PARANOIA POSTETÍLICA CAUSES OF TRESPASS TO FELIPE CALDERON SOVEREIGNTY OF EE.UU.MM., PUTTING ON THE INTEGRITY Vilo BIOPSYCHOSOCIAL THE PEOPLE OF MEXICO ...
during Bushism is not allowed such acts of espionage that flagrantly violate the national sovereignty, Constitutional Ministry itself which resides essentially and originally in the people. All power emanates from the people and is instituted for their benefit. The people at all times the inalienable right
alter or modify their form of government.
--- "The U.S. government sponsors to invade the country with unmanned aircraft, said the constitutional
Calderon blind eye to the violation of sovereignty: Castro and Castro
Announces Initiative to international agreements are ratified by plebiscites
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2011/03/19/fotos/007n1pol-1 . jpg
U.S. ambassadors are "spies over," said retired minister Juventino Castro y Castro Photo
Victor Camacho Roberto Garduño La Jornada newspaper
Saturday March 19, 2011, p. 7
The U.S. government itself violates national sovereignty and the Constitution with the flight of unmanned aircraft on Mexican territory, the introduction of weapons for use by criminal gangs and espionage makes from its embassy, \u200b\u200bthe minister said retired Juventino Castro y Castro, chairman of the Committee on Constitutional Chamber of Deputies. For the experienced
constitutionalist, it deplored the attitude of Felipe Calderón Hinojosa because it violates the unrestricted defense of national interest. In an interview, said that will be brought forward to reform the constitution so that any treaty or agreement with other countries is subject to approval by referendum.
argued that "national sovereignty is affected, the United States makes determinations regarding our authorities and our territory, and this should stop the president, who is president, and I refer specifically to Mr. (Felipe) Calderon.
"The Constitution in Article 42 provides that no air space, located on national territory," and it is clear that the U.S. authorities in Mexico can not order any act of an administrative or military, and also president of the Republic is responsible for ensuring this, and specifically the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. "
-Chancellor Patricia Espinosa has confirmed that the Mexican government requested the intervention U.S..
"I learned with amazement that the Secretary had requested the intervention of these aircraft. Not defending the national territory and is sponsoring it invaded and, of course, aerospace. If you do not increase the degree we end the United States under the pretext of defending its nationals may invade the country, or directly influence the choice of President, subjecting even more than at present.
- Do you see a likely invasion of national territory?
"I base all my statements on information that comes to me. If the Foreign Ministry agree to assign to the U.S. government Together, the president should order it. Mr. Calderón the Constitution gives the handling of foreign policy is one of its attributes constitutional, and not doing their job!
-The Mexican government says it is cooperation that has always existed.
"We're talking about national sovereignty. This is the national territory, including territorial waters and airspace. Can not anyone tell the people that on behalf of the bilateral relationship, 'Let's cede sovereignty. " That is profound. So when indignant Mexico because they so easily gave national sovereignty!
- Is deliberate omission of the Executive?
"I think that there is no international planning. The Constitution says the president on what terms should handle foreign policy, defending the dignity of the nation. Yes there is omission of Mr. Calderon.
- What is the role the U.S. ambassador in Mexico?
- spies are old! Are those who send us to Washington to report to the weaknesses of Mexico and its chances of coming here. Its ambassadors are the guards who immediately inform the State Department.
harshly accused the minister what he considers the main shortcoming of Mexican society, "all these things we go through the indifference of the people of Mexico. The people are the ones to resolve these issues. We propose that any treaty or agreement is concluded without the consent of the people. Must be made through direct participation in society. This has been hampered by those who oppose the repeal of the mandate. We efforts to ensure that public consultation can make the revocation of the mandate, at the highest level. "
- Does the president?
, including President of the Republic. Of course, the danger they see who are timid and oppose the people rule. Prefer to interpret Article 39 of the Constitution speaks of national sovereignty and 41 sets out how this exercise: we have a tremendous constitutional defect because he plays notes that the only way of exercising power is to appoint a representative, and then when you vote gives the power, cede sovereignty.
"And so we want the international agreements and negotiations are voted and ratified by the people through referendum, the recall or initiative."
"With that understanding everything is justified by the government.
- and God knows what things we do not know! When they crisis are going to come out and say "no, we will authorize, no problem! What violation of sovereignty? If the President says there is no violation of sovereignty, no! "
-La Jornada was ventilated with a profusion of communications of U.S. ambassadors in Mexico, and has generated a groundswell of public opinion to demand answers.
"I think you should continue to publish. And what is the harm for telling the truth? Handle the truth for a people is essential. Should continue with this, hit the nail on the head, but surely we know much more. I think we should modernize and not just say that the president is responsible in the exercise of his office for serious crimes and violations of the Constitution, but for specific crimes will be imposed.
- Such as?
-By its omissions in foreign policy. It should say what standards should follow the president, but also must tell the consequences. If the president does not, what happens?
"But the president today is still a demigod, a huey-tlatoani. Should demystified?
"Of course. I pretend that education must change. Not only taught in schools in early years, but taught by the parents. If parents are not convinced, will be useless to change the culture of Mexico in relation to political power. "
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2011/03/19/index.php?section=politica&article
= 007n1pol
--- "The President must respond by foreign policy failures"
U.S. overflights violate sovereignty: Juventino Castro
Without an end to these actions, while we are going to invade, says former Minister Rosario Green
Mexico has rejected foreign aircraft control
used for border surveillance aircraft, involved attacks on civilians
Roberto Garduño, Andrea Becerril and Pedro Miguel
More than 700 civilians were killed in two countries between 2005 and 2008 attacks on these devices
unmanned U.S. aircraft factory, numerous "collateral damage"
The Predator aircraft, vulnerable to cyberattacks, which was evidenced in Iraq in 2009
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2011/03/19/fotos/009n1pol-1.jpg
Booth control of a Predator drone Wikipedia
Photo
More than 700 civilians were killed in two countries between 2005 and 2008 attacks on these devices
U.S. drone factory, numerous "collateral damage"
The Predator aircraft, vulnerable to cyberattacks, which was evidenced in Iraq in 2009
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2011/03/19/
fotos/009n1pol-2.jpg
A Reaper drone launched a missile air-ground picture
Baronshobbies.com
Pedro Miguel
newspaper La Jornada
Saturday March 19, 2011, p. 9
Since 2004, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP, for its acronym in English) monitors the boundary with Mexico through unmanned combat aircraft (UCAV: unmanned combat aerial vehicle) popularly known as drones (buzzers). According to a May 2010 report of the institution, the UCAV had "directly contributed" to the 4000 arrest of 766 people and seized over 10 tons of marijuana.
Alongside these awards and numerous targets "terrorists" through UCAV destroyed in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, such devices have a black history as murderers of civilians not involved in the conflict and a growing resume of "collateral damage ".
According to a count of the Pakistani daily The News, more than 700 civilians lost their lives in Afghanistan and Pakistan between 2005 and 2008 because of attacks by UCAV.
and mortality is rising: in the north of the second country, more than 600 people died in hundreds of attacks by unmanned U.S. aircraft. Last Thursday, in Waziristan, were 38 innocent victims of a bombing carried out by an unmanned device.
If one accepts that the numerous massacres of civilians by the UCAV are mere mistakes and not part of a defined strategy to cause terror in the population of the countries subject to this unique aerial surveillance, the reasons would be in sight.
In an article published in English Air Force (Year VII, Volume 6, No. 51), the specialist Rafael Treviño Martinez said, referring to the Predator UCAV, which "has very limited value to classify or recognize targets due to poor quality of the resolution of your camera. For any level of detail, you should change your observation chamber, which has a narrow field of vision so that the aircraft lost their cognition of the situation. " As stated by Philip Coyle, who was the Pentagon's independent chief tester, "looking through the Predator's camera is like looking through a straw."
One of the main problems facing the United States in the deployment of the UCAV is the "bottleneck" determined by the lack of trained pilots. This lack has led to hand over control of the aircraft to civilian contractors, like Blackwater, which the Pentagon canceled the contract in question after the high rate of "collateral casualties" caused by his operators. In October 2009 this situation led the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Philip Alston, to declare that "the use of drones by the U.S. to find fighters in Pakistan and Afghanistan will be seen as a violation of law international, except that Washington can demonstrate that appropriate precautions observed and the mechanisms accountability. "
Another feature of the Predator weakness is its vulnerability to the actions of hackers, as evidenced in December 2009 in Iraq, where resistance fighters in that country, provided a simple laptop and a $ 30 program, intercepted Communications of the drones, seized videos taken by cameras of the ship and were able to pinpoint what areas of the country were under the supervision of the UCAV.
A fact that casts doubt on the degree of "control" that the Mexican authorities may have on the UCAV deployed in the national territory is the full complexity steering systems, guidance and operation of these aircraft, systems that would hardly be granted by Washington.
The control system of the Predator, for example, requires six main components, including the ground control station and the satellite link, whose main element is an antenna of 6.1 meters in diameter.
According to the definition of Globalsecurity.org, the UCAV is "an economic weapon system, with the potential to fully exploit the information revolution and" provide advanced air power at a fraction of the cost of manned systems normal " .
unmanned aircraft eliminate need cabin, air conditioning, pressurization and instruments on board, minimize spending in the training of pilots and allow operators to attack enemy targets from the safety and comfort of a checkpoint located hundreds or thousands of miles away from theater. "
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2011/03/19/index.php?section=politica&article=009n1pol
---" Green condemns EU submission
Calderon Andrea Becerril
newspaper La Jornada
Saturday March 19, 2011, p. 10
The chairman of the Committee on Senate Foreign Relations, Rosario Green said is very serious that the government of Felipe Calderón has been subject throughout the United States, in authorizing overflights to country and even to keep Ambassador Carlos Pascual, although the government itself said in Washington that he lost confidence.
added that it is for this subordination to the United States a day earlier, during his appearance before the full Senate, Foreign Minister Patricia Espinosa evaded the issue and many others of deliberately hiding information to Congress and the public. Green
considered unfortunate that the chancellor could not even respond to the senators who warned about the subordination and the betrayal of the federal government to U.S. interests. "I never could tell it was fake, but I was under oath to tell the truth, simply did not answer and pick things up 'absurd', like that of American aircraft flying over national territory are handled by Mexicans." Looking
fincar
responsibilities regard, the PRD Senator Pablo Gomez, who faced the day before the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and said that such a claim was "laughable," he said yesterday that he could fincar responsibilities to the officer for having lied to the full, as it is true that these aircraft are under control of Mexico. "The units leave the territory of the United States, make their flights over Mexican territory, transmit information to the government of his country and return to U.S. soil," stressed the PRD.
Moreover, International Relations Secretary of the PRD, Saul Escobar, said that they would ask their parliamentary groups in Congress to conduct research on U.S. interventionism on the subject of combating organized crime and that his case was brought to trial political Felipe Calderón, the chancellor Espinosa and request removal as ambassador Arturo Sarukhan.
Coahuila's governor, Jorge Torres Lopez, said, meanwhile, that Calderon should clearly inform the context in which the United States flies over Mexican airspace as part of the collaboration of both countries to combat drug trafficking. In his view, the bilateral cooperation to combat insecurity is important as long as there is a position of respect between the two nations.
With information and Leopoldo Muñoz Alma Ramos, a reporter and correspondent for "
http://www.jornada.unam.mx/2011/03/19/index.php?section=politica&article=010n1pol
---
"violated sovereignty, population under threat
During his appearance before the Senate, held Last Thursday, the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Patricia Espinosa, said U.S. flights of unmanned aircraft (UAV, for its acronym in English) on Mexican territory do not violate national sovereignty or the Constitution, and argued that these devices operate in the country at the Mexican government and control thereof, in the framework of bilateral cooperation on security.
is disturbing, to say the least, that the Mexican government to assume a position to consent and defense to what constitutes a clear violation of airspace by a foreign military force. As much as it is claimed that the reason for the overflights mentioned is to obtain intelligence information can not be ignored that the devices used in these tasks are primarily artifacts of war of a superpower.
is hard to imagine, given the current importance of unmanned aircraft in military operations and intelligence of the White House and the Pentagon, the U.S. authorities have decided to put such equipment under the control of a foreign government especially one whose capacity for security has been veiled and openly questioned U.S. officials. But assuming that the Barack Obama resigned to face the enormous political cost of such a decision, it would various technical problems, such as the need for trained military personnel for the operation of these sophisticated equipment and transfer to Mexican territory of the massive core of the UAV ground control, to the extent that the Mexican government has not demonstrated that these resources, it is unclear how it could support the statement by its chancellor, in the sense that the operation of U.S. drones under its control.
Beyond the issue of legal and constitutional nature, the operation of these devices in Mexico poses a threat to the physical integrity of the population, given its lethality and the margin of error that often operate. Not to go further, the same Thursday more than 40 people died in the Pakistani town of Miran Shah, in North Waziristan region near the Afghan border, after an attack by an unmanned U.S. . The episode is far from a fluke: According to the authorities in Islamabad, between 2006 and 2009 killed about 700 people on the borders Afghanistan and Pakistan as a result of these operations, of which only 14 were members of the network Islamist al Qaeda, the stated aim of the attacks.
The precarious security conditions for operating these devices and the high number of collateral casualties that lead has caused concern in the United Nations: in October 2009, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions of the multinational organization argued that the use of unmanned vehicles for aerial combat should be considered a violation of international law unless Washington can demonstrate that the cautions and mechanisms for proper accountability, which so far has not happened.
In the case of Mexico, are disturbing declarative collisions among U.S. officials about the use of these aircraft, while military sources cited by The New York Times have said the UAV operating in Mexico have no offensive capabilities, officials of Customs and Border Protection have argued that the models are the same as those used in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The least that could be hoped for is that the Mexican authorities to clarify the public the number and type of ordnance flying over U.S. territory.
In short, the policy of security cooperation with the United States has not only been ineffective and counterproductive in its efforts to reduce drug-related violence, but also has led to unacceptable violations of national sovereignty and now, moreover, poses a new threat to the civilian population: with the operation of unmanned U.S. planes, it is exposed to the open and declared espionage from the neighboring nation, the best, and even the risk of new balances tragic at worst. "http:/
/ www.jornada.unam.mx/2011/03/19/index.php?section=edito
--- Why Barack Obama Is Sending Drones to Mexico?
by John M. Ackerman
http : / / www.tdbimg.com/files/2010/05/20/img-author-photo---john-ackerman_065252378440.jpg
As if America isn't enough mired in wars, the president Apparently Thinks the rule of law stops at the Rio Grande. John M. Ackerman on America's bizarre-and dangerous—decision to violate the Mexican constitution.
President Barack Obama apparently thinks that respect for rule of law is only important north of the Rio Grande. In a desperate attempt to help Mexico´s President Felipe Calderón with his "drug war," Obama has authorized the U.S. military and other government agents to violate the Mexican constitution.
http://www.tdbimg.com/files/2011/03/17/img-article---ackerman-mexico_16385599143.jpg
As of last month, US military intelligence drones began to operate in Mexican airspace. (Credit: AP Photo)
U.S. agents both actively participate in the wiretapping of drug-trafficking suspects in Mexico and carry their weapons when they travel south of the border, according to The New York Times. As of last month, U.S. military-intelligence drones similar to those deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq began to operate in Mexican airspace. Such actions are entirely unprecedented in the history of U.S.-Mexican relations and could easily backfire as the Mexican population rejects such a blatant attack on its sovereignty.
Imagine armed Mexican agents tapping phone lines and flying military planes over Texas and Arizona in search of gun-shop owners and straw-buyers responsible for arming the drug cartels in Mexico. Such actions would not be tolerated by the American people and any suggestion that this were taking place would lead immediately to a high-level congressional inquiry. Although international coordination and support is always helpful, the U.S. legal framework correctly conceives of law enforcement as an eminently domestic affair.
The same is true in Mexico. Mexican law explicitly prohibits foreign agents from carrying weapons or being directly in charge of wiretaps or criminal investigations on Mexican territory. The Mexican constitution also requires the president to gain approval of its senate before allowing foreign military operations in domestic airspace. The general outcry in Mexico against these actions is therefore not a result of backward "nationalistic elements in the political elite," as one expert has claimed, but a healthy defense of fundamental constitutional principles. This Thursday, Mexico’s foreign secretary, Patricia Espinoza, received a well-deserved shellacking at the hands of leading senators from all of the major political parties, including the sitting government’s Nacional Action party.
The fact that the Calderón administration has turned a blind eye, or even encouraged, such blatant violations of the law should not provide solace but generate concern. Calderon has generally trampled on the rule of law since inaugurating his "drug war" four years ago. His government has avoided attacking head-on the institutional, financial, social, and economic roots of the problem. Instead, with U.S. support, it has preferred a "decapitation" strategy aimed at killing top drug lords and permitting inter-cartel fighting in the hope that this will weaken the criminals in the long run.
The problem with this strategy is that it becomes increasingly difficult to distinguish between the tactics of the drug cartels and those of the government. Instead of investigating and prosecuting crimes, the assumed "criminals" are simply wiped out without any due process. In addition, innocent bystanders often fall dead at military checkpoints or during government attacks on the cartels. Mexico’s National Human Rights Commission reported at least 110 such cases during 2010 alone. In one recent incident, troops even decorated a dead capo´s body with dollar bills and golden jewelry and exhibited it as if it were a trophy in their “war on drugs.”
By following along with Calderón's reckless strategy, the Obama administration loses all moral high ground. This is particularly relevant today given the serious blow the U.S. government has taken recently for its "Fast & Furious" program. In this program the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives intentionally allowed at least 1,700 assault weapons to cross the border and find their way into the hands of some of the most blood-thirsty Mexican criminals. The Mexican congress, civil society groups, and even the Catholic Church have all forcefully protested against the program. The U.S. ambassador to Mexico, Carlos Pascual, has come under heavy fire for not adequately informing the Mexican government of these actions.
By following along with Calderón's reckless strategy, the Obama administration loses all moral high ground.
The use of U.S. military drones and other illegal tactics in Mexico could also deal a death blow to Calderon. Forty-three percent of the population now disagrees with the way the generally pro-American Mexican president is handling the bilateral relationship, up 12 percentage points from last year. And the more Calderon is perceived as passive in his relationship to the U.S., the more his approval ratings fall. Although Obama probably thinks that he is strengthening Calderon with his actions, the U.S. president is actually weakening his Mexican counterpart in the eyes of the Mexican people.
Instead of sending drones across the border, the U.S. government should stop the southern flow of weapons. Obama´s opinion piece last Sunday in the Arizona Daily Star opens up a much-needed debate on the issue of enforcing existing gun laws in the context of the attack on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Nevertheless, Obama simply failed to mention the link between this issue and the 35,000 deaths south of the border over the past four years. In addition to strengthening background checks for U.S. purchasers, the ATF also needs to significantly boost its surveillance of the illegal resale and exportation of assault weapons to Mexico. This sort of lapse confirms Obama´s underlying lack of commitment to Mexico and the Mexican people. It is time to change course before it is too late.
John M. Ackerman is a professor at the Institute for Legal Research of the National Autonomous University of Mexico, editor in chief of the Mexican Law Review, and a columnist for Proceso magazine and La Jornada newspaper. His website is johnackerman.blogspot.com."
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2011-03-18/why-is-barack-obama-sending-drones-to-mexico/#
"Thousands take to the streets on the 8th anniversary of the Iraq war to demand: End the wars and occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan! Stop the bombing of Libya!"
http://www.answercoalition.org/national/news/m19-report-back.html
0 comments:
Post a Comment