"The Fed are spending $100,000,000 a week buying government
securities in the open market and are making a great bid for foreign
business.
They are trying to make rates so attractive that the human hair
merchants and the distillers and other business entities in foreign land will
come her and hire more of the public credit of the United States
Government to pay the Fed outfit for getting it for them.
World Enslavement Planned
"Mr. Chairman, when the Fed was passed, the people of these United States did not perceive that a world system was being set up here which
would make the savings of the American school teacher available to a
narcotic-drug vendor in Acapulco. They did not perceive that these United
States was to be lowered to the position of a coolie country which has
nothing but raw material and heart, that Russia was destined to supply the
man power and that this country was to supply the financial power to an
"international superstate".
A superstate controlled by international bankers,
and international industrialists acting together to enslave the world for their own pleasure? "The people of these United States are being greatly wronged.
They have been driven from their employment's. They have been dispossessed from
their homes. They have been evicted from their rented quarters. They have
lost their children. They have been left to suffer and die for lack of shelter,
food, clothing and medicine.
"The wealth of these United States and the working capital have been
taken away from them and has either been locked in the vaults of certain
banks and the great corporations or exported to foreign countries for the
benefit of the foreign customers of these banks and corporations. So far as
the people of the United States are concerned, the cupboard is bare.
"It is true that the warehouses and coal yards and grain elevators are full,
but these are padlocked, and the great banks and corporations hold the keys.
"The sack of these United States by the Fed is the greatest crime in history.
"Mr. Chairman, a serious situation confronts the House of Representatives
today. We are trustees of the people and the rights of the people are being
taken away from them. Through the Fed the people are losing the rights
guaranteed to them by the Constitution. Their property has been taken from
them without due process of law.
Mr. Chairman, common decency requires us to examine the public accounts of the Government and see what crimes against the public welfare (and against humanity) have been committed.
"What is needed here is a return to the Constitution of these United States.
"The old struggle that was fought out here in Jackson's time must be fought our over again. The independent United States Treasury should be reestablished and the Government should keep its own money under lock and key in the building the people provided for that purpose.
"Asset currency, the devise of the swindler, should be done away with.
The Fed should be abolished and the State boundaries should be respected.
Bank reserves should be kept within the boundaries of the States whose
people own them, and this reserve money of the people should be
protected so that the International Bankers and acceptance bankers and
discount dealers cannot draw it away from them.
"The Fed should be repealed, and the Fed Banks, having violated their
charters, should be liquidated immediately. Faithless Government officials
who have violated their oaths of office should be impeached and brought to
trial.
"Unless this is done by us, I predict, that the American people, outraged,
pillaged, insulted and betrayed as they are in their own land, will rise in their wrath, and will sweep the money changers out of the temple.
"Mr. Chairman, the United States is bankrupt: It has been bankrupted by
the corrupt and dishonest Fed.
It has repudiated its debts to its own citizens. Its chief foreign creditor is Great Britain, and a British bailiff has been at the White House and the British Agents are in the United States Treasury making inventory arranging terms of liquidations!
Great Britain, Partner in Blackmail
"Mr. Chairman, the Fed has offered to collect the British claims in full from
the American public by trickery and corruption, if Great Britain will help to
conceal its crimes. The British are shielding their agents, the Fed, because
they do not wish that system of robbery to be destroyed here. They wish it
to continue for their benefit! By means of it, Great Britain has become the
financial mistress of the world. She has regained the position she occupied
before the World War.
"For several years (Britain) has been a silent partner in the business of the Fed.
Under threat of blackmail, or by their bribery, or by their native treachery to
the people of the United States, the officials in charge of the Fed unwisely
gave Great Britain immense gold loans running into hundreds of millions of
dollars. They did this against the law! Those gold loans were not single
transactions. They gave Great Britain a borrowing power in the United
States of billions. She squeezed billions out of this Country by means of her
control of the Fed.
"As soon as the Hoover Moratorium was announced, Great Britain moved
to consolidate her gains. After the treacherous signing away of American
rights at the 7-power conference at London in July, 1931, which put the Fed
under the control of the Bank of International Settlements, Great Britain
began to tighten the hangman's noose around the neck of the United
States.
"She (Great Britain) abandoned the gold standard and embarked on a campaign of buying up the claims of foreigners against the Fed in all parts of the world.
She has now sent her bailiff, Ramsey MacDonald, here to get her war debt to this country canceled. But she has a club in her hands! She has title to the gambling debts which the corrupt and dishonest Fed incurred abroad.
"Ramsey MacDonald, the labor party deserter, has come here to compel the President to sign on the dotted line, and that is what Roosevelt is about
to do! Roosevelt will endeavor to conceal the nature of his action from the
American people. But he will obey the International Bankers and transfer
the war debt that Great Britain should pay to the American people, to the
shoulders of the American taxpayers.
"Mr. Chairman, the bank holiday in the several States was brought about by
the corrupt and dishonest Fed. These institutions manipulated money and
credit, and caused the States to order bank holidays.
"These holidays were frame-ups! "They were dress rehearsals for the
national bank holiday which Franklin D. Roosevelt promised Sir Ramsey
MacDonald that he would declare.
"There was no national emergency here when Franklin D. Roosevelt took
office excepting the bankruptcy of the Fed- a bankruptcy which has been going on under cover for several years and which has been concealed from the people so that the people would continue to permit their bank deposits and their bank reserves and their gold and the funds of the United States
Treasury to be impounded in these bankrupt institutions.
"Under cover, the predatory International Bankers have been stealthily
transferring the burden of the Fed debts to the people's Treasury and to the
people themselves.
They the farms and the homes of the United States to
pay for their thievery!
That is the only national emergency that there has been here since the depression began.
"The week before the bank holiday was declared in New York State, the
deposits in the New York savings banks were greater than the withdrawals.
There were no runs on New York Banks. There was no need of a bank holiday in New York, or of a national holiday.
Roosevelt and the International Bankers
"Roosevelt did what the International Bankers ordered him to do!
"Do not deceive yourself, Mr. Chairman, or permit yourself to be deceived
by others into the belief that Roosevelt's dictatorship is in any way intended to benefit the people of the United States: he is preparing to sign on the
dotted line! "He is preparing to cancel the war debts by fraud!
"He is preparing to internationalize this Country and to destroy our
Constitution itself in order to keep the Fed intact as a money institution for
foreigners.
"Mr. Chairman, I see no reason why citizens of the United States should be
terrorized into surrendering their property to the International Bankers who own and control the Fed.
The statement that gold would be taken from its lawful owners if they did not voluntarily surrender it, to private interests, show that there is an anarchist in our Government.
"The statement that it is necessary for the people to give their gold- the only real money- to the banks in order to protect the currency, is a statement of calculated dishonesty!
"By his unlawful usurpation of power on the night of March 5, 1933, and by
his proclamation, which in my opinion was in violation of the Constitution of
the United States, Roosevelt divorced the currency of the United States
from gold, and the United States currency is no longer protected by gold. It
is therefore sheer dishonesty to say that the people's gold is needed to
protect the currency.
"Roosevelt ordered the people to give their gold to private interests- that is, to banks, and he took control of the banks so that all the gold and gold
values in them, or given into them, might be handed over to the predatory
International Bankers who own and control the Fed.
"Roosevelt cast his lot with the usurers.
"He (Roosevelt) agreed to save the corrupt and dishonest at the expense of the people of the United States.
"He took advantage of the people's confusion and weariness and spread the dragnet over the United States to capture everything of value that was left in it. He made a great haul for the International Bankers.
"The Prime Minister of England came here for money! He came here to
collect cash!
"He came here with Fed Currency and other claims against the Fed which
England had bought up in all parts of the world. And he has presented them
for redemption in gold.
"Mr. Chairman, I am in favor of compelling the Fed to pay their own debts. I
see no reason why the general public should be forced to pay the gambling
debts of the International Bankers.
Roosevelt Seizes the Gold
"By his action in closing the banks of the United States, Roosevelt seized
the gold value of forty billions or more of bank deposits in the United States
banks. Those deposits were deposits of gold values. By his action he has
rendered them payable to the depositors in paper only, if payable at all,
and the paper money he proposes to pay out to bank depositors and to the
people generally in lieu of their hard earned gold values in itself, and being
based on nothing into which the people can convert it the said paper
money is of negligible value altogether.
"It is the money of slaves, not of free men.
If the people of the United States permit it to be imposed upon them at the will of their credit masters, the next step in their downward progress will be their acceptance of orders on company stores for what they eat and wear. Their case will be similar to that of starving coal miners. They, too, will be paid with orders on Company stores for food and clothing, both of indifferent quality and be forced to live in Company-owned houses from which they may be evicted at the drop of a
hat. More of them will be forced into conscript labor camps under
supervision.
"At noon on the 4th of March, 1933, FDR with his hand on the Bible, took
an oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the U.S. At
midnight on the 5th of March, 1933, he confiscated the property of
American citizens. He took the currency of the United States standard of
value. He repudiated the internal debt of the Government to its own
citizens. He destroyed the value of the American dollar. He released, or
endeavored to release, the Fed from their contractual liability to redeem
Fed currency in gold or lawful money on a parity with gold. He depreciated
the value of the national currency.
"The people of the U.S. are now using unredeemable paper slips for
money.
The U.S. Treasury cannot redeem that paper in gold or silver.
The gold and silver of the Treasury has unlawfully been given to the corrupt and
dishonest Fed.
And the Administration has since had the effrontery to raid
the country for more gold for the private interests by telling our patriotic
citizens that their gold is needed to protect the currency.
"It is not being used to protect the currency! It is being used to protect the
corrupt and dishonest Fed.
"The directors of these institutions have committed criminal offense against the United States Government, including the offense of making false entries on their books, and the still more serious offense of unlawfully abstracting funds from the United States Treasury!
"Roosevelt's gold raid is intended to help them out of the pit they
dug for themselves when they gambled away the wealth and savings of the
American people.
Dictatorship
"The International Bankers set up a dictatorship here because they wanted
a dictator who would protect them. They wanted a dictator who would
protect them. They wanted a dictator who would issue a proclamation
giving the Fed an absolute and unconditional release from their special
currency in gold, or lawful money of any Fed Bank.
"Has Roosevelt relieved any other class of debtors in this country from the
necessity of paying their debts?
Has he made a proclamation telling the farmers that they need not pay their mortgages? Has he made a proclamation to the effect that mothers of starving children need not pay their milk bills? Has he made a proclamation relieving householders from the necessity of paying rent?
Roosevelt's Two Kinds of Laws
"Not he! He has issued one kind of proclamation only, and that is a
proclamation to relieve international bankers and the foreign debtors of the
United States Government.
"Mr. Chairman, the gold in the banks of this country belongs to the
American people who have paper money contracts for it in the form of
national currency. If the Fed cannot keep their contracts with United States
citizens to redeem their paper money in gold, or lawful money, then the Fed
must be taken over by the United States Government and their officers
must be put on trial.
"There must be a day of reckoning.
If the Fed have looted the Treasury so that the Treasury cannot redeem the United States currency for which it is liable in gold, then the Fed must be driven out of the Treasury.
"Mr. Chairman, a gold certificate is a warehouse receipt for gold in the Treasury, and the man who has a gold certificate is the actual owner of a
corresponding amount of gold stacked in the Treasury subject to his order.
"Now comes Roosevelt who seeks to render the money of the United
States worthless by unlawfully declaring that it may No Longer be converted
into gold at the will of the holder.
"Roosevelt's next haul for the International Bankers was
the reduction in the pay of all Federal employees.
"Next in order are the veterans of all wars, many of whom are aged and
infirm, and other sick and disabled. These men had their lives adjusted for
them by acts of Congress determining the amounts of the pensions, and,
while it is meant that every citizen should sacrifice himself for the good of
the United States, I see no reason why those poor people, these aged Civil
War Veterans and war widows and half-starved veterans of the World War,
should be compelled to give up their pensions for the financial benefit of
the International vultures who have looted the Treasury, bankrupted the
country and traitorously delivered the United States to a foreign foe.
"There are many ways of raising revenue that are better than that barbaric act of injustice.
"Why not collect from the Fed the amount they owe the U.S. Treasury in
interest on all the Fed currency they have taken from the Government?
That would put billions of dollars into the U.S. Treasury.
"If FDR is as honest as he pretends to be, he will have that done
immediately. And in addition, why not compel the Fed to disclose their
profits and to pay the Government its share?
"Until this is done, it is rank dishonesty to talk of maintaining the credit of
the U.S. Government. "My own salary as a member of Congress has been
reduced, and while I am willing to give my part of it that has been taken
away from me to the U.S. Government, I regret that the U.S. has suffered
itself to be brought so low by the vultures and crooks who are operating the
roulette wheels and faro tables in the Fed, that is now obliged to throw itself
on the mercy of its legislators and charwomen, its clerks, and it poor
pensioners and to take money out of our pockets to make good the
defalcations of the International Bankers who were placed in control of the
Treasury and given the monopoly of U.S. Currency by the misbegotten Fed.
"I am well aware that the International Bankers who drive up to the door of
the United States Treasury in their limousines, look down with scorn upon
members of Congress because we work for so little, while they draw
millions a year. The difference is that we earn, or try to earn, what we get-
and they steal the greater part of their takings.
Enemies of the People They Rob
"I do not like to see vivisection's performed on human beings. I do not like
to see the American people used for experimental purposes by the credit
masters of the United States. They predicted among themselves that they
would be able to produce a condition here in which American citizens
would be completely humbled and left starving and penniless in the streets.
"The fact that they made that assertion while they were fomenting their
conspiracy against the United States that they like to see a human being,
especially an American, stumbling from hunger when he walks.
"Something should be done about it, they say. Five-cent meals, or something!
"But,FDR will not permit the House of Representatives to investigate the
condition of the Fed. FDR will not do that. He has certain International
Bankers to serve. They look to him as the man Higher Up who will
protect them from the just wrath of an outraged people.
"The International Bankers have always hated our pensioners. A man with
a small pension is a ward of the Government. He is not dependent upon
them for a salary or wages. They cannot control him. They do not like him. It gave them great pleasure, therefore, to slash the veterans.
"But FDR will never do anything to embarrass his financial supporters. He
will cover up the crimes of the Fed.
"Before he was elected, Mr. Roosevelt advocated a return to the earlier
practices of the Fed, thus admitting its corruptness. The Democratic
platform advocated a change in the personnel of the Fed. These were
campaign bait.
As a prominent Democrat lately remarked to me; "There is no new deal. The same old crowd is in control."
"The claims of foreign creditors of the Fed have no validity in law.
The foreign creditors were the receivers- and the willing receivers- of stolen goods! They have received through their banking fences immense
amounts of currency, and that currency was unlawfully taken from the United
States Treasury by the Fed.
"England discovered the irregularities of the Fed quite early in its
operations and through fear, apparently, the Fed have for years suffered themselves to be blackmailed and dragooning England to share in the business of the Fed.
"The Fed have unlawfully taken many millions of dollars of the public credit of the United States and have given it to foreign sellers on the security of the Debt paper of foreign buyers in purely foreign transactions, and when the foreign buyers refused to meet their obligations
and the Fed saw no honest way of getting the stolen goods back into their
possession, they decided by control of the executive to make the American
people pay their losses!
Conspiracy of War Debts
"They likewise entered into a conspiracy to deprive the people of the U.S.
of their title to the war debts and not being able to do that in the way they
intended, they are now engaged in an effort to debase the American dollar
so that foreign governments will have their debts to this country cut in two,
and then by means of other vicious underhanded arrangements, they
propose to remit the remainder.
"So far as the U.S. is concerned, the gambling counters have no legal standing.
The U.S. Treasury cannot be compelled to make good the gambling ventures of the corrupt and dishonest Fed.
Still less should the bank deposits of the U.S. be used for that purpose.
Still less should the national currency have been made irredeemable in gold so that the gold which was massed and stored to redeem the currency for American citizens may be used to pay the gambling debts of the Fed for England's benefit.
"The American people should have their gold in their own possession where it cannot be held under secret agreement for any foreign control bank, or world bank, or oreign nation. Our own citizens have the prior claim to it. The paper [money men] have in their possession deserves
redemption far more than U.S. currency and credit which was stolen from
the U.S. Treasury and bootlegged abroad.
"Why should the foreigners be made preferred creditors of the bankrupt
U.S.? Why should the U.S. be treated as bankrupt at all?
This Government has immense sums due it from the Fed. The directors of these institutions are men of great wealth. Why should the guilty escape the consequences
of their misdeeds? Why should the people of these U.S. surrender the
value of their gold bank deposits to pay off the gambling debts of these
bankers? Why should Roosevelt promise foreigners that the U.S. will play
the part of a good neighbor, 'meeting its obligations'?
"Let the Fed meet their own obligations.
"Every member of the Fed should be compelled to disgorge, and every
acceptance banker and every discount corporation which has made illegal
profits by means of public credit unlawfully bootlegged out of the U.S.
Treasury and hired out by the crooks and vultures of the Fed should be
compelled to disgorge.
Federal Reserve Pays No Taxes
"Gambling debts due to foreign receivers of stolen goods should not be
paid by sacrificing our title to our war debts, the assets of the U.S.
Treasury- which belong to all the people of the U.S. and which it is our duty
to preserve inviolate in the people's treasury.
"The U.S. Treasury cannot be made liable for them.
The Fed currency must be redeemed by the Fed banks or else these Fed banks must be liquidated.
"We know from assertions made here by the Hon. John N. Garner,
Vice-President of the U.S. that there is a condition in the [United States
such] would cause American citizens, if they knew what it was, to lose all
confidence in their government.
"That is a condition that Roosevelt will not have investigated. He has brought with him from Wall Street, James Warburg, the son of Paul M.Warburg. Mr. Warburg, alien born, and the son of an alien who did not become naturalized here until several years after this Warburg's birth, is a son of a former partner of Kuhn, Loeb and Co., a grandson of another partner, a nephew of a former partner, and a nephew of a present partner.
"He holds no office in our Government, but I am told that he is in daily
attendance at the Treasury, and that he has private quarters there! In other
words, Mr. Chairman, Kuhn, Loeb and Company now has control and occupy the U.S. Treasury.
Preferred Treatment for Foreigners
"The text of the Executive order which seems to place an embargo on
shipments of gold permits the Secretary of the Treasury, a former director
of the corrupt, to issue licenses at his discretion for the export of gold coin,
or bullion, earmarked or held in trust for a recognized foreign government
or foreign central bank for international settlement.
Now, Mr. Chairman, if gold held in trust for those foreign institutions may be sent to them, I see no reason why gold held in trust for American as evidenced by their gold certificates and other currency issued by the U.S. Government should not
be paid to them.
"I think that American citizens should be entitled to treatment at least as good as that which the person is extending to foreign governments, foreign central banks, and the bank of International Settlements. I think a veteran of the world war, with a $20.00 gold certificate, is at least as much entitled to receive his own gold for it, as any international banker in the city of New York or London.
"By the terms of this executive order, gold may be exported if it is actually required, for the fulfillment of any contract entered into prior to the date of this order by an applicant who, in obedience to the executive order of April
5, 1933, has delivered gold coin, gold bullion, or gold certificates. "This
means that gold may be exported to pay the obligations abroad of the Fed
which were incurred prior to the date of the order, namely, April 20, 1933.
"If a European Bank should send 100,000,000 dollars in Fed currency to a
bank in this country for redemption, that bank could easily ship gold to
Europe in exchange for that currency. Such Fed currency would represent
"contracts" entered into prior to the date of the order. If the Bank of
International Settlements or any other foreign bank holding any of the
present gambling debt paper of the Fed should draw a draft for the settlement of such obligation, gold would be shipped to them because the debt contract would have been entered into prior to the date of order.
Crimes and Criminals
"Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of constitutional privilege.
"Whereas, I charge. . .Eugene Meyer, Roy A. Young, Edmund Platt,
Eugene B. Black, Adolph Casper Miller, Charles S. Hamlin, George R.
James, Andrew W. Mellon, Ogden L. Mills, William H. Woo W. Poole,
J.F.T. O'Connor, members of the Federal Reserve Board; F. H. Curtis, J.H.
Chane, R.L. Austin, George De Camp, L.B. Williams, W.W. Hoxton, Oscar
Newton, E.M. Stevens, J.S. Wood, J.N. Payton, M.L. McClure, C.C. Walsh,
Isaac B. Newton, Federal Reserve Agents, jointly and severally, with
violations of the Constitution and laws of the United States, and whereas I
charge them with having taken funds from the U.S Treasury which were not
appropriated by the Congress of the United States, and I charge them with
having unlawfully taken over $80,000,000,000 from the U.S. Government in
the year 1928, the said unlawful taking consisting of the unlawful creation of
claims against the U.S. Treasury to the extent of over $80,000,000,000 in
the year 1928; and I charge them with similar thefts committed in 1929,
1930, 1931, 1932 and 1933, and in years previous to 1928, amounting to
billions of dollars; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally with having unlawfully created
claims against the U.S. Treasury by unlawfully placing U.S. Government
credit in specific amounts to the credit of foreign governments and foreign
central banks of issue; private interests and commercial and private banks
of the U.S. and foreign countries, and branches of foreign banks doing
business in the U.S., to the extent of billions of dollars; and with having
made unlawful contracts in the name of the U.S. Government and the U.S.
Treasury; and with having made false entries on books of account; and
"Whereas I charge them jointly and severally, with having taken Fed Notes
from the U.S. Treasury and with having put Fed Notes into circulation
without obeying the mandatory provision of the Fed Act which requires the
Fed Board to fix an interest rate on all issues of Fed Notes supplied to Fed
Banks, the interest resulting therefrom to be paid by the Fed Banks to the
government of the U.S. for the use of the Fed Notes, and I charge them of
having defrauded the U.S. Government and the people of the U.S. of
billions of dollars by the commission of this crime, and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having purchased U.S.
Government securities with U.S. Government credit unlawfully taken and
with having sold the said U.S. Government securities back to the people of
the U.S. for gold or gold values and with having again purchased U.S.
Government securities with U.S. Government credit unlawfully taken and
with having again sold the said U.S. Government security for gold or gold
values, and I charge them with having defrauded the U.S. Government and
the people of the U.S. by this rotary process; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having unlawfully
negotiated U.S. Government securities, upon which the Government
liability was extinguished, as collateral security for Fed Notes and with
having substituted such securities for gold which was being held as
collateral security for Fed Notes, and with having by the process defrauded
the U.S. Government and the people of the U.S., and I charge them with the
theft of all the gold and currency they obtained by this process; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having unlawfully issued
Fed currency on false, worthless and fictitious acceptances and other
circulating evidence of debt, and with having made unlawful advances of
Fed currency, and with having unlawfully permitted renewals of
acceptances and renewals of other circulating evidences of debt, and with
having permitted acceptance bankers and discount dealer corporations
and other private bankers to violate the banking laws of the U.S.; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having conspired to
have evidences of debt to the extent of $1,000,000,000 artificially created
at the end of February, 1933, and early in March 1933, and with having
made unlawful issues and advances of Fed currency on the security of said
artificially created evidences of debt for a sinister purpose, and with having
assisted in the execution of said sinister purpose; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having brought about the
repudiation of the currency obligations of the Fed Banks to the people of
the U.S. and with having conspired to obtain a release for the Fed Board
and the Fed Banks from their contractual liability to redeem all Fed
currency in gold or lawful money at the Fed Bank and with having
defrauded the holders of Fed currency, and with having conspired to have
the debts and losses of the Fed Board and the Fed Banks unlawfully
transferred to the Government and the people of the U.S., and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having unlawfully
substituted Fed currency and other irredeemable paper currency for gold in
the hands of the people after the decision to repudiate the Fed currency
and the national currency was made known to them, and with thus having
obtained money under false pretenses; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having brought about a
repudiation of the notes of the U.S. in order that the gold value of the said
currency might be given to private interests, foreign governments, foreign
central banks of issues, and the Bank of International Settlements, and the
people of the U.S. to be left without gold or lawful money and with no
currency other that a paper currency irredeemable in gold, and I charge
them with having done this for the benefit of private interests, foreign
governments, foreign central banks of issue, and the bank of International
Settlements; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with conniving with the Edge
Law banks, and other Edge Law institutions, accepting banks, and
discount corporations, foreign central banks of issue, foreign commercial
banks, foreign corporations, and foreign individuals with funds unlawfully
taken from the U.S. Treasury; and I charge them with having unlawfully
permitted and made possible 'new financing' for foreigners at the expense
of the U.S. Treasury to the extent of billions of dollars and with having
unlawfully permitted and made possible the bringing into the United States
of immense quantities of foreign securities, created in foreign countries for
export to the U.S. and with having unlawfully permitted the said foreign
securities to be imported into the U.S. instead of gold, which was lawfully
due to the U.S. on trade balances and otherwise, and with having lawfully
permitted and facilitated the sale of the said foreign securities in the U.S.,
and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having unlawfully
exported U.S. coins and currency for a sinister purpose, and with having
deprived the people of the U.S. of their lawful medium of exchange, and I
charge them with having arbitrarily and unlawfully reduced the amount of
money and currency in circulation in the U.S. to the lowest rate per capita in
the history of the Government, so that the great mass of the people have
been left without a sufficient medium of exchange, and I charge them with
concealment and evasion in refusing to make known the amount of U.S.
money in coins and paper currency exported and the amount remaining in
the U.S. as a result of which refusal the Congress of the U.S. is unable to
ascertain where the U.S. coins and issues of currency are at the present
time, and what amount of U.S. currency is now held abroad; (M1,M2,M3 2007)and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having arbitrarily and
unlawfully raised and lowered the rates of money and with having arbitrarily
increased and diminished the volume of currency in circulation for the
benefit of private interests at the expense of the Government and the
people of the U.S. and with having unlawfully manipulated money rates,
wages, salaries and property values both real and personal, in the U.S. by
unlawful operations in the open discount market and by resale and
repurchase agreements unsanctioned by law, and
"Whereas I charge them jointly and severally, with having brought about the
decline in prices on the New York Stock Exchange and other exchanges in
October, 1929, by unlawful manipulation of money rates and the volume of
U.S. money and currency in circulation: by theft of funds from the U.S.
Treasury by gambling in acceptances and U.S. Government securities; by
service rendered to foreign and domestic speculators and politicians, and
by unlawful sale of U.S. gold reserves abroad, and
"Whereas the unconstitutional inflation law imbedded in the so-called Farm
Relief Act by which the Fed Banks are given permission to buy U.S.
Government securities to the extent of $3,000,000,000 and to draw forth
currency from the people's Treasury to the extent of $3,000,000,000 is
likely to result in connivance on the part of said accused with others in the
purchase by the Fed of the U.S. Government securities to the extent of
$3,000,000,000 with U.S. Government's own credit unlawfully taken, it
being obvious that the Fed do no not intend to pay anything of value to the
U.S. Government for the said U.S. Government securities no provision for
payment in gold or lawful money appearing in the so-called Farm Relief bill-
and the U.S. Government will thus be placed in a position of conferring a
gift of $3,000,000,000 in the U.S. Government securities on the Fed to
enable them to pay more on their bad debts to foreign governments,
foreign central banks of issue, private interests, and private and
commercial banks, both foreign and domestic, and the Bank of
International Settlements, and
"Whereas the U.S. Government will thus go into debt to the extent of
$3,000,000,000 and will then have an additional claim of $3,000,000,000
in currency unlawfully created against it and whereas no private interest
should be permitted to buy U.S. Government securities with the
Government's own credit unlawfully taken and whereas currency should not
be issued for the benefit of said private interest or any interests on U.S.
Government securities so acquired, and whereas it has been publicly
stated and not denied that the inflation amendment of the Farm Relief Act
is the matter of benefit which was secured by Ramsey MacDonald, the
Prime Minister of Great Britain, upon the occasion of his latest visit to the
U.S. Treasury, and whereas there is grave danger that the accused will
employ the provision creating U.S. Government securities to the extent of
$3,000,000,000 and three millions in currency to be issuable thereupon for
the benefit of themselves and their foreign principals, and that they will
convert the currency so obtained to the uses of Great Britain by secret
arrangements with the Bank of England of which they are the agents, and
for which they maintain an account and perform services at the expense of
the U.S. Treasury, and that they will likewise confer benefits upon the Bank
of International Settlements for which they maintain an account and perform
services at the expense of the U.S. Treasury; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having concealed the
insolvency of the Fed and with having failed to report the insolvency of the
Fed to the Congress and with having conspired to have the said insolvent
institutions continue in operation, and with having permitted the said
insolvent institutions to receive U.S. Government funds and other deposits,
and with having permitted them to exercise control over the gold reserves
of the U.S. and with having permitted them to transfer upward of
$100,000,000,000 of their debts and losses to the general public and the
Government of the U.S., and with having permitted foreign debts of the Fed
to be paid with the property, the savings, the wages, and the salaries of the
people of the U.S. and with the farms and the homes of the American
people, and whereas I charge them with forcing the bad debts of the Fed
upon the general public covertly and dishonestly and and with taking the
general wealth and savings of the people of the U.S. under false pretenses,
to pay the debts of the Fed to foreigners; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with violations of the Fed Act
and other laws; with maladministration of the h evasions of the Fed Law
and other laws; and with having unlawfully failed to report violations of law
on the part of the Fed Banks which, if known, would have caused the Fed
Banks to lose their charters, and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with failure to protect and
maintain the gold reserves and the gold stock and gold coinage of the U.S.
and with having sold the gold reserves of the U.S to foreign Governments,
foreign central banks of issue, foreign commercial and private banks, and
other foreign institutions and individuals at a profit to themselves, and I
charge them with having sold gold reserves of the U.S. so that between
1924 and 1928 the U.S. gained no gold on net account but suffered a
decline in its percentage of central gold reserves from the 45.9 percent in
1924 to 37.5 percent in 1928 notwithstanding the fact that the U.S. had a
favorable balance of trade throughout that period, and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having conspired to
concentrate U.S. Government securities and thus the national debt of the
U.S. in the hands of foreigners and international money lenders and with
having conspired to transfer to foreigners and international money lenders
title to and control of the financial resources of the U.S.; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having fictitiously paid
installments on the national debt with Government credit unlawfully taken;
and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with the loss of the U.S.
Government funds entrusted to their care; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having destroyed
independent banks in the U.S. and with having thereby caused losses
amounting to billions of dollars to the said banks, and to the general public
of the U.S., and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with the failure to furnish true
reports of the business operations and the true conditions of the Fed to the
Congress and the people, and having furnished false and misleading
reports to the congress of the U.S., and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having published false
and misleading propaganda intended to deceive the American people and
to cause the U.S. to lose its independence; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with unlawfully allowing Great
Britain to share in the profits of the Fed at the expense of the Government
and the people of the U.S.; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having entered into
secret agreements and illegal transactions with Montague Norman,
Governor of the Bank of England; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with swindling the U.S.
Treasury and the people of the U.S. in pretending to have received
payment from Great Britain of the amount due on the British ware debt to
the U.S. in December, 1932; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having conspired with
their foreign principals and others to defraud the U.S. Government and to
prevent the people of the U.S. from receiving payment of the war debts due
to the U.S. from foreign nations; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with having robbed the U.S
Government and the people of the U.S. by their theft and sale of the gold
reserves of the U.S. and other unlawful transactions created a deficit in the
U.S. Treasury, which has necessitated to a large extent the destruction of
our national defense and the reduction of the U.S. Army and the U.S. Navy
and other branches of the national defense; and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, of having reduced the U.S.
from a first class power to one that is dependent, and with having reduced
the U.S. from a rich and powerful nation to one that is internationally poor;
and
"Whereas I charge them, jointly and severally, with the crime of having
treasonable conspired and acted against the peace and security of the
U.S. and with having treasonable conspired to destroy constitutional
Government in the U.S.
"Resolve, That the Committee on the Judiciary is authorized and directed
as a whole or by subcommittee, to investigate the official conduct of the
Fed agents to determine whether, in the opinion of the said committee,
they have been guilty of any high crime or misdemeanor which in the
contemplation the Constitution requires the interposition of the
Constitutional powers of the House. Such Committee shall report its finding
to the House, together with such resolution or resolutions of impeachment
or other recommendations as it deems proper.
"For the purpose of this resolution the Committee is authorized to sit and
act during the present Congress at such times and places in the District of
Columbia or elsewhere, whether or not the House is sitting, has recessed
or has adjourned, to hold such clerical, stenographic, and other assistants,
to require of such witnesses and the production of such books, papers, and
documents, to take such testimony, to have such printing and binding done,
and to make such expenditures as it deems necessary."
After some discussion and upon the motion of Mr. Byrns, the resolution and
charge was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
"Attacks on McFadden's Life Reported"
Commenting on Former Congressman Louis T. McFaddens's
"heart-failure sudden-death" on Oct. 3, 1936, after a "dose" of "intestinal
flu," "Pelley's Weekly" of Oct. 14 said:
Now that this sterling American patriot has made the Passing, it
can be revealed that not long after his public utterance against
the encroaching powers of Judah, it became known among his
intimates that he had suffered two attacks against his life.
The first attack came in the form of two revolver shots fired at him
from ambush as he was alighting from a cab in front of one of
the Capital hotels. Fortunately both shots missed him, the
bullets burying themselves in the structure of the cab.
"He became violently ill after partaking of food at a political
banquet at Washington. His life was only saved from what was
subsequently announced as a poisoning by the presence of a
physician friend at the banquet, who at once procured a stomach
pump and subjected the Congressman to emergency treatment." /s/
Robert Edward Edmondson (Publicist-Economist)
President Andrew Jackson stated in reference to
the bankers at the state of his administration: "You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out."
FINISH
1)the vast ramifications of this gigantic private credit monopoly
2)concerning banking and currency affairs
viernes, 3 de agosto de 2007
jueves, 2 de agosto de 2007
*Dorindo Cárdenas-50 años de Cultura Panameña
Josefponce-Dorindo Cárdenas-Mike Juraschek visitando a "Richard" en su paraiso de Cerro Campana Agosto 2007. No estaba "Richard."
Dorindo_jose-Primo
Dorindo+Afiche de Medio Siglo de Musico deleitando al Pueblo Panameño, dedicado a Basta Ya! USA! y a Miguel de Alemania.
Former VP Billy Ford, Mike en Cafe Coca Cola Agosto 2007 con "pericos del Barrio."
lunes, 30 de julio de 2007
*NGO´s, new fist and boot for USA Covert Diplomacy
Este analisis esta basado sobre hechos de hace 2-3 años en Europa, el
modo de operar del emperio sigue vigente en la actualidad en toda
America y resto del mundo.
http://www.voltaire net.org/article1 23804.html
La CIA con rostro humano
Las ONG, nuevo brazo de la diplomacia estadounidense
Aunque los recientes sucesos de Georgia y Ucrania fueron calificados
de «revoluciones» , la realidad es otra ya que su objetivo no era un
cambio de sociedad sino, únicamente, provocar cambios de gobierno
favorables a los aliados de Estados Unidos. Las protestas y los
movimientos callejeros fueron organizados por ONGs financiadas y
dirigidas, directa o indirectamente, por Washington conforme a un
plan expuesto hace más de un año en un informe oficial de la USAID.
En unos años, ciertas ONGs se han transformado en caballos de Troya
del departamento de Acción de la CIA.
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
11 de febrero de 2005
El derrocamiento del presidente georgiano Eduard Chevarnadze, en
noviembre de 2003, y la ascensión al poder de Viktor Yuschenko en
Ucrania, en diciembre de 2004, consagran, según la mayoría de los
politólogos europeos, el triunfo de la sociedad civil democrática en
los antiguos satélites soviéticos.
Al oír las loas de la llamada «prensa occidental», parece que no
puede uno menos que alegrarse de la forma en que los pueblos
sometidos por la antigua URSS toman hoy el destino en sus manos y se
unen, es debido, al único bando justo, representado por -no hay más
escoger- Occidente, Europa o la OTAN.
Todo ello, gracias al formidable trabajo de terreno y de movilización
que hicieron numerosas organizaciones no gubernamentales o
extranjeras para convencer a los georgianos, los ucranianos y, quizás
mañana, a los bielorrusos, de que es importante hacer valer sus
propios derechos.
La realidad es más compleja y seguramente mucho menos idílica. Parece
en efecto que, conforme a la línea de las teorías del politólogo
estadounidense Gene Sharp, desarrolladas en el seno de la Albert
Einstein Institution [1], Estados Unidos elaboró desde el final de la
guerra fría una nueva doctrina de golpes de estado soft mediante la
utilización de técnicas no violentas.
Inspirándose en la eficacia de las luchas políticas que desarrolló en
la India Mohandas K. Gandhi, Washington trata desde hace alrededor de
diez años de derrocar los gobiernos que no le gustan mediante un
dispositivo que le garantice el apoyo de la opinión pública
internacional.
En el centro de la nueva doctrina, las organizaciones no
gubernamentales, tan populares ante los medios de difusión, juegan un
papel esencial. Como señala el periodista de Counterpunch Jacob
Levich, «las organizaciones no gubernamentales -asociaciones
teóricamente independientes y con la reputación de humanitarias,
conocidas bajo de la denominación de ONG- están ya abiertamente
incorporadas a la estrategia de conjunto de Washington para
consolidar su supremacía global» [2].
El hecho de que la mayor parte de las ONG, sobre todo las más
importantes, sean financiadas por fondos «privados-públicos» no es
nuevo. Hace tiempo que las agencias gubernamentales de ayuda tienen
como objetivo subvencionar, por lo menos parcialmente, organizaciones
humanitarias especializadas en el desarrollo. Numerosas ONG aceptan
igualmente fondos provenientes del Open Society Institute de George
Soros aún cuando los lazos de este último con la diplomacia
subterránea estadounidense son bien conocidos [3].
Sin embargo, durante muchos años el carácter dudoso de esos
financiamientos -que ponen en tela de juicio la definición misma de
lo que debe ser una organización no gubernamental- no tenían
influencia real en la integridad con la estas realizaban sus
actividades. La cantidad de ONG que apoya, por ejemplo, el Open
Society Institut excluía la utilización de esa vía para establecer un
control sobre los numerosos proyectos en marcha [4].
Sin embargo, las cosas cambiaron desde principios de los años 2000, y el cambio fue deliberado. En el pasado, Estados Unidos acostumbraba a
financiar grupos políticos y guerrillas armadas, así como
sindicatos [5]. A partir de la llegada de George W. Bush al poder, en
enero de 2001, las ONG fueron integradas poco a poco al aparato
estadounidense de ingerencia.
La idea se fue imponiendo, primero en algunos think tanks [Centros
de investigación, propaganda y divulgación de ideas, generalmente de
carácter político] neoconservadores, luego en el seno de la United
States Agency for International Developpment (USAID) [6].
Esta agencia gubernamental estadounidense, dependiente del
Departamento de Estado, es el equivalente del ministerio francés de
Cooperación. Fundada por John F. Kennedy en 1961, la USAID «apoya el crecimiento económico equitativo y a largo plazo y promueve la
política exterior estadounidense apoyando: el crecimiento económico,
la agricultura y el comercio, la salud, la democracia, la prevención
de conflictos y la ayuda humanitaria».
Para ello, la USAID debe seguir directivas del Departamento de Estado
y es financiada por fondos públicos. Su acción en el terreno consiste
principalmente en redistribuir esos fondos en los países que
Washington desea «ayudar», sobre todo a través de organizaciones no
gubernamentales [7].
La llegada al poder de una administració n belicista en enero de 2001 no podía dejar de tener consecuencias para un organismo tan ligado a
la política exterior estadounidense. Sobre todo si se tiene en cuenta
que el director de l'agencia, Andrew S. Natsios, está muy ligado al
nuevo equipo de gobierno. Adepto del «conservadurismo compasivo»,
Natsios fue miembro del equipo que dirigió en 1980 la campaña
electoral de George H. W. Bush, quien lo nombró después, en 1988, en
el Buró de Ayuda para las Catástrofes en el Extranjero antes de que
Natsios se sumara a la asociación caritativa cristiana WorldVision a partir de 1992 [8].
A la par de la Casa Blanca, la USAID modificó por tanto su relación
con las ONG para integrarlas progresivamente al aparato de ingerencia
articulado alrededor del conjunto NED/CIA. Eso es lo que revela la
lectura de un informe publicado por la agencia en enero de 2003, documento en el que nadie reparó en pleno período de preparación de
la guerra contra Irak. El informe detalla cómo desea el Departamento de Estado utilizar en lo adelante las organizaciones no gubernamentales.
Bajo el título Ayuda internacional en nombre del interés nacional:
Promover la libertad, la seguridad y la oportunidad, el informe nos
pone al tanto de las nuevas prioridades de la USAID. La agencia no
concebirá ya sus programas con el fin único de aliviar la miseria
humana sino que se dedicará más bien a «estimular reformas
democráticas» [9].
Ese cambio de política es consecuencia de la nueva Estrategia de
Seguridad Nacional para Estados Unidos publicada por la Casa Blanca
en septiembre 2002. La administració n Bush afirma en esa estrategia que Estados Unidos necesita garantizar su propia seguridad instaurando regimenes democráticos en los países enemigos.
Esa es la posición que adoptó la USAID al planear que los regímenes
«amigos» sean recompensados mediante la atribución de financiamiento
para proyectos de desarrollo mientras que los países «hostiles» serán
blanco de programas de «reformas» aplicadas por organizaciones no
gubernamentales.
Estas últimas ONG´s, consignan en efecto los autores, dependen cada vez más
de sus fuentes de financiamiento y han perdido, por consiguiente,
mucho de su independencia: «las ONG trabajaban antes a buena
distancia de donantes gubernamentales, pero con el tiempo esa
relación se ha hecho más íntima».
Dicho por lo claro, los gobiernos ejercen actualmente mayor control
sobre los programas que financian, lo que abre la vía a su
utilización como instrumento. Eso es ni más ni menos lo que propone
la USAID. Casi sin disimulo, la agencia explica cómo utilizar las ONG
para propiciar golpes de Estado: «Es posible aportar una ayuda a los
reformadores que permitirán identificar a los ganadores y perdedores
más importantes, desarrollar la construcción de coaliciones y de
estrategias de movilización y elaborar campañas de relaciones
públicas (...) Ese tipo de ayuda puede representar una inversión para
el futuro, cuando un cambio político otorgue el verdadero poder a los
reformadores» (página 51).
Eso fue precisamente lo que pasó en Georgia en noviembre 2003.
Después de haber sido hasta entonces un aliado siempre fiel de
Estados Unidos, el presidente Eduard Shervarnadze se vio súbitamente
criticado por Washington en cuanto a su «gestión» democrática en el
país, cuando emprendió un acercamiento con la Rusia de Vladimir Putin.
Era ese el objetivo de la visita de James Baker III a Georgia,
durante el verano de 2003, ocasión en que el ex-secretario de Estado
advirtió al presidente georgiano y lo invitó a garantizar la
legalidad de las elecciones legislativas. Un discurso que permitió
legitimar después la llegada de numerosas organizaciones no
gubernamentales con el fin de controlar el escrutinio.
Paralelamente, Washington aplicó al pie de la letra las
recomendaciones de la USAID emprendiendo urgentemente el
adiestramiento de Mijail Saakachvili como sucesor pro estadounidense.
Durante el verano, este jurista, miembro del colegio de abogados de
New York y ex-miembro del gobierno georgiano, es invitado a un
seminario en Belgrado «para aprender cómo hacer una «revolución de
terciopelo» como la de los serbios. El señor Saakachvili recibió
instrucciones detalladas que siguió al pie de la letra» [10].
El tal seminario estaba organizado por el Centro para la Resistencia
no violenta de Belgrado, ONG subvencionada por el Open Society
Institute de George Soros [11]].
Al mismo tiempo, el «filántropo» financia un movimiento de jóvenes
opositores -algunos tienen apenas 15 años- para crear en Georgia
condiciones con vistas a una sublevación popular. Bajo el nombre de
Kmara (¡Basta!), la estructura de esa organización sigue el modelo del movimiento serbio Otpor que había desafiado a Milosevic en
Belgrado en el 2000, también gracias a los fondos del Open Society de Soros. Numerosos cuadros de Otpor fueron enviados a Georgia para
formar allí a los futuros cuadros de la «revolución no violenta».
Logos de las organizaciones Otpor y Pora. Dos organizaciones
juveniles controladas por los servicios secretos estadounidenses.
El factor desencadenante depende también de organizaciones no
gubernamentales. Se trata de poner en tela de juicio la limpieza del proceso electoral durante las elecciones legislativas de noviembre de
2003. Durante estas, los movimientos progubernamentales alcanzan una
victoria limitada, seguidas de cerca por la oposición que representan Mijail Saakachvili y Nina Bourdjanadze, la presidenta del parlamento.
Pero no son estos últimos quienes iniciarán las protestas sino un
responsable estadounidense, Adam Ereli, vocero del Departamento de
Estado. Habla de «fraudes masivos» y de «amplias manipulaciones del
conteo de votos». Ereli basa sus argumentos en la diferencia
existente entre las cifras que anuncia la comisión electoral
georgiana, cerca de tres semanas después del escrutinio del 2 de
noviembre, y las de «prestigiosas organizaciones independientes» [12].
En este aspecto, el papel de las ONG es también determinante. Los
sondeos estuvieron, efectivamente, a cargo de dos organismos
diferentes. El primero, la Fair Elections Society (ISFED), financiado
por el British Council y, del lado estadounidense, por la USAID y la
NED mediante el National Democratic Institute, la International
Foundation for Election Systems (IFES) y el International Republican
Institute [13].
El segundo sondeo fue realizado por una sociedad estadounidense
especializada en análisis electoral, el Global Strategy Group, con la ayuda de la Open Society Georgia de George Soros, de la Eurasia
Foundation (también financiada por la USAID y dirigida por un
ex-responsable del Departamento de Estado, Charles William Maynes) y
de la cadena de televisión «independiente» Rustavi 2, creada en 1994
gracias al financiamiento de George Soros [14].
Paralelamente, asociaciones georgianas de derechos humanos difunden,
mediante su sitio en internet y a través de comunicados, informes
alarmantes sobre la represión desatada contra la oposición y la
omnipresencia de la corrupción.
Estas afirmaciones, de las que se hacen eco constantemente los medios
de difusión de Europa occidental, proceden en realidad de una fuente
principal: la ONG Liberty Foundation, financiada por la USAID y que
hasta mayo de 2003 había sido dirigida por... Mijail Saakachvili [15].
El dispositivo es tan poderoso que no hay posibilidad de fracaso. A
finales de noviembre, Eduard Shevarnadze renuncia al poder. Lo
reemplaza la presidenta del parlamento Nina Bourdjanadze, hasta la
elección, en enero de 2004, de Mijail Saakachvili a la silla
presidencial.
Este último no olvidará a la «sociedad civil» que lo llevó al poder.
El presentador estrella de la cadena Rustavi 2, Nika Tabatadze, se
convierte en segundo del ministro de Relaciones Exteriores antes de
ser nombrado presidente de la cadena en octubre de 2004 [16].
El responsable del Open Society Institute en Georgia, Kakha Lomaia,
es nombrado ministro de Educación del gobierno de Saakachvili. Otras
personalidades pasan con él de la categoría de «miembros de
organizaciones no gubernamentales» al rango de miembros del gobierno.
El mismo guión se repitió al parecer en Ucrania en noviembre y diciembre de 2004 [17]. Allí encontramos de nuevo un movimiento de
oposición financiado por George Soros, un candidato de oposición muy
favorable a la OTAN, sondeos «a boca de urna» realizados por varias
ONG financiadas por la NED/CIA y favorables a la oposición, y una
campaña de prensa violentamente rusófoba en el seno de la Unión
Europea.
El parlamentario estadounidense Ron E. Paul va aún más lejos. Según
él, una de las ONG más activas en Ucrania, el International Center
for Policy Studies, es financiada por el gobierno estadounidense
mediante la Poland-America- Ukraine Cooperation Initiative (PAUCI),
organismo subvencionado por la USAID y administrado por la Freedom
House [18].
El mismo Viktor Yushchenko es miembro del consejo administrativo de
esta organización fundada por el Open Society Institute. Peor aún, el
mismo parlamentario norteamericano Ron E. Paul denuncia una sociedad estadounidense de relaciones públicas, Development Associates Inc. que recibió 100 millones de dólares del gobierno norteamericano, esencialmente para garantizar la cobertura de la «revolución naranja» en Ucrania [19].
Una nueva forma de ingerencia está naciendo. Mediante la utilización de elementos de la «sociedad civil», tiene como método esencial el de sembrar la duda sobre los procesos electorales y organizar
importantes campañas de propaganda para denigrar a los dirigentes que Washington decide eliminar.
Además de los dos recientes ejemplos, países como Venezuela, Zimbabwe y Bielorrusia son actualmente blancos de presiones similares, hasta ahora sin éxito. Un proyecto de organizaciones especializadas en la supervisión de elecciones, el European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations (ENEMO), nació en septiembre de 2001.
La enumeración de los asociados -entre otros, la OSCE, el National
Democratic Institute y el Open Society Institute- es suficiente para
tener una idea de los intereses que defienden. En ese dispositivo, el papel de catalizador corresponde a las ONG. Hace diez años se
sospechaba ya que, bajo la cobertura de la acción humanitaria, muchas de ellas realizaban trabajo de inteligencia con vista a la preparación de intervenciones militares.
El mundo vive hoy al ritmo de la CNN. Lo que importa no es la
realidad de una revolución o de un golpe de Estado sino la imagen que
se da del hecho. Es por eso que ciertas organizaciones no
gubernamentales están siendo llamadas hoy no solamente a informar
sino a intervenir directamente en el seno de los regimenes, como
caballos de Troya.
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
[1] Ver: «La Albert Einstein Institution: no violencia según la CIA»,
por Thierry Meyssan, Voltaire, 10 de febrero de 2005.
[2] «When NGOs Attack : Implications of the Coup in Georgia», por
Jacob Levich, Counterpunch, 6-7 de diciembre 2003.
[3] Ver: «George Soros, especulador y filántropo», Voltaire, 3 de
febrero de 2004.
[4] No es menos cierto que el generoso donante dispone siempre de un
importante medio de presión sobre la organización que financia: la
posibilidad de no renovar su subvención. Un elemento muy real para
las ONG aquí mencionadas, tanto más cuanto que el Open Society
Institute ocupa actualmente una situación excepcional en el «mercado»
de la filantropía, lo que hace que sea muy importante la posibilidad
de conservar su aprobación.
[5] Ver: «¿AFL-CIO o AFL-CIA?->article12 3396]», por Paul Labarique,
Voltaire, 19 de enero de 2005; «1962-1979: La AFL-CIO y la
contrainsurgencia sindical», Voltaire, 19 de enero de 2005.
[6] «La USAID y las redes terroristas de Bush» por Edgar Gonzales
Ruiz, Voltaire, 15 de julio de 2004.
[7] Desde 2003, Estados Unidos emprendió un amplio proyecto de ayuda
a los países en vías de desarrollo en el seno de una nueva agencia,
la Millenium Challenge Corporation. Esta exige que los países
beneficiados organicen la liberalizació n de sus economías y su
apertura a los inversionistas extranjeros. Reclama además importantes
reformas políticas muy similares a verdaderos cambios de regímenes.
Ver «Millenium Challenge, colonialisme libéral», texto en francés,
por Paul Labarique, Voltaire, 19 de febrero de 2004.
[8] «USAID Director Keeps an Eye on Long-Term Recovery», por Robin
Wright, Washington Post, 6 de enero de 2005.
[9] Foreign Aid in the National Interest : Promoting Freedom,
Security and Opportunity, USAID, enero de 2003.
[10] «'It looks disturbingly like a coup'», The Guardian, 25 de
noviembre de 2003.
[11] «US-Supported OTPOR now Ignites Ukraine», Zaman, 27 de noviembre de 2004.
[12] «Washington dénonce l'élection en Géorgie et désavoue
Chevardnadzé» (Washington denuncia la elección en Georgia y
desaprueba a Chevardnadzé) , por Christophe de Roquefeuil, AFP, 20 de
noviembre de 2003.
[13] Ver el sitio de la USAID Georgia.
[14] Ver: «Médias audiovisuels: qui détient le 4ème pouvoir en
Géorgie?», par Célia Chauffour, Regards sur l'Est, n°35, enero-marzo
de 2004.
[15] «Georgia human-rights organization accused of meddling», Zviad
Pochkhua, The World Paper, 1ero de mayo de 2003.
[16] «Géorgie: la chaîne TV Rustavi 2 aux mains de l'ex-numéro 2 du
ministère des Affaires étrangères», por Célia Chauffour, Regards sur
l'Est, n°35, 13 de octobre de 2004.
[17] Ver: «Ucrania: la calle contra el pueblo», Voltaire, 29 de
novembre de 2004.
[18] «Freedom House: cuando la «libertad» no es más que un pretexto»,
Voltaire, 3 de enero de 2005.
[19] «US Hypocrisy in Ukraine», Ron E. Paul Statements, 7 de diciembre de 2004.
modo de operar del emperio sigue vigente en la actualidad en toda
America y resto del mundo.
http://www.voltaire net.org/article1 23804.html
La CIA con rostro humano
Las ONG, nuevo brazo de la diplomacia estadounidense
Aunque los recientes sucesos de Georgia y Ucrania fueron calificados
de «revoluciones» , la realidad es otra ya que su objetivo no era un
cambio de sociedad sino, únicamente, provocar cambios de gobierno
favorables a los aliados de Estados Unidos. Las protestas y los
movimientos callejeros fueron organizados por ONGs financiadas y
dirigidas, directa o indirectamente, por Washington conforme a un
plan expuesto hace más de un año en un informe oficial de la USAID.
En unos años, ciertas ONGs se han transformado en caballos de Troya
del departamento de Acción de la CIA.
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
11 de febrero de 2005
El derrocamiento del presidente georgiano Eduard Chevarnadze, en
noviembre de 2003, y la ascensión al poder de Viktor Yuschenko en
Ucrania, en diciembre de 2004, consagran, según la mayoría de los
politólogos europeos, el triunfo de la sociedad civil democrática en
los antiguos satélites soviéticos.
Al oír las loas de la llamada «prensa occidental», parece que no
puede uno menos que alegrarse de la forma en que los pueblos
sometidos por la antigua URSS toman hoy el destino en sus manos y se
unen, es debido, al único bando justo, representado por -no hay más
escoger- Occidente, Europa o la OTAN.
Todo ello, gracias al formidable trabajo de terreno y de movilización
que hicieron numerosas organizaciones no gubernamentales o
extranjeras para convencer a los georgianos, los ucranianos y, quizás
mañana, a los bielorrusos, de que es importante hacer valer sus
propios derechos.
La realidad es más compleja y seguramente mucho menos idílica. Parece
en efecto que, conforme a la línea de las teorías del politólogo
estadounidense Gene Sharp, desarrolladas en el seno de la Albert
Einstein Institution [1], Estados Unidos elaboró desde el final de la
guerra fría una nueva doctrina de golpes de estado soft mediante la
utilización de técnicas no violentas.
Inspirándose en la eficacia de las luchas políticas que desarrolló en
la India Mohandas K. Gandhi, Washington trata desde hace alrededor de
diez años de derrocar los gobiernos que no le gustan mediante un
dispositivo que le garantice el apoyo de la opinión pública
internacional.
En el centro de la nueva doctrina, las organizaciones no
gubernamentales, tan populares ante los medios de difusión, juegan un
papel esencial. Como señala el periodista de Counterpunch Jacob
Levich, «las organizaciones no gubernamentales -asociaciones
teóricamente independientes y con la reputación de humanitarias,
conocidas bajo de la denominación de ONG- están ya abiertamente
incorporadas a la estrategia de conjunto de Washington para
consolidar su supremacía global» [2].
El hecho de que la mayor parte de las ONG, sobre todo las más
importantes, sean financiadas por fondos «privados-públicos» no es
nuevo. Hace tiempo que las agencias gubernamentales de ayuda tienen
como objetivo subvencionar, por lo menos parcialmente, organizaciones
humanitarias especializadas en el desarrollo. Numerosas ONG aceptan
igualmente fondos provenientes del Open Society Institute de George
Soros aún cuando los lazos de este último con la diplomacia
subterránea estadounidense son bien conocidos [3].
Sin embargo, durante muchos años el carácter dudoso de esos
financiamientos -que ponen en tela de juicio la definición misma de
lo que debe ser una organización no gubernamental- no tenían
influencia real en la integridad con la estas realizaban sus
actividades. La cantidad de ONG que apoya, por ejemplo, el Open
Society Institut excluía la utilización de esa vía para establecer un
control sobre los numerosos proyectos en marcha [4].
Sin embargo, las cosas cambiaron desde principios de los años 2000, y el cambio fue deliberado. En el pasado, Estados Unidos acostumbraba a
financiar grupos políticos y guerrillas armadas, así como
sindicatos [5]. A partir de la llegada de George W. Bush al poder, en
enero de 2001, las ONG fueron integradas poco a poco al aparato
estadounidense de ingerencia.
La idea se fue imponiendo, primero en algunos think tanks [Centros
de investigación, propaganda y divulgación de ideas, generalmente de
carácter político] neoconservadores, luego en el seno de la United
States Agency for International Developpment (USAID) [6].
Esta agencia gubernamental estadounidense, dependiente del
Departamento de Estado, es el equivalente del ministerio francés de
Cooperación. Fundada por John F. Kennedy en 1961, la USAID «apoya el crecimiento económico equitativo y a largo plazo y promueve la
política exterior estadounidense apoyando: el crecimiento económico,
la agricultura y el comercio, la salud, la democracia, la prevención
de conflictos y la ayuda humanitaria».
Para ello, la USAID debe seguir directivas del Departamento de Estado
y es financiada por fondos públicos. Su acción en el terreno consiste
principalmente en redistribuir esos fondos en los países que
Washington desea «ayudar», sobre todo a través de organizaciones no
gubernamentales [7].
La llegada al poder de una administració n belicista en enero de 2001 no podía dejar de tener consecuencias para un organismo tan ligado a
la política exterior estadounidense. Sobre todo si se tiene en cuenta
que el director de l'agencia, Andrew S. Natsios, está muy ligado al
nuevo equipo de gobierno. Adepto del «conservadurismo compasivo»,
Natsios fue miembro del equipo que dirigió en 1980 la campaña
electoral de George H. W. Bush, quien lo nombró después, en 1988, en
el Buró de Ayuda para las Catástrofes en el Extranjero antes de que
Natsios se sumara a la asociación caritativa cristiana WorldVision a partir de 1992 [8].
A la par de la Casa Blanca, la USAID modificó por tanto su relación
con las ONG para integrarlas progresivamente al aparato de ingerencia
articulado alrededor del conjunto NED/CIA. Eso es lo que revela la
lectura de un informe publicado por la agencia en enero de 2003, documento en el que nadie reparó en pleno período de preparación de
la guerra contra Irak. El informe detalla cómo desea el Departamento de Estado utilizar en lo adelante las organizaciones no gubernamentales.
Bajo el título Ayuda internacional en nombre del interés nacional:
Promover la libertad, la seguridad y la oportunidad, el informe nos
pone al tanto de las nuevas prioridades de la USAID. La agencia no
concebirá ya sus programas con el fin único de aliviar la miseria
humana sino que se dedicará más bien a «estimular reformas
democráticas» [9].
Ese cambio de política es consecuencia de la nueva Estrategia de
Seguridad Nacional para Estados Unidos publicada por la Casa Blanca
en septiembre 2002. La administració n Bush afirma en esa estrategia que Estados Unidos necesita garantizar su propia seguridad instaurando regimenes democráticos en los países enemigos.
Esa es la posición que adoptó la USAID al planear que los regímenes
«amigos» sean recompensados mediante la atribución de financiamiento
para proyectos de desarrollo mientras que los países «hostiles» serán
blanco de programas de «reformas» aplicadas por organizaciones no
gubernamentales.
Estas últimas ONG´s, consignan en efecto los autores, dependen cada vez más
de sus fuentes de financiamiento y han perdido, por consiguiente,
mucho de su independencia: «las ONG trabajaban antes a buena
distancia de donantes gubernamentales, pero con el tiempo esa
relación se ha hecho más íntima».
Dicho por lo claro, los gobiernos ejercen actualmente mayor control
sobre los programas que financian, lo que abre la vía a su
utilización como instrumento. Eso es ni más ni menos lo que propone
la USAID. Casi sin disimulo, la agencia explica cómo utilizar las ONG
para propiciar golpes de Estado: «Es posible aportar una ayuda a los
reformadores que permitirán identificar a los ganadores y perdedores
más importantes, desarrollar la construcción de coaliciones y de
estrategias de movilización y elaborar campañas de relaciones
públicas (...) Ese tipo de ayuda puede representar una inversión para
el futuro, cuando un cambio político otorgue el verdadero poder a los
reformadores» (página 51).
Eso fue precisamente lo que pasó en Georgia en noviembre 2003.
Después de haber sido hasta entonces un aliado siempre fiel de
Estados Unidos, el presidente Eduard Shervarnadze se vio súbitamente
criticado por Washington en cuanto a su «gestión» democrática en el
país, cuando emprendió un acercamiento con la Rusia de Vladimir Putin.
Era ese el objetivo de la visita de James Baker III a Georgia,
durante el verano de 2003, ocasión en que el ex-secretario de Estado
advirtió al presidente georgiano y lo invitó a garantizar la
legalidad de las elecciones legislativas. Un discurso que permitió
legitimar después la llegada de numerosas organizaciones no
gubernamentales con el fin de controlar el escrutinio.
Paralelamente, Washington aplicó al pie de la letra las
recomendaciones de la USAID emprendiendo urgentemente el
adiestramiento de Mijail Saakachvili como sucesor pro estadounidense.
Durante el verano, este jurista, miembro del colegio de abogados de
New York y ex-miembro del gobierno georgiano, es invitado a un
seminario en Belgrado «para aprender cómo hacer una «revolución de
terciopelo» como la de los serbios. El señor Saakachvili recibió
instrucciones detalladas que siguió al pie de la letra» [10].
El tal seminario estaba organizado por el Centro para la Resistencia
no violenta de Belgrado, ONG subvencionada por el Open Society
Institute de George Soros [11]].
Al mismo tiempo, el «filántropo» financia un movimiento de jóvenes
opositores -algunos tienen apenas 15 años- para crear en Georgia
condiciones con vistas a una sublevación popular. Bajo el nombre de
Kmara (¡Basta!), la estructura de esa organización sigue el modelo del movimiento serbio Otpor que había desafiado a Milosevic en
Belgrado en el 2000, también gracias a los fondos del Open Society de Soros. Numerosos cuadros de Otpor fueron enviados a Georgia para
formar allí a los futuros cuadros de la «revolución no violenta».
Logos de las organizaciones Otpor y Pora. Dos organizaciones
juveniles controladas por los servicios secretos estadounidenses.
El factor desencadenante depende también de organizaciones no
gubernamentales. Se trata de poner en tela de juicio la limpieza del proceso electoral durante las elecciones legislativas de noviembre de
2003. Durante estas, los movimientos progubernamentales alcanzan una
victoria limitada, seguidas de cerca por la oposición que representan Mijail Saakachvili y Nina Bourdjanadze, la presidenta del parlamento.
Pero no son estos últimos quienes iniciarán las protestas sino un
responsable estadounidense, Adam Ereli, vocero del Departamento de
Estado. Habla de «fraudes masivos» y de «amplias manipulaciones del
conteo de votos». Ereli basa sus argumentos en la diferencia
existente entre las cifras que anuncia la comisión electoral
georgiana, cerca de tres semanas después del escrutinio del 2 de
noviembre, y las de «prestigiosas organizaciones independientes» [12].
En este aspecto, el papel de las ONG es también determinante. Los
sondeos estuvieron, efectivamente, a cargo de dos organismos
diferentes. El primero, la Fair Elections Society (ISFED), financiado
por el British Council y, del lado estadounidense, por la USAID y la
NED mediante el National Democratic Institute, la International
Foundation for Election Systems (IFES) y el International Republican
Institute [13].
El segundo sondeo fue realizado por una sociedad estadounidense
especializada en análisis electoral, el Global Strategy Group, con la ayuda de la Open Society Georgia de George Soros, de la Eurasia
Foundation (también financiada por la USAID y dirigida por un
ex-responsable del Departamento de Estado, Charles William Maynes) y
de la cadena de televisión «independiente» Rustavi 2, creada en 1994
gracias al financiamiento de George Soros [14].
Paralelamente, asociaciones georgianas de derechos humanos difunden,
mediante su sitio en internet y a través de comunicados, informes
alarmantes sobre la represión desatada contra la oposición y la
omnipresencia de la corrupción.
Estas afirmaciones, de las que se hacen eco constantemente los medios
de difusión de Europa occidental, proceden en realidad de una fuente
principal: la ONG Liberty Foundation, financiada por la USAID y que
hasta mayo de 2003 había sido dirigida por... Mijail Saakachvili [15].
El dispositivo es tan poderoso que no hay posibilidad de fracaso. A
finales de noviembre, Eduard Shevarnadze renuncia al poder. Lo
reemplaza la presidenta del parlamento Nina Bourdjanadze, hasta la
elección, en enero de 2004, de Mijail Saakachvili a la silla
presidencial.
Este último no olvidará a la «sociedad civil» que lo llevó al poder.
El presentador estrella de la cadena Rustavi 2, Nika Tabatadze, se
convierte en segundo del ministro de Relaciones Exteriores antes de
ser nombrado presidente de la cadena en octubre de 2004 [16].
El responsable del Open Society Institute en Georgia, Kakha Lomaia,
es nombrado ministro de Educación del gobierno de Saakachvili. Otras
personalidades pasan con él de la categoría de «miembros de
organizaciones no gubernamentales» al rango de miembros del gobierno.
El mismo guión se repitió al parecer en Ucrania en noviembre y diciembre de 2004 [17]. Allí encontramos de nuevo un movimiento de
oposición financiado por George Soros, un candidato de oposición muy
favorable a la OTAN, sondeos «a boca de urna» realizados por varias
ONG financiadas por la NED/CIA y favorables a la oposición, y una
campaña de prensa violentamente rusófoba en el seno de la Unión
Europea.
El parlamentario estadounidense Ron E. Paul va aún más lejos. Según
él, una de las ONG más activas en Ucrania, el International Center
for Policy Studies, es financiada por el gobierno estadounidense
mediante la Poland-America- Ukraine Cooperation Initiative (PAUCI),
organismo subvencionado por la USAID y administrado por la Freedom
House [18].
El mismo Viktor Yushchenko es miembro del consejo administrativo de
esta organización fundada por el Open Society Institute. Peor aún, el
mismo parlamentario norteamericano Ron E. Paul denuncia una sociedad estadounidense de relaciones públicas, Development Associates Inc. que recibió 100 millones de dólares del gobierno norteamericano, esencialmente para garantizar la cobertura de la «revolución naranja» en Ucrania [19].
Una nueva forma de ingerencia está naciendo. Mediante la utilización de elementos de la «sociedad civil», tiene como método esencial el de sembrar la duda sobre los procesos electorales y organizar
importantes campañas de propaganda para denigrar a los dirigentes que Washington decide eliminar.
Además de los dos recientes ejemplos, países como Venezuela, Zimbabwe y Bielorrusia son actualmente blancos de presiones similares, hasta ahora sin éxito. Un proyecto de organizaciones especializadas en la supervisión de elecciones, el European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations (ENEMO), nació en septiembre de 2001.
La enumeración de los asociados -entre otros, la OSCE, el National
Democratic Institute y el Open Society Institute- es suficiente para
tener una idea de los intereses que defienden. En ese dispositivo, el papel de catalizador corresponde a las ONG. Hace diez años se
sospechaba ya que, bajo la cobertura de la acción humanitaria, muchas de ellas realizaban trabajo de inteligencia con vista a la preparación de intervenciones militares.
El mundo vive hoy al ritmo de la CNN. Lo que importa no es la
realidad de una revolución o de un golpe de Estado sino la imagen que
se da del hecho. Es por eso que ciertas organizaciones no
gubernamentales están siendo llamadas hoy no solamente a informar
sino a intervenir directamente en el seno de los regimenes, como
caballos de Troya.
------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
[1] Ver: «La Albert Einstein Institution: no violencia según la CIA»,
por Thierry Meyssan, Voltaire, 10 de febrero de 2005.
[2] «When NGOs Attack : Implications of the Coup in Georgia», por
Jacob Levich, Counterpunch, 6-7 de diciembre 2003.
[3] Ver: «George Soros, especulador y filántropo», Voltaire, 3 de
febrero de 2004.
[4] No es menos cierto que el generoso donante dispone siempre de un
importante medio de presión sobre la organización que financia: la
posibilidad de no renovar su subvención. Un elemento muy real para
las ONG aquí mencionadas, tanto más cuanto que el Open Society
Institute ocupa actualmente una situación excepcional en el «mercado»
de la filantropía, lo que hace que sea muy importante la posibilidad
de conservar su aprobación.
[5] Ver: «¿AFL-CIO o AFL-CIA?->article12 3396]», por Paul Labarique,
Voltaire, 19 de enero de 2005; «1962-1979: La AFL-CIO y la
contrainsurgencia sindical», Voltaire, 19 de enero de 2005.
[6] «La USAID y las redes terroristas de Bush» por Edgar Gonzales
Ruiz, Voltaire, 15 de julio de 2004.
[7] Desde 2003, Estados Unidos emprendió un amplio proyecto de ayuda
a los países en vías de desarrollo en el seno de una nueva agencia,
la Millenium Challenge Corporation. Esta exige que los países
beneficiados organicen la liberalizació n de sus economías y su
apertura a los inversionistas extranjeros. Reclama además importantes
reformas políticas muy similares a verdaderos cambios de regímenes.
Ver «Millenium Challenge, colonialisme libéral», texto en francés,
por Paul Labarique, Voltaire, 19 de febrero de 2004.
[8] «USAID Director Keeps an Eye on Long-Term Recovery», por Robin
Wright, Washington Post, 6 de enero de 2005.
[9] Foreign Aid in the National Interest : Promoting Freedom,
Security and Opportunity, USAID, enero de 2003.
[10] «'It looks disturbingly like a coup'», The Guardian, 25 de
noviembre de 2003.
[11] «US-Supported OTPOR now Ignites Ukraine», Zaman, 27 de noviembre de 2004.
[12] «Washington dénonce l'élection en Géorgie et désavoue
Chevardnadzé» (Washington denuncia la elección en Georgia y
desaprueba a Chevardnadzé) , por Christophe de Roquefeuil, AFP, 20 de
noviembre de 2003.
[13] Ver el sitio de la USAID Georgia.
[14] Ver: «Médias audiovisuels: qui détient le 4ème pouvoir en
Géorgie?», par Célia Chauffour, Regards sur l'Est, n°35, enero-marzo
de 2004.
[15] «Georgia human-rights organization accused of meddling», Zviad
Pochkhua, The World Paper, 1ero de mayo de 2003.
[16] «Géorgie: la chaîne TV Rustavi 2 aux mains de l'ex-numéro 2 du
ministère des Affaires étrangères», por Célia Chauffour, Regards sur
l'Est, n°35, 13 de octobre de 2004.
[17] Ver: «Ucrania: la calle contra el pueblo», Voltaire, 29 de
novembre de 2004.
[18] «Freedom House: cuando la «libertad» no es más que un pretexto»,
Voltaire, 3 de enero de 2005.
[19] «US Hypocrisy in Ukraine», Ron E. Paul Statements, 7 de diciembre de 2004.
*USA Bee Die Offs, David Hackenberg, Testimony US Congress
Committee hearings are available ahref "http://agriculture.senate.gov/live.ram "LIVE via audio at the time of the meeting, and also posted for replay within a few hours after completion (select the link for the hearing to access the replay). Opening statements of witnesses are posted during the hearing. However, the entire transcript of questions and answers is not available until posted by the http://www.senate.gov/cgi-bin/exitmsg?http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/senate02ch.html Gov't Printing Office -- according to Senate Rules. For previous years' hearings, please review the listing of http://agriculture.senate.gov/Hearings/hearprev.htm Archived Hearings .
Meeting:
Regional Farm Bill field hearing: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Full Committee Field Hearing
Date & Time
Friday, July 21 20061:00 PM
Location
Description
From the Pennsylvania Farm Show Complex in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
David Hackenberg representing the American Beekeeping Federation
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
Thank you for this opportunity to speak on issues important to beekeepers for the 2007 Farm Bill.
My name is David E. Hackenberg. From my headquarters in Lewisburg, Penn., my family and I operate 3,000 colonies of honey bees. We operate in Pennsylvania, Florida, California, New York, and Maine. We produce honey and beeswax and provide pollination services for growers of a wide variety of crops. I have been a beekeeper for 44 years.
Over the years I have worked with beekeepers associations in several states and have allowed federal and university bee researchers to use my colonies for field trials in several projects. I am also well acquainted with beekeeping issues across the country, having been active in the American Beekeeping Federation for 25 years; I was ABF president in 1998 and 1999 and have served two stints on the National Honey Board.
My family beekeeping operation and all of the American beekeeping industry are facing many challenges. We are continuing to deal with three exotic pests: varroa mites, honey bee tracheal mites, and small hive beetles. USDA and University scientists and working on solutions to these pests, but they develop resistance to the treatments about as fast as they come on line. All these treatments are expensive — costly to purchase and labor-intensive to apply.
Modern commercial beekeeping is a highly mobile operation, as we beekeepers move our colonies from honey crop to pollination contract to winter nursery grounds in an attempt to maximize our revenues. Mobile means fuel-consuming which these days translates into more dollars for every tank full.
Honey prices have strengthened recently, but they have been severely depressed for several years. Drought has taken a toll on honey crops, as it has on other crops, but poor honey crops don’t always see the expected bump in prices, since honey is a world crop that is freely imported into the United States.
Frequently, this imported honey is sold at prices below the U.S. cost of production. This gives producers in developing countries like China a clear economic advantage since they are not required to adhere to many of the costly requirements or realities of doing business in the U.S. Relatively low labor costs for foreign producers, and the lack of disincentives for adulteration or production of low-quality product are among the most problematic.
We are also facing an erosion in our markets from what we call “honey pretenders” – products that purport to be honey but are blends of cheaper sweeteners labeled to confuse consumers into thinking they are buying 100% pure honey. I see these fraudulent products on sale everywhere I go. The honey processors who buy my honey have to complete with them, resulting in lower prices paid to me.
Many of these “honey pretenders” contain little of no honey. Sometimes their labels are legal, if confusing to all but the most astute shoppers. Others are outright frauds that are clearly labeled as Pure Honey, even though they are not. We continue to seek assistance of the Food and Drug Administration to combat the frauds, but in this day of tight budgets, FDA assistance is very limited. The U.S. honey industry has petitioned the FDA to establish a Standard of Identity for Honey that we see as one means of dealing with “honey pretenders.” We ask the committee to identify this as priority for FDA and recommend that FDA devote sufficient staff and resources to this effort to promulgate a Standard of Identity for Honey as soon as possible.
HONEY MARKETING LOAN – OUR SAFETY NET
During the earlier period of honey price downturn, the honey marketing loan program of the 2001 Farm Bill served as a true safety net. It worked as intended, allowing honey producers to borrow funds while holding their honey crop for a better market – and the program has operated a minimal cost. In periods of low prices, it is critical that we beekeepers have this program available.
The industry is also working with USDA’s Risk Management Agency to make affordable and effective honey crop insurance available. I look forward to have such a crop insurance program to help stabilize my honey production income during times of disaster-diminished honey crops. However, so far RMA has not approved or piloted any crop or revenue insurance products for beekeepers. We urge the Committee to encourage RMA to move forward in this area.
POLLINATION – SWEETER THAN HONEY
Honey bees are known for their honey, but their value as pollinators of plants vastly exceeds the value of the honey produced [about $200 million at the farm gate in the U.S. last year]. Through pollination our bees provide a unique and irreplaceable service to the rest of agriculture — a service that enables those growers to be more productive and efficient. A Cornell University study has determined that pollination by honey bees adds $14.6 billion in value major crops. And this total does not take into consideration the pollination of backyard gardens, ornamental plantings, and environmental plants.
In my own operation, we pollinate almonds, oranges, pumpkins, cherries, cucumbers, cantaloupes, watermelons, and apples. The growers of these crops, which are dependent on pollination, pay me for that service. However, even as heavily involved in pollination as I am, I depend on honey production to round out my income. Honey crops also give my bees a chance to rejuvenate and build up for the next pollination crop, since many crops we pollinate produce little or no honey.
Honey bees play a vital role in their pollinating of plants that are important to the environment and conservation. It is important that beekeepers continue to be allowed to place their colonies on conservation acreages and that beekeepers be eligible for participation in conservation best practices programs.
U.S. beekeepers, especially those who operate in the Northeast as I do, are facing a shortage of natural habitat due to increasing suburban encroachment and land use changes have converted much prime bee habitat to other non-bee-friendly uses.
I have been told that the European Union has included an explicit economic incentive for farmers to set aside habitat for native species, especially pollinators like bees, in their Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The CAP aims to implement coherent and integrated agricultural and environmental policies. I encourage the Committee to study the EU model closely as it may represent a non-trade-distorting green box agricultural policy that achieves multiple aims – decoupling most direct payments from production, encouraging preservation and enhancement of conservations buffers in agricultural areas, providing wildlife habitat and refuge for keystone species, especially pollinators, and compensate farmers and land-owners for lost revenues with economic incentives to maintain and implement good environmental practices, such as growing plant communities that sustain and foster biodiversity and reduce pesticide and herbicide applications.
HONEY – TRULY A SPECIALTY CROP
Beekeepers want to be included in any specialty crop provisions of the new Farm Bill. Not only is honey itself a specialty crop, but, through pollination, honey bees contribute to the value of most other specialty crops.
While it might not lie within the Committee’s jurisdiction, I want to bring one issue to your attention that is having an adverse impact upon the number and health of honey bee colonies available for crop pollination. Beekeepers depend on the ready availability of new queen honey bees to produce healthy colonies. We have traditionally depended on the U.S. Postal Service to deliver them from the queen-rearing areas of the South, California, and Hawaii. However, USPS is not requiring the airlines to accept live animals such as queen bees and baby chicks. As a result many queen producers and their customers are finding it almost impossible to obtain queens in a timely fashion. Here in the Northeast, our beekeepers must have queens delivered by air mail to assure their supply. This issue deserves Congress’ attention too.
As the Committee begins to craft the new Farm Bill, I encourage you to work closely with national trade associations, such as the American Beekeeping Federation, in an effort to see that the Farm Bill ensures a safe and abundant food supply for consumers, protects producers from market disruptions and price/revenue volatility, and honors our commitments to free and fair trade, while enhancing environmental quality and biodiversity, wildlife habitat and preservation of open spaces.
Thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony on farm policy. I would be pleased to attempt to answer any questions you might have.
Sincerely,
David Hackenberg Hackenberg Apiaries Lewisburg, Penn.
Meeting:
Regional Farm Bill field hearing: Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
Full Committee Field Hearing
Date & Time
Friday, July 21 20061:00 PM
Location
Description
From the Pennsylvania Farm Show Complex in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
David Hackenberg representing the American Beekeeping Federation
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:
Thank you for this opportunity to speak on issues important to beekeepers for the 2007 Farm Bill.
My name is David E. Hackenberg. From my headquarters in Lewisburg, Penn., my family and I operate 3,000 colonies of honey bees. We operate in Pennsylvania, Florida, California, New York, and Maine. We produce honey and beeswax and provide pollination services for growers of a wide variety of crops. I have been a beekeeper for 44 years.
Over the years I have worked with beekeepers associations in several states and have allowed federal and university bee researchers to use my colonies for field trials in several projects. I am also well acquainted with beekeeping issues across the country, having been active in the American Beekeeping Federation for 25 years; I was ABF president in 1998 and 1999 and have served two stints on the National Honey Board.
My family beekeeping operation and all of the American beekeeping industry are facing many challenges. We are continuing to deal with three exotic pests: varroa mites, honey bee tracheal mites, and small hive beetles. USDA and University scientists and working on solutions to these pests, but they develop resistance to the treatments about as fast as they come on line. All these treatments are expensive — costly to purchase and labor-intensive to apply.
Modern commercial beekeeping is a highly mobile operation, as we beekeepers move our colonies from honey crop to pollination contract to winter nursery grounds in an attempt to maximize our revenues. Mobile means fuel-consuming which these days translates into more dollars for every tank full.
Honey prices have strengthened recently, but they have been severely depressed for several years. Drought has taken a toll on honey crops, as it has on other crops, but poor honey crops don’t always see the expected bump in prices, since honey is a world crop that is freely imported into the United States.
Frequently, this imported honey is sold at prices below the U.S. cost of production. This gives producers in developing countries like China a clear economic advantage since they are not required to adhere to many of the costly requirements or realities of doing business in the U.S. Relatively low labor costs for foreign producers, and the lack of disincentives for adulteration or production of low-quality product are among the most problematic.
We are also facing an erosion in our markets from what we call “honey pretenders” – products that purport to be honey but are blends of cheaper sweeteners labeled to confuse consumers into thinking they are buying 100% pure honey. I see these fraudulent products on sale everywhere I go. The honey processors who buy my honey have to complete with them, resulting in lower prices paid to me.
Many of these “honey pretenders” contain little of no honey. Sometimes their labels are legal, if confusing to all but the most astute shoppers. Others are outright frauds that are clearly labeled as Pure Honey, even though they are not. We continue to seek assistance of the Food and Drug Administration to combat the frauds, but in this day of tight budgets, FDA assistance is very limited. The U.S. honey industry has petitioned the FDA to establish a Standard of Identity for Honey that we see as one means of dealing with “honey pretenders.” We ask the committee to identify this as priority for FDA and recommend that FDA devote sufficient staff and resources to this effort to promulgate a Standard of Identity for Honey as soon as possible.
HONEY MARKETING LOAN – OUR SAFETY NET
During the earlier period of honey price downturn, the honey marketing loan program of the 2001 Farm Bill served as a true safety net. It worked as intended, allowing honey producers to borrow funds while holding their honey crop for a better market – and the program has operated a minimal cost. In periods of low prices, it is critical that we beekeepers have this program available.
The industry is also working with USDA’s Risk Management Agency to make affordable and effective honey crop insurance available. I look forward to have such a crop insurance program to help stabilize my honey production income during times of disaster-diminished honey crops. However, so far RMA has not approved or piloted any crop or revenue insurance products for beekeepers. We urge the Committee to encourage RMA to move forward in this area.
POLLINATION – SWEETER THAN HONEY
Honey bees are known for their honey, but their value as pollinators of plants vastly exceeds the value of the honey produced [about $200 million at the farm gate in the U.S. last year]. Through pollination our bees provide a unique and irreplaceable service to the rest of agriculture — a service that enables those growers to be more productive and efficient. A Cornell University study has determined that pollination by honey bees adds $14.6 billion in value major crops. And this total does not take into consideration the pollination of backyard gardens, ornamental plantings, and environmental plants.
In my own operation, we pollinate almonds, oranges, pumpkins, cherries, cucumbers, cantaloupes, watermelons, and apples. The growers of these crops, which are dependent on pollination, pay me for that service. However, even as heavily involved in pollination as I am, I depend on honey production to round out my income. Honey crops also give my bees a chance to rejuvenate and build up for the next pollination crop, since many crops we pollinate produce little or no honey.
Honey bees play a vital role in their pollinating of plants that are important to the environment and conservation. It is important that beekeepers continue to be allowed to place their colonies on conservation acreages and that beekeepers be eligible for participation in conservation best practices programs.
U.S. beekeepers, especially those who operate in the Northeast as I do, are facing a shortage of natural habitat due to increasing suburban encroachment and land use changes have converted much prime bee habitat to other non-bee-friendly uses.
I have been told that the European Union has included an explicit economic incentive for farmers to set aside habitat for native species, especially pollinators like bees, in their Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The CAP aims to implement coherent and integrated agricultural and environmental policies. I encourage the Committee to study the EU model closely as it may represent a non-trade-distorting green box agricultural policy that achieves multiple aims – decoupling most direct payments from production, encouraging preservation and enhancement of conservations buffers in agricultural areas, providing wildlife habitat and refuge for keystone species, especially pollinators, and compensate farmers and land-owners for lost revenues with economic incentives to maintain and implement good environmental practices, such as growing plant communities that sustain and foster biodiversity and reduce pesticide and herbicide applications.
HONEY – TRULY A SPECIALTY CROP
Beekeepers want to be included in any specialty crop provisions of the new Farm Bill. Not only is honey itself a specialty crop, but, through pollination, honey bees contribute to the value of most other specialty crops.
While it might not lie within the Committee’s jurisdiction, I want to bring one issue to your attention that is having an adverse impact upon the number and health of honey bee colonies available for crop pollination. Beekeepers depend on the ready availability of new queen honey bees to produce healthy colonies. We have traditionally depended on the U.S. Postal Service to deliver them from the queen-rearing areas of the South, California, and Hawaii. However, USPS is not requiring the airlines to accept live animals such as queen bees and baby chicks. As a result many queen producers and their customers are finding it almost impossible to obtain queens in a timely fashion. Here in the Northeast, our beekeepers must have queens delivered by air mail to assure their supply. This issue deserves Congress’ attention too.
As the Committee begins to craft the new Farm Bill, I encourage you to work closely with national trade associations, such as the American Beekeeping Federation, in an effort to see that the Farm Bill ensures a safe and abundant food supply for consumers, protects producers from market disruptions and price/revenue volatility, and honors our commitments to free and fair trade, while enhancing environmental quality and biodiversity, wildlife habitat and preservation of open spaces.
Thank you for this opportunity to provide testimony on farm policy. I would be pleased to attempt to answer any questions you might have.
Sincerely,
David Hackenberg Hackenberg Apiaries Lewisburg, Penn.
viernes, 27 de julio de 2007
Día de la Rebeldia, 26 de Julio 2007, Viva el Pueblo Cubano y su Liderazgo. Abrazos fraternales de amigos y vecinos de San Felipe
Hoy, Jueves, 26 de Julio 2007, Día de la Rebelión en Cuba, para Nuestro San Felipe se programo un asalto nacional e internacional cultural elite de Nuestro San Felipe; con la exhibicion de muestras representativas de etapas de la colección privada de la pintora Panameña, de Madre Norteamericana, Coqui Calderon (1937).
El programa de exhibición fue calculado y programado para llegarles a publico general permitido, estudiantes de artes invitados, a la creciente comunidad de visitantes y residentes extranjeros en Panamá y aspirantes a vivir en Panamá (parte de incentivos culturales de la campaña "vende a Panamá"), patrocinada entre otros, por La Sasona; Metales, SA; La Embajada de España con su Cooperación Española; la Prensa; Municipio de Panamá, Cía. de seguros ASSA.
Callejón, Sin Salida--1989--lienzo 70"x60"
La artista, por primera vez, a gestión de su prima, Marizta y sobrina, quienes le aseguraron que "si se puede" por primera vez, introducir, presentar y exponer más de 40 años de etapas de expressiones plasticas de sus vivencias.
Coqui nos compartio en vivo y en su folleto"...cada periodo de mis obras tiene parte de mi ser, en ellos vuelcos todo mis sentimientos, filosofía, y creencias."
Para mi, Basta Ya! USA!, sus obras representan el velo y anhelo de la salvación de su clase dominante. Su obra representa, la ideología individualista de su clase oligarquica, amarrada al imperialismo para
su salvación.
20 Diciembre 1989
El programa de exhibición fue calculado y programado para llegarles a publico general permitido, estudiantes de artes invitados, a la creciente comunidad de visitantes y residentes extranjeros en Panamá y aspirantes a vivir en Panamá (parte de incentivos culturales de la campaña "vende a Panamá"), patrocinada entre otros, por La Sasona; Metales, SA; La Embajada de España con su Cooperación Española; la Prensa; Municipio de Panamá, Cía. de seguros ASSA.
Callejón, Sin Salida--1989--lienzo 70"x60"La artista, por primera vez, a gestión de su prima, Marizta y sobrina, quienes le aseguraron que "si se puede" por primera vez, introducir, presentar y exponer más de 40 años de etapas de expressiones plasticas de sus vivencias.
Coqui nos compartio en vivo y en su folleto"...cada periodo de mis obras tiene parte de mi ser, en ellos vuelcos todo mis sentimientos, filosofía, y creencias."
Para mi, Basta Ya! USA!, sus obras representan el velo y anhelo de la salvación de su clase dominante. Su obra representa, la ideología individualista de su clase oligarquica, amarrada al imperialismo para
su salvación.
20 Diciembre 1989
Por otro lado en Nuestro San Felipe, las Doñas de la Fundación San Felipe, acarrearon un busito de niños parte de sus programas, para una exhibición en la Caja de Ahorros.
Con la ampliación del canal por intereses corporativos nacionales e imperialistas, vienen los diluvios de promociones comerciales y el arraso cultural elite de nuestro pueblo.
*****
Que hacer para desarrollar la cultura popular en Venezuela
MOTOR MORAL Y LUCES: ES NECESARIO TOMAR EL TORO POR LAS ASTAS.
Por Fernando Ramón Bossi* Periodista, Presidente de la Fundación Emancipación y Secretario de Organización del Congreso Bolivariano de los Pueblos
1. La cultura dominante es aquella que, desde las clases dominantes, se impone a toda la sociedad. En tanto esta cultura siga siendo hegemónica, la reproducción de las relaciones de producción que posicionan a las clases dominantes como tales, cuenta con una poderosísima arma a su favor.
Cuando las elites han perdido su poder político y parte del económico –como es el caso de Venezuela-, entendible es que éstas se refugien en su trinchera más inexpugnable: la cultura.
Contra esta trinchera de la reacción, el gobierno revolucionario de Venezuela ha lanzado el Tercer Motor Moral y Luces. Importante iniciativa pero carente aun de la contundencia deseada.
2. Muchos procesos nacionalistas y populares en Nuestra América, como es el caso del peronismo en la Argentina de las décadas del 40 y 50 -pese a haber transformado al país sustancialmente bajo la consigna de una “Patria justa, libre y soberana”-, cayó a los pies de la oligarquía, entre otros motivos, por no haber avanzado más radicalmente en la tarea de confiscar el aparato cultural de las elites y ponerlo al servicio del pueblo. Mientras los argentinos masivamente accedían a la educación como nunca antes lo habían hecho, la oligarquía nativa, acantonada en la trinchera cultural, bombardeaba el cerebro de los estudiantes con su prédica contrarrevolucionaria, su mensaje no estaba centrado en la coyuntura, sino que apuntaba a imponer los valores individualistas, autoritarios, materialistas, consumistas y jerárquicos que a la larga iban a carcomer el gobierno popular del Ge neral Perón.
Mientras más estudiaban los hijos de los obreros peronistas, más se alejaban del movimiento que les había permitido acceder a las universidades. El aparato cultural estaba manejado por liberales y conservadores, nacionalistas clericales e intelectuales del establishment, quienes supieron reacomodarse a la nueva situación, preservando la esencia de la educación oficial y enfilando sus cañones a criticar una simple iconografía oficialista que se insertaba en los textos escolares como mera propaganda gubernamental. La nueva clase media argentina, que se había consolidado económicamente con el gobierno peronista, paradójicamente, engrosaba las filas de la contrarrevolución a partir del frente estudiantil universitario.
3. Es que la cultura dominante impregna a toda la sociedad. No es sólo la cultura de las clases privilegiadas, sino que es la cultura que las clases privilegiadas imponen a las subalternas para evitar que éstas piensen y actúen en función de sus intereses. Cuando un ciudadano común, un asalariado por ejemplo, dice: “no me interesa la política, con la política no como ni alimento a mi familia”, no está expresándose la clase asalariada, sino que está hablando la clase dominante a través de ese asalariado, se está manifestando el pensamiento oligárquico, cuyo mayor interés radica en que los asalariados no participen en política.
Pero, ¿por qué ese asalariado o ciudadano común expresa esas ideas?, ¿de dónde provienen esos postulados?
De la cultura dominante, que por medio de diferentes instrumentos (educación oficial, medios de comunicación, propaganda, publicidad, etcétera) irradia valores, costumbres, impresiones, datos y mensajes que son asimilados acríticamente y que no desafinan en el concierto de la opinión generalizada. Educación, religión y medios de comunicación parecen ser las armas fundamentales de la artillería cultural oligárquica; sin subestimar un espacio muchas veces poco atendido a la hora de dar batalla: el espacio del entretenimiento, el juego, el ocio y la recreación.
Las fantasías y deseos impuestos -por las técnicas de manipulación, los mensajes subliminales, la publicidad y el marketing- en el momento en el que la persona se dedica al entretenimiento, penetran profundamente en la mente de los seres humanos, porque justamente ése es el momento en el que se busca un estado de relajación, y por lo tanto la persona baja sus defensas críticas y analíticas. Al mismo tiempo, condiciona la creatividad. Tanto más en el caso de los niños, para quienes jugar es en gran medida su forma de conocer el mundo.
4. Veamos algunos ejemplos: el niño o niña se levanta a la mañana y va a la escuela. Su morral, carpetas y cuadernos están impresos con Barbie, el Hombre Araña, Superman, Barney o Mickey. En la escuela estudian historia: “Colón y las Tres Carabelas”; los romanos, los egipcios, los griegos, Alejandro Magno y los Reyes Católicos, algo de matemática y geometría y algo de lenguaje y literatura, con ejemplos de elefantes, leones, tigres, focas, duendes, príncipes, hadas y dragones. De vuelta a casa los niños ven televisión en Cartoon Network; y si leen libros o historietas estarán presentes los X-Men, Harry Potter, Batman o el Pato Donald. A la hora de los juegos la Barbie ocupará un lugar de privilegio en las niñas; los Transformers, comandos y mercenarios, superhéroes de televisión y naves espaciales con la bandera estadounidense estampad a en algún lugar, serán las opciones más recurrentes para los niños. Cuando practiquen deportes soñarán con algún ídolo de las Grandes Ligas o de la NBA. Los carritos serán Ferraris, Batimóviles o blindados de USA Army. En los días de paseo, los niños y niñas se vestirán con franelas estampadas en inglés, habrá Sambil o cualquier otra versión local de shoppings y grandes galerias comerciales, McDonalds y Coca Cola y, si el presupuesto alcanza para ir al cine, se entusiasmará con las propuestas de cartelera: Los Cuatro Fantásticos y Silver Surfer; El Hombre Araña 3; Harry Potter y la Orden del Fénix, Transformers o Shrek Tercero. A la noche, los niños y niñas verán más televisión, o tal vez podrán ir a algún Video Juego donde se insertarán en el mundo de Super ! Mario BROS, Pac-Man, Carmaggedon o Dragon Ball, seguramente con auriculares para no desconcentrarse, aparatos que usarán antes de dormir para escuchar la música de moda normalmente entonada en inglés. ¿Y un adolescente o joven? Dejo al lector que haga su propio análisis. ¿Y un adulto? Tampoco escapa al bombardeo alienante de la industria cultural en manos de las clases dominantes. ¿Hay diferencia entre una persona rica y una pobre en esta materia? La diferencia es meramente cuantitativa, en absoluto cualitativa. El niño rico tendrá computadora y video-juego en su propia casa, el niño pobre buscará unas monedas para ir ciber, para acceder a los video-juegos o a un local de juegos electrónicos; el niño pobre tendrá un reproductor de música, un niño rico un MP4; un niño pobre tendrá un Transformers o una Barbie (o una imitación de los “originales”) y uno rico tendrá diez. El mensaje, la esencia del mensaje es la misma para ricos y pobres. La cultura dominante impregna a toda la sociedad.
5. Ahora, si aceptamos este perverso, alienante y antiético manejo de la educación y el entretenimiento, como asimismo de la propaganda y publicidad (otro tema es la religión pero aquí no ahondaremos en esta materia), que realizan las clases dominantes
¿Cómo vamos a pretender formar hombres y mujeres nuevos?
Teniendo en cuenta lo antes mencionado, ¿dónde aparecen los valores de la solidaridad, el desprendimiento, la austeridad, el amor al prójimo, el trabajo, la fraternidad y la honradez?
¿Dónde queda la autoestima del venezolano si desde la infancia sufrimos un bombardeo de enajenación donde la identidad nacional está borrada absolutamente?
6. Es necesario que de manera urgente la revolución bolivariana asuma la responsabilidad de ocupar el espacio de la industria cultural y de entretenimiento. No podemos dejar en manos de las clases dominantes un elemento tan importante que influye en las conductas, actitudes y normas de la vida cotidiana de los ciudadanos.
Es fundamental, entre otras medidas:
*Convocar a un Congreso Pedagógico que asuma la tarea de revisar y cambiar los contenidos de todos los programas educativos, agregando las asignaturas necesarias para garantizar el Proyecto Nacional, a nivel primario, medio y universitario, con la participación de toda la sociedad bajo el lema “Toda la Patria una Escuela”.
*Hacer de las escuelas un lugar de enseñanza y esparcimiento, donde el niño o niña pueda concurrir los fines de semana a jugar, hacer deportes, ver espectáculos infantiles, hacer arte, bailar y compartir con sus amigos.
*Trabajar para contar con un canal de televisión dirigido a niños y niñas exclusivamente. Asimismo estimular la producción visual y cinematográfica dirigida a ese público, contemplando los valores de la solidaridad, la identidad nacional y el amor al prójimo.
*Generar la infraestructura necesaria para hacer de los espacios públicos (plazas, paseos, campos deportivos, recreos, etc.) lugares de encuentro, entretenimiento y juego para todas las edades. La Misión Cultura no tiene que estar ajena a este emprendimiento.
*Impulsar, a través del Instituto Nacional de Capacitación y Educación Socialista, INCES, las escuelas de Educación Técnica, Pequiven, la fabricación de juegos de plaza.
*Impulsar, con el aporte de técnicos, creativos, inventores y artistas, fábricas de juguetes nacionales, donde aparezca nuestra fauna: muñecos de guacamayos, caimanes, jaguares, monos, chigüires, morrocoyes; nuestras leyendas y tradiciones, muñecos, marionetas, títeres con los seres fantásticos del imaginario venezolano: el caimán Babá; la Dientona; La Sayona; los Ceretones, Florentino, Carmelo Niño, etcétera; nuestros héroes: Bolívar, Sucre, José Leonardo Chirinos, Guaicaipuro, Andresote, Zamora y tantos; nuestras Fuerzas Armadas: soldaditos del ejército independentista, los llaneros, los guerrilleros, aviones, tanques, el carro Tiuna; nuestra sociedad: ¿por qué no tener Manuelitas con atuendo indígena, de afrodescendiente, de obrera, maestra, con uniforme de coronela, etcétera, en vez de Barbies con moda yanquis o de pasarelas glamorosas?; nuestra tecnología proyectándola al futuro: Satélite Bolívar, naves espaciales con bandera venezolana, nuestro robot “Petrobot” ¿por qué no?; nuestra diversidad racial: muñecos negros, indios, blancos; nuestros paisajes: “puzzle” con paisajes latinoamericanos en vez de Torres Eiffel, Big Ben, Estatua de la Libertad; nuestros juegos de mesas que estimulen la cooperación, la solidaridad, el conocimiento del entorno, en vez de los “Monopoly”; nuestros juguetes de miniatura: con mercalitos para jugar a las compras, equipos de Barrio Adentro para jugar al doctor, obras de infraestructura como puentes y trenes para los constructores, o un barco como el Leander.
*Controlar la venta y distribución de juegos electrónicos que inducen a la violencia, la guerra, el delito y la crueldad.
*Limitar la publicidad callejera que contienen mensajes ofensivos hacia la mujer y la sociedad toda, como asimismo aquella que en vez de promocionar las virtudes de un productos señalan el status social de quien lo consume. Utilizar los espacios publicitarios callejeros para la promoción de nuestro arte, nuestros paisajes y nuestra sociedad.
*Crear una editorial especializada en textos infantiles y para adolescentes contemplando la publicación de libros, revistas, historietas, juegos de salón y material didáctico.
7. Sobre la cultura dominante se podría hablar mucho, sobre hegemonía y contrahegemonía, sobre los valores impugnadores de la cultura popular, sobre los mass media, la comunicación de masas, sobre estética y producción artística y mil cosas más. Pero considero que el tema es demasiado serio como para quedarnos simplemente en un análisis intelectual.
El Motor Moral y Luces no es solo una idea, es un emprendimiento en marcha que debemos apoyar y apuntalar. Ya no se trata solo de criticar el modelo imperante, o diagnosticar sobre cómo el enemigo sigue alienándonos con métodos sutiles, sino que se trata de proponer y discutir sobre medidas concretas que den una batalla efectiva y eficiente contra el envenenamiento cotidiano que las clases dominantes siguen suministrando a cuentagotas a la sociedad venezolana.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
