Social Justice

During this election season we have heard a lot of blame. It comes from both sides and no side has really done more or less considering the positions candidates have been in up to this point in the campaign season. They have blamed members of their own party for their faults and positions – some that have contributed to where we are right now. They have blamed members of the other party for all manner of things various and sundry.

However, what's much harder to come by are admissions of wrongdoing on the part of the candidates for missteps, mistakes and more they have been responsible for themselves. There are very few admissions regarding where things went wrong for them politically and owning up to the fact they had culpability. It goes for people wrapped up in debates and people still free from having to face their opponents. But when the country is headed in the wrong direction, eating a little humble pie in front of the nation might be a good thing right about now.

People may be worried that they would be giving their opponents ammunition with which they may be fired at and attacked. But when we look at the top two Republican candidates, as of right now, both the establishment pick and the establishment wild card and the overall establishment pick already in place on the other side, which of them would be immune from being fired on? Is there really one among them that doesn't have a laundry list of things they would rather not have to fight back against?

What about the president? All a person has to do is go back to his list of promises from the 2008 campaign season and look at how many he's even attempted to pass so far, and then how many he actually did the exact opposite on. There's ample ammunition to go around for all, and it will be on the table. Things that have not yet been thought of or talked about will also be leaking out and thrown around by special interest groups, PAC's and other concerned interests however true or untrue – fair or unfair.

Right now we are trying to recover from two wars, one of them unnecessary and now that we know the truth, unjust, the other just, but which could have been over had we stuck to the mission before abandoning it right before the case for an invasion of Iraq was made. (http://articles.sfgate.com/2002-03-14/news/17535761_1_nuclear-weapons-bi...) We are trying to recover from an economy that soured after a decade of economic expansion - “the longest economic expansion in our history” (http://clinton5.nara.gov/WH/Accomplishments/eightyears-03.html)

One of the lies that has been abundant among candidates on one side that almost all of them have trumpeted is the idea the Bush tax cuts helped the economy. Let's look at that a litle. An article quoted in the book “That Used To Be Us” (Farr, Strauss and Giroux, 2011) that was originally published in the Washington Post notes, “For most of the past 70 years, the U.S. economy has grown at a steady clip, generating perpetually higher incomes and wealth for American households. But since 2000, the story is starkly different. The past decade was the worst for the U.S. economy in modern times, a sharp reversal from a long period of prosperity that is leading economists and policymakers to fundamentally rethink the underpinnings of the nation's growth.

“It was, according to a wide range of data, a lost decade for American workers. The decade began in a moment of triumphalism -- there was a current of thought among economists in 1999 that recessions were a thing of the past. By the end, there were two, bookends to a debt-driven expansion that was neither robust nor sustainable. There has been zero net job creation since December 1999. No previous decade going back to the 1940s had job growth of less than 20 percent. Economic output rose at its slowest rate of any decade since the 1930s as well.” (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/01/AR201001...)

This is further underscored in the same book when the authors quote economist Paul Krugman from a political discussion on ABC in 2009 when he said, “we should have been paying for these wars to begin with, right from the beginning. I mean, this was, if you want to talk firsts for Bush, this was the first time in American history that a president took us into a war and cut taxes.” (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/nov/30/paul-krug...) By cutting taxes when we were adding over a trillion dollars to the amount we spent on defense, which already eclipsed every other nation in the world each many times over, we effectively put ourselves over a trillion dollars more in debt at least. We took on huge expenditures without paying for them and worse at a time when we and reduced our income. If the head of a household did that in the real world they would be considered an irresponsible parent to say the least. How did those tax cuts help us again?

Another thing that keeps getting thrown around and blamed on one side is what is referred to as “cap and trade.” Cap and trade is a system created to try and control carbon emissions that pollute the environment and threaten global stability environmentally. The same book notes this about cap and trade and its history, “The basic premise of cap-and-trade is that government doesn't tell polluters how to clean up their act. Instead, it simply imposes a cap on emissions. Each company starts the year with a certain number of tons allowed—a so-called right to pollute. The company decides how to use its allowance; it might restrict output, or switch to a cleaner fuel, or buy a scrubber to cut emissions. If it doesn't use up its allowance, it might then sell what it no longer needs. Then again, it might have to buy extra allowances on the open market. Each year, the cap ratchets down, and the shrinking pool of allowances gets costlier. As in a game of musical chairs, polluters must scramble to match allowances to emissions.

“Getting all this to work in the real world required a leap of faith. The opportunity came with the 1988 election of George H.W. Bush. EDF president Fred Krupp phoned Bush's new White House counsel—Boyden Gray—and suggested that the best way for Bush to make good on his pledge to become the 'environmental president' was to fix the acid rain problem, and the best way to do that was by using the new tool of emissions trading. Gray liked the marketplace approach, and even before the Reagan administration expired, he put EDF staffers to work drafting legislation to make it happen...

“John Sununu, the White House chief of staff, was furious. He said the cap 'was going to shut the economy down,' Boyden Gray recalls. But the in-house debate 'went very, very fast. We didn't have time to fool around with it.' President Bush not only accepted the cap, he overruled his advisers' recommendation of an eight million-ton cut in annual acid rain emissions in favor of the ten million-ton cut advocated by environmentalists...

”Almost 20 years since the signing of the Clean Air Act of 1990, the cap-and-trade system continues to let polluters figure out the least expensive way to reduce their acid rain emissions.” (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Presence-of-Mind-Blue-Sky-T...) So over the objections of some in that party it was the very party deriding the system that actually put it in place, and by a former president from their own party no less. Never hear that being admitted to. Yet, they keep blaming the other side for it.

The current president also has his own list of things he really needs to clarify and finally be honest about. His record shows that in many ways he did not turn out to be the man he claimed he was. He needs to say how that came about and why without just blaming everyone else. He needs come clean about his real views on wars and the Iraq War and why we are staying in Afghanistan although the 'mission' of finding justice for what happened on 9/11 is over.

He needs to come clean on why hardly any of the stimulus was used to put people to work on things like infrastructure, even though our current infrastructure is lagging behind many nations when it was once the wonder of the world. The ASCE has called it a disgrace and gives it the kind of grades you would ground your children for. (http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/) It needs repairs regardless of the unemployment rate, but the two do happen to coincide. Yet all the money has gone to people in the financial world primarily, most of whom have not paid it back, and that held on to it without moving on the kinds of loans so necessary to stimulate a recovery. The word was without giving them money so they could give out loans, we would have collapsed. They didn't give them out, and we didn't collapse. That needs to be explained.

There is much from both sides. Perhaps the president will be honest about this as he has let down and disappointed so many since his overwhelming election in 2008 when he promised hope and change. He needs to explain why he's been so stingy with both.

To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.

With the official withdrawal from Iraq we will be officially spending a whole lot less money on warfare for the time being, and thus defense spending. One would think it should be pretty straightforward standard stuff from here on out as far as defense spending is concerned. Though we are pulling out, it unfortunately does not improve our situation with regards to the economy much. We will still need to get jobs going, and in fact we will have returning men and women in need of work for those whose service will be complete upon their coming home. There will still be the problems of our economy including trying to figure out places we can cut spending that both parties can agree on.

Most of us just figure whatever spending we will be doing in Iraq now will be nominal and pretty much rote. And thus, outside of Afghanistan and the billions slated for Iraq for the embassy and other non-specific stuff, our spending should be normal regarding the military. We probably just figure there may be some basic red tape happening that we can cut back on, but outside of that it's all pretty hum drum. There are no boondoggles there right? Maybe an experimental plane or two, but there will be those that will support such spending and those that won't and that kind of stuff can get contentious.

Outside of that we have seen little willingness to cut back. We have heard all kinds of quotes from prominent politicians. People have said, “we cannot afford to put our men and women in the field in harm's way.” That sentiment is echoed again and again.

That is a feeling I carry too. Believe me, I was absolutely outraged at the fact our troops were being sent to Iraq and forced to fight with no armor plating on their vehicles in the early days of Iraq. My eyes welled up and my jaw clenched tight just like yours when I saw the exposé's on military families having to scrimp together money to send appropriate kevlar vests to their sons, daughters, husbands and wives because the Bush administration claimed we could not afford them.

There are many things we spend money on in terms of the military. Many things. Things we don't think about. Now I don't dismiss the fine toothed comb approach. Accounting can be a very powerful tool and it was a government accountant that helped bring down Al Capone when all the other law enforcement personnel were failures at doing so. Figuring out how to save on pencils, washers, buttons, etc could definitely help. But there are some other places, larger chunks of spending, people may not be aware of.

When people think about the military we do not think about the game of golf. Likewise the military is not something we necessarily consider when pondering the sport of golf. Sure generals play and soldiers may get to also, but we just don't associate the two. Not usually anyway.

Well the two are associated and our tax dollars are associated right along with that as how could they not be? Now some people reading this may be thinking “come on give them a break.” So we chip in to give them discounts on local courses big deal.” Others may say, “r&r's important and if they get discounts or we pay a couple cents extra to cover their fees for those that want to spend the day on some local links fine.” Fine.

But I'm not referring to that. I'm referring to golf courses owned and maintained by the various branches of the military. Oh yes we have paid for the construction of courses. We also pay for the annual maintenance of those courses.

Again some people might say, “so what it's the military how big can they be?” Others might add “come on guy so there's some course that might as well be named 'Muddy's Step and Sink' located in the bayou somewhere. So what? Watch the alligators and let them have it. It's the least we can do.” SMH.

Let's look at the facts. While politicians have been running around saying we cannot afford to a dime in defense spending cuts they have been ignoring some real facts. We have golf courses owned and maintained by the various branches of the military located all over the world. And though some may be modest in their annual maintenance fees, others are not by anyone's standards.

For example, maintenance fees for the golf course owned and operated by the Air Force in Yokota, Japan cost $1,536,854 in 2008, $1,856,590 in 2009 and $1,881,963 in 2010. Maintenance fees for the golf course owned and maintained by the Air Force at their Osan Base cost $1,128,452 in 2008, $1,040,029 in 2009 and $1,070,958 in 2010. For the Air Force Base Kadena located in Kadena, Okinawa, Japan maintenance fees cost $1,506,450 in 2008, $1,777,271 in 2009 and $1,816,302 in 2010. Pearl Harbor-Hickam Air Force base owns and operates a golf course that cost $1,437,768 in 2008, $1,475,939 in 2009 and $1,576,026 in 2010. There are many more.

Looking at the Navy and its courses there is the golf course at the Admiral Baker Club in San Diego and maintenance costs of $1,539,096 in 2008, $1,462,493 in 2009 and $1,448,945 in 2010. The golf course owned and operated by the Navy at Seal Beach also in San Diego cost to maintain $1,188,593 in 2008, $1,199,971 in 2009 and $1,168,685 in 2010. The Navy golf course located on the island of Oahu costed for maintenance $1,387,379 in 2008, $1,291,976 in 2009 and $1,275,444 in 2010. There are many many more all across the world including Guam and Japan. (http://www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com/golfcourses.html)

I appreciate all the men and women in uniform and the branches of the service for their commitment to our freedom and their sacrifices. I appreciate the Navy and Air Force for being so open and honest. Unfortunately, so far the Army has not been as forthcoming about their fees with me, which every American has the right to know as it's our tax dollars, as is evidenced by the other two service branch's willingness to cooperate.

We installed most of those in different times when we had a different mentality right or wrong. We were trying to impress the world with our might. We were trying to show that American capitalism was better stronger than Soviet communism. We wanted big bases and shows of force. But we also wanted to impress upon nations in regions that were friendly to or close to the former Soviet Union that to pick our side was to prosper. So we spent not only on a military arsenal, but on opulence, decadence and overt lavishness. Our military didn't starve was the message, and that was then, right or wrong. We spent the money installing the large bases and maintaining them, including the lavish golf courses.

But, the Soviet Union fell in 1989. The Cold War ended then. The Berlin Wall fell and we were mighty America first in everything. Times changed and now we are in a recession. I now look at those figures and think of all else that money could be spent on.

First I think of the flack jackets and non-armored vehicles troops were forced to fight in while such figures were spent on watering and mowing those courses mentioned and the many more. I think about politicians that say the first place they want to make cuts in the military budget is in the Veterans Administration Hospitals and wonder how clueless they must be or worse.

I drive through the inner cities of my state where I do my grocery shopping and look at the run down parks, schools with cracked windows and lack of books and computers, at the glass and garbage all over the streets telling the kids they mean less, the dangers those kids and grown ups have to face just walking to the store or even from the bus to their apartment and the message that sends not only to them, but to those that live outside those places and so much more. I think of rural areas and the desperation to find work and the utter lack of jobs. I think about other politicians that want to expand our bases over seas and wonder why, what will happen to our kids and from whom will we borrow to saber rattle against China? Does China own our military golf courses?

There are many places we can cut including in the military budget. We should begin to think of living beyond our means not only in terms of the credit lines we take out and shady mortgages that we get into just to have a roof over our heads or a little more as individuals. We should also think of it in terms of government spending including the military. This is a place both the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street can meet and agree, though they may not agree what to do with all the savings.

It is why having millionaires running our country is not always prudent. They simply have a different view of things. An “oh heck why not” attitude when it comes to spending is something the rest of us cannot even fathom. In fact it's something the rest of us just can no longer afford. It's us on the unemployment line, it's us in the battle field, it's us losing our houses and trying to keep our kids safe and secure, it's us giving up hope on even finding a job and no longer being included in the unemployment figures, etc.

We need representation that not only started as us a long time ago, but still is us. For, who understands our suffering better than we? Representation should not be only by the middle class, but perhaps proportionate. Right now the president and almost half of the US Congress are millionaires. That is a sad statement especially in such times of bank bailouts and unemployment numbers that stopped counting those that have given up looking for jobs.

To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.

During the Arab Spring, we saw dictators and governments react a certain way to protesters calling for more say in their government. They first sent in police to order the protesters that occupied parks and plazas to move. They ordered and threatened that if they did not obey the protesters would be taken out by force. They gave those protesters in North Africa and the Middle East a deadline to move and threatened that if they did not by a certain date the forced removal mentioned would commence. They were told that if they regrouped afterwards they'd face stiffer penalties.

They refused. The protesters in North Africa and the Middle East starting at the end of 2010 and some continuing through to today, have chosen to stay put. They gave not an inch and if and when cleared out they re-grouped. That's how the movement progressed. That's how the movement gained strength, that's how it gained momentum and support. By staying put internally and keeping that flame going they made sure they would not be broken.

They needed the changes. They wanted the changes. They refused to stand down when dictators said, “your protests are bad for our city, your protests do not represent what we are as a community, your protests are not what we need right now.”

For those protesters knew better. They knew there never was a better time. They were being taken advantage of. Even their news media were against what they were doing and would couch anti-protest messages into their broadcasts by running the government line with leading questions to government officials like mayors, police chiefs, various government representatives and members of the ruling administration of the respective countries.

In those interviews they would say things like “people apparently don't agree with what the protesters are doing in the parks and plazas” and “we know this can't last as the government will crackdown on these fringe protesters.” They would interview people the government sent in to act as ordinary people on the street to say things like, “I don't agree with the protesters” and “they are bad for our country” or “I'm not sure what they want or what their message is.”

They would put forth false statistics to try and sway a public mostly in support of the protesters to turn and side with the government. The government would send in undercover operatives to those protests in the Middle East to start trouble as the protesters occupying the parks and plazas were intent on staying non-violent. These government operatives would throw bottles, rocks, bricks, fire guns, agitate the police so that there would be violence and it could be blamed on the protesters in the media. (If it were in America it would be like say today a modern version of the guy with wild blond hair and a camouflage jacket standing behind Ron Kovic at the 1972 Republican Convention who turned out to be an undercover cop. Perhaps today he would have a modern updated look maybe with spiky hair and multiple facial piercings to throw the dogs off the scent and a camera to help shape and simultaneously ruin the message. Say during the Portland protests maybe.)

By using these undercover operatives in the respective nations in the Middle Eastern and North African there could be broadcasts not only in the media in the country where the protests occurred, but also outside country in question that excused the violence of the government in forcing out people who just wanted a say. There they could claim asking for more of a say over their own lives free from corrupt powers in a non-violent manner was not what the protesters wanted, or make the coverage more about the 2 or 3 violent protesters (government operatives) as opposed to the mass amounts of people that were there for a new day, a new dawn and a country freer from corruption than it had been at the times they were in the process of protesting.

During the Arab Spring in North Africa and the Middle East, our news stations were on a continuous cycle of talking about the unfairness of the ruling administrations that forced their people to live under governments infiltrated by corruption. Our own media pundits on both of the only two sides we are allowed to have were constantly reiterating that the calls of the protesters to refuse to move until the links between their heads of city, state and country were tilted back into their hands were just. Those pundits even railed against our government when they wouldn't help out at times.

They brought up links between dictators in those countries and our own government for instance. Links such as the tear gas and rubber bullets sold to Middle Eastern dictators by companies in our countries approved by our government. (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/egypt-protest-police-us-made-tear-gas-demo...) The previous and current administrations also approved the sales of non lethal weaponry to Libya and Bahrain among others. (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1365523/Obama-administration-app...)

Initially the response from our government was muddled, tepid and confused to say the least. It was as though they weren't sure they wanted to stand up for democracy and denounce the dictators. In fact Vice President Joe Biden said of Egypt's dictator Mubarak, “I would not refer to him as a dictator” but yet said “I think the time has come for President Mubarak to begin to move in the direction that -- to be more responsive to some of the needs of the people out there. [...] a lot of the people out there protesting are middle-class folks who are looking for a little more access and a little more opportunity.” (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june11/biden_01-27.html)

Senators John Ensign and Kay Bailey Hutchison both introduced a resolution stating their opposition to helping Libyan protesters with a no-fly zone. (http://hutchison.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=538) Defense Secretary Robert Gates along with other members of Congress concurred. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870430890457622670426142043...) Yet there the current administration was against the use of force by a government to remove protesters occupying parks and plazas in Libya, and when those protesters were attacked by their government, our government sent in planes to help establish a no-fly zone to protect those protesters. The administration and members of their party especially denounced the actions of governments in North Africa and the Middle East during the Arab Spring to forcefully crackdown on protesters occupying parks and plazas those governments said were a nuisance, unsanitary, a health hazard and tried to paint as rabble basically.

The current administration wagged it's finger at governments all across the regions asking them to change and provide hope to their people. Those governments that were waiting until after elections or hoping they could go that long, then once in office remove the protesters by force, were roundly criticized by the current administration along with members of Congress, state governors, state senators and congressmen and congresswomen, mayors and other government representatives from our country. They said the dictators and governments in the countries where citizens were occupying parks and plazas so they could have freedom from a system more interested in power and money than the people during the Arab Spring, were in opposition to freedom and in abeyance of basic human rights to not allow those protesters to stay and have their say.

The administration went on and on about how “we stand with them in their pursuit to be cut free from the noose of corruption and greed.” When the current president and others in his party ran for office in 2008 they said they would be a government of hope. They said they would bring change from a previous administration that clamped down on freedoms of speech, freedoms of the press, the freedom to assemble in public and so much more. That previous administration had become one that was closely associated with corruption and greed. His party was in lock step with his rhetoric.

Yet now that protesters occupy parks and plazas in our own country today looking for a way to shake loose from the chains of big money's corrupting influence over our political system and the money stolen from taxpayers and given to them and wars and conflicts we have waged in support of those wealthy corporations and not our own people – the 99% - the majority of us, they backed away. Again their message became confusing and muddled. They said they understood the want for freedom from the oppressive corruption of big corporations. However, under their watch now in America police are using force to crack down on protesters occupying parks and plazas asking for more of a say and less favoritism for a broken system as people were asking for during the Arab Spring in North Africa and the Middle East.

What does it say about a person that was willing to spend over two billion dollars to support a no-fly zone over a country overseas his own administration approved the sale of non-lethal weapons to (a category of weaponry that includes tear gas and rubber bullets) then turns around and does the same thing as those dictators to unarmed civilians peacefully protesting the ills and corruption in his own country?

Tear gas canisters and rubber bullets manufactured by some of the same firms used to crack down on citizen protesters occupying parks and plazas in North Africa and the Middle East are being used right now in our country under the current administration against protesters occupying parks and plazas in this country. Members of his own party, that were mum before the election that just passed, suddenly are coming out with smug looks eager to use police force, just like dictators in North Africa and Middle Eastern countries did and still are in some places, to stop people occupying parks and plazas peacefully from having their say.

The president is not from a Middle Eastern country nor is he a dictator, that issue's been settled if there was ever any doubt in the minds of sane and rational Americans. However, we do expect him to be the man he said he was. He is supposed to bring hope and change.

Instead he has ignored his own promises and admissions during his 2008 campaign and as a result people have been taking to the streets. Instead of going in and saying that he apologizes, that he will do it, that he will listen, that he will bring hope and change as he admonished dictators during the Arab Spring to do, he is doing everything he claimed to be against. He is doing what he chastised them for doing. Right now his actions are speaking much louder than his words.

And to think, at the beginning of the Occupy Wall Street protests he claimed during this campaign trail he would try and tap into their energy. Not only did he not realize they were in opposition to some of his own hypocrisy and that partly their energy was directed towards getting him to change, but that he himself would become closer to a dictator from the Arab Spring in his handling of the situation here than the man he once portrayed himself to be when he ran for president back in '08. What in the world happened to all that talk of hope and change from our president? Was it just that... just talk?

Please, let us hope that's not so.

To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.

Starting in 2003 and ending in 2006 I attended school at a state university in Connecticut as a landscape architecture major. I expected to work hard towards getting a degree and hopefully start a career in that field. I didn't expect to become a famous landscape architect, or even want to. I did want to be successful to whatever degree I could be given the limitations of my talent. I looked forward to discovering where those limitations lay.

I became interested in the field as I had worked in landscaping and done some landscape design previously. A local landscape architect approached me while she was visiting a garden I was working in, and suggested I attend her alma mater. She said they had a solid program, and that, though it was not easy to get into, if a person worked hard enough during their freshman year and got good grades, they might get accepted.

I had been wanting to go to college for some time, but could not think of what I wanted to major in, ever since my plans to major in music recording/production suffered a setback in 1990. In between I worked many jobs and knew I had the work ethic, and hoped I could cut the academics. Only one way to find out.

I got in and found my experience in college would entail more than the average university experience, and certainly more than I bargained for. I ran into a few professors that seemed, after letting me into the program, to have had a change of heart. They embarked on a path of trying to find subtle ways of forcing me out. My grades were too good, so they really could not just flunk me out, they couldn't do much of anything except strategize for something more than a short term fix to accomplish their intended goals with regards to me.

They tried harder and harder and, as they did, had to try less subtle and more heavily planned strategies. They recruited students into their plans and used incentives, like grades and punishment for those not interested or that questioned it.

They would give me the wrong information for projects, give me one grade then switch it in an obvious, but not entirely illegal way, use subtle, but sustained verbal forms of harassment. They would position my desk in the studio next to a door to the studio room so that I was susceptible to being brushed past and bumped repeatedly as deadlines for submissions drew near in order to knock my concentration and focus off.

There were more methods than could be listed here, but they could go on for quite awhile. I learned a lot about what I was made of. Somehow I found a way to graduate, partially by threatening to sue in a discussion I had with a classmate. After that, things were thrown off for them during my last semester senior year; enough to allow me to squeak by anyhow.

While there I was subjected to numerous methods of harassment, which after leaving realized can be, and from what I read online often are, applied to situations of discriminatory harassment in many situations. After graduating and finding there are very few support resources for people that have or are suffering harassment outside of lawyers, I decided to write about my experiences at the school and some of my observations. I don't consider myself an expert on the subject of harassment, just a survivor and someone that cares.

The only thing I get out of it is the experience to work through it via writing, and to occasionally meet someone that has been through something similar.

There are numerous methods of making a person uncomfortable in an institutional situation or when a group of people are attempting to extricate someone from within their ranks through harassment. Once one way doesn't work, they need to try other methods or variations on the same theme. Truth is, you'll probably find the strategies attempted are the same ones, rehashed over and over with variations here and there. It wall be a set number of base methods, which once you have been through, you'll notice the patterns through repetition the more time passes.

As things fail people from within the group of harassers may lose confidence. In such cases various little accoutrements might be tacked on, in addition to the strategies they are employing to harass the person targeted for extrication, to deal with the lagging trust and confidence like a moral booster for the troops. Sometimes they will be directly for the troops, such as dinner or other incentives (you are typically not privy to). Other times they will try and inject new things into the latest variation on the same methods to make it seem things are going better than they are.

If you catching on and start to predict their strategies, what I found is that instead of just coming up with something new, they will often just attempt to fake things are better than they really are. It's as if someone has the money to replace the family car that keeps breaking down, but instead of just getting another car, they decide it takes less effort to simply say, “everything's fine.”

A twist on this, once that gets transparent enough that they notice how transparent it is (which can take some time depending on how fast/slow or populous the decision making body is), may be to say “we meant for that to happen” or “that person's doing exactly what we we want them to be doing.”

Fan belt squeaking? “That's the sound we want to be hearing.” Oil leaking all over the place? “Things are going better than we expected. Love that crude aroma.” Transmission falls out while driving down the highway? “That was part of what we planned for this trip, we wanted the kids to get to spend some time at a garage... as an educational destination.” Both the axles fall off and sunroof blasts into the sky simultaneously? “We believed this car was built to last and that's the kind of assurance we were looking for. Things are finally looking up.”

Besides the increasing jalopy status of the vehicle, a typical sign things aren't going as well as they are proclaiming, is the behavior belying the advertisements. For instance you may notice, as they are high fiving and breaking out the champagne glasses to toast the latest failure, increased subtle verbal barbs, facial expressions, contrary emotion in the eyes, telltale activity, etc. Whatever the sign, it will be the unscripted sort, revealing the true frustration and increasingly hard to suppress emotions welling up because things aren't the way they hope. Sort of like “Yes the engine's on fire!! Now we're finally seeing some progress!!” out loud followed by them running behind a rock and letting loose a torrent of mumbled expletives while pounding their fists on the rock. Yes, it will be comical at times.

Either way, it won't be hard to read and you'll know. Your situation will be different than mine as each is unique to the people and the place, but it should be obvious, if not immediately, then after a while. At times they will seem savvy, smart, quick and intelligent, but others you will wonder if the people writing the lyrics describing the script for each strategy are truly talented or whether they selected the most drugged up, liquor soaked bunch of morons they could find. You will want to hope for the latter, as it is really easy to see what's coming that way, and how people feel becomes pretty transparent.

It can really make the next decision pretty easy. And of course once they start down the path of saying you're doing exactly what they want – you are put in another advantageous situation. For if that's what they wanted, yet they complain, whose problem is it? Not yours anymore... not according to what they said themselves.

For people going through harassment it can be hard and difficult to endure as it was for me. It may be easier for you to just throw in the towel and most do. For those that choose to stick it out as I did, know it's possible. Stay alert, study your harassers and use your individual gifts to survive. And of course, good luck.

To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.

America's vast majority, those in the middle and lower income brackets, have always been the driving force behind this good nation and the first and last ones to sacrifice for it and happily so really. When wars came we were there on the front lines fighting. When times got tough financially we bit down and doubled down doing the heavy lifting keeping the rich wealthy and nation steady on its course back to prosperity. As a once booming and prosperous American middle class was sold out to facilitate the destabilization of the former USSR and simultaneously garner higher profit yields for wealthy companies, we complained a little, but figured by voting for the party we felt individually was best – whichever we each felt that was at any given time – that they would protect our future. We kept the flame alive – we kept the faith.

No matter the burden Americans had to bear we remained content with the two party system handed to us that had been in existence for over a hundred years. There can be no doubt during simpler times it was effective and could handle the needs of the nation impeccably. The times were less complicated, citizenry less diverse and the global community much less interwoven into the lush fabric of our every day lives. So many fewer things went into what made the world tick and continue down the tracks. Yet in today's world a time dependent on so less complicated a matrix is a dream held together by quaint memories.

In ways we could never have imagined previously all other sectors of our world and economy have revolutionized and been forced to change with the times. Even todays senior citizens have to learn to keep up with new technology just to live and understand the world they live in as those things their golden years balance upon are ever changing and shifting. Ten or twenty years ago that was not so much the case.

Yet the one sector we need change from the most has been the slowest to change, resisting like a spoiled baby what the world has asked of it. The place in question is of course Washington; I'm talking about Congress. The nation put in a passionate request for change in 2006 and 2008. They voted in one party (as there aren't any other choices if you're fed up with the one in power at any given time) to replace the other. The voters did so not because of any stellar track record, but because of an overwhelming desire for change (and of course a lack of any other recourse). We felt we had voted in the best folks available.

Those votes did not come from just the party loyalists that would have voted for them anyway or a radical faction of their party. They came from the left, the center and even some of the right. It was sweeping and in terms of Washington gave that party a super majority. They made promises the public believed they would make good on, but then they got in and spent a year on something else entirely. What was promised was not delivered by a long shot – not yet anyway.

Come the next election the believers had dwindled and lost the faith. It almost could not have been scripted better, as though they shot themselves in the foot on purpose. The guys on the other side of the coin from the supermajority mounted a campaign, and though they didn't do quite as spectacularly, took back a chamber of Congress, effectively balancing the scales between the two parties. And what the heck right? The super majority turned out not to have enough spine to do what they said they would anyway.

But, predictably the guys that got swept in from the other side of the same coin started to renege on their promises too. They basically ignored many of their pledges to the right including on stimulus' and transparency.

What both parties did was what Washington has done for a long time only much worse. They made huge issues out of almost every piece of legislation turning the last two and a half years into a time of low accomplishment in Washington - save politicians using their time in office to campaign by way of brat-like public obstinacy. One side can definitely be said to have carved out a greater legacy for themselves regarding such behavior, but the other for some odd reason have let them. They have basically enabled the behavior like “oh that's just my crazy uncle. It's cool.” Cool?

And for their part, when the party of the supermajority had a window to answer the requests of the American populace they got mired down in a year long mess to fulfill a C level campaign promise at best like some bumbling hesitating intellectuals. Yeah they warned us about long slogs, but that was about fixing the economy and the wars. All across the country guys at the end of the bar were proclaiming “Health care? What health care? What about jobs?” Then when the country's voters gave each party a say, due to an inability to perform under pressure both sides got wimpy and got bogged down in an effort to create Capitol Hill theater for the purposes of campaigning. This to ensure the message went out, “hey we're needed we're not like the other guy don't forget to vote for us” before passing a bill to raise the debt ceiling which they were obviously going to do anyway.

As we all know the theater resulted in yet more drama. One of the three main ratings agencies (not all three) downgraded our credit rating. It caused the biggest tumble in the markets since the previous Republican administration was in power.

And why did they downgrade our rating? “When Standard & Poor's downgraded the United State's credit rating, it said that the 'effectiveness, stability and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened.' In other words, S&P was down on Washington's dysfunction, distrust and gridlock.” (http://www.npr.org/2011/08/07/139069194/downgrade-a-result-of-washington...)

“In justifying the downgrade, S&P focused on political issues, saying it wasn't sure leaders in Washington were willing to take on the difficult task of truly addressing the nation's longer-term debt issues. Cowen says this downgrade could be an opportunity.'What you need are people looking at themselves long and hard in the mirror and saying, 'I was partly responsible for this. How can I change?' And until we do that that, I think it's just going to get worse,' he says.” (http://www.npr.org/2011/08/07/139058628/american-pride-takes-a-hit-with-...)

“U.S. lawmakers need to come together as they did for a 1980s overhaul of Social Security and compromise on the medium-term consolidation of the country’s fiscal position, said John Chambers, chairman of Standard & Poor’s sovereign debt committee. 'This is a problem that has to be addressed by the full spectrum of political parties,' he said in an interview on Bloomberg Television. 'You’ve got a position here where the debt is on a rising share if you measure it against GDP,” Chambers said. “The plan that has been put forward and we think will be adopted gets you part of the way there but it doesn’t get you all the way there. And we don’t see in the next few years a consensus forming that will get you the rest of the way.'” (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-08/s-p-s-chambers-says-u-s-debt-pr...)

So the ratings agency that handed out the downgrade said the problem was the fault of all parties concerned (the only two parties we currently can choose from). It was not one party or the other. So here we are in a supposed crisis moment and what has been the response from the parties? More maneuvering to make sure the process goes smoothly come next election. The ability to relax and focus under pressure – get better and stronger? Not this year.

Isn't this supposed to be a crisis? Where's the moment of clarity? Where's the scaffolding of lightness? Where's the urgent need to sit down and do what it takes now to fix things before they become worse later on? Where is the worry about the future of the American people on this? Is this really how we feel we can survive through into the future? Can we really keep getting slammed into crisis' by a system held together by coat hangers and bondo? Can we really survive that way? Can we really keep our role as international leaders by behaving that way? How badly do we desire greatness for our children?

When the traditional Republicans say it is the the Democrat's fault they are both right and wrong. When Democrats say Republicans are to blame they are similarly right and wrong. When people blame the Tea Party branch of the GOP they are right and wrong. The two party system has failed so both sides equally share the blame. Look at what they've given us over the past two and a half years.

At the beginning of 2009 we found ourselves hanging over a precipice, with the expensive dual wars, both in treasure and lives, one of them holding no reason for being waged. Even people within the Pentagon support this. (http://theglobalrealm.com/2011/04/27/a-national-strategic-narrative/) At the beginning of 2009, when we started anew, we were at crisis with the economy and remain so. Yet, what has been the response to this delicately balanced heavy load crushing the nation and crashing in on our daily lives, from our leaders in Washington on behalf of the majority of us? As yet, they have been unable to effectively act and respond under pressure. We're still hanging off that cliff slowly slipping and it's like they're arguing over what little scraps they might get off us before we die.

They simply have split and started blaming and finger pointing as though they were hacks and kids. This is not just from Tea Party Republicans, but mainstream Republicans and Democrats alike. It is not the blame of anyone – not by themselves. The place we are at now was caused by the entire group. That group is the one comprising what we know as the status quo. That's right, the group that called so loudly for the automakers to “get with the times” is themselves about as out of date as an Apple IIe. A good reason for this may be that the two party system in place currently has been in place since the late 1800's and just isn't sophisticated enough to handle the modern world. It's okay to accept we need change. Nothing wrong with it at all.

The wars will end and the economy will improve, but we should not forget these times lest they repeat themselves. Remember, our credit rating has not been downgraded since 1941 when we first received it. The agency that downgraded it said it was not the Tea Party branch of the GOP’s fault, not the rest of the Republican's fault, not the Democrat's fault and not the president's fault. The credit agency that gave us the downgrade said it was the fault of them all, and the blaming and ranting and accusing they are doing now, is exactly what they were talking about. Exactly. (Credibility of the credit rating agencies post-subprime mortgage fiasco notwithstanding.)

During the timespan since January of 2009 through to today they could have proven their relevance - how important the status-quo is, but they proved the opposite. The stage was theirs and they just could not get their time in the spotlight to be anything more than a transparent predictable mess. It's slightly disappointing especially when we had such high hopes so many promises would be met from both sides. Conversely, it gives us the chance to view it happening out in the open. The system is definitely broken, but over the next ten or twenty years we can start the process of fixing it.

We can vote in other parties, if we had say four or five of them, while two were obstinately in their corners refusing to come out and play with the rest of the kids, the the others could be sitting down, behaving like adults writing up and passing legislation crafted through the very thing the ratings agency asked for – consensus. You know that stuff we expect professional mature adults to be able to reach especially when the heat is turned up.

As for today? First of all they should all agree to get together and stand on the steps of Congress and simultaneously apologize to all of us on live TV. Seriously, they really should all be ashamed of themselves. Every one of them should hang their heads in shame as right now they have nothing to hold them high about. For all we have given to this great nation over the centuries, we the majority deserve so much better than that. We deserve a change and we have been asking for years with our pleas going unanswered. Through our voting power we can force whoever is in office next whether it is the same person or a new one to bring change not talk, because sometimes we need a little more and that time is now.

Right now today, we can start thinking about our future tomorrow. And, we can always have faith in the fact it will get better. It always does and we're tough enough to make things getting better the new status quo.

To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.

America is a great nation and despite the flaws characterizing all great nations throughout history we try and hold hope our leaders try to do what's right (most of the time). No matter our political differences and beliefs most of us are loyal to and have faith in our country. Where there are issues, it's not that we wish to give up on the good old US. In fact it's just the opposite, we simply want to see things fixed here and there, just the process of refinement as allowed for by our constitution. That's part of the reason for and greatness of our political system; having the voices of the many collaborate to resolve the numerous areas different sides have issues with and to come to common solutions regarding those places there are numerous visions for correcting any particular issue.

Part of a great nation is its capacity to defend itself in times of conflict or when it's sovereignty is threatened. We have been involved in armed conflicts for the the struggles for freedom on more than one occasion and front throughout our history. In World Wars I and II it was to stop the progress of forces threatening the world and the rights of friendly nations to decide their own destinies. There have been many other conflicts afterwards with other nations including the two wars Iraq and Afghanistan we are currently involved in.

And, as in every war, there are ugly and dark things that happen. Sometimes these are areas that can be addressed, and even fixed. One such area can be found in the relation between wars we are involved in and human trafficking. There are aspects of the current two wars we don't like; things we even hate. We hate that we were led into the War in Iraq on bad information – especially when there was a preponderance of information suggesting the smart thing to do would have been to wait. This, because what information we had suggesting WMD or links to Al Qaeda were weak at best.

In terms of the War in Afghanistan, we all understand the reasons for going in and it was directly a result of the attacks of 9/11 and the vast majority of Americans are fine with the logic behind waging that war. However, they aren't so happy about how it's been waged resulting in why we are still there.

One of the things we don't know is that in these war zones and in and around other US military bases today human trafficking aimed at the US service member market is big business. And despite what we may think or want to believe, it is happening in both the major theaters of war today and around US military bases in other parts of the world today.

The current form of prostitutes serving as part of a “tradition” for service members being big business in various parts of the world began roughly during the Vietnam War. The Foundation For Women's web site states, “Thailand is a country in Southeast Asia with 61 million inhabitants in which women comprise about half. Tourism was developed in the early 1980s after the fall of the old regime in Saigon in 1975 and the withdrawal of US bases in Thailand in 1976. The sex industry started to flourish as never before during the Vietnam War when Thailand was used as US base and RR (Rest and Recreation) destination for American soldiers. After American troops withdrew, sex tourism took over the existing sex-related infrastructure. Bangkok and Pattaya became sex havens of men all over the world. During the 1990s, the estimated number of women/girls engaged in sex industry was not less than 400,000.” (http://www.womenthai.org/eng/trafficking.html)

There's more. “Truong’s (1990) book Sex, Money and Morality: Prostitution and Tourism in Southeast Asia looks at sexual labor as a way of producing surplus with the growth of capitalism. Examples are the services used by U.S. soldiers during the Vietnam War and the growth of tourism after the war. His book agrees with a point in Pettman’s (1997) article Body Politics: international sex tourism which emphasizes the complex issues buried beneath the sex tourism industry, such as economic policies, international relations, business ethics, racial discrimination, and corruption.” (http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/235/rationalizing-sexual-tourism-ho...)

This unfortunate “tradition” continued into other wars. “During the brief Gulf War, the U.S. military prevented prostitution for its troops in Saudi Arabia, to avoid a backlash from its hosts. But on their return home, the troop ships stopped in Thailand for 'R & R.'” (http://www.counterpunch.org/mcnutt07112007.html)

This followed us into the War in the Balkans and the legacy remains. “According to deposition testimony from (US military contractor) DynCorp employees and DynCorp e-mails made public by Johnston's (a former employee of DynCorp) lawsuit, Bosnian police started an investigation in the summer of 1999 after local news media reported that five DynCorp employees had purchased the women's passports from local Serbian mafia elements. Johnston was still relatively new at the job, and says at the time he knew nothing of that investigation. A Bosnian government representative brought the allegations to the attention of the Task Force Eagle commander (Camp Comanche is one of the bases that make up the larger Task Force Eagle). The men were accused in the Bosnian press of "harboring illegal immigrants and participating in organized crime activities to buy ownership (passports) of these aliens," according to an e-mail from Martin Ayers, then DynCorp's manager of European operations, to DynCorp vice president Chris DiGesualdo.

“According to e-mails, on Aug. 10, the (US) Army informed DynCorp of the men's names and the accusations against them, and requested they be removed from Bosnia within 48 hours. By Aug. 12, DynCorp had flown the men to a DynCorp office in Germany to be interviewed. Within a few days of arriving in Germany, the men were fired. This apparently satisfied the Army. Thanks to DynCorp's swift action, Ayers' e-mail says, 'We were able to turn this into a marketing success.'” (http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2002/06/26/bosnia/index.html)

In Iraq it is also happening and military contractors are involved. In fact of the hundreds of military contractors currently paid by US taxpayers for their services in current theaters of war, one corporation's name keeps popping up regarding human trafficking. “A contractor died when a DynCorp manager used an employee's armored car to transport prostitutes, according to Barry Halley, a Worldwide Network Services employee working under a DynCorp subcontract.

"DynCorp's site manager was involved in bringing prostitutes into hotels operated by DynCorp. A co-worker unrelated to the ring was killed when he was traveling in an unsecure car and shot performing a high-risk mission. I believe that my co-worker could have survived if he had been riding in an armored car. At the time, the armored car that he would otherwise have been riding in was being used by the contractor's manager to transport prostitutes from Kuwait to Baghdad.

“Let's flash back to August of 2002, and meet the DynCorp whistleblowers of yesteryear:
Two former employees of DynCorp, the government contracting powerhouse, have won legal victories after charging that the $2 billion-a-year firm fired them when they complained that co-workers were involved in a Bosnia sex-slave trade” (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/29/us-military-contractor-us_n_991...)

And unfortunately even in Afghanistan it is happening. An “Afghanistan cable (dated June 24, 2009) discusses a meeting between Afghan Interior Minister Hanif Atmar and US assistant ambassador Joseph Mussomeli. Prime among Atmar's concerns was a party partially thrown by DynCorp for Afghan police recruits in Kunduz Province.

“Many of DynCorp's employees are ex-Green Berets and veterans of other elite units, and the company was commissioned by the US government to provide training for the Afghani police. According to most reports, over 95 percent of its $2 billion annual revenue comes from US taxpayers.

“And in Kunduz province, according to the leaked cable, that money was flowing to drug dealers and pimps. Pimps of children, to be more precise. (The exact type of drug was never specified.) The State Department has called bacha bazi a 'widespread, culturally accepted form of male rape.' (While it may be culturally accepted, it violates both Sharia law and Afghan civil code.)”
(http://blogs.houstonpress.com/hairballs/2010/12/wikileaks_texas_company_...) While this does not involve our servicemen purchasing the sexual services of the child slaves from the pimps it is our contracted mercenaries facilitating the rape.

Sex trafficking happens around bases in Korea and Japan and other places as well. Children are often the victims of human trafficking as were the cases in Afghanistan and Bosnia. In so far as our legacy in Vietnam, “currently in Vietnam, children working as prostitutes earn $1,000 per month, while the average monthly wage is $25 per month. Girls are moving from their small poverty-stricken villages to cities like Hanoi and Pattaya to make more money.” (http://www.childreninneed.org/magazine/sexual_exploitation.html)

In countries in Southeast Asia like Thailand and Vietnam the sex trafficking industry involves children sold as sexual slaves by parents that believe they can not afford to keep them. It is estimated that thousands of children were sold into bondage during the Vietnam War and sent to cities and other places popular with US servicemen for “R&R.” (Chalmers 2000) Of course those servicemen were ignorant to the fact they were having sex with children for those that unwittingly did. Still it is no less unsettling our tax dollars went to support that.

Just looking at statistics from here in the US alone, “just less than half of suspected human trafficking incidents in recent years involved the prostitution or sexual exploitation of children, according to United States Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). Nearly half – 48 percent – of human trafficking allegations investigated between January 2008 and June 2010 involved allegations of adult prostitution, the Bureau said; 40 percent of cases pursued during that same time period involved children.”
(http://jjie.org/justice-department-report-sheds-lights-on-human-traffick...)

In Afghanistan and Iraq we have gone as far as we can and done as much as we can. The futures of those countries are for the people of those counties to decide. Here in our own country we went through hard times as a new nation and struggled. There were popular uprisings and even a civil war. These too are things that may be unavoidable especially in countries with so many old issues as Afghanistan and Iraq. Afghanistan has been invaded by other nations going back to the time of Alexander the Great and before. The spot where the original Garden of Eden was located is now believed to be at the intersection of the Euphrates and Tigris rivers in Iraq.

The history of these areas as civilizations go back before ours. They have a chance for a new start. Let's allow them to tend to it and allow us to redirect moneys being spent there essentially to protect oil companies and mining interests that don't need our money there back here. And let's stop contributing to the enslavement of children through our wars.

There may be many people due to political reasons and the upcoming 2012 elections that say we should not address this issue. They may say let's just slow down and wait. The children and adult victims of human trafficking have been there this long they can wait a little longer. In fact there may be those that say there's nothing wrong with pimping women and children saying, “it's all part of the game” and that “it's all money.” Really? You really cool with that?

Though there was a time I was ignorant to the effects of human trafficking, I'm not anymore. There are things, though I don't condone, I understand as an act of desperation to feed oneself and ones family. Human trafficking is not one of them and it needs to be addressed. As far as politics is concerned as both parties have chosen to remain silent on the issue for the most part they are both to blame equally and it cuts across party lines.

But, in the end those children of war are supported as sex slaves via our tax money. It's just one more reason we should pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan today or certainly as close to it as we can. We are a great nation, let's keep as much tarnish as we can from our reputation and do all we can to just stay above that. Let's avoid Lyndon Johnson's primrose path.

To read about my inspiration for this article go to www.lawsuitagainstuconn.com.

The Peasant Patrols and the population of Santiago de Chuco, La Libertad require an audit in the Mixed Court of Santiago de Chuco, as the judge and the prosecutor are very biased. We make the petition to do a legal audit to them and they have to renounce their charge within fifteen days / since July 4, 2011 / !

If they do not renounce, it's need to take urgent measures against such venal authorities, covered by their political card of the party of APRA. We want their removal of them. Because the judge and the prosecutor are laying off employees who have worked for years in the Education Unit of Santiago de Chuco. Also theese biased authorities, they alleged that the brothers from The Peasant Patrols in the province of Santiago de Chuco made a troubles in the region. That isn't is a true.

Whatever is the prosecutor, the judge and Mr. Murgia want to put in those work - places, a people from the party of APRA. We accused to the prosecutor and the judge, both, that they have left out, so important cases, like some murders of persons, whose prime suspect is still free.

The population of Santiago de Chuco, Peru, demanding his constitutional rights to life, to decent work, and to deservedly paid ! The population of Santiago de Chuco, Peru, listings his desire to take more extreme measures if the justice are not pay attention to their demands!

We need yours support:
Each person which wish to support us, have to send complaint to the following addresses:

http://ocma.pj.gob.pe/default.aspx?view=servicios&id=1&opcion=queja

Dr. Enrique Javier Mendoza Ramírez
Email: ocmapj@pj.gob.pe

In the union there is the strength!
We expect your support!

Tanyita Yupanqui

http://juanestebanyupanqui.blogspot.com/2011/07/las-rondas-campesinas-y-...

http://www.trujillonoticias.pe/index.php?option=com_content&view=article...

I am asking of God only one thing: Does not exist anymore the mining company Barrick in my continent

I was at the top of my town, with my people, with the children ... We were watching to the horizon, looking with tenderness all the mountains that lie far away with their white color on their laps. And the cold wind of those giants was broken in our faces. They looked so far away but they were always in our life and we always loved them. And I remembered the song about the cardboard houses.

Watching them my tears runs away ... Like small pearls, when I still seeing over our mountain's peaks with all respect that they deserve. I am crying, because of the future that waits to my people, I am crying for the hundreds of children who roam the city streets aimlessly with the faces of hunger, with empty stomachs, staring the showcases full of shiny malls.

Those indigenous children haven't a future ... But they have schools that teach them to be westerners and consumers. It's necessary for not seeing them, that all of them will not have a future: Their farms infected by cyanide that destroys everything green that exist in our Mother the Earth. She gave to Us to eat we a rich fruits before, but now She languishes every one moment during our existence - with hers snow and glaciers that die each day and we can not to do anything, because the enemies took away our souls in more than five hundred years!

We were subjected to torture to stop being we Indigenous People: Huamanchucos, Chachapoyas, Cañares, Chancas Now I see those kids all pale as the white of our snow peaks, shivering in a cardboard house in the high hills of the big city, with the light of a candle that must be purchased with the sweat of their parents - slaves on the plantations of new bosses, which are the same as yesterday.

And also I see: all my years of struggle, there I were left my youth. I were fighting for my people all my life, and now in my years of old man, without almost forces I still fighting like yesterday... even though my feet were flying before as the condor in the sky's height, now my feet are heavy as the stone of Icchal.

I wanted to go to renew my promise that I made many years ago, but my feets just drag and my spirit feel so horrible pain. I want to rebel but my tired body is unresponsive. Because so many years, I was being arrested by the enemies of my nation.

I would: like the condor at the end of his years, I want to fly to the highest cliff, and to jump almost no forces and die! But after I've expulsed the idea of dying! I have to die with my face to my village.

I still want to fight to the moment of my death, I want to be a ray of fire - generated from Katequil and I will become to make fire all the steppes and to the highlands of hills, I will lift all stones and they too will follow me: We will evict the invader who enslaves and kills five hundred so long years to my people! My indigenous people who doesn't understood that their chains have even stronger then ever.

I see their faces, in my eyes and they say to me: "Tata Tupac, because it's so far the horizon, where you want to take us right now?" I answer: "Doesn't matter the time we will get there, you are the strength that I lost so many years ago!”

And I look back and I look for the huge hole. Our enemies turned in this hole so much people of my nation. The greedy interests of a handful of people who came to us from the north, they are not from our country. I see how the invasion would cheat to my people with a new glass bead: which were called schools of clay with beautiful stained glass windows. They make it while still burrowing and destroying to our Mother Earth! Before we loved our Mother Earth, and she gave us, all that we needed to live.

And I see my brothers who sold our people to the enemy. Those misery brothers all around with the alcohol, they say it gives them pleasure, others like fools wearing the clothes of mistis. The clothes, of the enemy who throw us away from our land.

The enemies say: "We are preaching the truth!"

But the only truth is: day after day we were nowhere to live. And we wonder: "Where will I die?"

Time ago this land was ours, but the Europeans took it from us and we have no where to go. My Mother Earth has wired now. I remember my childhood: I walked on this land with my feet or some times on my Moor horse, which tata Noah gave me. But now I can not go there and a sign says: "Private property! Forbidden to enter! Here has order: To shoot! "

I can not enter in my country to make my ritual offering by my lakes. Many times ago my Mother Water gives life to Mother Earth, which irrigate the fields where we played with my ayitos - guardians in that my childhood.

Just I found one of them engulfed in alcohol on a fork-lift He stop me and still recognize me ... He said: My boy, where you go? Where is yours mother Herlinda? I look in his eyes the sadness, which the European culture brought here to us. I saw his misery: his children crying for bread that the father will not give them. And I turned around; I just grabbed his tanned hands, his hands so sad and crumpled by the pain. Those hands now have not, a plantation there they working before. They have no running waters...

During my childhood, He looked after me, and in there lands we together saw a abundance of running waters! And now? My sadness now turns sadder.

And I see his children as slacker, they crouched in the corners of the streets, hoping to steal, because at home no food to eat. This is the only thing which the "European civilization" gave them.

And I remember those words, which the mining company told him: Barrick promise them that the indigenous people will have much money for their lands and thus will take them a progress.

They sold the piece of land that tata Noah was left at them. And after reached to the coast where they spent those little money. After looking for work they no found other: only a pawn for one person.

Then they wanted to return to his people and found no place to live. All the earth barbed with wire that was brought from the progress of the gringos. And there working like guardians - those brothers - who once told him: "Do not be goofy! Sale all the land of tata Noah and will see your life will change for better."

Now he has nothing and I ask him: "Where you live?” Because I know: if I give him some money, He only will consume it for alcohol. He did not tell me, but I do know where he lives, there, where all my brothers search refuge in the big city:

Behind the hills of sand with their cardboard houses, this can not keep them from the light and from the rains of the summers, and never can save them from the freezing of the winters. My brothers shivering without shelter, they will all be near the fire of newspapers, because they want to try a piece of his warm glow.

I tell my ayita-guardian to my childhood:" I see you soon". And now I have to fulfill my promise that I made yesterday. I am walking with pain burthen; because I see my brothers now suffer so much because they do not have anything today.

Túpac Isaac II

Juan Esteban Yupanqui Villalobos.

http://juanestebanyupanqui.blogspot.com

This--- is fucking awesome.
This video amazing. Madison, Wisconsin- small victories tonite. Republican defects in statehouse. People are holding out to stay overnight without the grace of Scott Walker. Cops promise to not take people out of statehouse.

video: http://qik.com/video/38026093/untitled

This is some website where you upload video directly from your phone. I have no idea how this works. Good to see the people get a few victories and persist in the good fight.

super movie Friday. let them eat crackBanksy is a graffiti artist from the UK known for his satiric and beautifully executed political cartoons. His work humorously, scathingly addresses social themes such as war, poverty, greed, inequality and hypocrisy through a combination of well-chosen subjects and very tactical placement. In Exit through the Gift Shop, graffiti art as a contemporary practice is put under critique- is it possible to have real political impact if the artist’s work also serves the market through the art gallery scene? This is a hilarious video and an up to date critical survey of the current high-art graffiti scene that features many artists and their work. Introduced and discussion following with Wendy Weinhold, and a special consideration for the audience—what shall we do on the Big Muddy Independent media’s external walls? Come down for the movie before heading (for those who are) to Love at the Glove.

--