Many of you are already familiar with this report, it appeared in the Mexican National news on 06/25 and I have been waiting for opinions and interpretations from the mensa team over at El Palenque to answer the question, "Que opinan de la reporte de EU"? Unfortunately they have not taken up the subject. However, here it is on this link at the very bottom - you can read the entire report in English: (or go here)
Aristegui Noticias
Tlatlaya, Ayotzinapa y otros casos, "serios abusos" en materia de derechos humanos:EU
I have a few first impressions on just some of the points made by the State Department - one of them is that it seems as though the State Department is distancing the United States from being a very large part of some of these events, and some of the information is just not current at all.
1. Finally nine to twelve months after the facts the cases of Tlatlaya (added video) and Ayotzinapa are officially briefly described; but in a cut and dry fashion and there is no mention of Military involvement in the case of Ayotzinapa. Yet for the past year survivors of this attack have repeatedly pointed to the involvement of members of the Army. The State Department report mentions the availability of freedom of information in Mexico, but still after four months of initiating investigations the experts from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have reported regarding the case of Ayotzinapa that the Federal government has yet to respond to 47 % of the inquiries set forth, among which are the interviews with members of the Army's Battalion 27 which was stationed in Iguala, Guerrero where the 43 Normalistas disappeared on 09/26/14. To date, the Mexican Federal government through the AG's office (PGR) has responded to only 30% of requests for information fully and 24 % partially:
Animal Politico
La PGR evade entregar informacion sobre Ayotzinapa: expertos de la CIDH
I sense this disconnect - we know the State Department was at least aware of Tlatlaya and now more recently there is a CNDH investigation into the Durango affair and of course Apatzingan where it has been implied by Mexican investigative reporters that there were more extrajudicial killings by the Military - so knowing this or at least questioning these cases, why did the U.S. State Department approve $1.15 billion arms sales just this year?
 |
| Courtesy Aristegui Noticias: PDF report enclosed in link |
Edit 07/02: Surely the State Department knew that, "...the Mexican Army had orders to kill civilians as part of "Operacion Dragon" prior to the deaths of 22 people (who had surrendered) en Tlatlaya of Mexico state during the military operation of 06/30/14":
Aristegui Noticias
Operacion Dragon: Hubo orden military de abatir civiles previo a Tlatlaya informe completo
And still they approved arms sales?
~~~~~
 |
| Dr. Mireles |
2. Under the "Political Prisoners and Detainees" section the State Department reports: "There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees." Many Mexican people would ask the State Department, "What about Jose Manuel Mireles Valverde ...and his three compadres ?"
3. Under "Internet Freedom" the State Department reports that : " The [Mexican] government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content, and there were no credible reports it monitored private online communications without appropriate legal authority..." Well, I think Lydia Cacho is credible ( wow... how could gringos bring their kids down here after that ?) and she and thousands of others in Mexico have switched from what they describe as the insecure Telnor lines to private satellite(s). These are not people who necessarily live in 'remote' areas - why do you think they switched? BTW, Proceso was hacked a couple of days ago, and I still can't pull their site up.
4. Under Section 7 - Worker Rights: The State Department reports that "The [Mexican] government did not consistently protect worker rights. Its general failure to enforce labor and other laws left workers with little recourse regarding violations of freedoms of associations, poor working conditions or other problems."
 |
| What's wrong with this picture ? |
I could not believe this one about the Maquiladoras:
"There were several complaints of poor working conditions in maquiladoras. Low wages, poor labor relations, long work hours, unjustified dismissals, the lack of social security benefits, unsafe workplaces, and the lack of freedom of association were among the most common complaints. The National Commission to Prevent and Eradicate Violence against Women reported 45 percent of women working in the maquila industry suffered some type of violence, most commonly a hostile work environment, sexual harassment, long work hours, low wages, and dismissal for pregnancy. Most maquilas hired employees through outsourcing with few social benefits. "
Well, it was the United States and Bill Clinton (... who I actually believed at the time and voted for twice) who sold NAFTA and the Maquiladora Program to all of us and Mexico without insuring labor rights, healthy and safe working conditions, decent wages, not to mention environmental safeguards, standards and controls - why didn't the State Department mention that ??? I think that since it was the U.S. who bulldozed the entire Maquiladora nightmare on the Mexican people, the U.S. should fix it. Do not miss the section on forced labor and the plight of the Jornaleros who put food on your U.S. tables.
So the La Jornada editorial's message was not lost on anyone when they stated:" While the U.S. government lacks the moral authority and legal mandate to make judgments on the situation of individual rights in third world countries, this is not the first time that international actors have pointed to the debacle of the law to the detriment of human rights in the country."
My neighbor told me that gringos would not "get" the Molotov song and video so maybe this one might work: ~~~~