text:
‘Rewire’: How to Be a Better Media Consumer · Global Voices
Rakotomalala

The book “Rewire: Digital Cosmopolitans in the Age of Connection” written by Ethan Zuckerman, co-founder of Global Voices, examines why the extraordinary potential for communication that technology brings doesn't necessarily translate into stronger connections between people. In “Rewire”, Zuckerman describes in particular the important role translators play in facilitating a better understanding of world events in context.
“Rewire” explains that despite the remarkable progress that has been made in information technology, with the entire world accessible to us in one click, the fact remains that the web that we use is still unintegrated and limited to those spheres with which we are most familiar.
Rewire: Digital Cosmopolitans in the Age of Connection by Ethan Zuckerman
In order to resolve this problem of self-segregation, Zuckerman proposes a few steps to “reconnect/rewire the web”. One of these suggestions is to encourage the discovery of new spheres of thinking by following what he refers to as “bridge figures” or “curators”.
Serendipity
One of the concepts that Zuckerman discusses in depth is serendipity. He argues that our consumption of content on the Internet tends to revolve around the same media outlets. To expand our intake of news online, we need to allow serendipity to guide us towards a more diversified media consumption.
The concept of serendipity is not easy to define. It is what happens when we make new discoveries through a confluence of fortunate events. Many important scientific achievements  have been serendipitous, such as the invention of penicillin, the Post-it, the Rosetta Stone, and Velcro.
The Rosetta Stone in the British Museum, discovered accidentally by a French Stoldier during the Campaign in Egypt carried out by Napoleon Bonaparte – Wikipedia CC-BY-NC
Hubert Guillaud, editor-in-chief of internetactu.net, a website dedicated to news, current events, and innovations on the World Wide Web, wrote the following comment on an article by Christian Faure: “How to quickly know what you don't know:” [fr]:
J’aime aller dans les librairies que je ne connais pas et quand elles me perdent, c’est-à-dire quand je ne reconnais rien de ce que je connais dans leur rayon, alors je me dis qu’elle semble intéressante. Je vais souvent au rayon des essais et mon plus grand plaisir est d’y découvrir ce que je ne connais pas et plus il y en a, qui semble de qualité, et plus ça m’intéresse en fait ou plus je considère la librairie. Ca ne signifie pas qu’en faisant ainsi on ne procède pas pour autant par induction, effectivement. Nous avons tous une tendance forte à l’induction, mais peut-être plus parce que nous avons toujours un avis singulier (par essence), une première impression, qu’une expérience multiple. J’ai même tendance à penser que concevant le monde ainsi, nous avons forcément tendance à construire des outils dans lesquels nous nous reflétons ou qui voient le monde tel qu’on le voit. Nos outils d’agrégation, nos outils de personnalisation ont tendance à voir le monde par la lorgnette où on le regarde
I like to go to unfamiliar bookstores, and when I get lost in them, meaning, when I don't recognize anything on the shelves…that's when it get's interesting. I often go to the essay section and my greatest pleasure is to discover something previously unknown to me. The more quality new material I discover, the more my interest is piqued, and in fact I hold the store in even higher regard. This doesn't actually mean that by doing this that one doesn't end up drawing general conclusions any way. We all are predisposed to draw larger conclusions, but perhaps we do this more because we each have our own unique point of view (essentially), a first impression, rather than a varied experience. I even have a tendency to think that viewing the world like this, we inevitably tend to create tools through which we reflect ourselves and our way of seeing the word. Our web aggregation and personalization tools have a tendency to see the world through the prism of our perspective.
Sylvie Catellin, an associate professor of information technology and communication, explains how serendipity is an important factor in all discoveries and is also a “tool of reflexivity” [fr] that gives rise to the conditions for it to occur:
L’intuition scientifique est définie comme une idée unifiante ou clarifiante, laquelle surgit dans la conscience en tant que solution d’un problème qui préoccupe intensément le chercheur. Elle survient de manière inattendue, de quelque étrange univers extérieur, lorsque l’on est absorbé par des problèmes urgents ou bien pendant le sommeil.  Parmi ces conditions, il faut notamment retenir le profond désir de savoir, le stock de connaissances en mémoire reliées au problème, le sentiment de liberté, l’aptitude à briser la routine, la discussion du problème avec d’autres chercheurs [..]  C’est peut-être justement lorsque les scientifiques réfléchissent à leur expérience de la créativité et de la sérendipité que les sciences dites « dures » sont les plus susceptibles d’entrer en dialogue avec les humanités, les arts, les sciences humaines et sociales, devenant plus réceptives à leurs discours et à leurs approches. La réflexivité (en supplément à la sérendipité) implique la liberté et l’émancipation par rapport aux dogmatismes épistémologiques.
Scientific intuition is seen as one unifying or illuminating idea, which comes about as a solution to a problem that engrosses the researcher. It emerges unexpectedly from some strange parallel universe, while one is consumed by pressing problems, or sleeping. In these conditions, it is essential to have the following: the profound desire to know the answer, the arsenal of memorized facts that are related to the problem, a sense of freedom, the ability to break through routine, the discussion of the problem with other researchers […] It is perhaps precisely when scientists reflect on their experiences of creativity and serendipity that the so-called “rigid” sciences are most likely to find common ground with the humanities, the arts, the human and social sciences, becoming more receptive to their speeches and their approaches. It is there that  reflexivity (in conjunction with serendipity) involves freedom and breaking free in the face of dogma and epistemology.
Cosmopolitanism
Cosmopolitanism is a concept that is fairly limited on the French-speaking Web. In the most general sense, it indicates an interest in foreign populations and countries. What this definition leaves out is the fact that the concept of cosmopolitanism also embraces the idea of belonging to a community of origin that has its own unique qualities. It is often discredited as a utopian concept, those who believe in the idea of a global citizenry are often in favor of a world that is unified on the basis of collaboration rather than competition.
This ideological approach to the world is not Zuckerman's aim. Instead, he emphasizes the need to become conscious of our narrow consumption of media and to open ourselves to other spheres of thinking in a progressive manner.
Rodrigue Coutouly, contributor on the French-language website Les échos, notes that in light of the growing complexity of human societies, [fr] it would perhaps be wise to try to open oneself as much as possible to diversity:
Il est devenu impossible de comprendre de l'extérieur, des organismes ou des sociétés humaines travaillés par des enjeux de plus en plus complexes et contradictoires, ayant accumulé des compétences et des modes d'actions foisonnants et d'une grande diversité.[..] La masse sans cesse renouvelée d'informations brutes finit en effet pour empêcher toute tentative cohérente d'analyse lucide des événements, elle renforce les stéréotypes et ne permet pas une compréhension distanciée, elle n'autorise aucune prise de hauteur, de prise de recul, dans le temps et dans l'espace.[..] (Il est primordial) de relier le particulier au général, le local au global.
It has become impossible to understand things from an outside perspective. To examine organizations, or societies that are challenged by increasingly complex and conflicting issues, after having built up a multitude of skills and modes of behavior and a great deal of diversity. […] The perpetual stream of uncurated news ends up preventing any coherent attempt to analyze events. It reinforces stereotypes and does not allow for objective understanding. There is no room for a broader perspective or taking a step back in time and space. […] (It is instinctive) to draw conclusions from the specific to the general; from local to global.
German Sociologist Ulrich Beck, who coined the term “risk society” and who and advocates for a cosmopolitan society, argues for a new face [fr] of cosmopolitanism:
Le cosmopolitisme est la prise de conscience du destin commun qui lie désormais toutes les parties du monde dans le partage des mêmes risques. [..] Il ne s’agit donc pas là d’un cosmopolitisme qui vient d’en haut comme celui incarné par les Nations unies ou par la Cour internationale de justice. Cela ne veut pas dire non plus que tout le monde devient cosmopolite, amateur de diversité culturelle ou polyglotte, ou que nous sommes tous conscients de ce phénomène. Cela signifie simplement qu’il y a de fait une cosmopolitisation qui vient d’en bas et qui change notre vie quotidienne, notre mode de consommation, notre vie politique, ou nos relations à l’intérieur même de nos frontières nationales. On peut parler en ce sens d’un « cosmopolitisme banal ». [..] Le risque global peut être l’une des forces aptes à produire des institutions cosmopolitiques capables de surmonter les intérêts appréhendés seulement à l’échelle nationale. Car les gens et les États peuvent apprendre qu’il faut résoudre les problèmes nationaux dans une société cosmopolitique. Cette perspective cosmopolite est réaliste ; c’est le nationalisme qui dans ce contexte est idéaliste : il regarde en arrière et n’apporte pas de vraies réponses aux sociétés.
Cosmopolitanism is the awareness of a common destiny that, from this moment on, unites all parties of the world in sharing the same risks. […] Therefore, it is not a question of a cosmopolitanism that is imposed by some authority, as embodied by organizations such as the UN or the International Court of Justice. Nor does it mean that the world is becoming cosmopolitan and more accepting of cultural diversity and increasingly polyglot, or that we are all more aware of this shift. It simply means that there is in fact, a cosmopolitan movement that is emerging from the ground up and that is changing our everyday lives, our habits as consumers, our political lives, even how we view things within our own borders. You can sort of call it an “everyday cosmopolitanism” […] The overall risk may be one of the forces that is capable of producing cosmopolitan institutions that can overcome those interests normally understood only on the national level. Because people and countries can learn that national problems need to be resolved in the context of a cosmopolitan society. This cosmopolitan perspective is in fact realistic, it's nationalism in this context that is idealistic. It looks to the past and doesn't offer any real solutions to societies.

author: Rakotomalala


text:
Saudi Arabia Continues to Fight Human Rights Organizations · Global Voices
Guest Contributor

It is almost impossible for human rights organisations to function legally in Saudi Arabia. The absolute monarchy has once again blocked the efforts of Adala Center for Human Rights to legalise its work in the country.
The centre's lawsuit against the Ministry of Social Affairs was recently dismissed, drawing criticism from activists. The Ministry of Social affairs had earlier rejected registering Adala center as an official association when it was newly established in 2011. Their application was rejected because Adala is not a charity organization, the only type of civil society organizations allowed in the Kingdom. The court has found the ministry's refusal compatible with laws and regulations.
Zaid al-Hussain, the vice president of the governmental Human Rights Commission, told Al-Madina that he expects a new civil society law to be issued soon.
Adala's lawyer, Taha Al-Hajji, referred to the United Nation's Universal Periodic Review recommendation in 2008: “Saudi Arabia should guarantee civil society representatives and human rights defenders their rights to establish organizations and exercise their rights to free expression.” “Saudi Arabia responded positively to the recommendation saying that the Kingdom encourages the establishment of human rights organizations,”  Al-Hajji told Al-Hayat.
On Riyadh Bureau, blogger Ahmed Al Omran explains:
The three judges presiding over the case said in their ruling that they found MOSA’s refusal to register Adala as a licensed organization compatible with laws and regulations. MOSA has argued that their decision to deny a license to Adala was on the basis that they can only license charities, and that the activities of Adala are not covered by the Ministry’s definition of what is a charity.
The fact that Adala’s principles and goals are based on international laws and accords like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was also of concern to the judges who said these “man-made laws” do not comply with Islamic Sharia.
“Using these man-made laws without reservations as it is evident in the Center’s charter violates Article 7 of the Basic Law of Governance,” the judges said. The Basic Law of Governance serves as a proto-constitution in Saudi Arabia where the uncodified tenets of Islamic Sharia remain the supreme law and judges, most of them trained as clerics, are granted excessive power to issue rulings according to their own interpretation of the law.
The Union for Human Rights:
The Union for Human Rights faced similar circumstances last May. All members were summoned to the bureau of investigations and persecution. There, they were asked to suspend any activities until their union gets licensed or they will face detainment.
Later, the Ministry of Social Affairs rejected their application and asked them to wait for the new civil society law.
On Twitter, activist Dr Madawi Al Rasheed comments on the continuous crackdown on human rights organisations and activists saying [ar]:
كلما زاد الوعي والنشاط الحقوقي كلما لجأت الانظمة الى السجون لردع الاخرين لكن الاستراتيجية تكون دوما فاشلة في المدى البعيد
— Dr Madawi Al-Rasheed (@MadawiDr) August 6, 2013
The more people's awareness of human rights work increases, the more authorities resort to imprisoning activists to deter others from joining them. But this strategy is doomed to fail on the long run.
The Saudi Civil and Political Rights Association:
In March, a judge had ordered the dissolving of the unlicensed Saudi Civil and Political Right Association, ACPRA, in addition to jailing two of its members. Five more members are in jail on various charges that include “breaking allegiance to the ruler and his successor,” “trying to impede the country’s developments” and “speaking with foreign media channels”
Under Saudi law, most forms of association are banned and public assembly is restricted. Human rights organizations have to get a license to operate, but the ministry rarely issues licenses to human rights organisations. The monarchy does not acknowledge basic human rights like freedom of speech. Most of the legal proceedings initiated against human rights activists in the last year have been because they are involved in organisations that “don't have permission” to operate.

source: news-globalvoices

license: Creative Commons - Attribution - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

author: Guest Contributor


text:
‘Spirited Away’ Director Criticizes Plans to Amend Japan’s Pacifist Constitution · Global Voices
Ayako Yokota

Award-winning Japanese animation film director Hayao Miyazaki and other members of his studio are making waves for their booklet speaking out against representatives's desire to change Japan's Constitution that renounces war.
Hayao is a co-founder of Studio Ghibli, Inc. renowned for the 2001 film “Spirited Away” whose work attracts both children and adults in Japan. The filmmaker initially started publishing seasonal booklets with the aim of discussing interests aside from film production.
While 75 percent of the members of House of Councilors [ja] support amending the Japanese Constitution, the July issue of the booklet “Neppu”, which means “hot wind” in Japanese makes loud criticism against potential moves by the Diet members to modify the country's Constitution, including the changes in Article 9 so that the country's Self Defense Force can be deployed overseas as well as changes in Article 21 to tighten freedom of expression and assembly.
The draft version of new Constitution by The Liberal Democratic Party was revealed in April and has been part of political topic during the recent 23rd election of the House of Councilors. Some critics are fearing amendments to basic human rights and larger power in military. It's been a long desire for Liberal Democratic Party to amend the constitution. But the public may not be as enthusiastic as the Diet members. According to telephone-based survey by Kyodo News [ja], 44 percent were for the amendment, and 38 percent of the informant were against the amendment. Given that the ruling party won the election with 52.61 per cent of its citizen [ja], the 3rd lowest voting rate after the Second World War 2, the administration is planning on changing the Article 96 firsthand to get rid of a clause designed to prevent an imprudent revision of the Constitution.
Screenshot from the Studio Ghibli publishing website announcing PDF download of the booklet
The booklet, which consists of four articles from four contributors related to the studio, begins with a short description of the anxiety surrounding the amendment plan: “Who understands correctly what Minister Abe is going to do regarding the amendment to the Constitution? It is very important to express one's opinion clearly.” None of the authors wish the Constitution to be amended.
Japan's mainstream media paid attention to the unusual, explicit criticism by filmmakers’ under-circulated booklet. Thus, the publisher decided to upload the digital version of this particular edition. Usually, the booklet is delivered to subscribers’ home and can be purchased at a limited number of bookstores [ja]. It is downloadable [ja] until 6 p.m. Japan Standard Time on August 20, 2013.
Hayao describes what the Constitution should stand for:
憲法は目標であって、条文をよくしたら貧乏人がいなくなるとか、そんなことあり得ない。でも、戦後の日本は、 その憲法に守られながら行ってきた経済建設のお陰で、他 の国々の人々から収奪したお陰もあるかもしれないけど も、飢え死にしている人を見かけることなどはほとんどな い国になれました。本当にある時期までは、戦後立 てた目標を実現しようと、公平な社会をつくろうと、右翼 の政治家たちも随分やってきたと思いますよ。 それが、経済的にもうこれ以上は無理となると、「この 制度はいけないんじゃないか」とか、「生活保護制度がいけないんじゃないか」とかいろいろ言う。どんな制度でも 悪用する人間は必ず現れますから、それを例にして潰すの は間違いです。
A constitution is a goal. I don't think that the number of poor people will decrease if a part of it has been rewritten into a better sentence. This is impossible. However, thanks to the protection of Article 9 and the reconstruction of our economy after World War [II], Japan has recovered into a country that has a low number of people who die of hunger. Up until a certain time, people, even the right-wing politicians, tried hard to make this goal, set after the war, and a equitable society a reality. However, when it is found that we cannot expect further economical growth, there are opinions such as, “This system is not good” or “Welfare benefits have to be reformed”. There are some bad people who abuse the system, but it is wrong if you reform the system only because people misuse it.
One of the most debated sections of the Constitution is the Article 9 in which stipulates Japanese people to forever renounce war. The existence of Japan's “Self Defense Force” [not as a military] ascribes to this Article:
Chapter II. Renunciation of War
Article 9. Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes.
(2) In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea, and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.
Hayao explains in the booklet why he is against amending the Constitution even though current status is somewhat ambivalent:
憲法を変えることについては、反対に決まっています。 選挙をやれば得票率も投票率も低い、そういう政府がどさ くさに紛れて、思いつきのような方法で憲法を変えような んて、もってのほかです。本当にそう思います。もちろん、憲法9条と照らし合わせると、自衛隊はいか にもおかしい。おかしいけれど、そのほうがいい。国防軍 にしないほうがいい
Without any doubt, I am against the amendment. We have a low voting rate and the party's share of votes is low as well. Why on earth can this government declare that they would like to amend our constitution? This is my true feeling. I agree that our nation's self-defense forces do not correspond with Article 9, but I think it is better. Better than turning the self-defense forces into a national military.
Producer Toshio Suzuki wrote about Article 9:
僕、日本が憲法九条を持っているって、海外の人はほと んど知らないと思う。だって自衛隊があるしね。そっちを 知っているわけでしょう。だから日本が世界にアピールす るとしたら、九条ですよね。これだけの平和は、九条がな ければあり得なかったわけですから.
I suppose Article 9 is not that known to the world because we have our self-defense forces. Our self-defense forces is more known to the world. If Japan wishes to prove itself to international society, we should do so through Article 9. Our peaceful society would not be a reality without Article 9.
そもそもいま憲法改正に、みんな、そんなに興味あるん ですかねぇ。そうじゃないでしょ。そんなことより、自分 たちの生活をどうするんだってことの方が大変で。だから、 僕は、政治家の独りよがりだと思っています。
Is everyone really interested in the amendment now? I don't think so. Everyone is more worried about their daily lives. I consider this issue as an ego trip of politicians.
Isao Takahata, the co-founder of Studio Ghibli and director of the “Grave of the Fireflies“, a film about a young brother and sister who survive on their own during the World War II but ultimately die of hunger, wrote:
私の憲法第九条に対する思いは、これは全世界で実現すべき素晴らしい理想の旗であり、日本はこの憲法第九条を 外交の中心に据えるべきである、ということに尽きます
Article 9 is a wonderful ideal and it should be put in place all over the world. The Japanese government shall take this Article as the basis of her diplomacy. This is all  I want to say about the Article.
私は、『火垂るの墓』を作る前も、今も、真の意 味で反戦ということで言うならば、こういう映画はたいし て有効ではない、と思い続けてきました。戦争がどんなに 悲惨かは、過去のことを振り返るまでもなく、現在、日々 のテレビのニュースでも目撃できます。しかし、どの戦争 も、始めるときには悲惨なことになると覚悟して始めるの ではありません。（中略）いまは、戦争末期の悲惨さではなく、あの戦争の開戦時 を思い出す必要があると思います。それまで懐疑的だった 人々も大多数の知識人も、戦争が始まってしまった以上、 あとは日本が勝つことを願うしかないじゃないか、とこぞ って為政者に協力しはじめたことを。有名人をふくめ、ほ とんどの人が知性や理性を眠らせてしまい、日本に勝って ほしいとしか願わなくなっていたのです。この情けない私たちに歯止めをかけるすべはあるのでし ょうか。知性や理性を眠らせないですむ方法はあるのでし ょうか。 そのための根本理念が、憲法第九条なのではないかと私 は思います
Making the film “Grave of the Fireflies”, I have always thought that this kind of film is not really powerful as a deterrence against war in any real way. Today, the cruelness of a war can be seen on television without recalling the past. No one starts any wars imagining the cruelness of the war. […] I think what we need to recall is how war was started, not the cruel moments at the end of the war. People who were skeptical about the war and most of the scholars at the time changed their minds to “the war has already started so what we can do is wish for Japan's triumph.” All of them rallied to support the politicians. Most of them buried their intelligence and rationality and began to hope that Japan would win the war. Are there any means to stop this pitiful habit? How can our intelligence or rationality survive? I believe it is our Article 9. It is our fundamental ideal.
On social bookmarking service hatena, user Tarou Takamori [ja] agreed with Isao that emotions can be easily manipulated:
TakamoriTarou web, 社会 高畑勲氏の話が興味深い。火垂るの墓等アニメが反戦を訴るから改正されても戦争にはならぬと言う意見に対し、これは「泣ける」と感情が価値基準だから裏返れば開戦の熱狂は簡単に起き、故に歯止めが必要だと説いてる
Mr. Isao Takahata's article was interesting. He says that we need the deterrence since it will be easy to be entusiastic about starting a war because nowadays our emotions are the basis of our actions. Some people say that a war will not happen even if the constitution is amended because films such as “Grave of the Fireflies” will teach us to be anti-war anyway.
Another user N2, who feels the issue of comfort women has already been solved with an apology and reparations in 1995, bashed the filmmaker that his opinions in the booklet had no basis of an argument:
宮﨑駿氏が「慰安婦の問題では謝罪と賠償すべし」と書いたとのことだったので、冒頭の氏の文章を、つまらなかったのだけど我慢して読んだ。 結局、謝罪と賠償すべき論理・論拠が展開されてるわけじゃなく、単に「すべし」と書いてあるだけ。
It heard that Hayao Miyzaki has written in the booklet that we have to apologize and compensate concerning the comfort women issue. So I read it till the end despite it was boring. All I found was his opinion saying that we “should” do so,  but it no logic, no reasons and no basis of an argument to support the his opinion.
Blogger H.Kazuyuki commented on Twitter [ja] that the studio seems to be turning into a political party:
スタジオジブリの熱風やばし。これじゃ政治結社だ。駿夫の意見はうなずける、みたいなコメを散見したがまったくうなずけない。http://t.co/VhJVYamdnH
— H・カズユキ (@hkazuyukiz) July 20, 2013
Studio Ghibli is scary. It's almost like a political organization. I found lots of comments such us “I agree with Hayao's opinion” but I hardly agree with any of it.
Film critic Tomohiro Machiyama [ja] sees Hayao not as a pacifist but rather someone who approves of the self-defense forces:
日本国憲法は軍を放棄していますが、宮崎駿監督は9条を守りつつ自衛隊を認める折衷派です。軍を保持しつつ国際紛争解決の手段としての戦争を違憲とする国は日本以外にも独西伊はじめ沢山ありますから、宮崎駿監督はそれと変わりないと思います。RT @sakechinagelion:
— 町山智浩 (@TomoMachi) July 22, 2013
In our constitution, we renounced military force. Mr. Miyazaki supports the compromise plan which wants to protect Article 9 but allows self-defense forces. There are many countries who have forces but don't allow war as settlement of international disputes such as Germany, Spain, and Italy. He has a same opinion as them.

author: Ayako Yokota


text:
“They have Killed Eid in Iraq” · Global Voices
Amira Al Hussaini

Ninety-one people (and counting) have been killed and 323 injured in a wave of 17 different bomb explosions across Iraq tonight.
The bombings took place in markets, restaurants and cafes, adding fuel to the on-going sectarian strife in Iraq. According to a report on the BBC, this month was the “deadliest Ramadan in years, with more than 670 people killed.” The New York Times, quotes the United Nations, providing another set of figures –  “1,057 Iraqis were killed and 2,326 were wounded in attacks in July, the highest monthly casualty figures since 2008.”
Al Jazeera reporter Rawya Rageh is lost for words. She tweets:
No words.. Death toll in #Iraq now at 91.. 323 injured..
— Rawya Rageh (@RawyaRageh) August 10, 2013
Just an hour before this, she had tweeted:
This is what Iraqis get on the last day of Eid: 13 blasts, 67 people killed, 218 injured.. Will this ever end? #Iraq
— Rawya Rageh (@RawyaRageh) August 10, 2013
Eid celebrations culminate the Muslim holy month of fasting, Ramadan, and is usually a time of joy and family gatherings. Not so for Iraqis, and many Arabs for that matter. London-based Iraqi researcher Hayder al-Khoei laments:
"In my country, Eid has died."
— Hayder al-Khoei (@Hayder_alKhoei) August 10, 2013
In a follow up tweet, he adds:
You would think that car bombs after car bombs would force Iraqi security officials to replace the magic wands. When is enough enough?
— Hayder al-Khoei (@Hayder_alKhoei) August 10, 2013
AFP's Iraq bureau chief Prashant Rao shares a photograph of the bureau's board, where the number of car bombs, and the number of those killed and those injured are tallied. He remarks:
This is becoming an all-too-familiar sight in the @AFP Baghdad bureau: pic.twitter.com/dJZii67X1B
— Prashant Rao (@prashantrao) August 10, 2013
He lists the places where the bombs exploded in Baghdad:
.@AFP tracking car bombs in Husseiniyah, Shaab, Kadhimiyah, Baghdad Jadidah, Amil, Dura, Saidiyah and Jisr al-Diyala areas of Baghdad.
— Prashant Rao (@prashantrao) August 10, 2013
And elsewhere in Iraq:
Iraq attacks today in Baghdad, Tuz Khurmatu, Hilla, Neel (near Hilla), Qaiyarah, and al-Jadaa (south of Mosul). 41 dead, 176 wounded – @AFP
— Prashant Rao (@prashantrao) August 10, 2013
The spate of bombings was met with outrage on social media. From Bahrain, blogger Ali Al Saeed expresses his disgust:
The mad sectarian killing spree continues in #Iraq and not a single Arab leader speaks out against it. Disgusting.
— Ali Al Saeed (@alialsaeed) August 10, 2013
And from France, Ammoun is also shocked by people's indifference to what is happening in Iraq. After sharing links on the breaking news in Iraq, she challenges her followers on Twitter:
Yes I'm flooding your timeline with #Iraq news, because no one else will. If you're not happy with it unfollow & bear it in your conscience.
— Ammoun (@AmmounAAY) August 10, 2013

author: Amira Al Hussaini


text:
Tunisia: Jailed Netizen Denied Eid Pardon · Global Voices
Afef Abrougui

Tunisian Twitter users expressed their disappointment when they learned that jailed netizen Jabeur Mejri, was not going to benefit from a recent presidential pardon issued on the occasion of Eid. Last year, Mejri was sentenced to seven and half years in prison over the publication of Prophet Muhammad cartoons on Facebook. His friend Ghazi Beji, who published a satirical book called the ‘Illusion of Islam’ on the document-sharing website Scribd also received the same severe sentence in absentia. Beji had fled Tunisia to escape prosecution and obtained political asylum in France. They were found guilty of ‘publishing material liable to cause harm to public order or good morals’, ‘insulting others through public communication networks’ and ‘assaulting public morals’.
Last April, Mejri's verdict was confirmed by the Cassation Court (the highest court of appeal in Tunisia). His defense team decided to seek a presidential pardon. However, Mejri was not included in the list of the pardoned prisoners issued on August 8.
Photo via Facebook Page ‘Pour la grâce présidentielle de Jabeur et Ghazi’
The committee in support of Mejri and Beji released a statement [fr]:
La présidence a annoncé une grâce présidentielle pour une liste de 343 prisonniers ainsi qu'une grâce spéciale de 20 autres prisonniers mais le nom de Jabeur Mejri ne figure pas sur aucune  de ces listes.
Nous avons espéré que le président se rappellerait que lui même, un jour a été à la  place de Jabeur Mejri et refuserait de voir des prisonniers d'opinion, durant son mandat mais … malgré les promesses qui ont été faites à demi mots à sa famille, le résultat est là : Jabeur reste en prison !
Jabeur Mejri ne passera pas l'Aid avec les siens ! Même si Jabeur n'est ni un terroriste, ni un violeur, ni un criminel ! Jabeur est un jeune qui a cru en une Tunisie nouvelle et a cru avoir le droit de s'exprimer librement !
Jabeur Mejri n'aurait jamais du être en prison! (…) Après un jugement inéquitable, il est accusé  pour trouble à l'ordre public pour un message sur Facebook sur une page où il avait 16 fans !
The president's office issued a presidential pardon of 343 prisoners and a special pardon of 20 other prisoners. But, the name of Jabeur Mejri is not listed.
We had hoped that the President would remember that he some time ago was a prisoner of conscience like Jabeur Mejri. We had hoped that he [interim President Moncef Marzouki], would refuse to see prisoners of opinion during his mandate. But despite the promises made to his family, Mejri remains in prison.
Jabeur Mejri will not celebrate Eid with his family even though he is not a terrorist, a rapist or a criminal. Jabeur is a young man who had believed in a new Tunisia and thought he had the right to express himself freely.
Jabeur Mejri should never have been in prison! (…) Following an unfair trial, he was convicted of causing harm to public order over a message he published on his Facebook page and where he only had 16 fans!
‘Express yourself,
Freedom’ via Amnesty Tunisia Facebook page
On Twitter, netizens expressed their dismay.
Plus de 300 detenus liberés aujourd hui et #FreeJabeur toujours derriere les barreaux pour ses opinions. N'oublions pas
— Farouk Zouhir (@fafou85) August 7, 2013
More than 300 prisoners were freed today but Jabeur remains behind bars for his ideas. Let's not forget this.
Sayeb #Jabeur yè @Moncef_Marzouki Jabeur n'est pas un danger public yè Marzouki #FreeJabeur #FreeJabeur #FreeJabeur #FreeJabeur
— Eglantine (@pink_eglantine) August 7, 2013
.@Moncef_Marzouki  Free Jabeur, he is not a danger to the public.
Pendant que vous fetez el aid un jeune croupit dans une prison tunisienne parce qu'il a osé mettre en doute vos croyances #freejabeur
— Anis (@mir3320) August 7, 2013
As you celebrate Eid, a young man rots in prison for daring to call into question your beliefs.
343 criminels libérés mais jaber est toujours en prison pour une caricature! #FreeJabeur
— Hassen HAMMECHE (@hassen_h) August 9, 2013
343 criminals freed but Jabeur remains in prison over a caricature!
@presidenceTN son crime ? Exprimer une idée ! Le prix 7.5 ans et demi de prison ! #freeJabeur ce n est pas un terroriste lui
— KolnaJabeur (@kolna_jabeur) August 9, 2013
.@presidenceTN  What's his crime? Expressing an idea! The reward is seven and half years in prison. Jabeur is not a terrorist!

author: Afef Abrougui


text:
Thousands Shave Their Heads for Cancer Awareness in Singapore · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

Launched in 2003 by Children's Cancer Foundation, the Hair for Hope is a head-shaving event in Singapore that raises funds and awareness on childhood cancer. Below are the campaign objectives:
- Create awareness of childhood cancer in Singapore
– Show children with cancer and their families that they are not alone in their fight against cancer
– Tell children with cancer that it is OK to be bald
– Raise funds to help children with cancer and their families
– Build a community of support for children with cancer and their families
The shaven head “represents an understanding by an individual of the ordeals that a child with cancer is subjected to.” In 2003 there were only nine volunteers but in 2012 the participants reached more than 6,000.
Kelvin Wee, a shavee newbie, explains why he joined the event:
Cancer does not have to be a death sentence and we can do our little part by supporting this event. There are too many kids out there who need our help and we can make a difference.
Patrick Koh has been participating in the campaign for the past seven years:
I know of people suffering from cancer who has gone through treatments. But not all lose their hair. But for sure they need more financial support as the treatment is quite costly. I am shaving to show the children that it's ok to be bald. There's nothing wrong at all. I am also shaving for donations to help support these children and families financially. My parents were also cancer patients many many years ago and thank GOD they were treated.
Here are some photos of last month's head shaving event:
Photo from Facebook page of Hair for Hope
Photo from Facebook page of Hair for Hope
Photo from Facebook page of Hair for Hope
A post-event incident became somewhat controversial when some female students who shaved their heads were ordered by their school principal to wear a wig inside the campus. The principal cited the school’s rules that do not allow “punk, unfeminine or sloppy hairstyles.”
Alfred Dodwell asks school officials to revisit policies that restrict freedom of expression:
Can't Singaporeans be free to express themselves in ways such as shaving their heads? Must there be restraints on that too? Is a teenager with a shaven head or coloured hair a bad influence on the rest of the school?
Perhaps it is time for the education ministry to re-look at the importance of uniforms and allow schoolchildren some level of self-expression in terms of the way they dress and choose to wear their hair.
Stefanie Yuen-thio wrote an open letter to the Minister of Education about the issue:
Minister, I write to you to express my grave concern for the state of our education system. It worries me that this form of technocratic rule compliance is the mindset of our leading educators. I would hope that this is an isolated incident and not representative of our educational system.
But an anonymous commenter pointed out that the girls made a promise to wear a wig before volunteering in the event:
A promise is a promise. What kind of value will you be instilling in our next generation if one can break a promise just because one feels he/she is doing the right thing? Today is breaking of a promise, what if tomorrow is the breaking of a law?
Grace Chua criticized the reaction of the school officials:
Is bald – PUNK? SLOPPY? and who is to say what is “Unfeminine”?
Even if said that they broke the rules of “Unfeminine” hairstyle, you can't have an excuse since it is for good cause?
Seriously, show some compassion. Rules are fixed but our minds are not.
BlackValkyrie7 praised all participants of the Hair for Hope event:
Those people (especially girls) who shaved bald in this event deserves full respect and recognition. Let's be honest… not everyone is able to participate to that extent. I will never participate something like this if I'm given the choice. I understand the pain of losing hair because I experienced it before. That's why I feel that those participants are very brave and sincere. It's something not everyone can do.
Thumbs up to those participants.

author: Mong Palatino


text:
‘Red Wednesday’ Protests to Benin President: ‘Don’t Touch My Constitution!’  · Global Voices
Sinatou Saka

Since July 17, 2013, every Wednesday many Beninese dress in red and gather together to say no to the revision of the constitution by the President of the Republic Boni Yayi. This revision would permit Boni Yayi to stand in the next presidential elections.
Why Red Wednesday? Dieu-Donné Hounwanou, a militant of this new movement, explains [fr]:
Cette couleur évoque le courage. Cette révision constitutionnelle par le Président Boni Yayi est opportuniste et n'inclut en aucun cas les intérêts du peuple. Par cette mobilisation, nous refusons à grand jamais la révision. Le peuple a faim et en a marre du gouvernement incapable. Mercredi rouge, tout rouge. Touche pas à ma constitution !
This color evokes courage. This constitutional revisions by President Boni Yayi is opportunistic and doesn't include under any circumstance the interests of the people. By mobilizing, we staunchly refuse this revision. The people are hungry and are tired of an incapable government. Red Wednesday, all red. Don't touch my constitution!
The Red Wednesday [fr] movement, launched by the organization [fr] “Alternative citizen” in effect seeks to assemble all Beninese disappointed with the current government since it's inception in 2006. But also, and above all, it seeks to end the project of revising the Beninese constitution, which according to the members of the movement, would permit the president to stand in the 2016 elections and to create a new republic.
Red Wednesday supporters- photo via the facebook page Red Wednesday [fr] with their permission
The revision of the Beninese constitution submitted in April 2013 calls for, among other things, the creation of a Court of Accounts, the initiation of laws by the people, the institutionalization of the National Autonomous Electoral Commission (CENA) or still the limitations of economic crimes.  The revised constitution would also allow the president to run one more time for president.
Born on Facebook [fr], the movement has begun to amplify on the streets of the country. T-shirt, pants, scarf, red caps, all the means are good to sustain the movement.
According to the previous Communication Minister Gaston Zossou [fr], this movement is not liked by the Boni Yayi administration as Zossou says on his Facebook account that his home was encircled by police officers on August 1, 2013, the country's independence day, to keep him from going to join the Red Wednesday protesters.
Soldiers near the home of Gaston Zossou. Photo: Red Wednesday Facebook page with their permission.
However, this movement is far from creating unanimity.
On one side, some question the good faith of the principle actors of the movement, such as Joseph Djogbenou, suspected of manipulating the cause with the support of businessman Patrice Talon, who is the the attorney in the case of the attempted poisoning of the head of state [fr].
And equally Gaston Zossou who blogger Alberic Gandonou qualified as the “transgressor that deceives the youth on the Internet.”
According to Gandonou, the intentions of Zossou [fr] are far from uninteresting:
En mal de publicité, Gaston Zossou dont les béninois de bonne foi se souviennent encore de la gestion désastreuse qu'il a faite des secteurs GSM et du dossier TITAN pendant qu'il était ministre de la communication, s'active sur les réseaux sociaux notamment Facebook où il anime une opposition intellectuelle fondée sur sa nostalgie des affaires de l'Etat.
Seeking publicity, Gaston Zossou, where the Beninese still recall in good faith his disastrous management of the GSM sectors and of the TITAN dossier when he was Communication Minister, is active on social networks notably Facebook where he leads an intellectual opposition based on his nostalgia for affairs of State.
He continues by saying that:
Les forces de l'ordre ont raison de veiller au grain pour empêcher que ce genre de personnage n'entraîne la jeunesse dans une aventure scabreuse.
The police are right to keep a close watch on this to avoid that this kind of character doesn't lead the youth into a scandalous adventure.
Revelations that certainly have already incited defections, such as that of Andoche Amégnissè, a great activist known on social media for his engagement among the Red Wednesday activists.
Secondly, the supporters of President Boni Yayi have imitated the movement and initiated the “White Friday” movement [fr]. The Minister of the Interior Benoît Dégla has declared [fr] that the “causes that defend the initiators of the Red Wednesday are not founded” and has qualified the movement as poison.
Le mouvement qui mène la fronde est manipulé
The movement that leads the revolt is manipulated.
On social media, the supporters of Red Wednesday have decided to to dedicate a blog to Red Wednesday [fr]. The key words #mercredirouge and #patriotes229 also compile the advice and opinions of the participants in the movement:
#BENIN Le Pdt interdit de porter le ROUGE compte du Mouvement Citoyen des “#MERCREDIROUGE# mais était en cravate Rouge lui mm #team229
— Erick-C AHOUNOU (@EAHOUNOU) August 1, 2013
#BENIN The President prohibits wearing RED considering it part of the citizen movement of #MERCREDITROUGE# but he himself was wearing a Red tie. #team 229
#Bénin – #Mercredirouge : le gouvernement demande aux opérateurs GSM d’intercepter les messages http://t.co/jXc63ea17A — Pass (@Nanguit) August 1, 2013
#Mercredirouge : the governments asks GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications) operators to intercept messages http://t.co/jXc63ea17A
#Bénin: Un deuxième « mercredi rouge » timide – http://t.co/2XUfgt9Xi4 #MercrediRouge — Benin Newsdesk (@BeninNewsDesk) July 25, 2013
#Bénin: A second tame “red wednesday” –  http://t.co/2XUfgt9Xi4 [fr] #MercrediRouge [fr]
Merdeeee le petite voiture que je conduis est rouge, les gars vont m'embarquer en taule #mercredirouge
— Zaf (@zaf22zi) July 16, 2013
Shit the small car that I drive is red, these guys are going to put me in jail #mercredirouge [fr]

author: Sinatou Saka


text:
Sri Lanka: “We Asked for Water Tanks And They Sent Us War Tanks” · Global Voices
Rezwan

Three men were killed and forty-five others injured after soldiers fired on protesters in Sri Lanka's Gampaha District demonstrating against ground water contamination.
On Thursday, 1 August, 2012 more than a thousand people gathered to protest authorities failing to resolve the ground water pollution that has created a shortage of drinking water in several areas in the area. When protesters blocked the main Colombo-Kandy Road at Weliweriya junction, police started spraying water canons and tear gas to disperse them, but called for military reinforcements when their attempts failed.
As the army went into action, they prevented journalists and camera crew from covering the clashes and a number of reporters were assaulted. Later it was revealed that during the clashes, soldiers shot at the Church of St Anthony as protesters sought shelter there. The soldiers reportedly threatened the mother superior of the convent at gunpoint, who was protecting the protesters.
Details of the incident which took place inside the church are gradually emerging from eyewitnesses. Parish priest of Weliweriya Rev. Fr. Lakpriya Nonis told media that there were gunshot marks in a concrete post and a wall of his church. Catholic priests and nuns launched a protest campaign in Colombo in over the attacks on church in Weliweriya.
BBC reporter and producer Azzam Ameen (@AzzamAmeen) reported:
It's a war zone in Weliweriya, Army personal on ground says they had no option other than fire #lka #Battleforwater pic.twitter.com/svd4VZNBQF
— Azzam Ameen (@AzzamAmeen) August 2, 2013
“We asked for water tanks & they sent us war tanks,went to road for water & they gave bullets” Weliweriya resident pic.twitter.com/mluRhG22JM
— Azzam Ameen (@AzzamAmeen) August 2, 2013
According to protesters who were demonstrating against the water shortage, the haphazard disposal of waste water from a Dipped Products factory located in Nedungamuwa, Weliweriya was causing environmental and water pollution in the area. Residents of some ten villages in the area took the streets a few days ago led by a Chief Monk of a temple in the area to protest the contamination. However the company rejected the allegations.
Sri Lankan Army Commander Lieutenant General Daya Rathnayake has appointed a board of inquiry to look into the incident. An army spokesman said that it will take two weeks to complete the report. The Gampaha Magistrate has ordered a report be completed on the Weliweriya incident.
A group of prominent Sri Lankans issued a statement titled “Justice for Weliweriya: Time for Indignation!” to protest the incident. Organizations like the Socialist Youth Union held awareness programme and campaign condemning the ‘brutal attack on unarmed civilians by Security Forces.
Reacting to the tragedy on online, journalist and mother Namini Wijedasa wrote on her blog:
I can’t sleep. For two days in a row, I woke up at 3 am. [..] Those moving images of armed soldiers and battle-tanks mowing down defenceless villagers at Weliweriya haunt me.
In my mind, the events keep merging: What I saw happen at Weliweriya from amateur television footage; and what I imagine might have happened in the North, during those final, anguished months of the army’s war with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam.
Civilians had perished in that battle. In Weliweriya, too, there was a battle.
After Weliweriya, things fall a little more into place. Not intentionally, but they do. Our life in Sri Lanka today is like this park: Structured by the State, manicured by the State, guided by the State, controlled by the State and, as sure as Hell, set upon by the State if we trip out of line.
Police fire live rounds and tear gas at protestors. Screenshot from YouTube video uploaded by Derana Videos
Shenali Waduge wrote an op-ed in the Ministry of Defense website which reiterated the claims that civilians “provoked an onslaught”, that agent provocateurs were involved. It labels those speaking out against the shootings as ”the same set of people who were LTTE sympathizers” and that the media is using “foul methods of fooling the public.”
Michelle Alexander at Lanka Web said authorities are to blame, not protesters:
The protestors of Weliweriya weren’t terrorists demanding a piece of the country. They were ordinary people demanding a very basic right. The right to clean drinking water. All they were given was blood. The authorities have no one but themselves to blame for this tragic turn of events.
Harim Peiris at Groundviews raised the question about the rules of engagement of the military and respect for the media. Dr. Dayan Jayatilleka at Groundviews had some questions:
Who deployed troops, clad in flak jackets (body armour) and armed with T-56 assault rifles to confront and disperse a crowd of protestors blocking a highway? Who was the ultimate decision-maker? The protestors were not armed, certainly not with lethal weapons. Therefore, no real harm could have come to soldiers in body armour. A ‘clash’ between lethally armed soldiers and protestors with stones and slippers is not a clash that warrants in any way, the use of lethal force.
Journalist, photographer and blogger Meg reported that the Sri Lankan government is wasting time testing the water in Weliweriya, when tests were carried out months before. She wrote:
It appears more as though the government is stalling. Buying their time until they come up with some relatively credible excuse with which they can confuse the masses.
Neelakandani (@NeelakandanS1) was skeptic about justice:
#Lanka: #FUTA demands Army Chief, Defence Secy. to resign over #Weliweriya incident.Never gonna happen. Culprits will roam freely. @DensiDj
— Neelakandani (@NeelakandanS1) August 8, 2013
Vidura (@Apelankawe) shared on Twitter:
Journalist loses job for reporting on #weliweriya. FMM had alerted about it earlier on #TNL talk show http://t.co/pWOZGjkVnf
— Vidura (@Apelankawe) August 8, 2013
Science writer and columnist Nalaka Gunawardene (@NalakaG) questioned Sri Lankan army's offensives against the Tamil Tigers (LTTE) in the Eastern and Northern provinces of the country during Sri Lankan civil war:
“If #Weliweriya shows policy of State…towards Sinhalese, how must they have conducted themselves in North & East?” http://t.co/PZugtpPohZ
— Nalaka Gunawardene (@NalakaG) August 4, 2013
Blogger Patta Pal Boru commented:
The Government by its direct action has effectively removed the right to peaceful protest, and thereby any semblance it has so far tried to pretend that we are a democracy.

author: Rezwan


text:
Cartoons Magazine Raises Funds for Brazil’s Free Fare Movement · Global Voices
Fernanda Canofre

Front page of the magazine #sobreontem. Photo: 10paezinhos/Flickr
[All links lead to Portuguese language pages except where indicated]
In June, while Brazil was “waking up” in a wave of protests [en] throughout the country, various Brazilian cartoonists left for the front line armed with pens and pencils. The result of these politically engaged cartoons which explore both the movement and its causes have been brought together in a collective publication called #sobreontem (#aboutyesterday), which Global Voices wrote about at the beginning of July.
“The idea isn’t only to educate people but also to raise money to help the Movimento Passe Livre”, or Free Fare Movement, the original group that started the demonstrations against the rise in bus fares. The magazine that previously could only be bought at certain events from the artists themselves is now being sold online and the revenue is used to help the Free Fare Movement.
Whoever is interested in “the second stage of this journey” in which the authors hope to make this “historic record finally available throughout the entire country” can access the blog of the cartoonists Fábio Moon and Gabriel Bá [they also have an English language blog, though it doesn't mention the magazine].

author: Fernanda Canofre


text:
Intense Debate Over Changes in Puerto Rico’s Political Status · Global Voices
Ángel Carrión

[All links lead to pages in Spanish, except where otherwise indicated.]
For the first time, a United States Congressman has officially described his country's political relationship with Puerto Rico as “undermining the moral standing” of the United States in the world.
This comment was made by Ron Wyden [en], a Democratic senator from Oregon and chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, the committee that holds jurisdiction over all issues in the Senate concerning U.S. territories, including Puerto Rico. In a committee hearing on August 1st, the senator made the following statement (which can be heard in this video [en], beginning at minute 0:25):
After 115 years, it is clearly time for Puerto Rico to determine what political path it will take. The question of whether Puerto Rico should become a state or a sovereign nation, or whether there are other options, defines much of the political debate today on the island. Puerto Rico faces huge economic and social challenges. Per capita income is stuck at about half that of the poorest U. S. state and the violent crime rate is well above the national crime rate, and rising. The lack of resolution of Puerto Rico's status not only distracts from addressing these and other issues, it contributes to them. […] Puerto Rico must either exercise full self-government as a sovereign nation or achieve equality among the states of the Union. The current relationship undermines our country's moral standing in the world.
Luego de 115 años, claramente es tiempo de que Puerto Rico determine qué vía política tomará. La cuestión de si Puerto Rico debe convertirse en un estado o en una nación soberana, o si existen otras opciones, define gran parte del debate hoy en la Isla. Puerto Rico enfrenta retos sociales y económicos enormes. El ingreso per cápita está estancado más o menos a la mitad del del estado más pobre de los EEUU y la tasa de crímenes violentos está muy por encima del promedio nacional, y aumenta cada vez más. La falta de resolución del estatus de Puerto Rico no solo distrae de atender estos y otros asuntos, sino que contribuye a ellos. […] Puerto Rico debe autogobernarse totalmente como un estado soberano, o lograr la igualdad entre los estados de la Unión. La relación actual socava la fuerza moral de nuestro país en el mundo.
The committee hearing, chaired by Senator Wyden, was held in conjunction with the Puerto Rican status referendum which took place on November 2012.
Symbols representing various political status options for Puerto Rico, as used on the ballot of the November 6, 2012 referendum: the star containing the number 51 represents Puerto Rico's inclusion as the 51st U.S. State; the native pitirre, or gray kingbird, represents commonwealth status; and the map of the Puerto Rican archipelago represents independence.
The referendum resulted in a rejection of Puerto Rico's current political status, the so-called Estado Libre Asociado (ELA), also known as the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, with 53.97% of constituents in favor of a change of status. But as to the question of which type of status the voters actually preferred for Puerto Rico, the results were not as clear. A cursory review of the data indicates that among the three status options, namely statehood (annexation), independence, and commonwealth status, statehood won out with 61.16% of the votes, followed by commonwealth status with 33.34%, and independence with 5.49%. However, if we include the 498,604 blank ballots submitted by many constituents as a symbol of protest over the voting process, the results look very different. The percentage for statehood is reduced dramatically to 44.4%, commonwealth status to 24.2%, and independence to 4%. To offer an idea of what these blank ballots represent, the commonwealth status received 454,768 votes. The option of Estado Libre Asociado in its current form was excluded from the ballot.
President Obama did not dispatch an administerial representative to attend the Senate committee hearing. It is also worth noting that of the twenty-two senators on the committee, only three attended the hearing. It appears that the Obama administration has responded just as the U.S. government had expected all along. It would not be unreasonable to say that President Obama decided to ignore the results of the November referendum, as Charles R. Venator Santiago, writing for Latino Decisions [en], has suggested:
President Obama’s request to fund a federal plebiscite for Puerto Rico sends a clear message that he does not recognize the outcome of the 2012 plebiscite […]. This position is consistent with earlier statements by President Obama indicating that he would only support an outcome that reflected a substantive majority of the vote (presumably at least a two-thirds majority).
La petición del presidente Obama de financiar un plebiscito federal para Puerto Rico envía un mensaje claro de que no reconoce el resultado del plebiscito de 2012 […]. Esta posición es consistente con declaraciones anteriores por el presidente Obama que indican que solo apoyaría un resultado que reflejara una mayoría sustancial de votos (presumiblemente al menos una mayoría de dos tercios).
Other proposals on the table include a referendum supported by the Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico (the non-voting Puerto Rican delegate to Congress), Pedro Pierluisi, of the New Progressive Party (Partido Nuevo Progresista, or PNP), in which Puerto Ricans would be given the opportunity to vote YES or NO regarding statehood, and the prospect of holding a Constitutional Assembly on status supported by some sectors of the Popular Democratic Party (PPD) and the Puerto Rican Independence Party (PIP). As of now, neither of the two proposals is strongly supported by the United States government.
Emilio Pantojas García, in his article for 80 grados magazine, claims that, given the U.S. track record of non-action regarding the status of Puerto Rico whenever a referendum is held, there is no reason to expect anything different on this occasion:
Es improbable que el Congreso apruebe alguna de estas medidas. Si nunca ha actuado sobre las propuestas radicadas, y las iniciativas presidenciales siempre han estado enmarcadas en cambios importantes en las relaciones interamericanas, por qué van a actuar ahora. Por qué pensar que la mayoría republicana en la Cámara va a considerar y aprobar un proyecto de estadidad. Los republicanos tradicionalmente se oponen a la estadidad para Puerto Rico, primero, porque la Isla es culturalmente una nación latinoamericana cuyo vernáculo es el español (apenas 10 por ciento de los puertorriqueños residentes en la Isla son bilingües). Segundo, la Isla es un bastión demócrata que añadiría dos senadores y cinco o seis congresistas para ese partido. A esto se añaden razones transitorias como que el gobierno de Puerto Rico está al borde de la bancarrota fiscal, la economía pasa por una contracción severa y el desempleo provoca la emigración masiva de los trabajadores/as más diestros/as. Puerto Rico sería un estado mendigo, una carga para un gobierno federal que tampoco está en su mejor momento. A la luz de la experiencia histórica, nada va a pasar con las iniciativas de status [sic], pero los que no conocen la historia están condenados a repetirla.
It's unlikely that Congress will approve any of these measures. If it has never acted on any of the proposals put forth, and if presidential initiatives have always been based on important changes in Inter-American relations, why would they act now? Why should anyone think that the Republican majority in the House is going to consider and approve a proposal for statehood? Republicans have traditionally opposed statehood for Puerto Rico, in the first place, because the island is culturally a Latin-American nation whose vernacular is Spanish (barely 10% of Puerto Ricans residing on the island are bilingual). Secondly, the island is a bastion for Democrats, and [statehood] would add two senators and five or six congressional delegates to the Democratic Party. Add to that such provisional considerations as the fact that Puerto Rico is on the verge bankruptcy, its economy is in the midst of an economic downturn, and unemployment is driving massive emigration of the most highly-skilled workers. Puerto Rico would become a beggar state and a burden on the federal government, which itself has seen better days. If we judge by past experience, nothing is going to happen with any of the status initiatives; but those who haven't learned from history are destined to repeat it.
Xavier “Xavi” Luis Burgos, writing for the digital magazine Gozamos [en] on the occasion of last November's referendum, states that the question is really whether the United States will honor its rhetoric of democracy:
[T]he real debate is not whether Puerto Ricans voted for statehood and whether the United States is going to “allow” that to happen. Instead, we must beg the question: What is the responsibility of the United States in living up to its rhetoric of democracy? This is not to say that the U.S. government must address the problems it created with religious paternalism, like it does when it brings “democracy” to places like Iraq and Afghanistan. Democratic processes are about having people engaged in determining their futures, through discussion, debate, and consensus. Puerto Rico was never offered this. Puerto Ricans have never been seen as full human beings in need of true self-determination. Therefore, in order for the United States to strive for a democratic potential, it must recognize its imperial stains and be a sincere and dedicated companion to reconciliation.
El debate real no es si los puertorriqueños votaron por la estadidad y si los Estados Unidos “permitirán” que eso suceda. En cambio, debemos hacernos la pregunta: ¿Cuál es la responsabilidad de los Estados Unidos en hacerle honor a su retórica de democracia? No se debe entender que el gobierno estadounidense debe atender con paternalismo religioso los problemas que creó, como hace cuando le lleva la “democracia” a países como Irak y Afganistán. Los procesos democráticos tratan sobre tener a la gente comprometida con la determinación de sus futuros mediante la discusión, el debate y el consenso. A Puerto Rico nunca se le ofreció esto. A los puertorriqueños nunca se les ha visto como seres humanos completos necesitados de verdadera autodeterminación. Por lo tanto, para que los Estados Unidos trate de alcanzar su potencial democrático, debe reconocer la mancha del imperialismo y ser un compañero sincero y dedicado a la reconciliación.
You can view the entire hearing by clicking here [en] (it begins around minute 22:45).

author: Ángel Carrión


text:
Iran: A New Internet Report · Global Voices
Farid

Small Media reports that”despite the introduction of new mechanisms to block tools used to bypass the filtering mechanism [in Iran], by July [a couple of weeks after presidential election] the Internet had returned to its previous state of affairs that existed before February.”

author: Farid


text:
Remembering the 1988 Student Revolt in Myanmar · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

Aung Zaw, the founding editor in chief of the Irrawaddy magazine, recalls the historic 1988 student uprising in Myanmar:
As a student at that time, I can clearly remember the exhilaration of knowing that the entire nation was behind us, that we could not possibly lose.
He issues this challenge to Myanmar citizens:
Only by continuing to resist the forces of ignorance and brutality will we be able to win the war on students, and on the minds of all Myanmar citizens.


text:
Turkmenistan’s “Book of the Soul” Facing Difficult Times · Global Voices
Farida Yoony

Saparmurat Niyazov, Turkmenistan's first President-for-Life, once suggested that reading his “Ruhnama” (“The Book of the Soul”) three times would be enough to guarantee a person's place in heaven. But with the isolated republic now ruled by a different strongman, eager to put his own stamp on Turkmen life, the Ruhnama's place in society is looking ever less prominent.
Despite Turkmenistan having an 80% Muslim population, the Ruhnama, a book on public mores that Niyazov, who died in December 2006, supposedly authored, was once promoted by state officials as being an equal of the Holy Koran. Mass media regularly quoted the book, as did schoolchildren, foreign investors and anyone that wanted to pass a driving test.
President Niyazov (right) authored the Ruhnama, but the book seems to be getting in the hair of President Berdymuhamedov (left), despite Berdymuhamedov kissing the text at his inauguration. Remixed image published on the Turkmen Chronicles news blog.
When it was first published in 2001, the book was portrayed by the government as a source of spiritual guidance and national identity for a society still struggling with the ideological vacuum left behind by the Soviet Union. As its role grew, however, it quickly came to be viewed as just another cog in Nizazov's personality cult, a personality cult that rivaled Stalin's, Mao's and Kim Jong-il's in pomp and audacity.
Although many historians dispute the accuracy of the book's vision of Turkmen history, the message from President Niyazov on the inlay leaves little room for interpretation:
The Ruhnama has absorbed the five thousand year history of our nation, the pearls of its wisdom, philosophy, mentality, its dreams and aspirations, unique culture and lifestyle, as well as its rich inner world.
The Rise and Rise of the Ruhnama
Within a couple of years of the Ruhnama's release it had become national dogma. Vilages and streets were named after the text, and a large statue of the book was built in the center of the capital, Ashkhabad. Every Saturday was proclaimed the day of Ruhnama and September 12 was celebrated as Ruhnama Day, one of the most important in the pantheon of Turkmen public holidays.
Furthermore, foreign investors such as DaimlerChrysler, Siemens and Bouygues International began promoting and translating the Ruhnama into foreign languages in order to curry favour with Niyazov and gain access to the Turkmen market. The producers of Shadow of the Holy Book, a 2007 documentary on the Ruhnama, asked the same question to several of the world's largest multinational companies: Why support a dictatorship by translating a book that oppresses its own population? [Watch full documentary here]. The book has now been translated into 41 languages.
Schoolchildren and university students in particular were forced to study the Ruhnama every day. As Surat Ajdarova recalled in an opinion piece on Fergana news:
It was mandatory to read the Ruhnama in schools, universities and governmental organizations. New governmental employees were tested on the Ruhnama at the job interview and even at [their] driver’s tests.
Is Turkmenistan waving goodbye to its soul?
Copies of the Ruhnama are still widely available in Turkmenistan, but as Gurbanguly Berdymuhamedov, Turkmen president since Niyazov's death and self-appointed “protector” of the Turkmen people has sought to bolster his own public profile [GV] the Ruhnama is no longer the omnipresence it once was. In 2011, for instance, Eurasianet.org reported that the Turkmen government had decided to remove the requirement to pass an exam in Ruhnama knowledge for secondary school students.
A statue of the Ruhnama in  Turkmenistan (Wikimedia commons)
While at the beginning of this month, The Times of Central Asia reported a further blow to the book's status:
A new curriculum prepared by the Turkmen Education Ministry for secondary schools for the coming school year does not include the study of Ruhnama…It means that from September 1, Turkmen school students will no longer study the “sacred book” written by Saparmurat Niyazov, late President for Life of Turkmenistan.
For the most part, the news was received positively by commentators on the diaspora-run Turkmen Chronicles News blog, a reader called Turkmen rejoicing [ru]:
Praise Allah!! This is at least one thing that The Protector has got right!
Another user, Leto, waxed philosophical [ru] over the possible legacies of personalized rule in Turkmenistan:
как потом нашим потомкам изучать эпоху туркменбаши? или ее не было? или стыдно будет перед потомками что вообще такое было и теперь продолжается
How will our descendants remember the era of Turkmenbashy [Father of the Turkmen – Niyazov's favourite title]? Or perhaps it never happened? Or will we be ashamed before our descendants that such [an era] even existed and that it continues on to this day?
Anonymous suggested [ru] sarcastically that a host of recently published books connected to the current president could soon be appearing on school syllabi, reflecting the transition from one cult of personality to another:
будут изучать «Верный сын Родины. Дело всей жизни Мяликгулы ага», «Педагог, воин, гражданин. Жизнь-подвиг Бердымухамеда Аннаева», «Имя доброе нетленно», «Ахалтекинец — наша гордость и слава», «Туркмения — страна здоровых и высокодуховных людей»
Now they are going to learn “True Son of the Homeland. The Life Works of Mayalikgul Aga” [a biography of President Berdymuhamedov's grandfather], “Teacher, Soldier, Citizen, The Life of Burdymuhamed Annaev” [a biography of President Berdymuhamedov's father], “A Good Name Doesn't Perish” [a novel purportedly written by Berdymuhamedov], “Akhal-Tekke Horses – Our Pride and Salvation” [Berdymuhamedov's book on the famous horses that hail from his home region], “Turkmenistan – a Country of Healthy and Spiritually Advanced People” [Berdymuhamedov's Ruhnama-like treatise on Turkmen culture and traditional knowledge].
In yet another move that can be perceived as aiming to dilute the influence of the Ruhnama, Berdymuhamedov has repeatedly stressed Turkmenistan's debt to Magtymguly Pyragy, an 18th century poet and spiritual leader born in what is now northeastern Iran. Commenting under an article about the president's promotion of Magtymguly over the Ruhnama on RFE/RL's Turkmen service, a user called Rayat welcomed [Tkm] the “rotting away” of a text that once dominated everyday existence in the country:
Fa$istba$ynyñ absurt ruhnamasyda ozi yaly cüyräp gider. Halk hakykaty bilyar.
Fascist-bashi's [reference to Niyazov] absurd Ruhnama ideology is rotting away just as he himself decays into the ground. The people will discover the truth.

author: Farida Yoony


text:
Vladimir Putin’s Solitary PR Stunt · Global Voices
Nina Jobe

Over the past months the Kremlin has given Russian bloggers more than the usual amount of fodder to ridicule the government and President Vladimir Putin. The curious PR-stunts show no signs of abating. Case in point — Vladimir Putin’s old judo coach, and self-proclaimed “second father,” Anatoly Rakhlin, passed away last week from an undisclosed illness. Two days later Putin returned [ru] to his native St. Petersburg to attend Rakhlin’s funeral. After the funeral, the state sponsored Russia Today aired footage of Putin walking alone down the streets of his native city, looking sad and forlorn.
From the relative emptiness of the usually busy St. Petersburg streets, it was very obvious that the touching stroll was staged. And so the jokes from opposition bloggers started immediately.
The popular satirical Twitter account KermlinRussia quipped [ru] along with a screenshot [ru] of Putin jaywalking:
Путин так держится за власть, потому что ничего не умеет и не знает. Не знает даже как дорогу переходить pic.twitter.com/95A69jE21H
— Пeрзидент Роисси (@KermlinRussia) August 9, 2013
Putin clings to power because he doesn’t know how to do anything.  He does not even know how to cross a road.
Blogger and social activist Mitya Aleshkovsky pointed out [ru] that Putin had, in fact, broken the law:
Однако, штраф за нарушение этих правил безопасности дорожного движения, в совокупности – 500 рублей. Но не для президента, он гуляет где хочет, когда хочет, и как хочет. Напоминаю, что сегодня – рабочий день, и его прогулки вполне могут сорвать кому-либо рабочую встречу, производственный план, личные или бизнес-договоренности, ну и так далее, но все мирские проблемы меркнут когда его величеству грустно.
By the way, the fine for violating road safety rules is all in all 500 rubles. But not for the president, he walks where he wants, when he wants and how he wants. I remind you that today is a work day, and his walk may well derail someone's working meeting, productivity, personal or business arrangements, and so on, but all worldly problems pale when his Majesty is sad.
The photographer Rustem Adagamov noted [ru] that activist and head of the Federation of Russian Car Owners, Vadim Korovin, had been fined for a pedestrian traffic violation just the day before:
Вчера вот Коровина оштрафовали за переход улицы в неположенном месте. А почему гаишник Путина не штрафует?
— Рустем Адагамов (@adagamov) August 9, 2013
Yesterday Korovin was fined for crossing the street in the wrong place.  Why wasn’t Putin fined by a traffic cop?
Some, like opposition member Roman Dobrokhotov mocked [ru] Putin's presumed sad mood:
На самом деле зря вы все, “постановка”, “пиар на крови” – глупости все это. На самом деле Путин тоже человек. Просто отошел отлить.
— Roman Dobrokhotov (@Dobrokhotov) August 9, 2013
Really, I think you are all wrong [about the stroll being] “set-up,” “cynical PR” – that's all foolish. Actually, Putin is simply a man. He just went to take a piss.
Others, like the journalist Arkady Babchenko joked [ru] about the empty streets:
Putin walking down a desolate St. Petersburg street. YouTube screenshot.
Какие питерцы молодцы – полностью решили проблему с парковками и пробками. Да и вообще с машинами. Да и с людьми.
Well done to the residents of St. Petersburg – they have completely solved the problems of parking and traffic-jams. And cars in general. And people.
This is the fourth public relations stunt the Kremlin has presented to the Russian public in the last month. First, Russians were shown Putin going down in a submarine at around the same time that Alexei Navalny returned to Moscow from his Kirov trial. This was followed by Putin’s fishing trip [GV], after which Putin’s press secretary was called out for lying about the weight of the President’s fish. Then there was Putin’s lackluster appearance at the annual Seliger youth camp, where he talked to a man in a cucumber suit. And finally, this. Has the Kremlin lost the plot? Or is this a series of clever attempts to distract public attention from important issues like the coming Moscow mayoral elections?

author: Nina Jobe


text:
Whistleblower Protection Urged to Fight Corruption in East Timor   · Global Voices
Mong Palatino

Jose Antonio Belo, editor of Tempo Semanal, discussed the anti-corruption crusade of the paper in East Timor. He also urged the passage of a Whistleblower Protection legislation to fight corruption.
We must find ways to support and protect people who blow the whistle on corruption. They must not be allowed to feel powerless and alone – afraid of speaking out.


text:
China Gives Internet Celebrities a Guide for Self-Censorship · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

A group of Internet celebrities in China have endorsed a government guideline for self-censorship on a variety of topics such as law, socialism, the state, the public's legal rights, and morality, according to state-controlled media outlet the People Daily. But did they really?
Some are arguing their endorsement was invented as political propaganda. The Internet celebrities were part of a group invited to attend a forum on Internet Celebrities’ Social Responsibility [zh] organized by the State Internet Information Office (IIO) and held at the China Central Television on August 10, 2013. There, they exchanged views with the head of IIO, Lu Wei, who presented the seven-point guideline.
The guideline includes principles for online public opinion leaders to self-regulate their online speech, which set limits [zh] and boundaries not to be crossed when it comes to discussion of law and regulation, the socialist political system, the state's interests, citizen's legal rights, public order, morality, and facts and accuracy.
Pan Shiyi said in the forum that all netizens are and should be treated as active individuals. Photo uploaded by Pan Shiyi to Weibo.
As social media becomes more and more popular, online public opinion leaders are becoming very influential. In Sina and Tencent Weibo, there are more than 19,000 microbloggers with 100,000 followers; 3,300 microbloggers with one million followers; and 200 microbloggers with more than 10 million followers.
Soon after the conference, state-controlled media outlet, the People Daily reported that all the celebrities who attended the forum had endorsed the seven-point guideline.
The set of principles has received quite some welcome in the past two days, yet others questioned it.
In fact, Pan Shiyi, CEO of real-estate developer Soho and one of the invited celebrities, questioned the premise of the seven principles during the forum:
大家现在热烈讨论网络应该不应该管控、治理、引导、教化民众……。我个人认为：网络社会应该人人都参与，民众不应该是被动要教化、引导的对象。谣言应该受到法律制裁。让大V、网络名人去教化民众，提高民众的道德水平，这不靠谱。
People here are discussing whether the Internet should be controlled, managed, channeled and turned into a tool for cultivating the mass…. My personal opinion is everyone should participate in the network society and people should not be considered a passive subject who need to be educated or channeled. Those who spread rumors should be punished according to the law. I don't think the Big V [online celebrities] should be responsible for lifting people's morality. It won't work.
Some netizens noticed the contradictions in the guideline. @juchenxi, head of a news information center in an academy in Hunan, also spotted the paradoxes:
有几组矛盾很难处理：符合社会主义制度的，不一定符合国家利益；追求了真实性，可能与社会主义制度的某些要求有抵触；要保障公民合法权益，但有可能囿于社会主义制度而不大可能。要同时坚守这七条底线，难。退而求其次，仅仅坚守真实性这一条也不容易。
A number of paradoxes here: Upholding the socialist system may contradict with national interest. The pursuit of truth may also contradict some conditions of the socialist system. Also, the protection of citizen's legal rights may also go against the system. It would be difficult to follow all these guidelines at the same time. It won't be easy just to uphold the truth.
Since the forum has invited quite a number of celebrities from the liberal sector which is often the target of censorship, there are some speculations about the its political intention. For example, @ranxiangbapi, a popular nationalistic microblogger, believed the celebrities were “forced to drink tea”, an online term used to describe interrogations by the internal security police:
你不觉的这次论坛有些喝茶的味道？请一些正能量大V陪衬，把面子给足，就看这些负能量大V以后的表现了。
Don't you smell the aroma of a “tea session” in this forum? It invited those Big V [online celebrities] with a positive attitude in the show and gave them faces. Let's see how the Big V with a negative attitude perform in the future.
@simanan, also a nationalist opinion leader, also believed the forum is a party strategy to build an united front with the influential liberals:
《南华早报》刚才问我，如何评论#鲁炜对话大V#？我说了几条: 1）新时期搞统战，只能拾起老法宝。2）点着名宣底线，给脸看你要不要。3）撞墙沉船者听仔细，勿谓言之不预也。4） 鲁七条其实就一条，宪法原则耳。5）潘石屹会上自我漂白，鲁炜没搭腔，众人不附和。
Just now the South China Morning Post asked me to comment on Lu Wei's conversation with the Big V. I raised a few points: 1. This is a strategy to build a united front in a new era. But they use an old set of tools; 2. Faces have been given to some names before the consensus was introduced; 3. It is a signal to the destructive ones; 4. The seven guidelines can be reduced to one. Follow the constitution [one party principle]. 5. @Pan Shiyi [CEO of Soho China, a liberal] tries to differentiate himself with others in the forum, Lu Wei did not give any response to him and no one backed him up.
Cultivate the angry youth?
Even though Chinese netizens still have doubts, the China Daily continued to propagate the necessity [zh] to cultivate the “angry youth” and develop common boundaries on discussion for a rational and healthy culture. But why are people angry in the first place? Many netizens questioned:
长空雁_MIN：那为何网络骂战如此疯狂？自己的切身利益得不到维护而现实中规则的制定者大多谋取了不正当利益，久而久之唯有对他人，对整个社会予以破口大骂才能解“心头之恨”。呼吁网民保持理性素养和道德自律是必须但是次要的，重点是如何解决不公，让更多人觉得自己生活在公正的时代，自身利益得到保护。
“Big bird in the sky”: Why there are so many fierce fights in the Internet? We can't defend our own interest but those who design the rules of the game have gained so much illegitimated interests. The resentment has kept on accumulating and we have to swear to maintain our balance. It is necessary but secondary to urge netizens to remain rational and well-mannered in discussion. The most urgent task is to solve the problem of social injustice so that people develop a feeling that they are protected and living in a fair world.
腹黑的果蝇：官员财产申报制度喊了多年，建设性的批评建议你听得进去吗？封锁消息防民之口倒是迅雷不及掩耳，在一个严格管制半封闭的网络环境下装模作样谈论自由理性平和，笑死人了
“Fly with black belly”: For how many years people have we demanded our officials to declare their properties? Can you even hear people's constructive suggestions? You have been so effective in blocking people's speech. In such a highly manipulated and censored environment, you pretend that it is free and ask people to be rational and soft? This is such a joke.
Fredio：缺的是老百姓对政府的监督机制。
Fredio: What has been missed is a mechanism for people to monitor the government.

author: Oiwan Lam


text:
China: Revenge or Justice? · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

A recent sex scandal involving two top Shanghai judges was exposed by a businessman Ni Peiguo who believes one of the judges was unfair in a ruling of a corporate suit that Ni was involved in. He took revenge of his financial loss by following the judge for a year and exposing the sex scandal. China Beat highlightes netizens’ comments on Ni's revenge, which is a lot more effective than trying to petition the case.


text:
China: WeChat Spy · Global Voices
Oiwan Lam

China Digital Times has collected another case on the spying of WeChat message, a smartphone messaging application and is now the world’s fifth most popular one. The latest case shows that the police is actively spying on a reporting group that shares news information.


text:
Mexican President Reveals Controversial Energy Reform Plans · Global Voices
J. Tadeo

[All links lead to Spanish language pages except where indicated]
The President of Mexico, Enrique Peña Nieto [en], publicly presented his plans to reform the country’s oil industry with particular emphasis upon the operations of the semi-public Petróleos Mexicanos (Mexican Petroleum). Mexican Petroleum, or PEMEX, was created by presidential decree on 7 June 1938, the same year that the country expropriated oil [en] then being pumped by various private companies.
The proposal was announced at the President’s official residence of Los Pinos [en] on 12 August 2013. President Nieto’s plan includes changes to specific articles of the Constitution of Mexico (those relating to monopolies and state ownership of natural resources), but this first has to be debated by representatives and senators before it can be passed.
The President’s announcement, however, came as little surprise to groups both inside and outside Mexico who have been anticipating the news for many months. The Mexican website Revolución tres punto cero (Revolution three point zero) broke the news after the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in January:
Durante una mesa redonda del Foro Económico Mundial que se lleva a cabo en Davos, Suiza, el titular de la Secretaría de Hacienda, Luis Videgaray, afirmó que se prevé que la Reforma Energética esté lista para la primera mitad de este 2013.
Dicha reforma comprendería cambios en Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex) para permitir mayor participación de empresas privadas.
Para Emilio Lozoya Austin, director de Pemex, quien también participó en dicha actividad, los cambios generarán “más valor” y, según afirma, no habrá privatización en los energéticos nacionales: “modernizar Pemex no implica privatizar ni que el Estado pierda la rectoría del sector energético”.
During a round table at the World Economic Forum taking place in Davos in Switzerland, the current Finance Secretary, Luis Videgaray, stated that it was thought that the Energy Reform would be ready by the first half of 2013.
This reform would involve changes to PEMEX in order to allow for greater participation by private companies.
According to the director of PEMEX, Emilio Lozoya Austin, who was also present at the meeting, the changes will generate “more value”, and that national energy will not be privatized: “modernizing PEMEX does not imply privatization nor that the state will lose control over the energy sector”
Days before the proposal was presented by President Peña Nieto, Victor Hernández from Blog de Izquierda (Leftist Blog) commented:
Photo by Matthew Rutledge on Flickr (CC BY 2.0)
La privatización de Pemex de Enrique Peña Nieto ya inició desde antes de que se presentara la reforma energética.
Empezó con la venta del 48% del complejo petromquímico de Pajaritos, en Coatzacoalcos, Veracruz. El acuerdo se hizo a principios de año y finalmente se publicó en el diario oficial de la federación el 30 de julio.
La promesa del PAN [Partido Acción Nacional] y del PRI [Partido Revolucionario Institucional] de que no se vendería un solo tornillo de Pemex resultó falsa. No vendieron sólo un tornillo, sino LA MITAD de una de las petroquímicas más importantes de Pemex.
Para que se den una idea de lo importante que es el complejo de Pajaritos, en el sexenio de Vicente Fox el ejército mexicano compró lanzamisiles para protegerlo.
The privatization of PEMEX by Enrique Peña Nieto started long before the presentation of any energy reform proposals.
It started with the sale of 48% of the petrochemical complex in Parjaritos in Coatzacoalcos, Veracruz. The agreement was made at the start of the year and finally made public on 30th July.
The promises made by the National Action Party [en] and the Institutional Revolutionary Party [en] that not a single part of PEMEX would be sold turned out to be a lie. In the end what they sold was HALF of one of PEMEX’s most important plants.
Just to get an idea of how important the Pajaritos complex is, during Vicente Fox’s six year term the Mexican army bought missile launchers to protect it
John M. Ackerman (@JohnMAckerman), who is a supporter of Andrés Manuel López Obrador [en], a firm opposer of the current government, commented that the president’s proposal (which he believes is seeking the privatization of PEMEX) would not be able to trick Mexican society:
Afortunadamente, ya no existe posibilidad alguna de engañar a la sociedad con una privatización light vestida con las sedas de un supuesto “pragmatismo”. Con la propuesta del PAN se transparenta la ambición desmedida de los grandes empresarios nacionales y extranjeros en su búsqueda de quedarse con una tajada aún más grande de la riqueza nacional. Y con las constantes denuncias de Andrés Manuel López Obrador se evidencian las mentiras escondidas detrás de la idea de que una mayor “participación” de Exxon-Mobil y Halliburton automáticamente beneficiará al pueblo de México.
Fortunately there no longer exists the chance of misleading society with a privatization made to look more attractive by so called “pragmatism”. The proposal made by PAN (National Action Party) exposes the gross ambition of big national and foreign companies to get themselves an even larger slice of the national wealth. And after the constant denunciations of Andrés Manuel López Obrador we now see the lies lurking behind the idea that greater “involvement” by Exxon-Mobil and Halliburton will automatically benefit the Mexican people
Ackerman adds:
Enrique Peña Nieto ha sido rebasado por la coyuntura. Pospuso una y otra vez la presentación de su iniciativa con la esperanza de poder tejer previamente las alianzas necesarias para que la naturaleza privatizadora de su propuesta no se evidencie de manera tan desvergonzada. Por ello el presidente incluso se atreverá a recurrir a la engañosa táctica de utilizar la histórica figura del mismo general Lázaro Cárdenas para dar la impresión de que su iniciativa tendría el aval de este gran mexicano. Como colofón de esta puesta en escena, el presidente del PRI, César Camacho, ha amenazado con “defender hasta en las calles” la propuesta energética de su partido.
Enrique Peña Nieto has been left behind by the situation. Time and time again he postponed presenting his initiative with the hope of being able to string together the alliances needed to make sure the privatizing nature of this proposal wouldn’t be exposed in such a shameless manner. The president even dared to resort to the dishonest tactic of using the historical figure of General Lázaro Cárdenas [en] to give the impression that his initiative would have the endorsement of this great Mexican. As a climax to this mise-en-scène, the president of the PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party [en]), César Camacho, has threatened to “defend in the streets” his party’s energy proposal.
On Twitter the username Arroz (@roxmgs) shared the following opinion regarding the reform:
Considero que la reforma energética es necesaria, pero en otro tenor: Redistribución de los ingresos por petroleo y no entregar a PEMEX.
— Arroz (@roxmgs) August 12, 2013
I view the energy reform as necessary but in a different way: Redistribution of earnings from oil and don’t hand them over to PEMEX
A day before the proposal was announced, the researcher Miguel Carbonell (@MiguelCarbonell) mentioned one of the things that worries Mexicans most:
El 50% de la gasolina que consumimos en México tenemos que importarla. Algo no estamos haciendo bien. #reformaenergetica
— Miguel Carbonell (@MiguelCarbonell) August 11, 2013
50% of the oil that we consume in Mexico we have to import. We’re doing something wrong #reformaenergetica
As is common among some Mexican analysts, the academic Luis Pazos (@luispazos1) could not resist comparing what is happening in Mexico with what is happening in an undeniably more advanced country:
En Noruega, con socios privados en empresas estatales petroleras y menos empleados que Pemex, producen +
— Luis Pazos (@luispazos1) August 12, 2013
In Norway, with private partners in state owned petrol companies and less employees than PEMEX, they produce more
Verónica Calderón (@veronicalderon), who followed the president’s speech, summed it up in the following way:
Termina discurso de @EPN en que nos contó lo importantísimos que somos y lo grande que es México. Un minuto de aplausos. #Pemex
— Verónica Calderón (@veronicalderon) August 12, 2013
Speech by @EPN finishes in which he tells how incredibly important we are and how great Mexico is. One minute of applause. #Pemex
Much more important will be what is said in the coming days about the proposed reform presented by the president, however, the most important thing will be to first of all understand it in detail before issuing a value judgement. Similarly, it is worth highlighting that this proposal has been made within a political system based on distributed power meaning that the proposal will have to go to congress which will have the final say.

author: J. Tadeo


text:
Police Censor Film Screening in Brazilian Neighbourhood · Global Voices
Thiana Biondo

[All links lead to Portuguese language pages. Video is in Portuguese without English subtitles]
In the neighbourhood of North East Amaralina in Salvador (Bahia), police officers banned the screening of the documentary Menino Joel (Little Joel). The film discusses the death of a child during a police operation in the very same working class neighbourhood where the session was to take place.
Image published on the Facebook page Mídia Periférica (Periphery Media) alongside a disclaimer by Associação de Moradores do Nordeste de Amaralina (North East Amaralina Residents’ Association).
On Saturday 3rd of August 2013, young representatives of the North East Amaralina Residents’ Association (AMNA) were surprised by armed police before the start of another session of their Cinemalóca project. According to a statement signed by AMNA, officers claimed that the film encouraged residents to be in opposition to the police. Despite trying to negotiate the screening of a different documentary, the police forced the cancelling of the event.
The film Menino Joel by the Italian director Max Gaggino provides testimonies from the family of ten year old Joel da Conceição Castro who in 2010 was killed during a police operation in North East Amaralina. Last June Carlos Alberto Conceição, Joel’s cousin, was also killed by police causing protests in the streets of Salvador.
This was Cinemalóca’s third open air screening in association with AMNA, with the objective of “promoting discussion and the mobilisation of the community around the problems of violence, precarious living conditions and the neighbourhood’s neglect by the public authorities.”
http://youtu.be/z5mpkPCVpNs

author: Thiana Biondo