One Man's Opinion

In order to fully grasp the nonsensical nature of the piece of legislation passed yesterday by the U.S. House of Representatives on the status of Puerto Rico, one only has to consider the following. The bill calls for a two-step process to consult the people of Puerto Rico on the kind of political relationship that they want with the U.S. The first vote would be on whether they want to continue with the present status or not. Obviously, if the majority were to vote yes, there would be no need for a second vote. If the majority were to vote no, then there would be a second vote to choose between statehood, independence, free association and - guess what - the present status. Now, would someone explain to me how is it possible to include the status rejected in the first vote, as one of the valid alternatives in the second vote? As it has been pointed out countless times, if the present status is the problem - otherwise, there would be no need to go through this process - by simple

Laura Bush has waited all these years to come clean about the car crash, in which, when she was 17, she killed a young man.  The fact is that she was speeding, got distracted, ran a stop sign and killed him.  According to her, she hasn't had a good night's sleep since.  Of course, she got away with it.  Hell, she even married a future President of the United States...not that he was much of one. Maybe, if justice had been done, by her being punished in some fashion, she wouldn't be so haunted by the memory of that tragedy.  I suppose she knows, deep down, that she deserved to pay for what she did.  Ultimately, she has ended paying for it all her life.

Now, I'm against the Arizona immigration law as much as anyone, but the fact of the matter is that this is to be expected in a country as racist as the U.S. is. No one with the least notion of American history should be surprised with this initiative. Other states will follow suit, and pretty soon you will have quite a few with the same legislation. As I've said before, this is no coincidence; it's all part of a plan to give Obama a hard time and challenge his leadership. Governors are defying the Federal government, by claiming that they have the right to pass laws that fly in the face of the U.S. Constitution, a Presidential directive or a Congressional mandate. The Union is crumbling fast, and there is very little that Obama can do, if enough states decide to go their own way in matters of public policy and a national agenda. They are determined to make the Black President fail.

I suppose that, sooner or later, it will happen to the best of us: we lose our mind.  Stephen Hawking, the brilliant physicist, has begun to talk about aliens and speculate on what they might look like and how they might behave.  In science fiction tradition, Hawking has said that they will be "dangerous", probably out to colonize us. For all we know, he could be right, but this whole scenario seems to be taken from one of those B-movies of the 1950's, in which aliens always had bad intentions towards Earth.  At 68, Hawking could be showing the early signs of some sort of senile dementia and is becoming delusional. A [great] mind is a terrible thing to [lose].

Wal-Mart , the world's biggest retailer and private employer, is facing a huge class-action suit by female employees who claim that they were discriminated against in terms of pay and promotion, based on their gender. The company has been fighting it since 2001, but it now appears to be headed for trial. Corporate giants feel that they can crush "the little people" and get away with it, as is wont to happen. But, once in a while, they have the fortitude to fight back for as long as it takes, to make them pay for it. Let's hope that this is one of those times, and that, at the end of the day, justice is done.

A year ago, former bishop and now President of Paraguay Fernando Lugo made headlines when he had to admit that, literally, he had been a father while being called one as a priest. Now, he makes headlines by signing a law that suspends certain basic criminal procedure rights for 30 days, so that, supposedly, it is easier to deal with a guerrilla group that is a major problem. Lugo has said that this doesn't really alter the rule of law in the country. Really? On the other hand, I find it interesting that the law will only be in effect for 30 days, as if that is all that it will take to get rid of the rebels. It seems to me that Lugo has given in to the first temptation of heads of state in a democracy: take a page out of the book of fascism, to make it "easier" to meet the challenges they face. But, in the end, that will only lead to totalitarianism, something the Paraguayans know all too well.

The signing of the immigration bill by Arizona's governor is the latest in a growing trend of defiance of the Federal government. Obama is being challenged every step of the way. Whites are on the move against the Black man in the White House. They are, literally, up in arms, witness the recent demonstration in which the participants were fully armed. Secession or something worse is the next step. Certain states are saying, in effect, that they do not recognize federal authority over them, and they won't abide by Federal law. The ink wasn't dry on the health reform law, when various states' Attorneys General were suing Obama over it, in a clear sign of the disrespect that they feel for the man. In a way, a "civil" war has begun in the U.S. Let's hope that it doesn't reach a climax similar to the one in the theater in the previous one.

The Vatican, looking to sort of redeem itself amidst all these scandals, plans to put its money where its mouth is by funding stem - cell research, with a key difference: it would be adult cells. In theory, these cells should be suitable for research purposes, although there seems to be a consensus in the scientific community that embryonic stem cells are much more productive in this regard. Anyway, it's a welcome step in the right direction, even if it looks like a diversionary tactic to focus attention away from the sexual abuse cases and the Church conspiracy to cover them up.

Earth Day, 40 years later, is a mixed bag of heightened awareness of the environment, while industry keeps polluting it in significant ways. The U.S., which is always claiming to lead the world in everything, is also its leading polluter and consumer of fossil fuels. Lots of laws on the books haven't really put a stop to the degrading of the planet by man's lust for economic gain. Lip service is paid to conservation, but there are always economic reasons to build more of everything, cutting down trees and covering soil with cement. The economic hard times has convinced too many of a false dichotomy : conservation or progress. People, then, are willing to sacrifice their habitat, in a blind pursuit of economic well-being. As usual, both things are lost. Nature will have its revenge.

Israel has, in effect, banned the I-Pad from its territory.  People who arrive with it are forced to relinquish it and pay for storage until they leave the country.  The official explanation is that the gadget interferes with Israel's communications system, especially the military. There is, however, a curious coincidence. The Israeli President's son has a communications company, and the I-Pad could be a factor in this highly-competitive business. Israel has always presented itself as a modern democracy, in stark contrast with the backward and autocratic Arab governments in the region.  It seems that Israeli freedom and rights go out the window, when special interests are concerned.

There is a small but growing trend among U.S. citizens that live and work abroad to turn their passports in and become citizens of the country they live in. The reason, as with most things American, is economic: it's too expensive to remain a U.S. citizen, because of the tax laws that their homeland chooses to impose on them and the fact that Americans insist that their banking laws apply to their citizens that live in another country. As a result, there are financial institutions that won't do business with these foreigners, to avoid the hassle of complying with all those laws, rules and regulations that follow Americans wherever they go. These people have found out or will, in due course, that it is possible to lead a normal and productive life having another passport. That the whole world is not "dying" to be American citizens. That there are wonderful countries besides their own, where people live perfectly happy being citizens of their homeland.

Another American myth bites the dust: George Washington took out two books from the New York City Library in 1789 and never returned them. The late fees now amount to over $4,500, and the books are nowhere to be seen. This reminds me of something I came across some years ago, while I was doing research for an article that I published about the "real" American history. The fact is that, when Washington was approached to act as Commander -in - Chief of the Revolutionary Army, he declines to be paid for his services. But, once the war was over, he presented the new government with an expense account. So, George may have been "first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen", but he was also first in looking out for number one.

According to some poll, Tea Party followers are, on the whole, better educated and have a somewhat higher income than the average American. Well, if that's the case, the U.S. is in really deep trouble. I really doubt that these people are well-informed, otherwise they wouldn't waste their time listening to the likes of Sarah Palin, the woman who single-handedly has created the "dumb brunette" concept. I don't dispute that these guys may be in a higher tax bracket; therefore, more inclined to take the position of extreme fiscal conservatives, but a higher I.Q., I very much doubt it. Embracing Palin, on their part, is just too stupid, for me to think otherwise.

As I write this, there's a discrepancy over the status of the Americans who were caught trying to smuggle 33 children out of Haiti three months ago. The U.S. State Department has informed that all charges have been dropped, while Haitian officials deny it, contending that the case is still pending. My money is on the State Department version because this is a question of money and influence, which the U.S. has lots of and Haiti has none. Not that the U.S. government really cares that much about those so-called missionaries, but it's a matter of policy - official or unwritten - that the Americans won't allow U.S. citizens to be tried or punished by a foreign country, certainly not one like Haiti because that would be tantamount to recognizing that they are subordinate in any way to people who are inherently inferior. So, the State Department seems to have jumped the gun, in announcing the deal that has been made, and the Haitians, wanting to save some face, will delay the

The CIA has done it again!  By destroying 92 tapes of the 2005 interrogations of two suspected terrorists connected to al Qaeda, it has wiped off proof positive that they were tortured, including the waterboarding of one of them 83 times in a month.  This should come as no surprise to anyone, as the CIA is a power unto itself, which cares very little, if any, for the rule of law, Congressional oversight or the President's directives, assuming that they are not really doing Washington's "dirty work", while the rest of the government pretends not to notice. By now, we all know that the CIA is really the Gestapo, Stasi and KGB all rolled into one.  For a long time, it operated in the shadows and very few people knew what they were up to, but thanks to Phillip Agee and his book, these "dirty tricks" were forever exposed.

The news that former Costa Rican President and Secretary General of the Organization of American States, Miguel A. Rodríguez, has been indicted for bribery is significant in two ways. First, because Costa Rica has always been touted as an exemplary democracy, and secondly, because the OAS has held itself to be the watchdog of the Americas as to good government. Of course, what Rodríguez may have done as an individual is his responsibility, but still, it somehow reflects on the government and the organization he presided over. One has to wonder about the possibility that this is not the first and only instance of corruption that he has been associated with, so, in that sense, he casts a shadow of suspicion on both Costa Rica and the OAS. The executive from a French communications company has admitted that he bribed Rodríguez, so things don't look too promising for the former President. Let's watch and wait.

So much of what is published about Cuba is negative, that one is left with the impression that there's nothing positive going on there. Well, it so happens that Cubans are rebuilding small and poor communities that were hard-hit by three hurricanes and tropical storms in 2008, and they are doing it with their own resources and at a very low cost. The new housing is nothing fancy, but when you lived in a wooden house that was blown away by a hurricane, and now you have one made of cement blocks, it's a vast improvement. The truly remarkable thing about it is the fact that the materials used are gathered up from the neighborhood and transformed by low-tech machinery right there where they're going to be used. In other words, it's a community effort, much in keeping with the socialist model of the Cuban revolution, of solidarity and the "new man" envisioned by Che Guevara. A different and better world is indeed possible.

The excuses for tolerating the sexual abuse of children and not acting, promptly and effectively, on information about it are, frankly, untenable. Now, the Boy Scouts in Oregon have had to pay over a million dollars for keeping the perpetrator around - although demoted - giving him the opportunity to molest other boys. As in the case of the Catholic Church worldwide, one has to ask why would an otherwise respectable organization proceed in such a callous and indifferent way towards the safety and well -being of children and young people who are entrusted to them. Either they thought that this wasn't something terrible or they thought first and foremost of their image and reputation, and wanted to sweep these things under the rug. But, now, these organizations are forever tarnished, not because these things happened, but because of the way they were handled. The Boy Scouts were not "prepared" to do the right thing, nor did they show much "honor" in this grave

This business of celebrating Confederacy Month or whatever they want to call it in the U.S. South is a sign that these people yearn for the past, a past of slavery and no rights for Blacks. The proclamation by Virginia's Governor is a dead giveaway of what they truly think and feel. No matter how much time has passed or that Obama is President, the fact of the matter is that a significant part of the population would be thrilled if Black people suddenly disappeared from their midst. Blacks are fine as athletes and entertainers, but that's about it. Celebrating the Confederacy is, to say the least, insensitive. That period in history deserves to be studied, but not celebrated, because a war was fought to preserve a way of life that was deeply immoral and offensive to mankind. One hundred and fifty years of tomorrows have gone by without "another day" of a change of hearts and minds.

It's odd, to say the least, that Americans abroad keep crossing into, "inadvertently", the territory of countries that the United States considers enemies. Typically, these are people who are hiking in remote places that, at first glance, have absolutely no interest to anyone, and they just wander over the border without meaning to. Now, I ask myself, why would anybody go to those places, to begin with? This is a big world, so choosing to go to a country that borders with the «enemy» country seems a strange decision. More so, if you consider the fact that stepping over the border means that these people have chosen to go to a part of the country that puts them in danger of doing just that. Why would anybody risk it, especially knowing that those countries take harsh measures against anyone who enters their territory in an unusual way? The truth is that these incursions are very suspicious in and of themselves, and those countries have every right to think that these f

It could very well be that the 7-year-old Russian boy adopted by a U.S. family is a "bad seed", a future serial killer, but the way his adoptive grandmother sent him back to Russia is, questionable, at best. First of all, it is quite significant that the adoptive mother signed him over to her mother, because she found the boy unbearable. Then, the grandmother, also finds him impossible to deal with, supposedly because of his violent nature, and without contacting any American authority, gets some legal advice on the Internet and proceeds to dispatch the boy back to Russia. All this in just six months since the boy was adopted. Adoption is a serious matter, and international adoption is only more so. People who advocate a fast - track approach to it should think long and hard about cases such as this one. There are mentally disturbed people who become obsessed with adopting, especially kids from other countries that they feel need to be "saved." Being born to a

Franco lives! The indictment against Baltasar Garzón, the Spanish judge who went after Pinochet, was bound to happen, because anyone who insists on digging up the past will face the stern opposition of those who want it buried. There are still people who, given the chance, would return gladly to the "good old days" of Franco's regime. If you or your father or grandfather were involved in that regime, you don't want someone going over that period because, chances are, your name will come up, and all that respectability will go down the drain. This is why in Spain, as in other countries in which major violations of human rights have taken place, as soon as the regime ends, laws are passed calling for "amnesty" and "reconciliation", a nice way of saying "let's bury the past." But, the dead and their loved ones are left without recourse, and that is what Garzón, technicalities and legal niceties aside, has tried to provide for the vic

The killing of those civilians, which included the Reuters reporter, that have now come to light shows that the U.S. has very little regard for the life and safety of the people on the ground in Afghanistan or Irak, or anywhere else, for that matter. In effect, Americans feel that they have a "license to kill", so they shoot first, and answer questions later, if any. This is something that happens over and over again, and nothing or very little ever comes of it. The official "explanation" for having killed the newsman is that his camera with telescopic lens was perceived to be some sort of weapon. That would mean that any news photographer is in mortal danger from U.S. forces. Now, Americans, who are so ready to condemn any aggression to members to the press in other countries, and the news organizations that attack Chávez for everything he does against freedom of the press have been significantly silent about this incident. But, then again, like the King of old

Mining is, at best, an extremely dangerous occupation, but the West Virginia incident seems to be the "chronicle of deaths foretold." The countless safety violations by the mining company points to a pattern of reckless disregard for the health and well - being of the miners who work there. This is an example of how big companies do as they damn well please, and the regulatory agencies that are supposed to protect workers and the general public are largely ineffective. The U.S. is constantly blowing its own horn about having the best systems in every aspect of human life. This explosion in a West Virginia mine has blown that claim to bits.

One the one hand, you've got to "admire" Karzai for saying "We run this country", in the face of American pressure to clean up his act.  On the other hand, he must have a death wish, because he's playing with explosives.  If he keeps this up, he's really going to have to go over to the Taliban side, to see if they protect him from an assassination attempt by the U.S.

Barring a second and successful appeal, the British couple in Dubai "convicted" of kissing in public will spend a month in jail, pay a fine and be deported. Needless to say that the law is nonsensical, but it is the law, and the man, especially, should have known better, since he lives and works in the country, while the woman is a visitor. Every country has peculiar laws with which we may not agree, but one has to respect them or face the consequences. Arab countries have a very strict code of public conduct that people have to be aware of. Being dismissive of other cultures will only get one in trouble.

Little by little, the U.S. seems headed for big trouble on the home front. Having focused on foreign threats for such a long time, the Americans are beginning to face an internal discontent that is turning increasingly ugly and violent. It all started with all those town hall meetings in which people screamed at each other and at the speakers. Then, the Congressman called the President a liar, and the Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, in effect, "said" the same thing. Now, it's the Christian Militia and the call for governors to resign or be "removed". It has gone from rudeness to rebellion very fast. I've said it before: there were plenty of people just waiting for a signal or an excuse of some sort to mobilize against the "nigger" in the White House. If it hadn't been health care, it would've been something else. Anything. The trouble is it's growing and getting bolder by the day. These people are white and speak English;

In classic "biting the hand that feeds you" fashion, Karzai blames the self-acknowledged election fraud on foreigners, without much of an explanation. Not even Obama's visit this past week has prevented the man from making such delusional accusations. Not that I would put it past the U.S. to "arrange" an election, both in and outside the United States. But, frankly, why go to all that trouble, when the Americans could just as easily have him killed, if he no longer serves their purposes or is too much of an embarrassment with all his fancy clothes, while the country goes to hell. In any case, the man has his days numbered. The U.S. giveth and the U.S. taketh away.

Free speech is a great thing, but it can go too far. A case in point is the one in which a military funeral was picketed by a"church" that, apparently, goes around protesting against soldier burials because, in their view, God is punishing the U.S. with these deaths, for tolerating "homosexuality" and other sins. Now, although I don't hold that view, I accept that they have the right to have it. What I disagree with is the method of protest that they engage in. It is truly unconscionable that someone would go to a funeral to demean, heckle, insult or in any other way disrespect the memory of the dead. This is an outrageous abuse of the freedom of speech and assembly that no civilized society should tolerate. What is even more outrageous is the fact that an appellate court has held that the dead soldier's family lawsuit against the church is without merit and that the plaintiffs should pay the costs and attorney's fees.