• #Bayer - #Monsanto Celebrates the Law to Promote Native Seed

    On March 24, in the midst of the crisis by Covid-19, the so-called federal law for the promotion and protection of native corn was approved with the unanimous vote of the Senate. With such a title many will have assumed that it would be a rule to stop the assault of transnational GM companies on seeds, indigenous peoples and peasant communities. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Beyond the intention of its promoters, this provision favors key interests of the companies that have wanted to advance in the country with their GM and other high-tech seeds for two decades.

    For this reason, the #Mexican_Seed_Association_AC (#AMSAC), whose board is made up of #Syngenta, #Bayer (now owner of #Monsanto), #Corteva (merger of #Dow and #DuPont-PHI Mexico) and other major global seed companies issued a bulletin the same day congratulating legislators on the approval of the law. They declare that this law “is an important step, (…) because it will give certainty to corn producers throughout the country”. They emphasize that “they will continue working to promote the object of this law (…) taking advantage of technological developments, such as improved seeds”. (https://tinyurl.com/vo9pawr)

    AMSAC is a board member of the National Agricultural Council (CNA), which in turn is a founding member of the #Business_Coordinating_Council. They represent, for the most part, the business sectors that have devastated peasant life, sustainable production and healthy food. The six global transnational companies that own more than 70 percent of the global seed and agrochemical markets (and 100 percent of the transgenic seeds) have been on the AMSAC board of directors for years. It is the main lobbyist for the seed industry, acting in conjunction with the ANC. They are the ones who fought for and obtained privileges for the transnationals in all the existing laws regarding seeds and patents. (https://tinyurl.com/ruoc3ka ; https://tinyurl.com/t6lxfov)

    Before the final vote in the Senate, from which the initiative came, the law to promote native corn was voted, with changes, in the Chamber of Deputies on March 18, with 270 votes in favor. No one opposed it anymore. Could it be that the PRI, PAN, PRD, Morena and all the parties suddenly realized the importance of protecting the corn peoples, their seeds and cultures against the transgenic invasion? Of course not. Because the law does not provide for such a thing. Nor does it prevent the patenting of peasant seeds. But it does separate corn from its peoples, reducing the complex process of thousands of years of many peoples creating milpas, assemblies, forests, and their own forms of government to the promotion of #community_seed_banks, an expression that the majority of the peoples reject, because it comes from the financial system and is alien to their conception of seeds as an element in the integral politics, economy, and worldview of their peoples. Furthermore, it establishes that only native corn is recognized by #Conabio, not by the peoples and communities themselves. It imposes on them a new #National_Maize_Council, which although merely consultative, has 16 members, of which only six are from indigenous communities or agrarian ejidos.

    But the main reason why the transnationals applaud this law is because it will delimit geographical areas, where the authorities will recognize that there are native maize production systems, which means it opens up the rest of the country to plant any other seed, from hybrids to transgenics or the new biotech seeds that the companies call genetic editing.

    Monsanto, Syngenta, and other companies have insisted on this point for decades: that areas must be defined, that in reality they are not interested in planting where there are farmers, only in the rest of the country. Against this fallacious and extremely risky position, which would eventually cause GM contamination to reach the entire country, we have insisted that all of Mexico – and Mesoamerica – is the center of origin of maize and therefore the planting of any genetically manipulated seed should be prohibited.

    This position of the so-called law of promotion and other serious errors of it – now approved – were clearly expressed by the Network in Defense of Maize since the publication of the commissions’ opinion, in October 2019 (https://tinyurl.com/vjk8qyl).

    Meanwhile, the #Monsanto_Law, as the current biosafety law passed in 2005 is called, remains untouched by all the now-legislators and officials who promised in the campaign that they would repeal it. Furthermore, Semarnat participated in an online forum on biosafety at the Biodiversity Convention in 2020 and its representative joined the seed industry’s position that there is no need to establish new biosafety frameworks, not even for the highly dangerous genetic promoters, transgenic exterminators.

    Why are none of the officials and legislators doing their job to really guarantee biosafety and that what AMLO announced, that no GM maize will be allowed in the country, is a reality?

    https://schoolsforchiapas.org/bayer-monsanto-celebrates-the-law-to-promote-native-seed

    #appropriation_intellectuelle #maïs #graines #semences #Mexiques #loi #peuples_autochtones #Chiapas #OGM #agriculture #multinationales #industrie_agro-alimentaire #loi #brevets #agriculture_paysanne

  • The Spark: Editorial
    We Are All One Class – the Working Class, All One Race – the Human Race https://the-spark.net (Aug 5, 2019)

    Twenty people are dead, massacred in an El Paso, #Texas_Walmart; twenty-six more were wounded. (These were the casualty figures Sunday noon, August 4. They will get worse.)

    The people killed weren’t all #Mexican_Americans or #Mexicans who crossed the border to do their weekly shopping – but they were all victims of a young man angered by what he called the “Hispanic invasion of #Texas.”

    A so-called “manifesto” was posted on an extreme-right on-line forum just before the gunman struck, apparently by the gunman or someone close to him.

    It described the weapon and ammunition which was about to be used in the Walmart shooting. And it analyzed their capacity to cause maximum damage to human flesh – in cold, technical terms, as though the shooting were simply a “test” to see which gun and which ammunition could produce the most terrifying result.

    With the same cold, technical language, the killer discussed the purpose of his carnage: he intended to “provide” Hispanic people with “the right incentive ... to return to their home countries.”

    That’s #terrorism, outright terrorism: inflict horrifying casualties to “give them an incentive to leave.” It’s the moral ethic of the gangster.

    It’s also the moral ethic with which #Trump approached the migrant crisis. On the 3rd of July he said it: “If illegal immigrants are unhappy with the conditions in the detention centers, just tell them not to come.”

    The location of the massacre in #El_Paso was not an accident. El Paso is the port of entry which the Trump administration has turned into a hell-hole for #migrants, fleeing desperate situations in their own countries.

    But El Paso is also the place where Americans of Mexican descent have lived for generations. It is connected by the “Bridge of the Americas” with the Mexican city of Ciudad Juárez. Dozens, hundreds, even thousands of people go back and forth every day. It’s an area where families have lived on both sides of the border for generations, with a grandparent in El Paso, parents in Ciudad Juárez, and adult children in both places. It’s a place where Americans of Mexican descent have married Americans whose ancestors came from someplace else – which finally is the issue that most outraged the man who killed those 20 people.

    In internet posts, he denounced “race-mixing,” which, according to him, foretells the “replacement of the white race.”

    These are not the ideas of just one crazy guy. They are the unscientific ideas that float every day on extreme-right, on-line forums around the world. The white man who killed 50 Muslims in New Zealand repeated them. So did the white man who killed 77 teenagers in Norway – as well as the white man who killed six Muslims in Quebec, and the white man who killed nine black people in a church in South Carolina.

    These men may all be white, but that’s not what links them. What they have in common is their commitment to terrorism and to racist ideology. Today, they may seem to be a few crazy people, but behind them there is money making sure these ideas circulate around the world.

    Trump sits in the White House today. The #racism didn’t start with him. Nor did the violence. But occupying the presidency, he gives legitimacy to these vile ideas.

    Behind Trump is the capitalist class. If they were really horrified by him, they would have dumped him long ago. No, the poison he spews can be useful in the future for dividing the working class. It’s why they keep him.

    The violence these “crazy” guys have created should be a warning to us. We’re going to face it in the future, carried out by more than a few crazies. We need to begin organizing ourselves today, figuring out how to deal with it.

    The #working_class – no matter where we come from, no matter what our nationality is – we are one class. We have the capacity to deal with the problems we will face. No matter what our “race” is, we are all one race: the human race. That is OUR manifesto.

  • America’s Forgotten History of Illegal Deportations

    In the late 1920s and early 1930s, the country carried out a wave of unconstitutional raids that affected as many as 1.8 million people. Is it on the verge of doing so again?

    It was a time of economic struggle, racial resentment and increasing xenophobia. Installed in the White House was a president who had never before held elected office. A moderately successful businessman, he promised American jobs for Americans—and made good on that promise by slashing immigration by nearly 90 percent.

    He wore his hair parted down the middle, rather than elaborately piled on top, and his name was Herbert Hoover, not Donald Trump. But in the late 1920s and early 1930s, under the president’s watch, a wave of illegal and unconstitutional raids and deportations would alter the lives of as many as 1.8 million men, women and children—a threat that would seem to loom just as large in 2017 as it did back in 1929.

    What became colloquially known as the “Mexican repatriation” efforts of 1929 to 1936 are a shameful and profoundly illustrative chapter in American history, yet they remain largely unknown—despite their broad and devastating impact. So much so that today, a different president is edging towards similar solutions, with none of the hesitation or concern that basic consciousness would seem to require.

    Indeed, in the last several weeks, President Trump ordered the Department of Homeland Security to greatly increase not only the scope of potential deportees, but the speed at which they are being sent out of the country—a bid at “stabilization” borne of many of the same nationalist anxieties that plagued his predecessor nearly a century ago.
    More Stories

    M. J. Hegar, a candidate for Senate in Texas, shakes hand with a voter.
    The Job of Campaigning Is Extremely Family-Unfriendly
    Joe Pinsker
    A photo of a large armored tank
    Antiques Road Show: The Real State of the U.S. Military
    Thomas G. Mahnken Roger Zakheim
    Radio Atlantic: The Veteran Candidate
    Edward-Isaac Dovere
    The Atlantic Politics & Policy Daily: Roby Waived
    Elaine Godfrey

    In his address to a joint session of Congress last week, the president painted a dark portrait of America’s immigrant population: “As we speak tonight,” he intoned, “we are removing gang members, drug dealers and criminals that threaten our communities and prey on our very innocent citizens.” It was the same foreboding message that Trump has espoused since he announced his candidacy, and yet there remains very little evidence to support it.

    Several weeks ago, Trump’s White House circulated a draft executive order aimed at “protecting U.S. jobs,” one that would shut America’s doors to immigrants most likely to require public assistance (including reduced school lunches) as well as tightly control who is able to enter the American workforce. It was very nearly Hoover’s rallying cry—American jobs for Americans—heard once again.

    In his speech on Tuesday, the president repeated this plan:

    Protecting our workers also means reforming our system of legal immigration. The current, outdated system depresses wages for our poorest workers and puts great pressure on taxpayers. Nations around the world, like Canada, Australia and many others, have a merit-based immigration system. It’s a basic principle that those seeking to enter a country ought to be able to support themselves financially. Yet in America we do not enforce this rule, straining the very public resources that our poorest citizens rely upon.

    Back in Hoover’s era, as America hung on the precipice of economic calamity—the Great Depression—the president was under enormous pressure to offer a solution for increasing unemployment, and to devise an emergency plan for the strained social safety net. Though he understood the pressing need to aid a crashing economy, Hoover resisted federal intervention, instead preferring a patchwork of piecemeal solutions, including the targeting of outsiders.

    According to former California State Senator Joseph Dunn, who in 2004 began an investigation into the Hoover-era deportations, “the Republicans decided the way they were going to create jobs was by getting rid of anyone with a Mexican-sounding name.”

    “Getting rid of” America’s Mexican population was a random, brutal effort. “For participating cities and counties, they would go through public employee rolls and look for Mexican-sounding names and then go and arrest and deport those people,” said Dunn. “And then there was a job opening!”

    “We weren’t rounding up people who were Canadian,” he added. “It was an absolutely racially-motivated program to create jobs by getting rid of people.”

    Why, specifically, men and women of Mexican heritage? Professor Francisco Balderrama, whose book, A Decade of Betrayal: Mexican Repatriation in the 1930s is the most definitive chronicle of the period (and, not coincidentally, one of the only ones), explained: “Mexican immigration was very recent. It goes back to that saying: Last hired, first fired. The attitude of many industrialists and agriculturalists was reflected in larger cities: A Mexican is a Mexican.” And that included even those citizens of Mexicans descent who were born in the U.S. “That is sort of key in understanding the psychic of the nation,” said Balderrama.

    The so-called repatriation effort was, in large part, a misnomer, given the fact that as many as sixty percent of those sent to “home” Mexico were U.S. citizens: American-born children of Mexican-descent who had never before traveled south of the border. (Dunn noted, “I don’t know how you can repatriate someone to a country they’ve not been born or raised in.”)

    “Individuals who left at 5, 6 and 7 years old found themselves in Mexico dealing with process of socialization, of learning the language, but they maintained an American identity,” said Balderrama. “And still had the dream to come back to ‘my country.’”

    The raids, as detailed in Balderrama’s chronicle, were vicious. With national concerns over the supposed burden that outsiders were putting on social welfare agencies, authorities targeted those Mexicans utilizing public resources. “In Los Angeles,” explained Balderrama, “they had orderlies who gathered people [in the hospitals] and put them in stretchers on trucks and left them at the border.”

    The efforts were equally chaotic. “The first raid in Los Angeles was in 1931—they surrounded La Placita Park near downtown L.A.,” Dunn recalled. “It was a heavily Latino area. They, literally, on a Sunday afternoon, rounded everyone up in park that day, took them to train station and put them on a train that they had leased. These people were taken to Central Mexico to minimize their chances of crossing the border and coming back to the U.S.”

    Dunn continued, “It was not like there was a master committee mapping out blocks. It was more fly-by-the-seat-of-the-pants. As in, Here’s a park where Mexicans go, okay let’s go there.”

    Mexicans in the United States—and Americans of Mexican descent—had little understanding of what was happening, and what their rights were. Elena Herrada, one of the founders of the oral history project, “Los Repatriados: Exiles from the Promised Land,” is the grandchild of Mexican-Americans who were targeted in the raids. Her grandparents, she recalled, lived in a “mostly Mexican neighborhood” in Detroit, known as Court Town.

    “It was the welfare officials who were doing it. A worker came to the door,” Herrada said. “My father remembered his father being asked by the worker, Where are you from?”

    “My dad was really puzzled,” she said. “Because his father didn’t want to say ‘Mexico’. My father was confused because he had always been a proud Mexican.”

    The family, Herrada recounted, was “de-patriated” to Mexico.

    “My grandfather didn’t have work at the time, and they were forcing them to leave. There was no gun put to his to head, but [they said he] wouldn’t be eligible to receive assistance—and he would starve.”

    “Many people didn’t believe they had a choice,” Herrada explained, “so they didn’t resist. My family didn’t believe they had a choice.”

    Herrada’s father and uncle would spend two years in Mexico before his parents were able to bring him back to the United States—after her grandfather, a veteran of the U.S. Army, returned to the country and once again found work.

    If American deportees made it back to America, according to Dunn, it was often because a friend or family member back in the States managed to obtain a copy of their birth certificate, proof of citizenship. And if they weren’t U.S. citizens, by the onset of World War II and the departure of much of the able-bodied workforce to the front, Mexican labor was back in demand: bodies were needed for low-paying agricultural work, and the xenophobia subsided under the auspices of the Bracero Program (a bilateral agreement between the U.S. and Mexico, the program brought Mexican workers to the states for short-term labor).

    But some never made it back to America. “We are who we are because of what people did in that moment,” said Herrada.

    Each state handled the raids differently—sometimes federal agents were involved, sometimes it was social workers and local law enforcement who targeted people for removal. Hoover’s precise role in directing the deportation efforts is unclear, but, according to Professor Kevin Johnson, Dean of the UC Davis School of Law, and a specialist in public interest law and Chicano studies, “There was a lot of correspondence between the different levels of government, and there was logistical support.” This support included reimbursing states for the chartering of busses and trains to transport people to Mexico.

    Deportations took place across the country: Los Angeles had the largest concentration of Mexicans and Mexican-born Americans, but communities in Detroit were also targeted in large number. “America’s most industrial city was in many ways the promise of the age in terms of economic prosperity,” according to Balderrama, and because of this, its Mexicans and citizens of Mexicans-descent were not exempt from deportation. “The archival evidence points to a full map, across the nation,” said Balderrama. There were deportations in states as far flung as Alaska, Alabama and Mississippi.

    And yet, confirming the precise number of people who were deported during this era is difficult, said Balderrama. “Both governments”—Mexico and the United States—“weren’t very interested in keeping records about what happened. It was a problem and they wanted to get rid of it. That’s why the numbers are very difficult.”

    Dunn, however, spent nearly three years doing archival research, enlisting his state senate staff to comb through federal, state and local records in a bid to reconcile California’s tortured legacy. He feels confident in his citation of 1.8 million people deported. “That number came out of several documents we got from the federal government,” he told me.

    Beyond the travesty inflicted upon hundreds of thousands of U.S. citizens, the Mexican deportations of the 1920s and 1930s are also shocking—and at this moment, particularly enlightening—for the illegalities visited upon non-citizens. Trump is unlikely to willfully deport American citizens, but he appears perilously close to replicating many of the mistakes Hoover did as it concerned the undocumented. And given the number of mixed-status families in the U.S.—as of 2015, 16.6 million Americans lived in residences with at least one undocumented immigrant—these deportations will affect citizens and non-citizens alike.

    Johnson said that in hindsight, it is clear Hoover’s deportations were a violation of “several constitutional rights,” including the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause and the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizure.

    “Now it’s very clear that some of those provisions apply to immigrants in the U.S. The Supreme Court has made very clear that as long as you’re in the U.S., you have a right to due process and hearing. That doesn’t mean you can’t be removed,” said Johnson. “But you have the ability to retain counsel.”

    Johnson said that many immigrants—especially those who have been here for any extended amount of time, may have “deep community ties—to citizens, churches, employers.” The longer someone is in the U.S., he explained, “the more of those ties you have, and the deeper your rights are.”

    He pointed out that this legal reality, “is an issue right now because the White House is making efforts to expedite and expand deportations. But it means no hearing, no judicial review; it could be ready as a summary deportation.”

    Further, the expedited deportations can now occur beyond one hundred miles of the U.S.-Mexico border, and can target people who have been here for as many as two years. “Imagine what can happen in two years,” said Johnson. “All kinds of relief you might be eligible for, but you might not even have a hearing. The reason you have hearings is to try and avoid mistakes: If you don’t … you are probably going to have some mistakes tolerated and accepted.”

    Perhaps more than anything, the humanitarian cost of the Hoover-era deportations are the specter that looms largest over Trump’s immigration policy of today. Given the burden mass deportations would have placed on the federal bureaucracy, Hoover’s administration outsourced the raids, targeting and deportation to local and state officials—persons not particularly well versed in constitutional law, nor the sensitivities surrounding deportation.

    Trump appears ready to do the same: while the administration has directed the hiring of 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials to oversee the dramatic increase in deportations, the administration has also revived the controversial 287(g) program, which recruits local law enforcement and sheriff’s deputies to assist in deportations.

    “It’s frightening and terrifying,” said Johnson. “We have a recent history—one not limited to the 1930s—of law enforcement engaging in excess in the name of law enforcement.”

    “I may be suspicious of ICE officials and how they apply the law,” he added, “but I do think they are trained to enforce the laws. And it’s the job of state and local police to enforce criminal laws—they don’t have the training, expertise or sensitivity to enforce accurate immigration decisions.”

    And yet it’s unclear if federal agents are the ones who intend on showing any particular restraint, given the new guidelines. According to the New York Times, ICE agents have already been targeting church shelters, airports and other areas where immigrants are known to convene.

    Two officials in Washington said that the shift [in policy]— and the new enthusiasm that has come with it — seems to have encouraged pro-Trump political comments and banter that struck the officials as brazen or gung-ho, like remarks about their jobs becoming “fun.” Those who take less of a hard line on unauthorized immigrants feel silenced, the officials said.

    Brazen behavior by those tasked with deportations, Johnson said, “is opening the door to the kinds of excesses that happened ... across the nation during the Depression—when state and local law enforcement made mistakes and rounded up brown people as their way of general relief reduction. I understand why immigrant communities are very frightened about what could happen.”

    In the meantime, only a limited number of Americans seem to even be aware of the gross mistakes their country made in the name of security. While still a state senator, Dunn successfully sponsored the Apology Act, an official mea culpa from the state of California to its Mexican residents—it passed in 2006. He also led efforts to have a memorial erected in La Placita park, the site of the first raids on L.A.’s Mexican community, where it now stands in memoriam.

    And yet, when Dunn took his apology proposal to members of the U.S. Congress, no one was interested. “They would say, ‘Immigration is really volatile right now. We’re gonna look like we’re only fighting for Latinos.’ We couldn’t convince anyone to pick it up.”

    As for all the records and material unearthed during his research? Dunn said, “Those documents are still sitting in my garage. Nobody really wanted them.”

    Those whose families were affected by the deportations—in some cases forever changed—appear no more eager to delve into the sins of the past. “They never talked about it,” said Herrada, “there was a lot of shame associated with it … They didn’t know why they got deported. They didn’t know what they did to bring that on. The only thing they knew was that they were Mexicans—and this only happened to Mexicans.”

    She added, “My grandfather still didn’t want to say he was deported. And my father, on his deathbed, said to me, You know, I never liked that word. He was really angry that I had used it.”

    https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/americas-brutal-forgotten-history-of-illegal-deportations/517971
    #histoire #USA #Etats-Unis #renvois #expulsions #migrations #Mexican_repatriation #Mexique

    signalé par @isskein via la mailing-list de Migreurop

  • #9500_Liberty

    9500 Liberty documents the first time in U.S. history that an Arizona-style immigration law was actually implemented—and the surprising grassroots opposition that led to its repeal.

    Racial tension and threats of violence erupt when Prince William County, #Virginia adopts a law requiring the police to question people who appear to be undocumented immigrants. Supporters of the law ride a wave of hysteria to an election victory. But many reconsider when the local economy feels the impact of a sudden exodus of workers, consumers, and business owners. Despite fears of reprisal, a group of concerned citizens launches a “virtual resistance” using social media, setting up a final showdown with the law’s -ferocious advocates.

    https://vimeo.com/128386646


    #film #documentaire #migrations #USA #xénophobie #racisme #racial_profiling #profilage_ethnique #Etats-Unis #résistance #sans-papiers #réseaux_sociaux

    Le site de #help_save_manassas :
    http://www.helpsavemanassas.org
    –-> #délation :

    Intéressant, autour de 1 heure après le début du documentaire, on montre les répercussions économiques (#économie) de cette loi anti-immigrants, quand un grand nombre de migrants ont quitté la ville... Résultat ? Maisons vides, enfants qui perdent la majorité des amis, restaurants sans clients, etc.

    • #Mexicans_Without_Borders

      Mexicans Without Borders (Spanish: Mexicanos Sin Fronteras) is a Washington, D.C.-based rights group that has been active against what it sees as the growing harassment of alien workers. The group also seeks to address the broader social and political roots of immigration.

      The central objectives of MSF are permanent residency for all illegal aliens residing in the country and the establishment of legal channels for future waves of aliens.

      The committees of undocumented folks that now form the organization first came together in 2001. Its organizers claim that giving permanent residency to the 11 million workers and families in the country illegally would greatly benefit all workers. They have stated that they support all reforms that benefit aliens, but are looking for a more thorough reform that provides solutions to the phenomenon of immigration at a structural level, not just at the level of legality.

      The group has organized mass demonstrations in the Virginia and Washington D.C. areas to protest local laws that they claimed targeting aliens. They also document and record cases of alleged discrimination and racial profiling in order to build civil lawsuits in federal courts.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexicans_Without_Borders

    • #Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform

      The Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) is a non-profit tax exempt organization in the United States that advocates changes in U.S. immigration policy that they believe would result in significant reductions in immigration, both legal and illegal. It reports a membership of more than 250,000 members and supporters,[1] and has been called to testify before the United States Congressional committees on immigration bills.

      FAIR is headquartered in Washington, D.C. It was founded on January 2, 1979, with seed money from the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. Its founding chairman was John Tanton, a leader of many anti-immigration and environmentalist groups, including Zero Population Growth and the Sierra Club’s population committee.[2]

      FAIR’s first executive director was environmental lawyer Roger Conner. Other co-founders included University of California, Santa Barbara, history professor emeritus and author Otis L. Graham, Jr., feminist Sharon Barnes, and the late former Gulf Oil president and board chairman Sidney Swensrud.[3][4] Dan Stein has been president of #FAIR since 1988.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation_for_American_Immigration_Reform

      site de FAIR :
      http://www.fairus.org

    • #Anti_BVBL

      AntiBVBL was formed in February 2008 in response to an anti-immigrant sentiments which surfaced in Prince William County, Virginia. The blog ceased official production in February 2010 but a spin-off blog formed and can be found at Moonhowlings.net

      Prince William County citizens united against these measures which have been declared unconstitutional in other localities, further vindicating their efforts for a tempered approach on the issue.❞

      http://antibvbl.net

  • Mexique : une mystérieuse meurtrière venge les femmes violées | Amérique latine
    http://www.lapresse.ca/international/amerique-latine/201309/03/01-4685702-mexique-une-mysterieuse-meurtriere-venge-les-femmes-violees.php

    Les autorités mexicaines sont à la recherche d’une vengeresse de femmes violées de Ciudad Juárez, à la frontière avec les États-Unis, qui a revendiqué sur internet les récents assassinats de deux conducteurs d’autocar, a annoncé le ministère public de l’État de Chihuahua.

    #Mexique #vengeresse #femmes #violées

  • #Cannibal_Holocaust: Interview With Filmmaker Jorge Michel Grau | Death and Taxes
    http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/54729/cannibal-holocaust-interview-with-filmmaker-jorge-michel-grau

    My friend was impressed not by the art house heavy-hitters like Godard and Leigh but by a #Mexican #horror film by a first time director. The film, he said, was about a family of #cannibals trying to fend for themselves after their father dies. It was called “We Are What We Are” written and directed by Mexican filmmaker Jorge Michel Grau.