1. SuJung, Kim 2. Scores ill in Peru 'meteor crash' 3. After an object crashed down and left a deep cfater near the town of Carancas in the Andes, Peru, hundreds of Peruvians suffer from illness. Scientists were making research to verify where the object was meteorite or not. Some said there is a possiblity that the object might be a satellite. Due to the fetid, noxious gases which were spewed from the crater lots of people are suffering from physical and psychological pain. Also, people are worrying that animals would become ill.
------------------ Hundreds of people in Peru have needed treatment after an object from space - said to be a meteorite - plummeted to Earth in a remote area, officials say.
They say the object left a deep crater after crashing down over the weekend near the town of Carancas in the Andes.
People who visited the scene have been complaining of headaches, vomiting and nausea after inhaling gases.
But some experts have questioned whether it was a meteorite or some other object that landed in Carancas.
"Increasingly we think that people witnessed a fireball, which are not uncommon, went off to investigate and found a lake of sedimentary deposit, which may be full of smelly, methane rich organic matter," said Dr Caroline Smith, a meteorite expert at the London-based Natural History Museum.
"This has been mistaken for a crater."
A team of scientists is on its way to the site to collect samples and verify whether it was indeed a meteorite.
Geologists have called on the authorities to stop people going near the crash site.
A local journalist, Martine Hanlon, told the BBC experts did not believe the meteor would make anybody sick, but they did think a chemical reaction caused by its contact with the ground could release toxins such as sulphur and arsenic.
An engineer from the Peruvian Nuclear Energy Institute told AFP news agency that no radiation had been detected from the crater. He ruled out any possibility that the fallen object might be a satellite.
Afraid
Nestor Quispe, the mayor of the municipality to which Carancas belongs, told the BBC that many residents had been affected.
"Lots of people from the town of Carancas have fallen ill. They have headaches, eye problems, irritated skin, nausea and vomiting," he said.
"I think there's also a certain psychological fear in the community."
Local resident Heber Mamani said a bull and some other animals had become ill.
"That is why we are asking for an analysis, because we are worried for our people. They are afraid," he said.
Another local villager, Romulo Quispe, said people were worried that the water was no longer safe to drink.
"This is the water we use for the animals, and for us, for everyone, and it looks like it is contaminated," he said.
"We don't know what is going on at the moment, that is what we are worried about."
The incident took place on Saturday night, when people near Carancas in the remote Puno region, some 1,300km (800 miles) south of the Peruvian capital, Lima, reported seeing a fireball in the sky coming towards them.
The object then hit the ground, leaving a 30m (98ft) wide and 6m (20ft) deep crater.
The crater spewed what officials described as fetid, noxious gases.
Jorge Lopez, a health director in Puno, told Reuters news agency he had an irritated throat and itchy nose after visiting the site. ------- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7001897.stm
1.Kyung-Hee, Kang 2.Gay rights in Latin America - Out of the closet 3.Begins the first gay soccer world cup on september 24, in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The event is organized by the International Gay and Lesbian Football Association and Buenos Aires won the contest to host it getting through tough competition with Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) and Lima (Peru). On the newses reporting the gay WC, I've just found that Buenos Aires was well known gay-friendly city where same sex civil union was approved. In fact, despite being home of machismo and many problamatic issues and conditions, the progresses on gay rights in Latin America are quite impressive. Of course there are still strong social bias and high rate hate crimes, as the article also mentioned.
And sorry about the serie of deleted comments. Thre's been a trouble with my keyborad.. ------------------- Mar 8th 2007 | LIMA From The Economist print edition
LATIN AMERICANS are surprisingly tolerant of homosexuality—within limits. Though they may face taunts and violence, men in particular can sometimes lead openly, even flamboyantly, gay lives as long as they conform to certain stereotypes (such as working as hairdressers). Those who prefer to be discreet usually benefit from Catholic society's widespread “don't ask, don't tell” tolerance of private foibles. It is when they start challenging norms and agitating for legal rights that the trouble typically starts.
AP
Giving the kiss-off to machismoNow, this too is gradually changing. In January two lesbians became the first same-sex couple to register a “civil solidarity union” in Coahuila, the first Mexican state to legalise such partnerships. This month Mexico City will follow suit. Buenos Aires, Argentina's capital, and the southern Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul also allow same-sex unions.
Argentina and Costa Rica too are considering giving legal recognition to same-sex unions. Last month Colombia's Constitutional Court granted gay couples who have lived together for more than two years the same inheritance rights as married heterosexuals. A bill to give them the same social-security rights is pending in Colombia's Congress.
The beginnings of a shift are visible in more conservative countries as well. In 2004 Peru's Constitutional Court struck down a law that banned members of the armed forces from having homosexual relations, whether on or off base, while the police's human-rights manual instructs officers not to mistreat gays, lesbians or transvestites. A Peruvian activist, Jorge Bracamonte, ran for a seat in the Andean Parliament last year, not so much to win (he didn't) but in order to campaign against homophobia. Even in Chile, where divorce has been legal only since 2004, a gay-rights group has begun lobbying politicians to legislate against discrimination.
Such legal changes would have been unthinkable in the region a decade ago. Abortion remains illegal in many Latin American countries. However, gays who campaign for change still face prejudice, and worse. The International Lesbian and Gay Association, a Brussels-based NGO, reported that in 2005 a gay man was killed every two days in Latin America solely because of his sexuality. In Brazil, whose government launched a campaign against homophobia in 2004, 2,509 gay men have been murdered over the past decade.
“Countries that have made the most progress, such as Brazil and Mexico, also have the highest levels of hate crimes,” says Mr Bracamonte, a historian. The more they come out of the closet, the easier targets gay people become. In January an immigration judge in the United States who had previously denied a Mexican gay man's asylum bid, on the ground that he could conceal his sexual orientation and was therefore not in danger of persecution as a homosexual, reversed his decision.
Same-sex unions face powerful opposition from conservative political parties and the Catholic church. Because of that, campaigners have so far pushed only for civil unions, not marriage. But across the region, gay groups are slowly becoming part of the political scene. --- http://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8819803
A nice concise article recording Chavez's comments about the allegedly ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro. Although the article did not elaborate much about Chavez's meeting with Castro, it really depicted how unreasonable Chavez appears to be. With some even conjecturing Castro's death, we know by common sense that not even Castro could survive another 100 years after going surgery. This article didn't concentrate on any other part of Chavez's speech either. Thus the only value this article has really is to belittle the Venezuelan president. ------------ MANAUS, Brazil (AP) -- Ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro has a "little problem" with his health but could live for another century, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Friday during a trip to Brazil's Amazon.
"Castro has a little problem, but he can live another 100 years with this little problem," Chavez was quoted as saying by Venezuela's Bolivarian News Agency.
Castro, 81, has not appeared in public since announcing more than a year ago that he had undergone intestinal surgery and was provisionally ceding power to his younger brother, Raul.
Chavez, a close Castro ally, said Castro was "close to death" but underwent several operations and has regained weight.
Castro had "three operations, and he's 81, imagine that. They changed almost all the blood with transfusions. Fidel is alive because he is Fidel," Chavez said.
Chavez made the comments early Friday after meeting with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa in the jungle city of Manaus. ---- http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/09/21/chavez.castro.ap/index.html
Title: US, EU Hope Brazil, India Will Open Up Their Markets
This article was another personal reminder of how media contents are manipulated products of a certain 'point of view' that can differ among every people, region, country, class, and so on, around the world.
In one part of the world, people are fighting their individual lives to kick out any kind of influx related to globalism,(although this may be controversial as there always tend to be unknown people who share similar thoughts and problems as others, just existing on the other side of the globe), while in the other part of the world verbally well-mannered group of authorities are making big decisions to clear away the illegitimate demonstrations of people and legitimately bring down the boundaries and bring this world into a single market.
What a contrast of reality when you think for a minute what we saw last week in the documentary (despite that fact that the docum. Itself had its political bias and a standpoint), the angry and desperate people doing their best to guard their local economy—their only means of living.
On a personal note, there are always way too many people with concluded point of views but never enough reciprocal discussion and an open investigation of the reality that is an on-going matter.
--------------------------
GENEVA, 23 September 2007 — US and European trade officials said Friday they hope recent progress in World Trade Organization talks to reduce farm tariffs and subsidies will persuade major developing countries such as Brazil and India to open up their manufacturing markets.
US President George W. Bush is likely to meet Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva in New York next week in what could be an important encounter for the WTO’s six-year drive to conclude a new global trade pact. The two leaders would be joined by their top trade negotiators, US Trade Representative Susan Schwab and Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim, according to US officials.
The talks come as Washington has breathed new life into the World Trade Organization talks, signaling its willingness at a meeting Wednesday to limit trade-distorting farm subsidies to a level between $13 billion and $16.4 billion (9.3 billion euros and 11.74 billion euros). The question of rich countries’ farm subsidies has been a major stumbling block in the WTO talks. On Friday, senior WTO diplomats from the United States and the 27-nation European Union urged their partners in the developing world to share the burden in a trade round that was promised as recipe for adding billions of dollars (euros) to the world economy and lift millions of people out of poverty.
US Ambassador Peter Allgeier said he hoped Washington’s commitment to negotiate within the ranges of a draft WTO agriculture agreement would prompt Argentina, Brazil, India and others to make a similar commitment on a parallel WTO proposal for cutting industrial tariffs. “We haven’t seen that yet,” Allgeier told The Associated Press at the WTO’s Geneva headquarters.
EU Ambassador Eckhart Guth said the US move represented a step forward and added that he was optimistic “progress in agriculture will also trigger progress in other areas,” a reference to talks on industrial commerce that will restart in earnest next week. The global trade talks known as the Doha round have repeatedly stalled since their inception in Qatar’s capital in 2001, largely because of wrangling between rich and poor nations over eliminating barriers to farm trade and, more recently, manufacturing trade.
The United States has been under considerable pressure to limit payments to American farmers of major crops such as corn, cotton, rice, soybean and wheat. Critics of the subsidies say they drive down prices, making it impossible for small farms to compete in international markets and more difficult for poorer countries to develop their economies by selling agricultural produce abroad.
3. First of all, sorry for posting this article late. I completely forgot that today is Sunday - I only thought of the lond holidays.. I though this article is very interesting because I never realized the status of Venezuela in this world society. It was a country than many of my friends were from, and also a very exciting place to have fun. However, through this article the author is telling how dangerous it is to put Venezuela on the UN security council with its dictator who has trubled the international society for a long time. In fact, it turned out that Venezuela won the seat, and I am not sure how it is doing these days well and planning to follow up the current issue. However, I felt akward the fact just becuase Chevaz's has been against the "American way" is the reason the author is afraid of Venezuela winning the seat. Maybe we can all think about what it the "American way"
--------------------------------- Venezuela On The UN Security Council? On October 16th, the United Nations General Assembly will decide, by a secret ballot, who will take over the recently vacated Latin America seat on the U.N. Security Council. Guess who is at the top of the very short list?
Venezuela.
Now isn't that a little like putting Mark Foley in charge of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus?
Guatemala is also a candidate, and there is talk of adding Uruguay to the list, as well.
But according to The Center for Security Policy:
Venezuela has put a lot of effort into winning this seat. Among those supporting Venezuela are the 22 members of the Arab League, the countries of the Southern Common market Mercosur including Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay. Bolivia, Cuba and the Caribbean Community 13 country trade bloc known as CARICOM. Russia and China have announced that they will also support Venezuela. Iran, of course, is a strong supporter of Venezuela. Opposed to Venezuela are Mexico, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Colombia, the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico. Most European countries seem to be backing Guatemala while Asia and Africa are divided. In Latin America Chile, Haiti and Peru remain undecided.
Even though Venezuela is a country led by a radical and delirious dictator, it has amassed great support. This is the effective result of a world campaign which included more than a mere public relations strategy. Venezuela has been offering subsidized oil to countries in the Caribbean, buying foreign debt bonds (Argentina) and offering financial assistance to far away countries in Asia and Africa.
Now this could get very ugly, very quickly, folks. The CSP, again:
Why should the world oppose Venezuela's seat on the UN Security Council since it would be temporary?
There are a number of reasons why it is imperative to oppose Venezuela's bid to be on the Security Council. Venezuela proclaims a strong anti-Americanism, and, at the same time tries, to counterbalance US power in the world and particularly in Latin America. In the course of that action Venezuela's leader Hugo Chavez makes alliances with rogue and dangerous states such as Iran and Syria, tries to politically de-stabilize regimes in Latin America such as Peru, Mexico and Ecuador; actively supports radical guerilla and terrorist groups such as FARC and has declared open support for Hezbollah. As a matter of moral principle this should be unacceptable in an era characterized by a global war against terrorism and the danger of nuclear weapons falling in the hands of unscrupulous states and organizations. Appointing Venezuela to the Council would be the wrong message to the world community and a big defeat for the enlightened nations of the West.
By the same token and in more formal terms, Venezuela occupying a seat in the Security Council is nothing but a reversal of the reforms promoted by the US and European countries in the world body.
Nothing has reflected more the moral bankruptcy of the world body than the third world and the former communist block's concept that social justice and social equality stood as supreme values above what is morally acceptable or human rights, properly speaking. Thus, membership of rogue states and ruthless dictatorships on the Security Council and on the Human Rights commissions has been routine throughout the history of the United Nations. This moral relativism has ultimately helped legitimize terrorism and other forms of political violence.
[...]
Thus, the appointment of Venezuela to fill the Security Council seat would be a political and moral reversal. Venezuela is a country that has openly supported everything the western world stands against. Chavez's concern for the Latin American poor and other "acts of compassion" should not blur the fact that the man is a regional conspirator and an ally of rogue states. If the world community provides a Security Council seat to Venezuela it would provide him with a platform to be a strong advocate of Iran and international terrorism. This would be a defeat not only for the US but also for the western hemisphere as a whole. Voting for Chavez is against the spirit of reform and moral improvement promoted by the United States and other Western countries. The fact that Europeans are not voting for Venezuela is encouraging but they must also apply their influence to convince Latin American countries, who themselves have a third very good reason to defeat Chavez: the stability of their still fragile and young democracies.
The US and its European allies must convince Latin American countries that the short-term benefits deriving from the relation with Venezuela should not interfere with the long-term stability of the region. Latin American countries must be reminded that Venezuela is a highly de-stabilizing force that has and can turn against democratically elected regimes in Latin America, as Hugo Chavez has already done in Peru, Mexico and Ecuador. It would be difficult to convince Argentina since Chavez, by buying foreign debt bonds from Argentina and providing other trade benefits, has enabled the Argentinean government to restore some of the reserves lost as the result of the payment of the foreign debt to the International Monetary Fund. However, Brazil is by far stronger and less dependent on Venezuela. Chavez incited Bolivia to nationalize Brazilian owned companies (Petro-Bras). Brazil, being the largest, most powerful and oil-independent country in Latin America has no reason to support Venezuela except for President Lula's socialist affinity with Venezuela and solidarity with another member of Mercosur. Chile, under President Michelle Bachelet's leadership, has for a long time shied away from the assertiveness of its predecessors and become apologetic of Latin American populisms. Chavez endorsed Bachelet when she ran for election. In return, Bachelet in early September, stated that to "vote against Chavez is to vote against the region". However, later the same month Venezuela and Chile confronted each other amid declarations by the Venezuelan Ambassador in Santiago accusing the Chilean Christian Democratic Party of having supported the coup against Chavez in April 2002 and the Pinochet coup against Allende in 1973. Bachelet declared that the Ambassador's statements are "unacceptable" and represent interference in Chile's internal affairs. Now the government of Chile is again considering whether it will vote for Chavez or not. This is a perfect time for American and western diplomats to persuade Chile to vote against Venezuela.
Chile has not only been an ally of the US but also one of the most economically successful countries in Latin America. Chile, like Brazil, does not depend on Venezuela. The US must convince Chile that the relationship with the US is important and that Chile's position may be weakened by siding with somebody like Chavez. Furthermore, Chavez is not a regional leader but, as he has demonstrated, his authoritarian instincts may turn against an ally at the moment Chavez is displeased with certain policies carried out by a regional country. The same principle applies to Argentina and other countries. However, the stubborn personality of the Argentinean president does not allow for dialogue, at least for the time being. Furthermore, Argentina was a bankrupt country and Chavez's help was badly needed. However, Chile is different. Chile is successful and it should not budge by showing weakness. Chile, like Brazil must be persuaded to oppose Venezuela. It goes without saying that Peru suffered direct interference by Chavez in its domestic politics. Chavez criticized the current President of Peru, Alan Garcia, during the election by confronting him and publicly supporting the pan-indigenous, ultra-nationalist Ollanta Humala.
In sum, it is imperative that US and European diplomats continue an aggressive diplomacy and give priority to the goal of defeating Chavez's bid to the Security Council. World principles and world stability are at stake.
Venezuela and Hugo Chavez have been amping up the rhetoric in hopes of claiming this seat, which, by the way, is non-permanent.
There was this recent flap where Venezuela claimed that their foreign minister was detained at a U.S. airport. A whopping ninety minutes, mind you.
And news that Venezuela is kissing up to Iran with new trade pacts.
And Chavez's recent trip to the U.S. last month, where he insulted the president and gave all of us firsthand insight into what the UN will be like with Venezuela on the Security Council. (see: CTT: Time For A New U.N.)
Chavez has claimed that he has caught U.S. spies in his country (CTT: U.S. Spies In Venezuela?), that the U.S. is out to kill him and invade his country, and that he now has a "White House Informant".
The bottom line is that the upcoming vote is a test for the U.N. and for Latin America. Hopefully, they will make it count and do the right thing.
A very down to earth* kind of guy. I'm an environmental sociologist interested in establishing material and organizational sustainability worldwide. I'm always looking for interesting materials/technologies, inspiring ideas, or institutional examples of sustainability to inspire others to recognize their choices now. To be fatalistic about an unsustainable world is a sign of a captive mind, given all our options.
*(If "earth" is defined in a planetary sense, concerning comparative historical knowledge and interest in the past 10,000 years or so anywhere...) See both blogs.
8 comments:
1. SuJung, Kim
2. Scores ill in Peru 'meteor crash'
3. After an object crashed down and left a deep cfater near the town of Carancas in the Andes, Peru, hundreds of Peruvians suffer from illness. Scientists were making research to verify where the object was meteorite or not. Some said there is a possiblity that the object might be a satellite. Due to the fetid, noxious gases which were spewed from the crater lots of people are suffering from physical and psychological pain. Also, people are worrying that animals would become ill.
------------------
Hundreds of people in Peru have needed treatment after an object from space - said to be a meteorite - plummeted to Earth in a remote area, officials say.
They say the object left a deep crater after crashing down over the weekend near the town of Carancas in the Andes.
People who visited the scene have been complaining of headaches, vomiting and nausea after inhaling gases.
But some experts have questioned whether it was a meteorite or some other object that landed in Carancas.
"Increasingly we think that people witnessed a fireball, which are not uncommon, went off to investigate and found a lake of sedimentary deposit, which may be full of smelly, methane rich organic matter," said Dr Caroline Smith, a meteorite expert at the London-based Natural History Museum.
"This has been mistaken for a crater."
A team of scientists is on its way to the site to collect samples and verify whether it was indeed a meteorite.
Geologists have called on the authorities to stop people going near the crash site.
A local journalist, Martine Hanlon, told the BBC experts did not believe the meteor would make anybody sick, but they did think a chemical reaction caused by its contact with the ground could release toxins such as sulphur and arsenic.
An engineer from the Peruvian Nuclear Energy Institute told AFP news agency that no radiation had been detected from the crater. He ruled out any possibility that the fallen object might be a satellite.
Afraid
Nestor Quispe, the mayor of the municipality to which Carancas belongs, told the BBC that many residents had been affected.
"Lots of people from the town of Carancas have fallen ill. They have headaches, eye problems, irritated skin, nausea and vomiting," he said.
"I think there's also a certain psychological fear in the community."
Local resident Heber Mamani said a bull and some other animals had become ill.
"That is why we are asking for an analysis, because we are worried for our people. They are afraid," he said.
Another local villager, Romulo Quispe, said people were worried that the water was no longer safe to drink.
"This is the water we use for the animals, and for us, for everyone, and it looks like it is contaminated," he said.
"We don't know what is going on at the moment, that is what we are worried about."
The incident took place on Saturday night, when people near Carancas in the remote Puno region, some 1,300km (800 miles) south of the Peruvian capital, Lima, reported seeing a fireball in the sky coming towards them.
The object then hit the ground, leaving a 30m (98ft) wide and 6m (20ft) deep crater.
The crater spewed what officials described as fetid, noxious gases.
Jorge Lopez, a health director in Puno, told Reuters news agency he had an irritated throat and itchy nose after visiting the site.
-------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7001897.stm
1.Kyung-Hee, Kang
2.Gay rights in Latin America - Out of the closet
3.Begins the first gay soccer world cup on september 24, in Buenos Aires, Argentina. The event is organized by the International Gay and Lesbian Football Association and Buenos Aires won the contest to host it getting through tough competition with Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) and Lima (Peru).
On the newses reporting the gay WC, I've just found that Buenos Aires was well known gay-friendly city where same sex civil union was approved. In fact, despite being home of machismo and many problamatic issues and conditions, the progresses on gay rights in Latin America are quite impressive. Of course there are still strong social bias and high rate hate crimes, as the article also mentioned.
PS. Several related links, if you're intersted.
Dos Patrias [Cuba y la Noche] hompage
; a cuban documentary film on six gay men and their lives in very macho Cuban society.
"Gay Rights Gain Ground Around Globe" on Newsweek
LGBT rights by country" on wikipedia
And sorry about the serie of deleted comments. Thre's been a trouble with my keyborad..
-------------------
Mar 8th 2007 | LIMA
From The Economist print edition
LATIN AMERICANS are surprisingly tolerant of homosexuality—within limits. Though they may face taunts and violence, men in particular can sometimes lead openly, even flamboyantly, gay lives as long as they conform to certain stereotypes (such as working as hairdressers). Those who prefer to be discreet usually benefit from Catholic society's widespread “don't ask, don't tell” tolerance of private foibles. It is when they start challenging norms and agitating for legal rights that the trouble typically starts.
AP
Giving the kiss-off to machismoNow, this too is gradually changing. In January two lesbians became the first same-sex couple to register a “civil solidarity union” in Coahuila, the first Mexican state to legalise such partnerships. This month Mexico City will follow suit. Buenos Aires, Argentina's capital, and the southern Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul also allow same-sex unions.
Argentina and Costa Rica too are considering giving legal recognition to same-sex unions. Last month Colombia's Constitutional Court granted gay couples who have lived together for more than two years the same inheritance rights as married heterosexuals. A bill to give them the same social-security rights is pending in Colombia's Congress.
The beginnings of a shift are visible in more conservative countries as well. In 2004 Peru's Constitutional Court struck down a law that banned members of the armed forces from having homosexual relations, whether on or off base, while the police's human-rights manual instructs officers not to mistreat gays, lesbians or transvestites. A Peruvian activist, Jorge Bracamonte, ran for a seat in the Andean Parliament last year, not so much to win (he didn't) but in order to campaign against homophobia. Even in Chile, where divorce has been legal only since 2004, a gay-rights group has begun lobbying politicians to legislate against discrimination.
Such legal changes would have been unthinkable in the region a decade ago. Abortion remains illegal in many Latin American countries. However, gays who campaign for change still face prejudice, and worse. The International Lesbian and Gay Association, a Brussels-based NGO, reported that in 2005 a gay man was killed every two days in Latin America solely because of his sexuality. In Brazil, whose government launched a campaign against homophobia in 2004, 2,509 gay men have been murdered over the past decade.
“Countries that have made the most progress, such as Brazil and Mexico, also have the highest levels of hate crimes,” says Mr Bracamonte, a historian. The more they come out of the closet, the easier targets gay people become. In January an immigration judge in the United States who had previously denied a Mexican gay man's asylum bid, on the ground that he could conceal his sexual orientation and was therefore not in danger of persecution as a homosexual, reversed his decision.
Same-sex unions face powerful opposition from conservative political parties and the Catholic church. Because of that, campaigners have so far pushed only for civil unions, not marriage. But across the region, gay groups are slowly becoming part of the political scene.
---
http://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8819803
Euna Lee
Chavez: Castro could live 'another 100 years'
A nice concise article recording Chavez's comments about the allegedly ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro. Although the article did not elaborate much about Chavez's meeting with Castro, it really depicted how unreasonable Chavez appears to be. With some even conjecturing Castro's death, we know by common sense that not even Castro could survive another 100 years after going surgery. This article didn't concentrate on any other part of Chavez's speech either. Thus the only value this article has really is to belittle the Venezuelan president.
------------
MANAUS, Brazil (AP) -- Ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro has a "little problem" with his health but could live for another century, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said Friday during a trip to Brazil's Amazon.
"Castro has a little problem, but he can live another 100 years with this little problem," Chavez was quoted as saying by Venezuela's Bolivarian News Agency.
Castro, 81, has not appeared in public since announcing more than a year ago that he had undergone intestinal surgery and was provisionally ceding power to his younger brother, Raul.
Chavez, a close Castro ally, said Castro was "close to death" but underwent several operations and has regained weight.
Castro had "three operations, and he's 81, imagine that. They changed almost all the blood with transfusions. Fidel is alive because he is Fidel," Chavez said.
Chavez made the comments early Friday after meeting with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa in the jungle city of Manaus.
----
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/09/21/chavez.castro.ap/index.html
Yong Mie Jo
Title: US, EU Hope Brazil, India Will Open Up Their Markets
This article was another personal reminder of how media contents are manipulated products of a certain 'point of view' that can differ among every people, region, country, class, and so on, around the world.
In one part of the world, people are fighting their individual lives to kick out any kind of influx related to globalism,(although this may be controversial as there always tend to be unknown people who share similar thoughts and problems as others, just existing on the other side of the globe), while in the other part of the world verbally well-mannered group of authorities are making big decisions to clear away the illegitimate demonstrations of people and legitimately bring down the boundaries and bring this world into a single market.
What a contrast of reality when you think for a minute what we saw last week in the documentary (despite that fact that the docum. Itself had its political bias and a standpoint), the angry and desperate people doing their best to guard their local economy—their only means of living.
On a personal note, there are always way too many people with concluded point of views but never enough reciprocal discussion and an open investigation of the reality that is an on-going matter.
--------------------------
GENEVA, 23 September 2007 — US and European trade officials said Friday they hope recent progress in World Trade Organization talks to reduce farm tariffs and subsidies will persuade major developing countries such as Brazil and India to open up their manufacturing markets.
US President George W. Bush is likely to meet Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva in New York next week in what could be an important encounter for the WTO’s six-year drive to conclude a new global trade pact. The two leaders would be joined by their top trade negotiators, US Trade Representative Susan Schwab and Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim, according to US officials.
The talks come as Washington has breathed new life into the World Trade Organization talks, signaling its willingness at a meeting Wednesday to limit trade-distorting farm subsidies to a level between $13 billion and $16.4 billion (9.3 billion euros and 11.74 billion euros). The question of rich countries’ farm subsidies has been a major stumbling block in the WTO talks.
On Friday, senior WTO diplomats from the United States and the 27-nation European Union urged their partners in the developing world to share the burden in a trade round that was promised as recipe for adding billions of dollars (euros) to the world economy and lift millions of people out of poverty.
US Ambassador Peter Allgeier said he hoped Washington’s commitment to negotiate within the ranges of a draft WTO agriculture agreement would prompt Argentina, Brazil, India and others to make a similar commitment on a parallel WTO proposal for cutting industrial tariffs. “We haven’t seen that yet,” Allgeier told The Associated Press at the WTO’s Geneva headquarters.
EU Ambassador Eckhart Guth said the US move represented a step forward and added that he was optimistic “progress in agriculture will also trigger progress in other areas,” a reference to talks on industrial commerce that will restart in earnest next week. The global trade talks known as the Doha round have repeatedly stalled since their inception in Qatar’s capital in 2001, largely because of wrangling between rich and poor nations over eliminating barriers to farm trade and, more recently, manufacturing trade.
The United States has been under considerable pressure to limit payments to American farmers of major crops such as corn, cotton, rice, soybean and wheat. Critics of the subsidies say they drive down prices, making it impossible for small farms to compete in international markets and more difficult for poorer countries to develop their economies by selling agricultural produce abroad.
- by Bradley S. Klapper, Associated Press
- Sunday, 23, September, 2007
---
http://arabnews.com/?page=6§ion=0&article=101592&d=23&m=9&y=2007&pix=business.jpg&category=Business
1. Ju, Hyun Ji
2. Venezuela on the UN security council?
3. First of all, sorry for posting this article late. I completely forgot that today is Sunday - I only thought of the lond holidays..
I though this article is very interesting because I never realized the status of Venezuela in this world society. It was a country than many of my friends were from, and also a very exciting place to have fun.
However, through this article the author is telling how dangerous it is to put Venezuela on the UN security council with its dictator who has trubled the international society for a long time.
In fact, it turned out that Venezuela won the seat, and I am not sure how it is doing these days well and planning to follow up the current issue.
However, I felt akward the fact just becuase Chevaz's has been against the "American way" is the reason the author is afraid of Venezuela winning the seat. Maybe we can all think about what it the "American way"
---------------------------------
Venezuela On The UN Security Council?
On October 16th, the United Nations General Assembly will decide, by a secret ballot, who will take over the recently vacated Latin America seat on the U.N. Security Council. Guess who is at the top of the very short list?
Venezuela.
Now isn't that a little like putting Mark Foley in charge of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus?
Guatemala is also a candidate, and there is talk of adding Uruguay to the list, as well.
But according to The Center for Security Policy:
Venezuela has put a lot of effort into winning this seat. Among those supporting Venezuela are the 22 members of the Arab League, the countries of the Southern Common market Mercosur including Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay. Bolivia, Cuba and the Caribbean Community 13 country trade bloc known as CARICOM. Russia and China have announced that they will also support Venezuela. Iran, of course, is a strong supporter of Venezuela. Opposed to Venezuela are Mexico, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Costa Rica, Colombia, the Dominican Republic and Puerto Rico. Most European countries seem to be backing Guatemala while Asia and Africa are divided. In Latin America Chile, Haiti and Peru remain undecided.
Even though Venezuela is a country led by a radical and delirious dictator, it has amassed great support. This is the effective result of a world campaign which included more than a mere public relations strategy. Venezuela has been offering subsidized oil to countries in the Caribbean, buying foreign debt bonds (Argentina) and offering financial assistance to far away countries in Asia and Africa.
Now this could get very ugly, very quickly, folks. The CSP, again:
Why should the world oppose Venezuela's seat on the UN Security Council since it would be temporary?
There are a number of reasons why it is imperative to oppose Venezuela's bid to be on the Security Council. Venezuela proclaims a strong anti-Americanism, and, at the same time tries, to counterbalance US power in the world and particularly in Latin America. In the course of that action Venezuela's leader Hugo Chavez makes alliances with rogue and dangerous states such as Iran and Syria, tries to politically de-stabilize regimes in Latin America such as Peru, Mexico and Ecuador; actively supports radical guerilla and terrorist groups such as FARC and has declared open support for Hezbollah. As a matter of moral principle this should be unacceptable in an era characterized by a global war against terrorism and the danger of nuclear weapons falling in the hands of unscrupulous states and organizations. Appointing Venezuela to the Council would be the wrong message to the world community and a big defeat for the enlightened nations of the West.
By the same token and in more formal terms, Venezuela occupying a seat in the Security Council is nothing but a reversal of the reforms promoted by the US and European countries in the world body.
Nothing has reflected more the moral bankruptcy of the world body than the third world and the former communist block's concept that social justice and social equality stood as supreme values above what is morally acceptable or human rights, properly speaking. Thus, membership of rogue states and ruthless dictatorships on the Security Council and on the Human Rights commissions has been routine throughout the history of the United Nations. This moral relativism has ultimately helped legitimize terrorism and other forms of political violence.
[...]
Thus, the appointment of Venezuela to fill the Security Council seat would be a political and moral reversal. Venezuela is a country that has openly supported everything the western world stands against. Chavez's concern for the Latin American poor and other "acts of compassion" should not blur the fact that the man is a regional conspirator and an ally of rogue states. If the world community provides a Security Council seat to Venezuela it would provide him with a platform to be a strong advocate of Iran and international terrorism. This would be a defeat not only for the US but also for the western hemisphere as a whole. Voting for Chavez is against the spirit of reform and moral improvement promoted by the United States and other Western countries. The fact that Europeans are not voting for Venezuela is encouraging but they must also apply their influence to convince Latin American countries, who themselves have a third very good reason to defeat Chavez: the stability of their still fragile and young democracies.
The US and its European allies must convince Latin American countries that the short-term benefits deriving from the relation with Venezuela should not interfere with the long-term stability of the region. Latin American countries must be reminded that Venezuela is a highly de-stabilizing force that has and can turn against democratically elected regimes in Latin America, as Hugo Chavez has already done in Peru, Mexico and Ecuador. It would be difficult to convince Argentina since Chavez, by buying foreign debt bonds from Argentina and providing other trade benefits, has enabled the Argentinean government to restore some of the reserves lost as the result of the payment of the foreign debt to the International Monetary Fund. However, Brazil is by far stronger and less dependent on Venezuela. Chavez incited Bolivia to nationalize Brazilian owned companies (Petro-Bras). Brazil, being the largest, most powerful and oil-independent country in Latin America has no reason to support Venezuela except for President Lula's socialist affinity with Venezuela and solidarity with another member of Mercosur. Chile, under President Michelle Bachelet's leadership, has for a long time shied away from the assertiveness of its predecessors and become apologetic of Latin American populisms. Chavez endorsed Bachelet when she ran for election. In return, Bachelet in early September, stated that to "vote against Chavez is to vote against the region". However, later the same month Venezuela and Chile confronted each other amid declarations by the Venezuelan Ambassador in Santiago accusing the Chilean Christian Democratic Party of having supported the coup against Chavez in April 2002 and the Pinochet coup against Allende in 1973. Bachelet declared that the Ambassador's statements are "unacceptable" and represent interference in Chile's internal affairs. Now the government of Chile is again considering whether it will vote for Chavez or not. This is a perfect time for American and western diplomats to persuade Chile to vote against Venezuela.
Chile has not only been an ally of the US but also one of the most economically successful countries in Latin America. Chile, like Brazil, does not depend on Venezuela. The US must convince Chile that the relationship with the US is important and that Chile's position may be weakened by siding with somebody like Chavez. Furthermore, Chavez is not a regional leader but, as he has demonstrated, his authoritarian instincts may turn against an ally at the moment Chavez is displeased with certain policies carried out by a regional country. The same principle applies to Argentina and other countries. However, the stubborn personality of the Argentinean president does not allow for dialogue, at least for the time being. Furthermore, Argentina was a bankrupt country and Chavez's help was badly needed. However, Chile is different. Chile is successful and it should not budge by showing weakness. Chile, like Brazil must be persuaded to oppose Venezuela. It goes without saying that Peru suffered direct interference by Chavez in its domestic politics. Chavez criticized the current President of Peru, Alan Garcia, during the election by confronting him and publicly supporting the pan-indigenous, ultra-nationalist Ollanta Humala.
In sum, it is imperative that US and European diplomats continue an aggressive diplomacy and give priority to the goal of defeating Chavez's bid to the Security Council. World principles and world stability are at stake.
Venezuela and Hugo Chavez have been amping up the rhetoric in hopes of claiming this seat, which, by the way, is non-permanent.
There was this recent flap where Venezuela claimed that their foreign minister was detained at a U.S. airport. A whopping ninety minutes, mind you.
And news that Venezuela is kissing up to Iran with new trade pacts.
And Chavez's recent trip to the U.S. last month, where he insulted the president and gave all of us firsthand insight into what the UN will be like with Venezuela on the Security Council. (see: CTT: Time For A New U.N.)
Chavez has claimed that he has caught U.S. spies in his country (CTT: U.S. Spies In Venezuela?), that the U.S. is out to kill him and invade his country, and that he now has a "White House Informant".
The bottom line is that the upcoming vote is a test for the U.N. and for Latin America. Hopefully, they will make it count and do the right thing.
----------------------
http://copthetruth.typepad.com/cop_the_truth/2006/10/venezuela_on_th.html
Post a Comment