Queridas amigas y amigos:

En estos días en los cuales, por no tener en nuestro país libertad, democracia, justicia, y ser Perseguido Político, escribo algunas ideas para compartir con Uds.:

Primero, es muy importante y necesario concentrar esfuerzos en la salida de Chávez y su equipo de gobierno, como sabemos son el principal impedimento para lograr el objetivo de la Venezuela siglo XXI que TODOS queremos. Ese es el objetivo más inmediato y en nuestro plan ocupa el primer paso a cumplir. Por supuesto, siempre democrática y constitucionalmente. A tal efecto, mantengamos la presión en la calle, porque como lo hemos dicho en tantas oportunidades, no hay gobierno ni gobernante que resista esa presión.

En segundo lugar, muchos se preguntan por qué y para qué protestamos. La respuesta es: Para salir de un gobierno totalitario que trata de imponernos un régimen sin libertad, ni democracia que no aceptamos, ni elegimos. Además protestamos por lograr nuestra visión compartida de la Venezuela siglo XXI: " Un país en donde los principios sean, la Tolerancia, la Unión, el Mérito; y el Conocimiento, en un régimen de libertad y democracia, en donde vengamos de donde vengamos, todos tengamos la oportunidad de prosperar, sin distingo de clases, raza o religión. Generador de riqueza, para que sea distribuida de manera eficiente y eficaz con justicia social". Un país con perspectivas concretas del siglo XXI, ejemplo a seguir.

Para todo lo anterior, son necesarios dos elementos fundamentales. El primero es el desarrollo de un Acuerdo de Principios donde estén alineados todos los factores, políticos, sociales, empresariales, laborales, religiosos, educativos, etc., para la reconstrucción y teniendo como norte la Visión de País. Por supuesto que estos factores mantendrían su identidad y diferencias, pero con un objetivo común la Venezuela siglo XXI. En donde de las diferencias se encuentren las soluciones.

El segundo elemento es el establecimiento de un contrato para la reconstrucción de Venezuela. Este contrato contendría los objetivos, las obligaciones y deberes de todos nosotros. Unos como ejecutores, otros como receptores, y por supuesto con un esquema de rendición de cuentas claro al país, indicando el avance en el desarrollo de la visión de la Venezuela Siglo XXI.

No puedo terminar esta carta sin enviar un mensaje muy especial a mis compañeros, trabajadores petroleros y decirles que nos preparemos para la reconstrucción de la PDVSA de todos los venezolanos eje fundamental para desarrollar la Visión de País que tanto queremos y por las cuales les aseguro trabajaremos juntos con nuestros compatriotas. Lo haremos como lo sabemos hacer, con profesionalismo, ética y eficiencia. El reto lo tenemos y estoy seguro lo tomaremos con el mayor de los gustos, con el favor de Dios y la Virgen.

Quedo de Uds. con el compromiso de escribirles pronto de nuevo.

Saludos a todos, un beso a mis hijas y mi familia, su amigo

Juan Fernández.

www.newshax.com Posted by Big Brother on 2003/3/17 3:25:14 (95 reads)

(NewsHax wire) Observant readers of the weeks upcoming television listings point out that the publication has revealed the start date for the war: Wednesday, March 19 at 8EST/5PST, the time set to kick off the FOX Networks new spring comedy and reality show lineup. (more...)

FOX won the contract to exclusive interviews with the big stars of the war as well as winning the bidding for the exclusive broadcast rights of the opening salvo. Both auctions were sealed bid auctions and the price will not be revealed as customary.

However the start of the war was just revealed by TV Guide, as sheceduled by FOX owner Rupert Murdoch."We have an all-star lineup scheduled for Wednesday evening, starting with back-to-back Simpsons followed by a half hour introduction special and then the actual war will begin, live on FOX." said NewsCorp Chairman Rupert Murdoch, obviously giddy in eager anticipation of the coming week.

"We will also be debuting our newest reality show during a scheduled TV timeout in the war that will start in Iraq and will be called 'Escape from Baghdad', where we give 12 contestants nothing but a Confederate flag T-Shirt, pocketless speedos, $5 and a pair of flip-flops to start out, with the ultimate goal of reaching New York harbor and with no help from anything or anyone, just them and their wits.", Rupert added as he gushed in glee during promotion of his newest show.

Scheduled for the TV war timeouts during the weekend are several timeless WW2 movie classics, combining high profit war ad time with royalty-free public domain movies. Said Brian Upshaw, programming director of CBS, "FOX really scored a coup here, we don't know how they could have outbid everyone for the war but they are going to make alot of money from it now. We are all jealous, they could make record profits over the coming weeks."

17.03.2003 - 08:14 CET The two authors, ANDREAS OLDAG, former EU correspondent in Brussels for the Süddeutsche Zeitung and HANS-MARTIN TILLACK, Stern’s correspondent in the EU capital, know the inner life of the European Union very well. (Photo: Argon) EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – It is not only the German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder who has recently decided to go his own way in international politics. Two well-known German journalists are now going beyond the pale, as well.

In a new 400-page book named "Raumschiff Brüssel - Wie die Demokratie in Europa scheitert" (The Brussels Spaceship - How Democracy Fails in Europe), to be published on Tuesday, they paint a damaging insider portrait of the European Union.

The two authors, Andreas Oldag, a former Brussels correspondent for the Süddeutsche Zeitung and Hans-Martin Tillack, Stern’s current correspondent in the EU capital, know the inner life of the European Union very well. The book explains in detail, and with numerous examples, how the European institutions function – or more precisely how they do not function.

No person or institution is singled out for the failures and malfunctioning of the European Union. Mr Tillack and Mr Oldag find fault with the system as a whole.

Each topic is dealt with in a separate chapter. There include ones on the Commission, the Council, the Parliament, the EU summits, the Presidencies, the governments and the Convention on the Future of Europe. The book manages to give a real insight into the inner working of the different institutions and their complicated interaction in Brussels.

Tips for newcomers in Brussels The book does not tell anything that is new for most bureaucrats and correspondents in the "space centre" Brussels. But much of the information might be interesting for people outside.

Before entering the EU, for example, it might be helpful for diplomats in the 10 new member states to know that representatives may only speak at council meetings if they are opposed to proposals. This was something the Austrians were unaware of in their first council meetings

Another useful tip for newcomers might be that the officials from the Northern part of Europe normally show up in office at eight in the morning to take their turn of the day and insist on leaving at five. The first Southerners are not likely to be seen before 9 in the morning and have no problems with staying late in the evening. So whether a decision is passed easily or not can depend on whether a meeting is scheduled for 8am or 6pm.

Prodi - a weak president The Commission President Romano Prodi is portrayed as very weak. The book lists his notorious slip-ups such as when he called the Stability and Growth Pact stupid and when he implied to the Irish that it did not matter what they voted in the Nice Treaty as enlargement would go ahead anyway.

On the big-bang enlargement with a planned 10 new countries to enter the EU on 1 May 2004, the authors claim that everybody in Brussels knows the major risks – but they are not being discussed. The European Union is in major crisis and 25 members could bring about collapse, the book warns.

Lacking political opposition and a critical press The book also tells of journalists in Brussels, who are not working entirely in the interest of their readers but also as heralds for the European idea.

It is not that the Brussels-based bureaucrats are any better or worse than their counterparts at home. The difference is that those in Brussels are not living under the constant pressure of having a political opposition or a critical press.

The fundamental failures in the structures of the European Union cause many absurdities but because the system is not scrutinised enough, these errors are not corrected.

"It is not those responsible for mismanagement, irregularities and self-service mentality who are punished in Brussels, but those who point to the problems," the book says.

Criticism and opposition may not be pleasant, but without it the European Union is at major risk.

Scandals and absurdities "Raumschiff Brüssel" refers to the many scandals and ridiculous situations which have occurred over the last years in the EU - from the fall of the Santer Commission in 1999 to the disputed perks and payments systems for officials and politicians.

It is revealed how boring Commission meetings are and how the heads of states behave behind the well-guarded and opaque European summits.

What happened in the late night hours at the Nice summit? What is ANTICI - the famous system developed to communicate the latest disputes and decisions inside the summits to the officials at lower level who do not have a seat inside the meeting room.

What is the Concour - the system where the EU in 1998 alone examined 30,000 candidates hoping to become the highly-paid EU officials of the future, only 475 were employed in the end. How are they chosen?

The book sheds light on these and many other questions.

The empty cockpit of the space ship Now, who is in charge of this huge system which has stripped national parliaments of much of their power and hidden them inside very complicated decision-making structures meaning that few understand what is really going on?

According to the book, 50 per cent of all legislation originates in Brussels. 360,000 journeys are made to the EU capital every year as part of working groups preparing for council decisions. In the Council, only 15-20% of decisions are taken by ministers, 80-85% of European legislation is agreed among civil servants.

The Commissioners are certainly not running the show. They are very dependent on their staff, according to the book.

In the first half of 2002, the Commissioners took only 79 decisions, while their staff pushed through 1090. While Commissioners are changed - generally every five years - the top administrators of the system are permanent. This is one of the system's major problems, say the authors.

The reforms carried out by UK Labour Commissioner, Neil Kinnock, to streamline the system are described as about as useful as moving around the chairs on the deck of Titanic.

Commission president Prodi regularly complains about the complicated administration procedures. Once, upon receiving a document with ten signatures, he is reported to have asked: "Ten signatures. And who of the ten has actually read the paper"?

MEPs bury their heads in the sand The European Parliament is also described as a very weak institution, even though it is the only EU institution holding a democratic mandate.

When the Parliament could really make a difference, MEPs merely bury their heads in the sand. They accept year after year that accounting for the EU budget is not correct. The MEPs continue to put up with tax payers’ money being wasted on keeping three working places for the European Parliament (some 3200 boxes containing official documents have to be transported by lorries between Brussels and the Strasbourg every month).

The book does not provide a good explanation for the indulgent behaviour of the Parliament, the authors allege that the same political families setting the tone in the Parliament are seated as Commissioners and in the national governments.

But why paint such a bleak portrait of the European Union, which has achieved so many good things for European citizens and is so attractive to those not yet members of the club?

The authors say it is simply to make the European Union survive. "Europe is too important to be left with the career Europeans".

"RAUMSCHIFF BRÜSSELS - Wie die Demokratie in Europa scheitert", by Andreas Oldag, former EU correspondent in Brussels for the Sueddeutsche Zeitung and Hans-Martin Tillack, Stern’s correspondent in the EU capital. Published by Argon Verlag, 416 pages, hardcover 19,90 euro

Profile Andreas Oldag / Hans-Martin Tillack

Written by Lisbeth Kirk Edited by Honor Mahony

www.euobserver.com 17.03.2003 - 05:32 CET

JOSE MARÍA AZNAR - Spanish prime minister said it is hard to imagine Europe’s future without a transatlantic commitment. (Photo: Spanish EU Presidency, EFE) EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – US president George Bush has issued a deadline for UN Security Council members to rubber stamp the use of force against Iraq, motioning toward war within days.

Speaking after an emergency summit in the Azores, attended by leaders from Spain and the UK and the hosts, Portugal, the US president said he gave the other members of the Security Council 24 hours to agree to issue a deadline for the Iraq regime to disarm.

According to the rhetoric only two peaceful outcomes are now possible, the Iraqi government going into exile or complete disarmament.

With both of these scenarios extremely unlikely it is now clear that any deadline will be a de facto declaration of war and crucially that this war will go ahead with or without UN backing.

Last chance Mr Bush billed the deadline as an opportunity for the UN to get its "legs of responsibility back." Mr Blair was clearer, without a credible ultimatum "more debate just means more delay," he said.

France has repeatedly stated that they would veto any resolution that includes an automatic trigger for war.

The UK, US and Spain are now likely to push for a ‘moral majority’ securing the votes of nine of the 15 members of the security council regardless of any veto. If nine votes are not found, the new resolution is not likely to be put to the vote for fear that the already dubious legality of military force would be undermined.

On Sunday key members of the British government were claiming that resolution 1441, which spoke of "serious consequences" for non-disarmament by Iraq, gives legal cover for going to war despite the fact the US ambassador to the UN said this was not the case when the resolution was being negotiated.

Most undecided Security Council members are likely to opt not to back a move to war that is domestically unpopular, and one that will go ahead in any case.

Domestic problems In the past week the US has become more and more eager to press ahead with the military campaign but stayed the course of diplomacy in order to help UK Prime Minister Tony Blair's case at home.

Without a second resolution, Mr Blair may be faced with a wave of resignations including that of the former Foreign Minister and now leader of the House of Commons, Robin Cook.

The Spanish Premier, José Maria Aznar, is unlikely to face resignations but with polls indicating 80% of Spain’s population is against the war, his Partido Popular, commentators say, has already lost the next election.

Atlanticism Opening the press conference following the hour-long meeting, Portuguese Prime Minister, Durão Barroso, spoke of the symbolism of the Azores lying midway between Europe and North America and the importance of transatlantic ties.

Mr Blair echoed this sentiment "Europe and America should stand together on the big issues of the day." It is hard to imagine Europe’s future without a transatlantic commitment, added Mr Aznar.

Press Articles El Mundo Al-Bawaba BBC RTP Deutsche Welle La Stampa Corriere della sera

Declaration Guardian

Written by Andrew Beatty Edited by Lisbeth Kirk

www.euobserver.com BRUNO KAUFMANN - In order to be ready for such windows of opportunities in transnational politics we have to be ready to go beyond the surface of politics offered to us by "our leaders", political parties and much of the media.

EUOBSERVER / SALT&PEPPER - With just a days and hours before - as US President announced on the Azores yesterday - "the End of Diplomacy and the Start of the first War in the 21st Century" it is time to reflect on the state of Global and European politics. The announced war in the Gulf region is the expression of a of a very big problem: too much of brachial power (weapons and finances) are gathered in too few hands. Finally this has also been realized on the other side of the Atlantic. "What really has the insiders panicked", comments the Herald Tribune on the weekend, "is the irresponsibility of Bush and his team, their almost childish unwillingness to face up to problems that they don't feel like dealing like now".

Fast food politics But "Bush and his team" is of course not alone. Independently of the stand you may take, the War politics "on Terrorism" offers a big dose of black-and-white, good-and-bad, we-and-them ingredients. Ingredients, which in a world of superficial, fast-food politics and media are essential. What seems to work on a world stage can also be seen on a European level and in the political debates of many countries.

I want to give you an example from country, in which I spent the last couples of days: Finland. Here the citizens elected yesterday a new countrywide parliament. Out of this 200-seat-assembly a new government will be elected next week. A government, which will have an important voice and vote in the next Intergovernmental conference of the EU on the Constitution. Similar to Bush, who yesterday underlined "the importance of the UN for world peace", the Finnish Prime Minister Paavo Lipponen stated on Sunday the "need for a broad citizens debate on the European constitution". But as little Bush have done for the empowerment of the UN, Lipponen seems willing to give his citizens a say on the future of Europe.

In the campaign up to yesterday’s vote Lipponen never addressed the big European challenges coming up, nor did his main opponent of the Centre party, Anneli Jääteenmäki (her party became the biggest on Sunday) indicate anything about her preferences or goals in European politics. Both Lipponen and Jääteenmäki underlined instead that the elections were about "choosing the leader" and giving them an open mandate to do what she or her is the "morally right thing" - as Tony Blair would express it.

It is not enough to just elect leaders Both Bush and Lipponen shows us: it is not enough to elect leaders. And it is not enough to have an international "community", which is based on international governmental cooperation. What we have to work for is to establish democratic structures on a trans-national level too. Developing and agreeing (by referendums in all member states) on a European constitution is a necessary but not sufficient step. We need further a truly reformed UN in which small and big states have an equal say and which also the peoples of our world are represented by a directly elected assembly.

Days or just hours before another "Bush War" all this goals seems to be light years away. However, it could be that when a few try to force the many to follow their will, the many will not accept this longer - and changes are coming faster than we may believe today. In order to be ready for such windows of opportunities in trans-national politics we have to be ready to go beyond the surface of politics offered to us by "our leaders", political parties and much of the media. What politicians like Bush, Blair or even Lipponen are offering and delivering is by far not enough, not seldom even counter productive - it is now time to become "producers" of politics ourselves!

Join the debate

BRUNO KAUFMANN - is a peace- and conflict researcher, radio journalist and president of the Initiative & Referendum Institute Europe in Amsterdam. Website: www.iri-europe.org.

Website Initiative and Referendum Institute Europe

Written by Bruno Kaufmann Edited by Honor Mahony