los intereses del imperialismo? ¿Por qué ahora, organismos como la OEA no levantan una vos condenatoria y se quedan en el más absoluto silencio? ¿Cómo entender la doble moral de algunos gobiernos que condenan actos terroristas que tienen lugar en el mundo y no se pronuncien en estos momentos?
Toda manifestación terrorista merece la más enérgica condena por parte de la comunidad internacional que lucha denodadamente por un mundo de paz. Nuestra región tiene ese sello desde la II Cumbre de la CELAC de La Habana y no podemos permitir por ninguna razón que se ponga en peligro la soberanía, la coexistencia pacífica entre nuestros Estados y mucho menos se quebrante la institucionalidad democrática en nuestra región. La defensa de América Latina y el Caribe como región de Paz debe ser un compromiso permanente.
Este acto extremista, así como todas las acciones contrarrevolucionarias contra la Patria de Simón Bolívar y del líder eterno Hugo Chávez Frías, incluso los más crueles crímenes contra simpatizantes del Gobierno Bolivariano, forman parte de la escalada que los grupos más reaccionarios de la oposición venezolana llevan adelante para frustrar el proceso emancipador latinoamericano y derribar por la fuerza a un gobierno que fue ungido por la voluntad soberana de su pueblo en elecciones validadas también por organismos internacionales.
El Gobierno Bolivariano ha pasado por todo, acciones económicas, políticas, mediáticas, conspirativas y diplomáticas, ahora, enfrenta acciones terroristas que constituyen un serio peligro para la seguridad del país y que trata por todos los medios de que se produzca una intervención militar, que es a ciencia cierta uno de los principales objetivos para derrocar al Gobierno constitucional.
Esta nueva escalada dirigida a quebrantar la seguridad ciudadana ha costado la vida de 79 hijos del bravo pueblo venezolano.
La OSPAAAL reitera la más firme solidaridad con la Revolución Bolivariana, sus líderes y su pueblo que se mantienen en pie de lucha y al propio tiempo rechaza los ataques armados perpetrados contra las instituciones gubernamentales, así como los reiterados llamados a golpes militares, saqueos y violencia por parte de sectores opositores con el objetivo de socavar la unidad cívico-militar en la hermana República Bolivariana de Venezuela.
Una vez más reafirmamos el compromiso de que la hermana nación bolivariana podrá contar con nosotros en esta etapa difícil, convencidos de que la paz y la razón se impondrán contra el odio y los planes desestabilizadores de la derecha fascista.
¡Cesen las presiones!
¡Cesen las intromisiones en los asuntos internos de Venezuela!
¡Viva la unidad cívico-militar!
¡Viva la Paz!
¡Venezuela no está sola!
¡Por una victoria contundente en la Asamblea Nacional Constituyente, VENCEREMOS!
Secretariado Ejecutivo Internacional
La Habana, 30 de junio de 2017
Trump: Thunders and Traps
- English
- Español
Trump: Thunders and Traps
BULLETIN 4. RESPONSES TO TRUMP’S MIAMI SPEECH AND THE MEASURES ANNOUNCED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
As part of the responses to the rude speech of Trump in Miami and the announced measures of the US government to intensify the blockade; Cubarte offers you other opinions, declarations and messages of solidarity.
By Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada RedDH
A CubaNews translation edited by Walter Lippmann.
Much has been said and will be said about the grotesque show that took place in Miami on June 16 and the lies and threats against Cuba there pronounced. Trump’s speech, incoherent and clumsy like all his, made at least two things clear: he will do all he can to harden US policy toward Cuba, canceling the timid steps that his predecessor had taken and the current President is an irremediable liar.
It is customary there in the North to mix politics with spectacle, information with entertainment, even if, as in this case, in terrible taste. For those who look at it from the outside, a good dose of Cartesian doubt is advisable and prudence is necessary to avoid being confused. Especially if it’s about what someone says like the quirky occupant of the White House.
Congresswoman Barbara Lee, a tireless fighter for justice and civil rights, was right to reject Trump’s speech. She stressed the importance of fighting to prevent specific regulations which would translate the presidential directive into mandatory rules that are even more damaging to peoples of the two countries. There, on that very day, there was evident proof of the correctness of her concern.
In his speech, Trump announced that he would issue a new executive order to replace the one already repealed that had guided Obama’s policy in its last two years. There in front of everyone, he added his signature to the document that appears on the official site of the White House, but which nobody read.
What he said does not correspond exactly with what he signed and the latter is what counts, because it has legal force and will guide the conduct of his administration. The contrast is evident, for example, in the case of remittances many Cubans on the island receive from their relatives residing in the United States. According to the speaker in Miami, such remittances would continue and would not be affected.
But right there, in the same act, without hiding, he signed an order that says exactly the opposite. On this issue of remittances, the document entitled “Presidential Memorandum for the Strengthening of The United States Policy towards Cuba,” which Trump signed and which was publicized by the White House and in which the fine print states that there would be millions of Cubans living on the island who would not be allowed to receive remittances.
In Section III, subsection (D), the definition of “prohibited officials of the Government of Cuba” is now extended to cover the officers and employees of the Cuban State and Government and members of the Armed Forces And the Ministry of the Interior, the cadres of the CTC and those of the local trade unions and Defense Committees of the Revolution. Professor William M. Leogrande estimates that this would be more than one
million families.
Trump boasted that he would drop all Obama’s moves and he probably intends to do so.
But he knows that this contradicts the interests and opinions of some business sectors linked to the Republican Party and that is why he hides behind aggressive rhetoric and often undecipherable jargon. With regard to the issue of Cubans and remittances had no choice but to use his favorite weapon: the lie.
We must now see how they write and apply this new order that seeks to punish the Cuban population as a whole.
From: cubarte <cubarte@cubarte.cult.cu>
To: Cubarte <cubarte@cubarte.cult.cu>
Subject: [special] Bulletin 4 of June 30
Date: Jun 30, 2017 3:20 PM
BOLETIN 4. RESPUESTAS AL TRUMP DE MIAMI Y LAS ANUNCIADAS MEDIDAS DEL GOBIERNO ESTADOUNIDENSE
Como parte de las respuestas al grosero discurso de Trump en Miami y las anunciadas medidas del gobierno estadounidense para recrudecer el bloqueo; Cubarte pone a su disposición otras opiniones, declaraciones y mensajes
de solidaridad.
———————————————————————————————————-
I. OPINIONES
TRUMP: TRUENOS Y TRAMPAS
Por Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada RedDH
Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada
Mucho se ha dicho y se dirá sobre el grotesco show que tuvo lugar en Miami el 16 de junio y las mentiras y amenazas contra Cuba allí proferidas. El discurso de Trump, incoherente y torpe como todos los suyos, dejó en claro al menos
dos cosas: que hará todo lo que pueda para endurecer la política contra Cuba, anulando los tímidos pasos que había dado su predecesor y que el actual Presidente es un mentiroso irremediable.
Es costumbre allá en el Norte mezclar la política con el espectáculo, la información con el divertimiento, aunque sea, como en este caso, de pésimo gusto. Para quien lo observa desde fuera es recomendable una buena dosis de duda cartesiana y la prudencia necesaria para no dejarse confundir. Sobre todo si se trata de lo que diga alguien como el estrafalario ocupante de la Casa Blanca.
Con razón la congresista federal Barbara Lee, incansable luchadora por la justicia y los derechos civiles, al rechazar el discurso de Trump, subrayó la importancia de pelear por evitar que las regulaciones específicas para traducir en normas obligatorias la directiva presidencial sean aun más perjudiciales para los pueblos de los dos países. Allí mismo ese día se dio una prueba evidente de la justeza de su preocupación.
En su perorata Trump anunció que iba a emitir una nueva orden ejecutiva para reemplazar la ya derogada que había orientado la política de Obama en sus últimos dos años. Allí delante de todos, estampó su firma en el documento que
aparece en el sitio oficial de la Casa Blanca pero que nadie leyó.
Lo que dijo no corresponde exactamente con lo que suscribió y esto último es lo que vale, lo que tiene fuerza legal y guiará la conducta de su Administración. El contraste es evidente, por ejemplo, en el caso de las remesas que reciben
muchos cubanos en la isla de sus familiares residentes en Estados Unidos. Según el que habló en Miami tales remesas continuarían y no serían afectadas.
Pero allí mismo, en el mismo acto, sin esconderse, firmó una orden que dice exactamente lo contrario. A esta cuestión de las remesas dedica varios párrafos el documento titulado “Memorandum Presidencial para el Fortalecimiento de
la Política de Estados Unidos hacia Cuba”, que firmado por Trump publicó la Casa Blanca y con todas las letras establece que serían millones los cubanos residentes en la isla a quienes no se les permitiría recibir remesas.
En la Sección III, inciso (D) la definición de “funcionarios prohibidos del gobierno de Cuba” se amplía ahora para abarcar más allá de los dirigentes del Estado y el Gobierno cubanos a sus funcionarios y empleados y a los miembros y empleados de las Fuerzas Armadas y el Ministerio del Interior, a los cuadros de la CTC y a los de los sindicatos y los Comités de Defensa de la Revolución locales. El profesor William M. Leogrande calcula que se trataría de más de un
millón de familias.
Trump alardeó de que echaría abajo todas las medidas adoptadas por Obama y probablemente se propone hacerlo.
Pero sabe que ello contradice los intereses y opiniones de algunos sectores empresariales vinculados al Partido Republicano y por eso se escudó tras su retórica agresiva y su jerga a menudo indescifrable. Respecto al tema de los
cubanos y las remesas no le quedó otro remedio que emplear su arma favorita: la mentira.
Habrá que ver ahora como redactan y aplican esta nueva orden que pretende castigar al conjunto de la población cubana.
From: cubarte <cubarte@cubarte.cult.cu>
To: Cubarte <cubarte@cubarte.cult.cu>
Subject: [especial] Boletín 4 del 30 de Junio
Date: Jun 30, 2017 3:20 PM
Vicious Cyber-War Against Venezuela
Vicious Cyber-War Against Venezuela
By Manuel E. Yepe
The psychological warfare being waged by the oligarchic opposition in Venezuela –following the strategic and tactical objectives of US imperialism– has strong support in a well-organized Twitter operation that promotes protests from the Miami-based DolarToday platform. This is described in a research article published by the well-known specialist Erin Gallagher.
DolarToday is a US website based in Miami that, according to Wikipedia, “is more known for being an exchange rate reference to the Venezuelan bolivar” and “monitoring the Venezuelan economy.”
Currently, with no other reliable source other than the black market exchange rates, these rates are used by Reuters, CNBC, and several media news agencies and networks.
The Economist states in its defense that the rates calculated by DolarToday are “erratic”, but that they are “more realistic than the three official rates” released by the Venezuelan government. It maintains that it is not true that the rates published by DolarToday are manipulated in order to undercut the Venezuelan government.
The DolarToday website has been denounced by the Venezuelan State for setting a parallel dollar artificial price marker (black market). It has also been the target of a lawsuit by the Central Bank of Venezuela for falsifying the country’s exchange rates.
In 2013, President Maduro accused the website of “fueling an economic war against his government, and manipulating the exchange rate.”
“DolarToday is also promoting opposition protests in Venezuela. Its tweets are being boosted by automated accounts that exhibit repetitive, bot-like characteristics and are using a social media management tool called IFTTT (If This Then That) to automate their tweets”, says Erin Gallagher.
“What immediately caught my attention in the #TeamHDP hashtag data were the shared networks between the influencers (real persons of high credibility),” explained the specialist.
Trolls and bots carry out coordinated attacks to create false trends, congest or disrupt networks, and disseminate misinformation. Sometimes they succeed having a respected media –by neglect or mistake– disseminate their fake information and misleading headlines.
“Bots” are automated systems or programs –that can be run on home computers or on sophisticated servers—which use non-existent Twitter accounts to repeat a certain phrase hundreds or thousands of times. Thus they can turn those phrases into “trends”; that is to make them appear among the 10 or 20 topics that Twitter considers the subjects most discussed in recent hours.
Bot experts disguise themselves as “digital marketing companies”,create dozens or hundreds of fake Twitter accounts, and then use “bots” so that these accounts simultaneously tweet certain content, including headlines from news sites.
Because many journalists in the print media, radio and television use Twitter trends to determine what topics to deal with in their media, whoever dominates Twitter trends can get to determine the topics most talked about in the country’s media.
Gallagher says it is relatively easy to discover the use of these systems: when you enter a tag on Twitter and then click “Most Recent”, you will notice that there are hundreds or thousands of accounts tweeting exactly the same phrase.
This is not the first time robotic cyber actions have been observed in Venezuelan networks. Mexican researchers from the platform “LoQueSigue” used, in 2014, bots with the hashtag #PrayForVenezuela, which denounced “the violence, the repression and the supposed “censorship” of the protests in Venezuela,” which became a worldwide trend.
In addition, NoBotsPolitico of Spain documented fake accounts that supported the protests in Venezuela until June 2014, then remained silent for eight months, but went back to tweeting propaganda against Podemos in hashtags related to the 2015 elections in Spain.
Bloomberg published a feature on an investigation of March 2016 titled “How to Hack an Election” about the Colombian hacker Andrés Sepulveda, who worked with a team of hackers to manipulate information about the elections in Latin America. Sepulveda is currently serving 10 years in prison for crimes such as abusive access to computer networks, violation of personal data, espionage, and the use of malicious software during the 2014 election in Colombia.
It is not difficult to guess who controls the automated accounts that support #TeamHDP. The counterrevolution will someday have to answer for so much crime against the Venezuelan people.
June 26, 2017.
A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann.
Lack of labor discipline, a problem that needs solving
Lack of labor discipline, a problem that needs solving
Author: Lourdes Perez Navarro
January 10, 2009 0:40:08 CDT
A CubaNews translation.
Edited by Walter Lippmann.
A little over two years ago, the Resolution 188 of 2006, issued by the Minister of Labor and Social Security, came into effect. Consequently, institutions created or updated their internal disciplinary regulations. The aim was to strengthen labor discipline, educate the workers and deal with the lack of discipline and illegalities present in work places.
The draft [of this Resolution] was discussed and analyzed in meetings with workers before its approval, because it establishes rules and obligations at the workplace. Obligations include punctuality, meeting schedules, not leaving the workplace during working hours without permission of the supervisor, etc. It also states prohibitions like, not punching the card or signing the attendance record of another employee, and serious offenses, such as repeated absences, unjustified unpunctuality, and disregarding warnings and remonstrances.
According to Resolution 188, administrations are obliged to disclose and permanently explain to the workers the internal disciplinary regulations. Workers must obey regulations, or be subject to different disciplinary sanctions, depending on the gravity of the infraction.
It is known that lack of labor discipline slows production rates, erodes service quality and efficiency, and damages the country’s economy. It also dissatisfies the population. For example, if a machine operator doesn’t arrive on time, he interrupts or reduces that day’s production. If a lab technician is absent from work, a number of clinical trials can no longer be made.
These things are happening now. Specialists of the Ministry of Labor and Social Security monitored 2 042 companies and budgeted units during May-June 2008. The study showed that 60% of the workers did not comply with their working day.
They recorded 26 622 violations of labor discipline. Some of them were: late arrivals (46%), taking more than the allotted time for recess and eating (19%), working less than the stipulated working hours(13%), leaving before closing time(10% ) performing other unauthorized activities (5%), and leaving the workplace without proper authorization (4%).
Are a lot of financial and material resources needed to control and enforce discipline and efficient performance during the working day in each workplace? Or do we need more control, supervision and organization at the workplace?
Local administrations and directors are responsible for ongoing observation and control of how their workers comply with their obligations and abide by the rules established. Higher instances must be more demanding.
Why are internal disciplinary regulations put away in a drawer? On the contrary, they should be displayed on the workplace bulletin board, so all workers can see them. The Boards of Directors should periodically discuss the results of internal control checks.
Lack of labor discipline is not only personal. Certainly, those who violate discipline have names, and are liable to disciplinary actions that affect their pocket, their prestige or, in more serious cases, cost them their jobs.
But, this is not the only consequence. It damages the workers collective image, hinders completing economic plans, and affects the quality and efficiency of service. That is why labor discipline should be discussed in workers assemblies, at least once each quarter. This can not continue to be a problem.
How To Link Young People to Study and Work
A DEBATE ON HOW TO LINK YOUNG PEOPLE TO STUDY AND WORK
By Juan Morales Agüero
A CubaNews translation.
Edited by Walter Lippmann.
Social Workers considered this social problem in territorial evaluations and agreed that it has to be faced by all factors.
Las Tunas.-Nationwide, 2008 was the best year ever with regard to the reintegration and incorporation of young people to classrooms or workplaces. But, it has not yet reached all young people who neither do one, nor the other.
This statement was made by Enrique Gomez Cabezas, head of the social workers program in the country, during the provincial assembly of these professionals. The assembly analyzed the performance of this important program of the Revolution during 2008.
The most debated issue was, without doubt, young people who neither study nor work. Participants made a profound analysis and agreed that it needs a multi-factor approach. This is logical, because it is an issue that has a high priority today.
“We need to establish a link with the community, so that the different factors can keep us informed in a permanent and rapid way of the situation of the universe of their young people,” said Gomez Cabeza. He added that the work has to be personalized because there are no two cases alike. “Until we achieve this, we won’t have arrived at total results “, he said.
An aspect of the problem that received particular attention during the evaluation was the time period in which the identified cases must be dealt with. It is not enough to have the names of the young people in this situation. What is urgently needed is to work with them and resolve their situation.
Edgar Fernandez, from the municipality of Jesús Menéndez, took the floor to clarify that social workers have an enormous job before them regarding unemployed young people. He added that lots of creativity is needed to deal with it. And, that it depends on the links established with the family and the environment of the young person in question.
Cabeza Gomez took the floor again to remind participants that to have the healthy, just society we want to build, we can not have people that do not contribute anything to the country in terms of employment. He added that, in fact, many cases are very difficult and seemingly impossible to solve, but you can not dismiss anyone. We need to detect, identify and take care of them. “You have to be the social microscopes Fidel spoke about,” he said.
Yariri Torres, from the Amancio municipality, spoke about the usefulness of accompanying former prisoners throughout the process of getting jobs. She said former prisoners appreciate the presence of a social worker when they begin their new life in a workshop, a cooperative, or in any another job.
In a special intervention Deibis Garcia, provincial director of Labor, said that follow up is just as important as identifying and taking care of unemployed youths. If after the young person is studying or working, he doesn’t continue and gives up, then that defeat will be charged to our account.
A Probably Civil War in Israel
- English
- Español
A PROBABLE CIVIL WAR IN ISRAEL
By Manuel E. Yepe
http://manuelyepe.wordpress.com/
Exclusive for daily POR ESTO! of Mérida, México.
A CubaNews translation.
Edited by Walter Lippmann.
Is Israel on the verge of civil war, as a growing number of Middle East commentators suggest, with its Jewish population deeply divided over the future of the occupation of Palestinian soil?
Such is the question asked by Jonathan Cook, British writer and journalist based in Nazareth, a specialist on Middle East issues who writes for The Guardian, Al Jazeera and other media, who attempted to answer it in a recent article.
Cook wrote that on one side is a new peace movement, Decision at 50, stuffed with former political and security leaders. Ehud Barak, a previous prime minister who appears to be seeking a political comeback, may yet emerge as its figurehead.
The group has demanded the government hold a referendum next year – the half-centenary of Israel’s occupation, which began in 1967 – on whether it is time to leave the occupied territories. Its own polling shows a narrow majority ready to concede a Palestinian state.
On the other is Benjamin Netanyahu, in power for seven years with the most right-wing government in Israel’s history. Recently he posted a video on social networks criticizing those who want to end the occupation.
Cook wrote that whatever its proponents imply, the Decision at 50 referendum is about neither peace nor the Palestinians’ best interests. Its assumption is that yet again the Israeli public should determine unilaterally the Palestinians’ fate.
An Israeli consensus believes Gaza has been free of occupation since the settlers were pulled out in 2005, despite the fact that Israel still surrounds most of the coastal strip with soldiers, patrols its air space with drones and denies access to the sea.
The same unyielding, deluded Israeli consensus has declared East Jerusalem, the expected capital of a Palestinian state, as instead part of Israel’s “eternal capital”.
But the problem runs deeper still. When the new campaign proudly cites new figures showing that 58 per cent support “two States for two nations”, it glosses over what most Israelis think such statehood would entail for the Palestinians.
So what do Israelis think a Palestinian state should look like? Previous surveys have been clear. It would not include Jerusalem or control its borders. It would be territorially carved up to preserve the “settlement blocs”, which would be annexed to Israel. And most certainly it would be “demilitarized” – without an army or air force. In other words, Palestinians would lack sovereignty.
Such a state exists only in the imagination of the Israeli public. A Palestinian state on these terms would simply be an extension of the Gaza model to the West Bank.
Nonetheless, the idea of a civil war is gaining ground. Tamir Pardo, the recently departed head of Israel’s spy agency MOSSAD, warned before his death that Israel was on the brink of tearing itself apart through “internal divisions”. He rated this a bigger danger than any of the existential threats posited by Mr. Netanyahu, such as Iran’s supposed nuclear bomb.
But the truth is that there is very little ideologically separating most Israeli Jews. All but a tiny minority wish to see the Palestinians continue as a subjugated people. For the great majority, a Palestinian state means nothing more than a makeover of the occupation, penning up the Palestinians in slightly more humane conditions.
According to Cook, Israeli moderates have had to confront the painful reality that their country is not the enlightened outpost in the Middle East they had imagined. Those who cannot stomach such a view will have to stop equivocating and take sides.
They can leave, as some are already doing, or stay and fight – not for a bogus referendum that solves nothing, but to demand dignity and freedom for the Palestinian people, advises Jonathan Cook.
September 22, 2016.
You must be logged in to post a comment.