By the Australian Army Band (Melbourne) & LIQ SONG’ TD BAND
When : Sunday, 3 February 2008
Time : 7 until 9pm
Where : GMT Dili
Sponsored by the Australian Embassy Dili and ISF
CONCERTO Gratuitu ba Joventude Timor Oan
Anima Husi Grupo Banda Forsa Militar Australia & LIQ SONG’ TD BAND
Wainhira : Domingo, 3 Fevreiro 2008
Horas : tuku 7 to’o 9 kalan OTL
Fatin : GMT Dili
Sponsor husi Embaixada Australia Dili ho FSI
Tradução:
CONCERTO GRATUITO para a Juventude Timorense Pela Banda das Forças Armadas Australianas (Melbourne) & LIQ SONG’ TD BAND
Quando : Domingo, 3 Fevereiro 2008
Hora : 7 até 9 pm
Onde : GMT Dili
Patrocinada pela embaixada Australiana Dili e ISF
quinta-feira, janeiro 31, 2008
FREE CONCERT for East Timorese Youth
Subscrever:
Enviar feedback (Atom)
5 comentários:
Tradução:
CONCERTO GRATUITO para a Juventude Timorense
Pela Banda das Forças Armadas Australianas (Melbourne) & LIQ SONG’ TD BAND
Quando : Domingo, 3 Fevereiro 2008
Hora : 7 até 9 pm
Onde : GMT Dili
Patrocinada pela embaixada Australiana Dili e ISF
Jornal Diario Nacional, 31/1/08
Dili, Timor-Leste
Better for PNTL and UNPOL to Arrest Alfredo
The Commander of the International Stabilsation Forces (ISF) John Hutcheson stated that the ISF does not have the right to arrest Alfredo and his group, but if the court wants to arrest him it will be better to send the Timor-Leste National Police (PNTL) and UNPOL who have that function in Timor-Leste to arrest people.
The ISF Commander John Hutcheson said this to journalists following having participated in a farewell ceremony with the new ISF Commander James Baker at the ISF General Headquarters, Caicoli, Dili (28/1).
The ISF Commander explained further that it is the police who are able to undertake the arrest of Alfredo because according to the law in place it is the police who are able to arrest persons who have committed crimes, but the military cannot undertake such arrests.
“The relationship between the ISF and the Timor-Leste judiciary are good. But we do not have the right to capture or arrest anyone, especially those who commit crimes or other violations,” said the ISF commander.
Regarding the order that the ISF received recently from the court to capture Major Alfredo, the ISF Commander explained that only the court will be able to explain to the public the fundamental reason why the ISF cannot capture Major Alfredo in accordance with the letter sent by the court to the ISF.
“Regarding our not capturing Alfredo, only the court will be able to respond to this question,” recounted the ISF Commander.
When asked about the ISF action in Same some time ago, the ISF Commander explained that it was part of the ISF’s role to guarantee security to enable the people to go about their activities in peace. (END)
FOOTNOTE: So! That's what they are doing here! Having concerts and going to the beach? But more seriously, what "right or power" did they have to mount operations against IDP camps and shoot dead two Timorese young men from Lorosae? What right or power did they have to mount the operation in Same which resulted in five dead? What right did they have to mount checkpoints with search and seize consequences, prinicpally against FRETILIN convoys, during the prsidential and parliamentary elections of 2007? They have no legal right to do any of these things because their presence is illegal because the bilateral agreement that purports to allow to remain in Timor-Leste has not been ratified by the National Parliament. Their actions are all therefor illegal. Brig Hutcheson seems to be verifying that now. In fact their soldiers have no immunity because only parliament can grant such immunities under the constitution, and the agreement has not been taken to the parliament. When will someone bring legal action to test this in the Timor-Leste courts? Why is the current government not keen to bring the agreement to the parliament for ratification despite even people when their own AMP group in parliament is saying it would be better to end the controversy? Because they know that bringing it now to the parliament would uncover the error in Prime Minister Ramos Horta not bringing it before the parliament and now the Gusmao government compounding the error. Alkatiri had already resigned in June 2006.
There is another theory, and that is that the only thing that the ISF are here for is to be a bullwark to any possible coup by the F-FDTL against this Timor-Leste President and government. That is highly unlikely because of the discipline and loyalty nthe F-FDTL command has shwon to the rule of law and the constitution, but Australia needed to protect its allies Ramos Horta and Gusmao. But do they still feel the same? This is confirmed by comments by the former Australian Ambassador, Margaret Twoomey to the UN Security Council delegation late last year during a meeting with the Dili diplomatic corps: "We (the ADF/ISF) are here to make sure that FRETILIN does not do to this government what they did to FRETILIN in 2006." We know now perhaps they are not here just for concerts and the booze and the beaches. They are here to keep an eye on their traditional enemy (Falintil) from the time the ADF and the TNI were on the same side sharing counter guerilla warfare startegies in places like Cunungra, Queensland, Australia and Solor, Java. When Koppassus and the SAS together mounted a live round guerrilla warfare exercise using captured Falintil soldiers like the Falintil hero Mau Hodu (deceased believed killed by Indonesian army in 1999). Falintil's historic legacy is this: they defeated the TNI, and the TNI's mentors: The Australian and US Defence establishments. Memories die hard with old soldiers who mistrust the Falintil. Nothing has really changed. Are you up to changing this mindset Mr Rudd?
Jornal Diario Nacional, 31/1/08
Dili, Timor-Leste
Better for PNTL and UNPOL to Arrest Alfredo
The Commander of the International Stabilsation Forces (ISF) John Hutcheson stated that the ISF does not have the right to arrest Alfredo and his group, but if the court wants to arrest him it will be better to send the Timor-Leste National Police (PNTL) and UNPOL who have that function in Timor-Leste to arrest people.
The ISF Commander John Hutcheson said this to journalists following having participated in a farewell ceremony with the new ISF Commander James Baker at the ISF General Headquarters, Caicoli, Dili (28/1).
The ISF Commander explained further that it is the police who are able to undertake the arrest of Alfredo because according to the law in place it is the police who are able to arrest persons who have committed crimes, but the military cannot undertake such arrests.
“The relationship between the ISF and the Timor-Leste judiciary are good. But we do not have the right to capture or arrest anyone, especially those who commit crimes or other violations,” said the ISF commander.
Regarding the order that the ISF received recently from the court to capture Major Alfredo, the ISF Commander explained that only the court will be able to explain to the public the fundamental reason why the ISF cannot capture Major Alfredo in accordance with the letter sent by the court to the ISF.
“Regarding our not capturing Alfredo, only the court will be able to respond to this question,” recounted the ISF Commander.
When asked about the ISF action in Same some time ago, the ISF Commander explained that it was part of the ISF’s role to guarantee security to enable the people to go about their activities in peace. (END)
FOOTNOTE: So! That's what they are doing here! Having concerts and going to the beach? But more seriously, what "right or power" did they have to mount operations against IDP camps and shoot dead two Timorese young men from Lorosae? What right or power did they have to mount the operation in Same which resulted in five dead? What right did they have to mount checkpoints with search and seize consequences, prinicpally against FRETILIN convoys, during the prsidential and parliamentary elections of 2007? They have no legal right to do any of these things because their presence is illegal because the bilateral agreement that purports to allow to remain in Timor-Leste has not been ratified by the National Parliament. Their actions are all therefor illegal. Brig Hutcheson seems to be verifying that now. In fact their soldiers have no immunity because only parliament can grant such immunities under the constitution, and the agreement has not been taken to the parliament. When will someone bring legal action to test this in the Timor-Leste courts? Why is the current government not keen to bring the agreement to the parliament for ratification despite even people when their own AMP group in parliament is saying it would be better to end the controversy? Because they know that bringing it now to the parliament would uncover the error in Prime Minister Ramos Horta not bringing it before the parliament and now the Gusmao government compounding the error. Alkatiri had already resigned in June 2006.
There is another theory, and that is that the only thing that the ISF are here for is to be a bullwark to any possible coup by the F-FDTL against this Timor-Leste President and government. That is highly unlikely because of the discipline and loyalty nthe F-FDTL command has shwon to the rule of law and the constitution, but Australia needed to protect its allies Ramos Horta and Gusmao. But do they still feel the same? This is confirmed by comments by the former Australian Ambassador, Margaret Twoomey to the UN Security Council delegation late last year during a meeting with the Dili diplomatic corps: "We (the ADF/ISF) are here to make sure that FRETILIN does not do to this government what they did to FRETILIN in 2006." We know now perhaps they are not here just for concerts and the booze and the beaches. They are here to keep an eye on their traditional enemy (Falintil) from the time the ADF and the TNI were on the same side sharing counter guerilla warfare startegies in places like Cunungra, Queensland, Australia and Solor, Java. When Koppassus and the SAS together mounted a live round guerrilla warfare exercise using captured Falintil soldiers like the Falintil hero Mau Hodu (deceased believed killed by Indonesian army in 1999). Falintil's historic legacy is this: they defeated the TNI, and the TNI's mentors: The Australian and US Defence establishments. Memories die hard with old soldiers who mistrust the Falintil. Nothing has really changed. Are you up to changing this mindset Mr Rudd?
A short artcile on US "democracy development" assistance. Recently Timorese civil servants were taken to El Salvador by the NED funded group. Timor-Leste has been a "project" for the same operations. IRI has had a controversial role in Timor-Leste. It will continue to operate unless their real intent and objective is discussed publicly and questions really asked about their role here. We Indonesians are seeing the same attempts in our country. Takens from:
http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2004/11/11_401.html
Title: The Coup Connection
By Joshua Kurlantzick
November/December 2004 Issue
In early 2004, chaos overwhelmed Haiti. In January, a rebellion erupted against President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the former slum priest who had frequently angered the United States with his leftist rhetoric. Aristide had twice been elected, but he had alienated many Haitians with his increasing demagoguery and use of violence against the opposition. Yet polls showed that Aristide remained relatively popular, so even experienced Haiti watchers were surprised when, in late February, armed militias marched on the nation’s capital while demonstrators shut down the streets. In the violence, some 100 Haitians were killed. At dawn on February 29, with the militias closing in, Aristide left Haiti on a U.S. government plane.
But did the rebellion really spring from nowhere? Maybe not. Several leaders of the demonstrations -- some of whom also had links to the armed rebels -- had been getting organizational help and training from a U.S. government-financed organization. The group, the International Republican Institute (IRI), is supposed to focus on nonpartisan, grassroots democratization efforts overseas. But in Haiti and other countries, such as Venezuela and Cambodia, the institute -- which, though not formally affiliated with the GOP, is run by prominent Republicans and staffed by party insiders -- has increasingly sided with groups seeking the overthrow of elected but flawed leaders who are disliked in Washington.
In 2002 and 2003, IRI used funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to organize numerous political training sessions in the Dominican Republic and Miami for some 600 Haitian leaders. Though IRI’s work is supposed to be nonpartisan -- it is official U.S. policy not to interfere in foreign elections -- a former U.S. diplomat says organizers of the workshops selected only opponents of Aristide and attempted to mold them into a political force.
The trainings were run by IRI’s Haiti program officer, Stanley Lucas, the scion of a powerful Haitian family with long-standing animosity toward Aristide -- Amnesty International says some family members participated in a 1987 peasant massacre. “To have Lucas as your program officer sends a message to archconservatives that you’re on their side,” says Robert Maguire, a Haiti expert at Trinity College in Washington, D.C.
IRI’s anti-Aristide focus appeared to have support from the Bush administration. The former U.S. diplomat in Haiti says Lucas was in constant contact with Roger Noriega, the administration’s top Latin America official, who had previously worked for Senator Jesse Helms and had long sought to oust Aristide. Noriega and conservative Republican congressional staffers kept in close touch with IRI-trained opposition leaders and pushed for additional funding for IRI’s Haiti activities. “The USAID director in Haiti was under enormous pressure [from Congress] to fund IRI,” says the former diplomat.
According to an internal report by the USAID inspector general obtained by Mother Jones, in July 2002 the U.S. Embassy in Haiti protested that IRI’s actions were undermining the official U.S. policy of working with all sides in Haiti and that Lucas was spreading unsubstantiated rumors about the U.S. ambassador. In response, USAID barred Lucas from running the IRI program for 120 days. Lucas, according to several observers, threatened to use Bush administration connections to have embassy officials fired. He continued to essentially run the IRI Haiti program while serving as a “translator,” in what IRI officials acknowledged was a violation of USAID’s ban, according to the inspector general’s report.
In 2004, several of the people who had attended IRI trainings were influential in the toppling of Aristide. Among them, according to Kim Ives, a journalist with the newspaper Haiti Progres, was André Apaid, a conservative Haitian politician who had backed a previous anti-Aristide coup in 1991. Apaid became one of the leaders of the Group of 184, which organized the street demonstrations against Aristide. Other members of the group trained in the Dominican Republic were in close contact with the thuggish armed opposition -- participating in rebel meetings, serving as liaisons between the armed groups and foreign embassies, and negotiating for the militia leaders. Among them was Paul Arcelin, a leading member of the opposition who had served as an ambassador under Haiti’s previous military junta. Arcelin told Canadian reporters that he and other opposition leaders frequently met with Guy Philippe, the leader of the armed rebels, to “prepare for Aristide’s downfall.”
When the uprising against Aristide began in late 2003, the White House did little to stop it. In February 2004, as the militias were marching on Port-au-Prince, President Bush issued a statement blaming Aristide for the violence. In late February, the administration urged Aristide to leave Haiti, and on February 29 he was flown into exile in the Central African Republic on a U.S. plane dispatched by the Pentagon. Today, conservative politicians and the military are reinstalling themselves in power, Haiti experts report; the country’s infamous intelligence services are being re-created, and violence against Aristide supporters is commonplace.
Haiti is not unique. In Venezuela, Cambodia, and other nations, IRI—unlike other government-funded democratization groups—has increasingly focused on training opposition parties intent on toppling elected governments. The institute is one of several democracy-promotion groups financed by USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED); others include the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the AFL-CIO’s international wing. Under their bylaws, the groups are supposed to work with actors across the political spectrum in democracies. In Haiti, for example, NDI, which is controlled by Democrats, worked with members of Aristide’s party as well as opposition parties, and was lauded for its grassroots efforts.
IRI, by contrast, has increasingly come under attack for choosing sides. In Venezuela, the institute dramatically expanded its presence in 2001 and 2002 as President Hugo Chavez ratcheted up his anti-U.S. rhetoric. IRI’s Latin America program was led by Georges Fauriol, who had previously worked at a conservative Washington think tank alongside Otto Reich, who has been Bush’s closest adviser on Latin America policy. Reich, who according to Congress’ Government Accountability Office conducted “prohibited covert propaganda” on behalf of the Nicaraguan Contras in the 1980s, is a former ambassador to Venezuela who had frequently denounced Chavez.
In Venezuela, IRI staffed its program with Bush allies and campaign supporters; in turn, in 2001 the administration increased funding for IRI’s activities in Venezuela sixfold, from $50,000 to $300,000 -- the largest grant any of NED’s democracy-promotion organizations received that year.
At the time, all the major U.S. democracy-promotion groups were active in Venezuela, including both IRI and NDI. But documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show that while NDI worked with parties across the political spectrum, IRI staffers spent much of their time cultivating the opposition. IRI worked closely with Acción Democrática, a group that, IRI’s own documents acknowledge, “refused to recognize the legitimacy of the Chavez presidency.” IRI also tutored opposition figures, including Caracas mayor Alfredo Peña, an outspoken Chavez critic, on how to create a political party. And despite a warning from the National Endowment for Democracy not to take sides in Venezuela, IRI also used its own money to bring opposition figures to Washington, where they met with top U.S. officials.
In April 2002, a group of military officers launched a coup against Chavez, and leaders of several parties trained by IRI joined the junta. When news of the coup emerged, democracy-promotion groups in Venezuela were holding a meeting to discuss ways of working together to avoid political violence; IRI representatives didn’t attend, saying that they were drafting a statement on Chavez’s overthrow. On April 12, the institute’s Venezuela office released a statement praising the “bravery” of the junta and “commending the patriotism of the Venezuelan military.”
That drew a sharply worded email from NED president Carl Gershman, a copy of which was obtained by Mother Jones. Gershman wrote: “By welcoming [the coup] -- indeed, without any apparent reservations—you unnecessarily interjected IRI into the sensitive internal politics of Venezuela.”
At roughly the same time that IRI issued its statement, Reich announced that Chavez had resigned -- though he had not -- and said the United States would support the new government in Venezuela. But within a day, Chavez was restored to power by popular demonstrations, the presidential guard, and segments of the army. At least 40 people were killed in the violence surrounding the coup.
IRI’s selective approach to democracy-building has also been in evidence in Cambodia, where it has thrown its support behind the Sam Rainsy Party, an opposition group led by a former banker who is popular in conservative Washington circles. Institute staff members have written speeches and managed campaigns for Rainsy, according to several sources. “IRI people were part of the [Rainsy] machine,” says one human rights expert who focuses on Cambodia.
Cambodian prime minister Hun Sen, like Chavez and Aristide, is no saint. He has been linked to political violence and has little respect for civil liberties. “In some ways, IRI [is] leveling the playing field,” says the Cambodia expert. Similarly, in Haiti, says another observer, there was a legitimate need to help the opposition organize because Aristide was becoming so abusive of his power.
Yet IRI’s singular focus on groups seeking to overthrow leaders seen as hostile to the United States can sometimes harm American diplomatic efforts. In Cambodia, notes one official with considerable experience in the country, “it hurt the U.S. government’s credibility as an honest broker in the election processes.” In Haiti, IRI has had a similar impact, experts say, by unbalancing an already volatile situation and causing people to wonder what the United States’ true agenda was. In 2003, after being threatened by IRI’s Stanley Lucas, the departing U.S. ambassador, Brian Dean Curran, gave a farewell speech to the Haitian chamber of commerce. “There are many in Haiti who prefer not to listen to me,” he said, “but to their own friends in Washington—the sirens of extremism.” Then he added, using the Haitian word for “thugs”: “I call them the chimères of Washington.”
http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2004/11/11_401.html
The Coup Connection
By Joshua Kurlantzick
November/December 2004 Issue
In early 2004, chaos overwhelmed Haiti. In January, a rebellion erupted against President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the former slum priest who had frequently angered the United States with his leftist rhetoric. Aristide had twice been elected, but he had alienated many Haitians with his increasing demagoguery and use of violence against the opposition. Yet polls showed that Aristide remained relatively popular, so even experienced Haiti watchers were surprised when, in late February, armed militias marched on the nation’s capital while demonstrators shut down the streets. In the violence, some 100 Haitians were killed. At dawn on February 29, with the militias closing in, Aristide left Haiti on a U.S. government plane.
But did the rebellion really spring from nowhere? Maybe not. Several leaders of the demonstrations -- some of whom also had links to the armed rebels -- had been getting organizational help and training from a U.S. government-financed organization. The group, the International Republican Institute (IRI), is supposed to focus on nonpartisan, grassroots democratization efforts overseas. But in Haiti and other countries, such as Venezuela and Cambodia, the institute -- which, though not formally affiliated with the GOP, is run by prominent Republicans and staffed by party insiders -- has increasingly sided with groups seeking the overthrow of elected but flawed leaders who are disliked in Washington.
In 2002 and 2003, IRI used funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to organize numerous political training sessions in the Dominican Republic and Miami for some 600 Haitian leaders. Though IRI’s work is supposed to be nonpartisan -- it is official U.S. policy not to interfere in foreign elections -- a former U.S. diplomat says organizers of the workshops selected only opponents of Aristide and attempted to mold them into a political force.
The trainings were run by IRI’s Haiti program officer, Stanley Lucas, the scion of a powerful Haitian family with long-standing animosity toward Aristide -- Amnesty International says some family members participated in a 1987 peasant massacre. “To have Lucas as your program officer sends a message to archconservatives that you’re on their side,” says Robert Maguire, a Haiti expert at Trinity College in Washington, D.C.
IRI’s anti-Aristide focus appeared to have support from the Bush administration. The former U.S. diplomat in Haiti says Lucas was in constant contact with Roger Noriega, the administration’s top Latin America official, who had previously worked for Senator Jesse Helms and had long sought to oust Aristide. Noriega and conservative Republican congressional staffers kept in close touch with IRI-trained opposition leaders and pushed for additional funding for IRI’s Haiti activities. “The USAID director in Haiti was under enormous pressure [from Congress] to fund IRI,” says the former diplomat.
According to an internal report by the USAID inspector general obtained by Mother Jones, in July 2002 the U.S. Embassy in Haiti protested that IRI’s actions were undermining the official U.S. policy of working with all sides in Haiti and that Lucas was spreading unsubstantiated rumors about the U.S. ambassador. In response, USAID barred Lucas from running the IRI program for 120 days. Lucas, according to several observers, threatened to use Bush administration connections to have embassy officials fired. He continued to essentially run the IRI Haiti program while serving as a “translator,” in what IRI officials acknowledged was a violation of USAID’s ban, according to the inspector general’s report.
In 2004, several of the people who had attended IRI trainings were influential in the toppling of Aristide. Among them, according to Kim Ives, a journalist with the newspaper Haiti Progres, was André Apaid, a conservative Haitian politician who had backed a previous anti-Aristide coup in 1991. Apaid became one of the leaders of the Group of 184, which organized the street demonstrations against Aristide. Other members of the group trained in the Dominican Republic were in close contact with the thuggish armed opposition -- participating in rebel meetings, serving as liaisons between the armed groups and foreign embassies, and negotiating for the militia leaders. Among them was Paul Arcelin, a leading member of the opposition who had served as an ambassador under Haiti’s previous military junta. Arcelin told Canadian reporters that he and other opposition leaders frequently met with Guy Philippe, the leader of the armed rebels, to “prepare for Aristide’s downfall.”
When the uprising against Aristide began in late 2003, the White House did little to stop it. In February 2004, as the militias were marching on Port-au-Prince, President Bush issued a statement blaming Aristide for the violence. In late February, the administration urged Aristide to leave Haiti, and on February 29 he was flown into exile in the Central African Republic on a U.S. plane dispatched by the Pentagon. Today, conservative politicians and the military are reinstalling themselves in power, Haiti experts report; the country’s infamous intelligence services are being re-created, and violence against Aristide supporters is commonplace.
Haiti is not unique. In Venezuela, Cambodia, and other nations, IRI—unlike other government-funded democratization groups—has increasingly focused on training opposition parties intent on toppling elected governments. The institute is one of several democracy-promotion groups financed by USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED); others include the National Democratic Institute (NDI) and the AFL-CIO’s international wing. Under their bylaws, the groups are supposed to work with actors across the political spectrum in democracies. In Haiti, for example, NDI, which is controlled by Democrats, worked with members of Aristide’s party as well as opposition parties, and was lauded for its grassroots efforts.
IRI, by contrast, has increasingly come under attack for choosing sides. In Venezuela, the institute dramatically expanded its presence in 2001 and 2002 as President Hugo Chavez ratcheted up his anti-U.S. rhetoric. IRI’s Latin America program was led by Georges Fauriol, who had previously worked at a conservative Washington think tank alongside Otto Reich, who has been Bush’s closest adviser on Latin America policy. Reich, who according to Congress’ Government Accountability Office conducted “prohibited covert propaganda” on behalf of the Nicaraguan Contras in the 1980s, is a former ambassador to Venezuela who had frequently denounced Chavez.
In Venezuela, IRI staffed its program with Bush allies and campaign supporters; in turn, in 2001 the administration increased funding for IRI’s activities in Venezuela sixfold, from $50,000 to $300,000 -- the largest grant any of NED’s democracy-promotion organizations received that year.
At the time, all the major U.S. democracy-promotion groups were active in Venezuela, including both IRI and NDI. But documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show that while NDI worked with parties across the political spectrum, IRI staffers spent much of their time cultivating the opposition. IRI worked closely with Acción Democrática, a group that, IRI’s own documents acknowledge, “refused to recognize the legitimacy of the Chavez presidency.” IRI also tutored opposition figures, including Caracas mayor Alfredo Peña, an outspoken Chavez critic, on how to create a political party. And despite a warning from the National Endowment for Democracy not to take sides in Venezuela, IRI also used its own money to bring opposition figures to Washington, where they met with top U.S. officials.
In April 2002, a group of military officers launched a coup against Chavez, and leaders of several parties trained by IRI joined the junta. When news of the coup emerged, democracy-promotion groups in Venezuela were holding a meeting to discuss ways of working together to avoid political violence; IRI representatives didn’t attend, saying that they were drafting a statement on Chavez’s overthrow. On April 12, the institute’s Venezuela office released a statement praising the “bravery” of the junta and “commending the patriotism of the Venezuelan military.”
That drew a sharply worded email from NED president Carl Gershman, a copy of which was obtained by Mother Jones. Gershman wrote: “By welcoming [the coup] -- indeed, without any apparent reservations—you unnecessarily interjected IRI into the sensitive internal politics of Venezuela.”
At roughly the same time that IRI issued its statement, Reich announced that Chavez had resigned -- though he had not -- and said the United States would support the new government in Venezuela. But within a day, Chavez was restored to power by popular demonstrations, the presidential guard, and segments of the army. At least 40 people were killed in the violence surrounding the coup.
IRI’s selective approach to democracy-building has also been in evidence in Cambodia, where it has thrown its support behind the Sam Rainsy Party, an opposition group led by a former banker who is popular in conservative Washington circles. Institute staff members have written speeches and managed campaigns for Rainsy, according to several sources. “IRI people were part of the [Rainsy] machine,” says one human rights expert who focuses on Cambodia.
Cambodian prime minister Hun Sen, like Chavez and Aristide, is no saint. He has been linked to political violence and has little respect for civil liberties. “In some ways, IRI [is] leveling the playing field,” says the Cambodia expert. Similarly, in Haiti, says another observer, there was a legitimate need to help the opposition organize because Aristide was becoming so abusive of his power.
Yet IRI’s singular focus on groups seeking to overthrow leaders seen as hostile to the United States can sometimes harm American diplomatic efforts. In Cambodia, notes one official with considerable experience in the country, “it hurt the U.S. government’s credibility as an honest broker in the election processes.” In Haiti, IRI has had a similar impact, experts say, by unbalancing an already volatile situation and causing people to wonder what the United States’ true agenda was. In 2003, after being threatened by IRI’s Stanley Lucas, the departing U.S. ambassador, Brian Dean Curran, gave a farewell speech to the Haitian chamber of commerce. “There are many in Haiti who prefer not to listen to me,” he said, “but to their own friends in Washington—the sirens of extremism.” Then he added, using the Haitian word for “thugs”: “I call them the chimères of Washington.”
A VOZ DO POVO OPRIMIDO MAUBERE CLAMA PELA JUSTIÇA A TODOS OS LIDERES POLÍTICOS QUE ESTIVERAM ENVOLVIDOS NA CRISE POLÍTICA DE 2006 E QUE JÁ ARRASTOU ATE AO PRESENTE MOMENTO SEM NENHUMA DEVIDA SOLUÇÃO PARA QUE O POVO PEQUENO E DÉBIL MAUBERE VOLTA A SENTIR E RESPIRAR O AR FRESCO DAS MONTANHAS SAGRADAS DE TIMOR LESTE E ASSIM PODENDO ATE VOLTAR A VIDA QUOTIDIANA DE VIVER LIVRE E SEGURO NA SUA PRÓPRIA TERRA E AGE COMO VERDADEIRO SENHOR DO SEU PRÓPRIO DESTINO.
O Povo Maubere chama atenção de todos os lideres políticos em geral e em particular ao vigente governo, de que, o pequenez e pobre Maubere já mais se vergara a qualquer chantagem política de intimidação e coação no recurso de uso de forcas alheias para chacinar mais bons e inocentes filhos timorenses em prol dos seus próprios interesses e assim chegam ate ao cumulo de vergonha de humilhar e fazer sofrer mais na pele e na carne dos próprios filhos e reais herdeiros timorenses na sua própria Terra, porque estes opõem freneticamente a política vergonhosa da actual liderança da RDTL camuflada as suas tenebrosas intenções em cumplicidade com as políticas forasteiras dos países que ate hoje em dia continuam a semear discórdias e desavenças no seio dos povos de Médio Oriente, de Europa do Leste, da África e da América Latina e que neste momento este sistema moribunda esta a ser também transportada e aplica-la mecanicamente em Timor Leste com o lema e lúcido objectivo de nos dividir para melhor reinar-nos.
Apelamos a todo o explorado e oprimido Povo Maubere de Ponta Leste a Oeste, de Norte por Centro a Sul, por Jaco, Ataúro ate ao enclave de Oecússi Ambeno, esta e a hora de acordarmos e orgulharmos mais uma vez com a nossa própria determinação e coragem de sermos sucessores destemidos dos nossos valorosos assuwains guerrilheiros e veteranos combatentes da libertação Nacional de Timor Leste para assim redobrarmos novamente as nossas forcas genuínas e oriundos de um Povo lutador da sua própria causa e libertador de si mesmo das garras das sucessivas formas de governação dos colonialistas, neocolonialistas e seus lacaios como hoje estamos vendo e acompanhando de perto e no dia-a-dia em nosso solo Pátrio de Timor Leste.
Filhos obreiros de Timor Leste, não e nunca devereis sucumbir-se a vossa dignidade e identidade de bons filhos de um Povo sofredor que lutou abnegadamente contra todas as formas mais veladas do jugo colonial e neo-colonial e seu sistema retrógrado que nunca se tem ouvido falar de que na historia dos povos colonizados, os colonialistas, neocolonialistas e seus lacaios não foram seres humanos sensatos para com os povos colonizados, pelo contrario havia sempre barreiras e muros cimentados de política de sionismo, tiranismo, despotismo, xenofobismo na discriminação de raças, culturas, tradições, posições sociais e educacionais tal que os colonialistas sempre se mostraram aos povos colonizados como deuses intocáveis na historia da era de colonização, os colonizadores foram sempre com tom de superioridade em todos os aspectos da vida humana e que consideravam os povos colonizados por iletrados, analfabetos, escravos e ate ao cumulo consideravam os seres humanos colonizados como objectos de venda e de compra. Embora esses senhores colonialistas do outrora iam por terras desconhecidas desvendavam novos mundos, novos povos, culturas, usos e costumes, com Cruz de Cristo, mais não sabiam absolutamente nada dos verdadeiros ensinamentos de Nosso Senhor Jesus Cristo, como tal, ate os próprios missionários que tinham missão de evangelizar os povos encontrados nas longínquas paragens dos países donde eles partiam com a doutrina de Cristo, chegaram ao cumulo de se enquadrar-se nas forcas das baionetas para dominar e fazer humilhar os povos ainda não civilizados e que a luz de Cristo por eles ainda não chegados e faziam deles como ovelhas cegas por os melhor explorar e oprimir mas nunca com boa intenção de libertar essas almas perdidas para poderem se libertar das garras das culturas e tradições arcaicas que não permitiam conhecer ate aquele momento a civilização ocidental como apregoavam os nossos colonizadores e seus peões avançados como hoje prevalecem os seus modos de vida como de outrora embora não abertamente nas vistas dado a evolução da nossa sociedade humana mas eles continuam a praticar essas formas mais desumanas para poder melhor explorar e oprimir com objectivo claro de nos dividir para reinar e depois expropriar todas as nossas riquezas naturais como gás, petróleo, cafés, sândalos, borrachas, copras, peixes, níqueis, mármores, manganésios, cobres, cristais e tantos outros mais todos são os produtos genuínos e naturais provenientes do solo Pátrio Maubere mil vezes martirizado e querido.
Face este prelúdio de uma situação política predicada para um caos de grande risco para uma verdadeira segurança e manutenção do bem-estar do pobre, humilde e débil Povo Maubere, nos apelamos a todos os nacionalistas e patriotas que cerram as nossas fileiras em todas as frentes contra tudo e qualquer outra manobra premeditada de política facínora e traiçoeira aos interesses mais supremos do nosso Povo de Timor Lorosae. Jamais permitiremos de que os imorais líderes políticos utilizem as forcas estrangeiras como seus escudos para nos desferir golpes mortais com suas máquinas de guerra que na realidade tem objectivo de nos defender do que nos virar os canos mortíferos das armas assassinas para nos sacrificar por interesses dum punhado de homens insensatos na liderança da actual RDTL. Queira Deus que isto não aconteça, mas por insensatez dos despóticos e tiranos lideres se persistem em pôr-nos em risco a nossa vida deveremos reagir com todas as nossas forcas e meios que dispomos para neutralizar toda e qualquer tentativa dos megalômanos e lalomanos líderes incompetentes na governação de Timor Leste.
Viva o Povo Maubere!
Vivam as Gloriosas Falintil e os heróicos Veteranos da Libertação da Pátria Maubere!
Viva a Juventude Maubere!
Viva a Mulher Bibere!
Viva a lúcida Vanguarda do Pobre e Débil Povo Maubere no solo Pátrio de Timor Leste!
Nas Montanhas e Selvas de Timor Leste ao primeiro dia do mês de Fevereiro e do ano de 2008.-
Assinado Maubere!
Enviar um comentário