Select:
* The Aug Patzin column will
be released Aug. 18.
COLUMN OF THE AMERICAS
AUG. 4, 2008
QUESTIONS JOURNALISTS
NEVER ASK
BY ROBERTO RODRIGUEZ
Having recently returned
from a national journalism conference, I was
reminded how most national
mainstream journalists nowadays fail to ask
the most basic of questions
of powerful corporate executives or
government officials. This
is especially true in regards to issues of
war and peace, where many
journalists and commentators seemingly
continue to act as government
stenographers at best, and cheerleaders
at worst.
Since 911 of 2001, many journalists
have begun to fear that being
watchdogs of freedom will
brand them as disloyal and anti-American.
Here are some questions
you will most likely not hear in the next few
months from mainstream journalists.
Questions for President Bush:
If everything you warned about regarding Iraq was demonstrably
false, why should you
or anyone who has supported your policies be
believed about anything
regarding Iran or anything else for that
matter?
If the United States is the only nation ever to use nuclear weapons
in wartime against civilian
populations, where does this nation get
its moral authority on this
issue?
On Iraq, you defer to "the commanders on the ground" to make
decisions regarding war
and peace. Under the U.S. Constitution, have
you not surrendered your
role as Commander in Chief?
Why have you deliberately equated "supporting the troops" with
supporting your war policies
a practice that has encouraged the
questioning the loyalty
and patriotism of those that have questioned
your policies?
Conventional wisdom holds that "the surge" has worked and has thus
vindicated you. How many
Iraqis and American soldiers died during this
"surge" and has your idea
of "progress" made the war legal?
Questions for House Speaker
Nancy Pelosi:
By taking impeachment hearings "off the table," did you not
unilaterally disarm Congress
in your effort to end the Iraq War and to
hold the president accountable
for starting an illegal, immoral and
unnecessary war?
What has Congress done to ensure that the president cannot wage yet
another illegal war before
his term is out?
Questions for John McCain:
You voted to prohibit U.S. military personnel from utilizing torture
("enhanced interrogation
techniques"), yet you sided with the
president to exempt the
CIA from this prohibition. Doesn't this
loophole render the prohibition
meaningless?
In response to heat from your own party, you have backed away from
your own legislation calling
for comprehensive immigration reform. You
now state that it will come
only after the border is "secure." What is
the definition of "secure"
and does it involve a timeline? Does your
change of position on the
issue an example of "straight-shooting?"
All your experience did not help you in making the decision to
support the president on
illegally invading and occupying Iraq. You
now support an open-ended
deployment in a volatile environment
depending on conditions
on the ground. How much are you prepared to
spend in dollars and lives?
Questions for Barack Obama:
One of your steadfast positions in the primaries was your opposition
to granting immunity to
telecommunications companies that cooperated
with the White House in
spying on Americans without warrants. Why have
you now changed positions?
The president and vice president have amassed unprecedented
executive power. Will you
reverse this, including ceasing the practice
of signing statements that
thwart the intent of Congress?
You appear to believe that the Afghan War is a "just war." How long
are you prepared to stay
there? How much money and how many lives are
you prepared to lose?
Questions for CNN's Lou Dobbs
& Other anti-Immigrants:
You are always quick to point out that you have nothing against
legal immigrants. However,
on "the street," this disdain [and the
accompanying hate crimes]
is focused on brown peoples. How do you and
the people you have stirred
up, distinguish between "legal" and
"illegal" immigrants without
resorting to racial profiling?
Every evening, you tie the notion of broken borders and illegal
immigration to the future
of this nation. Do you honestly believe that
your nightly obsession is
contributing to a more perfect union?
Question for the mainstream
media:
* You in fact do ask the
tough questions not of the strong and
powerful, but of those that
question the strong and powerful. When can
we expect to see a return
to the journalism that is preoccupied with
protecting freedoms as opposed
to the bottom line?
Rodriguez can be reached
at XColumn@gmail.com or Column of the
Americas, PO BOX 85476 -
Tucson, AZ 85754
Columns are archived at:
http://web.mac.com/columnoftheamericas/iWeb/Site/Welcome.html
To the Table of Contents
Business News
To the Table of Contents
Education News
Time for historical lesson
on Mexican migration into U.S.
By Arturo Villarrealand
Charley Trujillo
Article Launched: 08/06/2008
01:34:15 AM PDT
Immigration is driven by
historical and economic necessity on both sides of
the border. There are times
when the United States needs Mexican labor, such
as during World War I and
World War II, that migration is encouraged. During
economic downturns, migration
is discouraged. Repression is directed toward
this population, such as
during the Great Depression, the economic recession
of the 1950s and the present
downturn.
Perhaps by analyzing and
understanding history, we can change our
perspective on the issue
- not by building a fence across the border but by
building a bridge between
two countries that share a long history. It is
difficult to comprehend
that a physical barrier across the border will fence
in history.
Most discussions of Mexican
migration into the United States lack a
historical perspective that
lead to characterize it as a spontaneous and
recent phenomenon. However,
people of Mexican origin are descendants of one
of the six original world
civilizations and whose ancestors help lay the
foundation for the development
of the present-day Southwest and other
regions.
The melting pot theory of
assimilation and its assumptions are most often
used by journalists, politicians
and citizens who don't believe Mexican
immigrants, legal or not,
are productive members of society. At best, this
theory is applicable to
ethnic immigrants of European heritage. Unlike
European immigrants who
had to traverse an ocean, this theory does not apply
to Native Americans or Mexicans
who are indigenous to America.
The first significant contact
between whites and Chicanos led to the Texas
revolt of 1834-36 when the
symbolic battle of the Alamo occurred. Many of
the whites in the Alamo
were undocumented because Mexico barred further
white immigration into Texas
in 1830. Armed with a strong military and the
ideological doctrine of
manifest destiny that deemed the United States as
people chosen by God to
rule from sea to shining sea, the United States
invaded Mexico in 1846.
Mexico lost the war and signed
the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848.
Mexico ceded California,
Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and parts of Nevada,
Utah and Wyoming for $15
million. Under the treaty, remaining Mexicans
became U.S. citizens with
all rights of property, language and religion.
However, the provisions
were ignored; or, in the case of property, it was
taken by legal and extralegal
means.
Violence against Chicanos
by vigilantes and law enforcement officials was so
severe that scores left
for Mexico. Violence faced by those remaining was
comparable to what blacks
faced in the South. By the early 1900s, cheap
Mexican labor was needed
for work in the mines, railroads, agriculture and
other industries. During
this period, Mexicans also migrated to the Midwest
and Northwest. The Mexican
Revolution and World War I also contributed to
push and pull factors that
brought migration of Mexicans into the United
States. It is estimated
one-eighth of Mexico's population legally moved into
the United States during
this period.
Mexican labor has been instrumental
in the development of infrastructure and
capital accumulation in
the United States. However, with the economic
depression of the 1930s,
Mexican labor was no longer necessary. Hundreds of
thousands of Mexicans were
deported. This deportation included U.S.
citizens, a practice that
continues.
Racial categorization in
the United States is the confusion of race,
nationality and ethnicity,
whereby people of Mexican origin are always
suspect of being foreign,
regardless of legal status. To the dominant
society, however, they are
all indistinguishable. Unlike European immigrant
groups who are removed geographically
from home countries, Chicano culture
and language are reinforced
by new arrivals from Mexico. Unlike immigrants
from other countries who
can forge a new place for themselves, migrants from
Mexico have a ready-made
niche for them because of historical circumstances.
Historical perceptions and
stereotypes of Mexicans precede them as they
venture into other parts
of the United States. Hopefully, by understanding
our shared history, we can
refrain from stereotyping and scapegoating
Mexicans.
ARTURO VILLARREAL is a professor
at Evergreen Valley College in San Jose.
CHARLEY TRUJILLO is a writer
and publisher in San Jose. They wrote this
article for the Mercury
News.
To the Table of Contents
Health News
To the Table of Contents
Spotlight
To the Table of Contents
Technology News
To the Table of Contents
Art
