Nuestro Puerto Rico del Alma

Una vida no es fuerte sino cuando se ha consagrado a conquistar su ideal por sencillo que sea. Eugenio María de Hostos.

domingo, 30 de noviembre de 2008

don Manuel G Tavárez y don Cayetano Coll y Toste

28: 1843-1883 Nacimiento de don Manuel G. Tavárez en San Juan. Fue músico y compositor. Padre de la danza puertorriqueña compuso Entre otras, las Danzas Margarita, Ausencia y Violeta.

30: 1850-1930 Nacimiento de don Cayetano Coll y Toste en Arecibo. Fue medico e historiador. Entre sus obras más conocidas están Tradiciones y Leyendas Puertorriqueñas y el Boletín Histórico de Puerto Rico.

sábado, 29 de noviembre de 2008

Para los amantes del buen jazz

WBGO Jazz 88.3 FM es una estación de Jazz de la ciudad de Newark, NJ. Se puede escuchar en la Internet las 24 horas del día. Los amantes del buen jazz podrán disfrutar de buena música. Este es la dirección:

Que lo disfruten.

viernes, 28 de noviembre de 2008

Troops battle to end Mumbai siege

Commandos are battling the last few militants at a landmark Mumbai hotel, two days after the start of attacks which have killed at least 144 people.

While almost 100 people were rescued from a second hotel, six bodies were found at a Jewish centre and battles rage on at the Taj Mahal Palace Hotel.

A 29-year-old rabbi and his wife were confirmed as among those killed.

India's foreign minister has said "elements with links to Pakistan" were involved in the attacks on Mumbai.

However, his Pakistani counterpart has urged India not to bring politics into the issue, saying "we should join hands to defeat the enemy".

'Ultimate sacrifice'

As night fell on the Taj Mahal Palace hotel, the landmark building which has become the symbol of the crisis, the BBC's Adam Mynott reported that militants were continuing to hold out.

New explosions and gunfire rang out from the luxury hotel at about 0400 local time (2230 GMT), reports said. Blasts had rung out for most of the day after truckloads of commandos entered the premises.

A journalist and bystander outside the hotel were taken to hospital after being hit by shrapnel.

Indian commandos who managed to enter other parts of the Taj say they found at least 30 bodies in one hall.

JK Dutt, the head of India's elite National Security Guards, told Reuters news agency he suspected two or three gunmen remained inside.

Fighting appears to have ended at the other key flashpoints in Mumbai, chief among them the Oberoi-Trident hotel - where nearly 100 people were rescued and 24 bodies were found earlier on Friday.

But at Nariman House, the Mumbai base of Chabad-Lubavitch, a New York-based orthodox Jewish organisation, the news was grim.

As night fell in Mumbai, the organisation confirmed that Rabbi Gavriel Holtzberg, 29, had been killed alongside his wife, Rivka.

The Holtzbergs had moved to India in 2003 from New York to run the Mumbai branch of the outreach organisation, which offers services and hospitality to Jewish travellers.

In New York, Rabbi Moshe Kotlarsky, of Chabad-Lubavitch, said the Holtzbergs made "the ultimate sacrifice".

The couple's young son Moshe - who will mark his second birthday on Saturday - was evacuated from the building earlier in the day as commandos battled the hostage-takes inside. He is now being cared for by his grandparents.

There was no word on the identities of the others found dead on the premises, but Orthodox Jewish rescuers sent to Mumbai to assist also confirmed that five bodies had been found. Two kidnappers were also reported killed.

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said the attack was no coincidence: "The fact that the attack took place at the Chabad house is the clearest sign that the attack was directed against Jews and Israelis."

Death toll rising

The stand-offs began late on Wednesday when gunmen armed with automatic weapons and grenades opened fire indiscriminately on crowds at a major railway station, the two hotels, the Jewish centre, a hospital and a cafe frequented by foreigners.

Indian media have reported that at least 154 people have been killed since Wednesday, with around 370 injured, the vast majority Indian citizens.

An Indian official said the toll could rise much higher.

"Once the bodies are collected, the number of deaths might go up to 200," said Minister of State for Home Affairs Sri Prakash Jaiswal.

Confirmation also came on Friday that a French couple and two US citizens died while eating at the Oberoi-Trident. The US state department said Americans were still at risk in Mumbai.

At least 16 foreigners are known to have died, including victims from Germany, Japan, Canada, Australia, Italy and Singapore. One Briton, Andreas Liveras, has been killed.

But security services said they had killed at least two militants as they freed people from the Oberoi-Trident on Friday morning.

One of those freed, Briton Mark Abell, spoke of his delight at seeing several heavily armed soldiers at his hotel door after spending more than 36 hours in his room.

But he was shocked by the state of the hotel. "The lobby was carnage, blood and guts everywhere. It was very upsetting," he told the BBC.

Pakistani 'link'

State home minister RR Patil, speaking outside the Oberoi-Trident hotel, said a total of nine militants had been killed, along with 15 police officers and two commandos.

He said one of those arrested was a Pakistani citizen.

Earlier, the Indian navy took control of two Pakistani merchant navy ships and began questioning their crews after witnesses said some of the militants came ashore on small speedboats.

India's Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee said preliminary evidence "leads us to believe that some elements in Pakistan may be connected to these events". But he added that it was too soon to give details.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi responded by saying: "This is a collective issue. We are facing a common enemy and we should join hands to defeat the enemy."

The head of Pakistan's powerful military intelligence agency, Ahmed Shuja Pasha, was due to travel to India to discuss the situation with his Indian counterparts, but will now send a representative instead, reports say.

India has complained in the past that attacks on its soil have been carried out by groups based in Pakistan, although relations between the two countries have improved in recent years and Pakistani leaders were swift to condemn the latest attacks.

But the BBC's Pakistan correspondent, Barbara Plett, says there is a feeling among senior officials in Islamabad that India has acted too hastily in linking the Mumbai attackers to Pakistan.

In the UK, officials denied reports that some of the attackers may have been British citizens of Pakistani origin.

The UK officials said had Indian authorities told them there was no indication so far that anyone shot or in custody was British.

A claim of responsibility for this week's attacks - the worst in India's commercial capital since nearly 200 people were killed in a series of bombings in 2006 - has been made by a previously unknown group calling itself the Deccan Mujahideen.

However, most intelligence officials are keeping an open mind as the attacks have thrown up conflicting clues, BBC security correspondent Frank Gardner says.

Fuente: Story from BBC NEWS:

Published: 2008/11/28 22:35:47 GMT


Matanza terrorista en India

El saldo de víctimas de los atentados de Bombay asciende a más de 150.

Cinco rehenes muertos en el centro israelí, asaltado por agentes de élite.- El ejército libera el hotel Oberoi y saca a todos los rehenes, incluidos dos españoles.- Hay tres estadounidenses muertos.- La policía aún lucha en el hotel Taj Mahal.

Cinco rehenes muertos en el centro israelí, asaltado por agentes de élite.- El ejército libera el hotel Oberoi y saca a todos los rehenes, incluidos dos españoles. Hay tres estadounidenses muertos.- La policía aún lucha en el hotel Taj Mahal.

ELPAÍ / AGENCIAS - Madrid / Bombay - 28/11/2008

La policía y el ejército indios están ultimando las operaciones para liberar los tres edificios que esta mañana seguían en poder de los terroristas que el miércoles sembraron el caos y el pánico en Bombay, además de causar al menos 150 muertos y otros 300 heridos. En primer lugar, el hotel Oberoy / Trident ha quedado "completamente bajo control" y "libre de terroristas", según ha informado el jefe del comando que lo ha asaltado esta madrugada. Finalmente, otro comando de élite ha asaltado el centro judío Nariman House. Han muerto dos terroristas, pero los soldados no han podido salvar a cinco rehenes, que han sido hallados muertos.

Al tiempo que los soldados entraban en el Oberoi, efectivos especiales han saltado desde un helicóptero al tejado del centro judío Nariman House. Durante toda la mañana se han oído disparos y explosiones. La operación ha finalizado sobre las 13.00 GMT, aunque con éxito relativo. Según J. K. Dutt, director general de la Guardia Nacional de Seguridad, el cuerpo de élite que ha llevado a cabo los asaltos, sus hombres han volado un muro exterior del centro y han irrumpido en él, "neutralizando" -matando- a dos terroristas. sin embargo, no han podido evitar la muerte de cinco rehenes.

El que ha quedado liberado completamente es el hotel Oberoi, donde esta mañana aún había varias decenas de huéspedes atrapados, entre ellos dos empresarios españoles, Álvaro Rengifo y Alejandro de la Joya, que ya ha podido salir sanos y salvos. Lo han hecho después de que un comando de élite del ejército indio se lanzara al asalto del hotel descolgándose de helicópteros sobre la azotea. En el asalto habrían sido abatidos al menos nueve terroristas, según ha informado J. K. Dutt, precisando que ahora sus comandos se centran en comprobar que no quedan "elementos no deseados". En el asalto, las fuerzas especiales han encontrado más de 20 cadáveres.

Finalmente, a pocas manzanas del Oberoi, la policía seguía enfrascada en el hotel Taj Mahal, donde al menos un terrorista se resiste a entregarse. Este hotel, una de las joyas arquitectónicas de la ciudad, construido el siglo XIX, pareció haber quedado limpio ayer, pero esta mañana se ha reavivado el fuego entre los agentes que lo registraban puerta por puerta y un militante escondido, al que aún no han logrado dar caza.

Confusión sobre la autoría de los ataques

En un principio, la autoría de los atentados se atribuyó a la organización islamista Deccan Muyahidiny, que había reivindicado las acciones. Sin embargo, tres de los terroristas detenidos en el transcurso de la contraofensiva del ejército indio han confesado ser miembros de la célula rebelde con base en Pakistán, Lashkar-e-Taiba (Ejército de los Puros), según ha informado el diario Hindu. Lashkar-e-Taiba, uno de los grupos de milicianos islamistas más influyentes en Asia, había negado este jueves su implicación en los atentados.

El primer ministro, Manmonah Singh, en una comparecencia ante la nación ayer, condenó los ataques y manifestó que su Gobierno tomará "las medidas necesarias para defender la seguridad" de los ciudadanos. Además, señaló a terroristas llegados de fuera del país como responsables de la matanza.

En este sentido, el ministro de Asuntos Exteriores indio, Pranab Mukherjee, ha señalado directamente hoy a militantes paquistaníes como responsables de la cadena de atentados y ha pedido al país vecino que desmantele la infraestructura que los cobija. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, el jefe del espionaje paquistaní, ha viajado hasta Bombay para aliviar tensiones.

Víctimas de varias nacionalidades

Entre el más de centenar de muertos en esta oleada de ataques hay varios extranjeros, entre los que se ha confirmado la presencia de un ciudadano británico, cuatro australianos, un italiano y un japonés. Además, el Departamento de Estado de EE UU ha informado de la muerte de tres ciudadanos estadounidenses, un hombre de 58 años y su hija de 13 y un rabino de Brooklyn, Gavriel Holtzberg. También ha muerto su mujer.

Entre los heridos hay también un matrimonio español, formado por Rafael Deaux y María Rosa Romero. Ambos continúan hospitalizados con pronóstico leve y su salud no corre peligro. Se prevé que permanezcan en la ciudad aún unos días.

En los sucesos se vieron envueltos la presidenta de la Comunidad de Madrid, Esperanza Aguirre, y la delegación que la acompañaba en su visita, junto a un grupo de parlamentarios europeos entre los que se encontraba el español Ignasi Guardans (CIU). Aguirre, que ha salido ilesa -así como Guardans-, fue evacuada de la zona de conflicto y llegó este jueves por la mañana a Madrid.

© Diario EL PAÍS S.L. - Miguel Yuste 40 - 28037 Madrid [España] - Tel. 91 337 8200
© Prisacom S.A. - Ribera del Sena, S/N - Edificio APOT - Madrid [España] - Tel. 91 353 7900

miércoles, 26 de noviembre de 2008

Carta Autonomica a Puerto Rico.

1897- Se le concede la Carta Autonómica a Puerto Rico.

“Una vez aprobada por las Cortes del Reino la presente Constitución para las Islas de Cuba y Puerto Rico, no podrá modificarse sino en virtud de una ley a petición del Parlamento insular.”

Carta Autonómica.

Atentado terrorista en Bombay

Al menos 80 muertos en varios tiroteos y explosiones en Bombay

Un ataque coordinado con tiroteos y explosiones ha dejado 80 muertos y 250 heridos en Bombay, entre los que figura un eurodiputado húngaro cuya identidad aún no ha trascendido, ha informado la policía. Sin embargo, la eurocámara ha asegurado que no hay heridos en su delegación y que todos se encuentran bien. En siete lugares se han producido explosiones, incluído el hotel Oberoy y otro establecimiento hotelero cercano que están situados en la zona más elegante y turística de Bombay, informa Ana Gabriela Rojas desde Nueva Delhi.

Los ataques han sido reivindicados por una organización autodenominada como Deccan Mujahideen. Los asaltantes tienen rehenes dentro de los hoteles y están buscando pasaportes de extranjeros. En uno de los hoteles que han sufrido los atentados continúan atrapados tres españoles.

En los sucesos de hoy se han visto envueltos la presidenta de la Comunidad de Madrid, Esperanza Aguirre, y la delegación que la acompaña en su viaje a India. Cuando se registraban en el hotel en que se iban a hospedar les sorprendió un intenso tiroteo en Bombay, del que han escapado sin sufrir daño alguno, al margen del tremendo susto. Esta web ha sabido de fuentes de la Comunidad de Madrid que la presidenta regional estaba a pocos metros y que oyó silbar las balas. Aguirre fue evacuada de la zona de conflicto y se encuentra volando hacia España, vía Zurich, junto a cuatro miembros del contingente español. En Bombai permanece parte de la delegación en el domicilio del cónsul de España.

El suceso comenzó pasadas las 22.00 hora local (cuatro horas y media menos en la España peninsular) en el interior del hotel Oberoy de Bombay, que ha sido inmediatamente desalojado. El contingente español había llegado esta tarde a la ciudad procedente de Bangalore y se registraba en el edificio cuando se produjo el suceso.

Fuentes de la embajada aseguran que todos están bien aunque hay mucho caos y confusión. Los miembros de la delegación están muy asustados. Varias de las personas que acompañan a Aguirre han contado a este medio que las carreteras están bloqueadas. El hotel en llamas y se ha producido una nueva explosión.

La delegación de la Comunidad de Madrid que está visitando Bombay se encuentra fuera del hotel en el que estaba alojada, en un malecón justo enfrente del establecimiento. "Nos hemos salvado de milagro. Estamos muy mal. Muy destrozados y hechos polvo. Pensábamos que nos iba a pasar lo peor", afirmó con mucho nerviosismo un trabajador de la Comunidad de Madrid, ha informado F. Javier Barroso. El presidente del Gobierno, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, ha telefoneado este miércoles por la tarde a la presidenta de la Comunidad de Madrid para interesarse por su estado y el de sus acompañantes y ha puesto a su disposición los servicios del Consulado General de España en Bombay y de la Embajada en Nueva Delhi, además de ofrecerles todo el apoyo del Gobierno.

Se teme que se trate de un atentado terrorista. Según fuentes de la embajada algunos miembros de la delegación escucharon dos bombas, aunque no está confirmado. Según los medios indios hay diez muertos.

El eurodiputado Ignasi Guardans ha contado a la cadena SER cómo ha sido el tiroteo . Guardans ha contado a este medio que se encuentra en un restaurante junto al hotel Taj Mahal, donde se encuentran alojados y ha declarado "estamos muy asustados, ahora mismo acaba de sonar una bomba". El presidente de los empresarios madrileños ha confirmado a la cadena que "toda la comisión está bien ".

Aguirre se encontraba de visita en el Estado indio de Karnataka, para visitar el campus de Infosys Tecnologies, una de las multinacionales de la informática líder en el mundo, entre otras actividades.

EL PAÍ - Madrid - 26/11/2008

Fuente: EL Pais

martes, 25 de noviembre de 2008

Luchan por lo mismo que luchó Roma.

“Luchan por lo mismo que luchó Roma. Roma apoyó al rico contra el pobre en todas las comunidades extranjeras que cayeron en su poder; y como los pobres fueron cada vez más numerosos que los ricos, Roma se hizo partidaria de la desigualdad, la injusticia y menor felicidad para el mayor número. A menos que mi apreciación sea incorrecta, Estados Unidos ha adoptado deliberadamente la decisión de desempeñar el papel de Roma”.

Arnold Toynbee (1961).

lunes, 24 de noviembre de 2008

Resolución 1514 de la ONU sobre la concesión de la Independencia a los países y pueblos coloniales

La Asamblea General,

Teniendo presente que los pueblos del mundo han proclamado en la Carta de las Naciones Unidas que están resueltos a reafirmar la fe en los derechos fundamentales del hombre, en la dignidad y el valor de la persona humana, en la igualdad de derechos de hombres y mujeres y de las naciones grandes y pequeñas y a promover el progreso social y a elevar el nivel de vida dentro de un concepto más amplio de la libertad.

Consciente de la necesidad de crear condiciones de estabilidad y bienestar y relaciones pacíficas y amistosas basadas en el respeto de los principios de la igualdad de derechos y de la libre determinación de todos los pueblos, y de asegurar el respeto universal de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales para todos sin hacer distinción por motivos de raza, sexo, idioma o religión, y la efectividad de tales derechos y libertades.

Reconociendo el apasionado deseo de libertad que abrigan todos los pueblos de pendientes y el papel decisivo de dichos pueblos en el logro de su independencia.

Consciente de los crecientes conflictos que origina el hecho de negar la libertad a esos pueblos o de impedirla, lo cual constituye una grave amenaza a la paz mundial.

Considerando el importante papel que corresponde a las Naciones Unidas como medio de favorecer el movimiento en pro de la independencia en los territorios en fideicomiso y en los territorios no autónomos.

Reconociendo que los pueblos del mundo desean ardientemente el fin del colonialismo en todas sus manifestaciones.

Convencida de que la continuación del colonialismo impide el desarrollo de la cooperación económica internacional, entorpece el desarrollo social, cultural y económico de los pueblos dependientes y milita en contra del ideal de paz universal de las Naciones Unidas,

Afirmando que los pueblos pueden, para sus propios fines, disponer libremente de sus riquezas y recursos naturales sin perjuicio de las obligaciones resultantes de la cooperación económica internacional, basada en el principio del provecho mutuo, y del derecho internacional,

Creyendo que el proceso de liberación es irresistible e irreversible y que, a fin de evitar crisis graves, es preciso poner fin al colonialismo y a todas las prácticas de segregación y discriminación que lo acompañan.

Celebrando que en los últimos años muchos territorios dependientes hayan alcanzado la libertad y la independencia, y reconociendo las tendencias cada vez más poderosas hacia la libertad que se manifiestan en los territorios que no han obtenido aún la independencia.

Convencida de que todos los pueblos tienen un derecho inalienable a la libertad absoluta, al ejercicio de su soberanía y a la integridad de su territorio nacional.
Proclama solemnemente la necesidad de poner fin rápida e incondicionalmente al colonialismo en todas sus formas y manifestaciones.

Y a dicho efecto

Declara que:

1. La sujeción de pueblos a una subyugación, dominación y explotación extranjeras constituye una negación de los derechos humanos fundamentales, es contraria a la Carta de las Naciones Unidas y compromete la causa de la paz y de la cooperación mundiales.

2. Todos los pueblos tienen el derecho de libre determinación; en virtud de este derecho, determinan libremente su condición política y persiguen libremente su desarrollo económico, social y cultural.

3. La falta de preparación en el orden político, económico, social o educativo no deberá servir nunca de pretexto para retrasar la independencia.

4. A fin de que los pueblos dependientes puedan ejercer pacíficamente y libre mente su derecho a la independencia completa, deberá cesar toda acción armada o toda medida represiva de cualquier índole dirigida contra ellos, y deberá respetarse la integridad de su territorio nacional.

5. En los territorios en fideicomiso y no autónomos y en todos los demás territorios que no han logrado aún su independencia deberán tomarse inmediatamente medidas para traspasar todos los poderes a los pueblos de esos territorios, sin condiciones ni reservas, en conformidad con su voluntad y sus deseos libremente expresa dos, y sin distinción de raza, credo ni color, para permitirles gozar de una libertad y una independencia absolutas.

6. Todo intento encaminado a quebrantar total o parcialmente la unidad nacional y la integridad territorial de un país es incompatible con los propósitos y principios de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas.

7. Todos los Estados deberán observar fiel y estrictamente las disposiciones de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas, de la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos y de la presente Declaración sobre la base de la igualdad, de la no intervención en los asuntos internos de los demás Estados y del respeto de los derechos soberanos de todos los pueblos y de su integridad territorial.

Nueva York

14 de diciembre de 1960

sábado, 22 de noviembre de 2008

Soplan vientos de represión y persecución

Hago acuse de recibo del libro, La Mordaza, de la Dra. Ivonne Acosta Lespier. Es la Quinta Edición (2008) y tengo el privilegio y el honor de haber leído este magnifico libro en su primera edición de 1987 y de haber regalado el mismo a colegas y amigos.

Ivonne, como le gusta que le digan, tiene y tendrá un lugar en nuestra historia por la gran aportación que realizo mediante esta investigación y posterior publicación del libro. Este libro es la recopilación de eventos y hechos que marcaron una terrible época de la historia de nuestro país. Fue la era de la ley 53 de 1948, o mejor conocida como La Mordaza.

Fue una década (de 1947 al 1958) de “brutal” represión por parte del estado. Dicha ley se derogó posteriormente, pero no así la práctica del carpeteo, ni la persecución de ciudadanos por el mero hecho de creer y defender unas causas.
Como bien señala la autora, “No se puede entender la historia reciente de Puerto Rico sin que se conozca la historia de La Mordaza”. Pero a este comentario hay que añadirle que no se puede entender el presente y el futuro del país sin leer este maravilloso libro.

Todos aquellos que sentimos de algún modo la represión y persecución del estado en el pasado, de ese estado que está obligado a proteger los derechos civiles de los ciudadanos y no a violentarlos, sentimos aprehensión por unos cambios que estamos viendo en nuestra amada isla.

Hay que ser cauteloso con un gobierno que controla la gobernación, la legislatura, la mayoría de las alcaldías, y el cual propone nombrar como jefe de la policía al Sub-Director del Buró Federal de Investigaciones. Todos sabemos lo que esta agencia ha hecho y hace en el país. Por otro lado, “The United Justice Court”, los fiscales y jueces de dicha corte tienen un historial nefasto y una trayectoria de represión en el país. Para mí, este cuadro es peligroso, da pánico y pavor.

Solo hay que mirar ese pasado que Ivonne denuncia y expone en su libro, y descubriremos que nuestro futuro no es nada halagador, soplan vientos de represión y persecución, solo hay que mirar al coliseo romano y ver al pueblo pedir…

La represión y persecución vendrá para los ambientalistas, los defensores de los derechos humanos, los independentistas y todos aquellos que no piensen como los “Romanos”. Solo el tiempo dirá si mis aprehensiones son infundadas o no.

¿Cual será la realidad?

“Por esta razón, entre muchas otras la relevancia de las historias de intolerancia y opresión como las que se detallan en La Mordaza no caducan”. Eugenio Martínez Rod

Gracias por el obsequio.

viernes, 21 de noviembre de 2008

Hoy en la Historia

El Tribunal Supremo de Puerto Rico confirma la sentencia dictada por el Hon. Arnaldo Pérez Rodríguez declarando inconstitucional la preparación de expedientes policíacos a 135,000 ciudadanos únicamente por su creencia en la independencia y sin prueba de que hubiesen cometido alguna actividad delictiva. No es delito creer en la independencia.

"No cabe duda alguna que la
Acción en estos casos envuelve
Un agravio de patente intensidad
Al derecho del individuo que
Requiere en este momento
Urgente reparación.”

Arnaldo López Rodríguez

jueves, 20 de noviembre de 2008


U.S. Supreme Court

BALZAC v. PEOPLE OF PORTO RICO, 258 U.S. 298 (1922)
258 U.S. 298


Nos. 178, 179.
Argued March 20, 1922.

Decided April 10, 1922.

[258 U.S. 298, 299] Mr. Jackson H. Ralston, of Washington, D. C. for plaintiff in error.

Mr. Grant T. Trent, of Washington, D. C., for the People of Porto Rico.
[258 U.S. 298, 300]

Mr. Chief Justice TAFT delivered the opinion of the Court.
These are two prosecutions for criminal libel, brought against the same defendant, Jesus M. Balzac, on informations filed in the district court for Arecibo, Porto Rico, by the district attorney for that district. Balzac was the editor of a daily paper published in Arecibo, known as 'El Baluarte,' and the articles upon which the charges of libel were based were published on April 16 and April 23, 1918, respectively. In each case the defendant demanded a jury. The Code of Criminal Procedure of Porto Rico grants a jury trial in cases of felony, but not in misdemeanors. The defendant, nevertheless, contended that he was entitled to a jury in such a case, under the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, and that the language of the alleged libels was only fair comment, and their publication was protected by the First Amendment. His contentions were overruled; he was tried by the court, and was convicted in both cases and sentenced to five months' imprisonment in the district jail in the first, and to four months in the second, and to the payment of the costs in each. The defendant appealed to the Supreme Court of Porto Rico. That court affirmed both judgments. People v. Balzac, 28 P. R. R. 139; second case, 28 P. R. R. 141.

The first question in these cases is one of jurisdiction of this court. By section 244 of the Judicial Code, approved March 3, 1911 (36 Stat. 1157), it was provided that writs of error and appeals from the final judgments and decrees of the Supreme Court of Porto Rico might be prosecuted to this court in any case in which was drawn in question the validity of a treaty or statute of, or authority exercised under, the United States or wherein the Constitution of the United States, or a treaty thereof, or an act of Congress was brought in question and the right claimed thereunder was denied, and this without regard to the [258 U.S. 298, 301] amount involved. By the Act of January 28, 1915 (38 Stat. 803), section 244 of the Judicial Code was repealed, but section 246 (Comp. St. 1223) was amended and made to apply to the appellate jurisdiction of this court in respect to the decisions of the Supreme Court, not only of Hawaii, as before, but also Porto Rico, and it was provided that writs of error to those courts from this court could be prosecuted in the same class of cases as those in which this court was authorized under section 237 of the Judicial Code (Comp. St. 1214) to review decisions of state courts of last resort. Section 237 at that time allowed a writ of error to final decisions in state courts of last resort where was drawn in question the validity of a treaty, or a statute of, or an authority exercised under, the United States and the decision was against its validity, or where was drawn in question the validity of a statute of, or an authority exercised under any state, on the ground of its being repugnant to the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States and the decision was in favor of its validity, or where any title, right, privilege, or immunity was claimed under the Constitution, or any treaty or statute of, or commission held, or authority exercised under, the United States, and the decision was against the title, right, privilege or immunity especially set up or claimed by either party under such Constitution, treaty, statute, commission or authority. By Act of January 28, 1915 (38 Stat. 803, 804, amending section 246), this court was given power by certiorari to bring up for review all final judgments or decrees in civil or criminal cases in the supreme courts of Porto Rico and Hawaii, other than those reviewable here by writ of error because in the class similar to that described in section 237 of the Judicial Code. By Act of September 6, 1916 (39 Stat. 726), the jurisdiction of this court to review by writ of error, under section 237, final judgments and decrees of state courts of last resort was cut down by omitting cases (other than those involving the validity of [258 U.S. 298, 302] a treaty, statute or authority exercised under the United States or any state) wherein a title, right, privilege, or immunity, was claimed under the Constitution, or any treaty or statute of, or commission held, or authority exercised under, the United States, and the decision was against such title, right, privilege or immunity, and such cases, it was provided, could only be examined on review in this court by certiorari.

The question now presented is whether the amendment to section 237 of the Judicial Code by the Act of 1916 applies to, and affects, the appellate jurisdiction of this court in reviewing decisions of the Supreme Court of Porto Rico. We think it does. We think that the manifest purpose of the Act of 1915, amending section 246 of the Code, in its reference to section 237 of the Judicial Code was to assimilate the appellate jurisdiction of this Court over the Supreme Courts of Porto Rico and Hawaii to that over state courts of last resort, and that the reference in amended section 246, to section 237 may be fairly construed to embrace subsequent changes in section 237 that are not obviously inapplicable.

This brings us to the question whether there was drawn in question in these cases the validity of a statute of Porto Rico under the Constitution of the United States. The Penal Code of Porto Rico divides crimes into felonies and misdemeanors. Rev. Stat. and Codes of Porto Rico 1911, Penal Code, 13. A felony is described as a crime punishable by death or imprisonment in the penitentiary. Every other crime is declared to be a misdemeanor. Penal Code, 14. Section 178 of the Porto Rican Code of Criminal Procedure provided that issues of fact in cases of felony should be tried by a jury when the defendant so elected, but gave no such right in the case of misdemeanors. This was construed by the Supreme Court to deny such right. People v. Bird, 5 P. R. R. 387.

By section 244 (5676) of the Penal Code (as amended by Act of March 9, 1911, p. 71), the publication of a libel is made [258 U.S. 298, 303] punishable by a fine not exceeding $5,000, or imprisonment in jail for a term not exceeding two years, or both such fine and imprisonment, and also the costs of the action in the discretion of the court. It is, therefore, plain that libel under the Porto Rican law is a misdemeanor, and a jury trial was not required therein. By the Act of July 22, 1919 (Laws of Porto Rico 1919, No. 84, p. 684), a jury trial is now given in misdemeanors, but that did not come into force until after these libels were published and these trials had.

When the Penal Code, and the Code of Criminal Procedure were first passed in 1901, they both contained the provision that in all cases of libel the jury should determine the law and the fact. It was held, however, by the Supreme Court of Porto Rico in People v. Bird, 5 P. R. R. 387, 405, that this did not give a jury trial, but only made provision that if and when a right of jury trial was given in such cases, the jury should have the power to determine the law and the fact. Thereafter the Act of March 10, 1904 (Laws of Porto Rico 1904, p. 130), expressly repealed all reference to trials for libel in the Jury Act.

The effect of the Penal Code of Procedure, as construed by the Supreme Court of Porto Rico, and of the Act of March 10, 1904, repealing the jury act as to libel cases, was a statutory denial of the right of jury trial in such cases. A demand for a jury trial in this case, therefore, drew in question the validity of the statutes upon which the court relied in denying the demand. This necessarily leads to the conclusion that these cases are in the same class as those which come to this court by writ of error under section 237, as amended by the Act of 1916, and that jurisdiction by writ of error exists.

Was the issue properly saved in the record by the defendant? We think it was. The demand for a jury trial, the statute to the contrary notwithstanding, was made at the trial. It was renewed in the assignments of error in [258 U.S. 298, 304] the Porto Rican Supreme Court and here. Those assignments did not mention the statutes whose validity was involved, but merely averred that the defendant had been denied his right as an American citizen under the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution. While this is informal, we think that it is sufficient when the record discloses the real nature of the controversy and the specification of the assignment leaves no doubt that it is directed to that controversy.

We have now to inquire whether that part of the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution, which requires that in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, applies to Porto Rico. Another provision on the subject is in article 3 of the Constitution providing that the trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed. The Seventh Amendment of the Constitution provides that in suits at common law, when the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved. It is well settled that these provisions for jury trial in criminal and civil cases apply to the Territories of the United States. Webster v. Reid, 11 How. 437, 460; Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 , 167; Callan v. Wilson, 127 U.S. 540, 556 , 8 S. Sup. Ct. 1301; American Publishing Co. v. Fisher, 166 U.S. 464 , 17 Sup. Ct. 618; Thompson v. Utah, 170 U.S. 343, 347 , 18 S. Sup. Ct. 620; Capital Traction Co. v. Hof, 174 U.S. 1 , 19 Sup. Ct. 580; Black v. Jackson, 177 U.S. 349 , 20 Sup. Ct. 648; Rasmussen v. United States, 197 U.S. 516, 528 , 25 S. Sup. Ct. 514; Gurvich v. United States, 198 U.S. 581 , 25 Sup. Ct. 803. But it is just as clearly settled that they do not apply to territory belonging to the [258 U.S. 298, 305] United States which has not been incorporated into the Union.

Hawaii v. Mankichi, 190 U.S. 197 , 23 Sup. Ct. 787; Dorr v. United States, 195 U.S. 138, 145 , 24 S. Sup. Ct. 808, 1 Ann. Cas. 697. It was further settled in Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 , 21 Sup. Ct. 770, and confirmed by Dorr v. United States, 195 U.S. 138 , 24 Sup. Ct. 808, 1 Ann. Cas. 697, that neither the Philippines nor Porto Rico was territory which had been incorporated in the Union or become a part of the United States, as distinguished from merely belonging to it; and that the acts giving temporary governments to the Philippines, 32 Stat. 691 (Comp. St. 3804 et seq.), and to Porto Rico, 31 Stat. 77 (Comp. St. 3748 et seq.), had no such effect. The Insular Cases revealed much diversity of opinion in this Court as to the constitutional status of the territory acquired by the Treaty of Paris ending the Spanish War, but the Dorr Case shows that the opinion of Mr. Justice White of the majority, in Downes v. Bidwell, has become the settled law of the court. The conclusion of this court in the Dorr Case, 195 U.S. 149 , 24 Sup. Ct. 813, 1 Ann. Cas. 697, was as follows:

'We conclude that the power to govern territory, implied in the right to acquire it, and given to Congress in the Constitution in article 4 , 3, to whatever other limitations it may be subject, the extent of which must be decided as questions arise, does not require that body to enact for ceded territory, not made part of the United States by congressional action, a system of laws which shall include the right of trial by jury, and that the Constitution does not, without legislation and of its own force, carry such right to territory so situated.'

The question before us, therefore, is: Has Congress, since the Foraker Act of April 12, 1900 (31 Stat. 77), enacted legislation incorporating Porto Rico into the Union? Counsel for the plaintiff in error give, in their brief, an extended list of acts, to which we shall refer later, which they urge as indicating a purpose to make the island a part of the United States, but they chiefly rely on the Organic Act of Porto Rico of March 2, 1917 (38 Stat. 951 [Comp. St. 3803a-3803z]), known as the Jones Act. [258 U.S. 298, 306] The act is entitled 'An act to provide a civil government for Porto Rico and for other purposes.' It does not indicate by its title that it has a purpose to incorporate the island into the Union. It does not contain any clause which declares such purpose or effect. While this is not conclusive, it strongly tends to show that Congress did not have such an intention. Few questions have been the subject of such discussion and dispute in our country as the status of our territory acquired from Spain in 1899. The division between the political parties in respect to it, the diversity of the views of the members of this court in regard to tis constitutional aspects, and the constant recurrence of the subject in the Houses of Congress, fixed the attention of all on the future relation of this acquired territory to the United States. Had Congress intended to take the important step of changing the treaty status of Porto Rico by incorporating it into the Union, it is reasonable to suppose that it would have done so by the plain declaration, and would not have left it to mere inference. Before the question became acute at the close of the Spanish War, the distinction between acquisition and incorporation was not regarded as important, or at least it was not fully understood and had not aroused great controversy. Before that, the purpose of Congress might well be a matter of mere inference from various legislative acts; but in these latter days, incorporation is not to be assumed without express declaration, or an implication so strong as to exclude any other view.

Again, the second section of the act is called a 'Bill of Rights,' and included therein is substantially every one of the guaranties of the federal Constitution, except those relating to indictment by a grand jury in the case of infamous crimes and the right of trial by jury in civil and criminal cases. If it was intended to incorporate Porto Rico into the Union by this act, which would ex proprio vigore make applicable the whole Bill of Rights [258 U.S. 298, 307] of the Constitution to the island, why was it thought necessary to create for it a Bill of Rights and carefully exclude trial by jury? In the very forefront of the act is this substitute for incorporation and application of the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. This seems to us a conclusive argument against the contention of counsel for the plaintiff in error.

The section of the Jones Act which counsel press on us is section 5. This in effect declares that all persons who under the Foraker Act were made citizens of Porto Rico and certain other residents shall become citizens of the United States, unless they prefer not to become such, in which case they are to declare such preference within six months, and thereafter they lose certain political rights under the new government. In the same section the United States District Court is given power separately to naturalize individuals of some other classes of residents. We set out the section in full in the margin. 1 Unaffected by the considerations [258 U.S. 298, 308] already suggested, perhaps the declration of section 5 would furnish ground for an inference such as counsel for plaintiff in error contend, but under the circumstances we find it entirely consistent with nonincorporation. When Porto Ricans passed from under the government of Spain, they lost the protection of that government as subjects of the king of Spain, a title by which they had been known for centuries. They had a right to expect, in passing under the dominion of the United States, a status entitling them to the protection of their new sovereign. In theory and in law, they had it as citizens of Porto Rico, but it was an anomalous status, or seemed to be so in view of the fact that those who owed and rendered allegiance to the other great world powers were given the same designation and status as those living in their respective home countries so far as protection against foreign injustice went. It became a yearning of the Porto Ricans to be American citizens, therefore, and this act gave them the boon. What additional rights did it give them? It enabled them to move into the continental United States and becoming residents of any State there to enjoy every right of any other citizen of the United States, civil, social and political. A citizen of the Philippines must be naturalized before he can settle and vote in this country. Act of June 29, 1906, 30, 34 Stat. 606 (Comp. St. 4366). Not so the Porto Rican under the Organic Act of 1917. [258 U.S. 298, 309] In Porto Rico, however, the Porto Rican can not insist upon the right of trial by jury, except as his own representatives in his legislature shall confer it on him. The citizen of the United states living in Porto Rico cannot there enjoy a right of trial by jury under the federal Constitution, any more than thePorto Rican. It is locality that is determinative of the application of the Constitution, in such matters as judicial procedure, and not the status of the people who live in it.

It is true that in the absence of other and countervailing evidence, a law of Congress or a provision in a treaty acquiring territory, declaring an intention to confer political and civil rights on the inhabitants of the new lands as American citizens, may be properly interpreted to mean an incorporation of it into the Union, as in the case of Louisiana and Alaska. This was one of the chief grounds upon which this court placed its conclusion that Alaska had been incorporated in the Union, in Rasmussen v. United States, 197 U.S. 516 , 25 Sup. Ct. 514. But Alaska was a very different case from that of Porto Rico. It was an enormous territory, very sparsely settled, and offering opportunity for immigration and settlement by American citizens. It was on the American continent and within easy reach of the then United States. It involved none of the difficulties which incorporation of the Philippines and Porto Rico presents, and one of them is in the very matter of trial by jury. This court refers to the difficulties in Dorr v. United States, 195 U.S. 138, 148 , 24 S. Sup. Ct. 808, 812 (49 L. Ed. 128, 1 Ann. Cas. 697):

'If the right to trial by jury were a fundamental right which goes wherever the jurisdiction of the United States extends, or if Congress, in framing laws for outlying territory, ... was obliged to establish that system by affirmative legislation, it would follow that, no matter what the needs or capacities of the people, trial by jury, and in no other way, must be forthwith established, although the result may be to work injustice [258 U.S. 298, 310] and provoke disturbance rather than to aid the orderly administration of justice. ... Again, if the United States shall acquire by treaty the cession of territory having an established system of jurisprudence, where jury trials are unknown, but a method of fair and orderly trial prevails under an acceptable and long-established code, the preference of the people must be disregarded, their established customs ignored, and they themselves coerced to accept, in advance of incorporation into the United States, a system of trial unknown to them and unsuited to their needs. We do not think it was intended, in giving power to Congress to make regulations for the territories, to hamper its exercise with this condition.'

The jury system needs citizens trained to the exercise of the reponsibilities of jurors. In common-law countries centuries of tradition have prepared a conception of the impartial attitude jurors must assume. The jury system postulates a conscious duty of participation in the machinery of justice which it is hard for people not brought up in fundamentally popular government at once to acquire. One of its greatest benefits is in the security it gives the people that they, as jurors, actual or possible, being part of the judicial system of the country, can prevent its arbitrary use or abuse. Congress has thought that a people like the Filipinos, or the Porto Ricans, trained to a complete judicial system which knows no juries, living in compact and ancient communities, with definitely formed customs and political conceptions, should be permitted themselves to determine how far they wish to adopt this institution of Anglo-Saxon origin, and when. Hence the care with which, from the time when Mr. McKinley wrote his historic letter to Mr. Root in April of 1900 (Public Laws Philippine Commission, 6-9-Act of July 2, 1902, 691, 692), concerning the character of government to be set up for the Philippines by the Phillippine Commission, until the Act [258 U.S. 298, 311] of 1917, giving a new Organic Act to Porto Rico, the United States has been liberal in granting to the islands acquired by the Treaty of Paris most of the American constitutional guaranties, but has been sedulous to avoid forcing a jury system on a Spanish and civillaw country until it desired it. We cannot find any intention to depart from this policy in making Porto Ricans American citizens, explained as this is by the desire to put them as individuals on an exact equality with citizens from the American homeland, to secure them more certain protection against the world, and to give them an opportunity, should they desire, to move into the United States proper, and there without naturalization to enjoy all political and other rights.

We need not dwell on another consideration which requires us not lightly to infer, from acts thus easily explained on other grounds, an intention to incorporate in the Union these distant ocean communities of a different origin and language from those of our continental people. Incorporation has always been a step, and an important one, leading to statehood. Without, in the slightest degree, intimating an opinion as to the wisdom of such a policy, for that is not our province, it is reasonable to assume that, when such a step is taken, it will be begun and taken by Congress deliberately, and with a clear declaration of purpose, and not left a matter of mere inference or construction.

Counsel for the plaintiff in error also rely on the organization of a United States District Court in Porto Rico, on the allowance of review of the Porto Rican Supreme Court in cases when the Constitution of the United States is involved, on the statutory permission that Porto Rican youth can attend West Point and Annapolis Academies, on the authorized sale of United States stamps in the island, on the extension of revenue, navigation, immigration, [258 U.S. 298, 312] national banking, bankruptcy, federal employers' liability, safety appliance, extradition, and census laws in one way or another to Porto Rico. With the background of the considerations already stated, none of these, nor all of them put together, furnish ground for the conclusion pressed on us.

The United States District Court is not a true United States court established under article 3 of the Constitution to administer the judicial power of the United States therein conveyed. It is created by virtue of the sovereign congressional faculty, granted under article 4, 3, of that instrument, of making all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory belonging to the United States. The resemblance of its jurisdiction to that of true United States courts, in offering an opportunity to nonresidents of resorting to a tribunal not subject to local influence, does not change its character as a mere territorial court. Nor does the legislative recognition that federal constitutional questions may arise in litigation in Porto Rico have any weight in this discussion. The Constitution of the United States is in force in Porto Rico as it is wherever and whenever the sovereign power of that government is exerted. This has not only been admitted, but emphasized, by this court in all its authoritative expressions upon the issues arising in the Insular Cases, especially in the Downes v. Bidwell and the Door Cases. The Constitution, however, contains grants of power, and limitations which in the nature of things are not always and everywhere applicable and the real issue in the Insular Cases was not whether the Constitution extended to the Philippines or Porto Rico when we went there, but which ones of its provisions were applicable by way of limitation upon the exercise of executive and legislative power in dealing with new conditions and requirements. The guaranties of certain fundamental personal rights declared in the Constitution, as, for instance, [258 U.S. 298, 313] that no person could be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, had from the beginning full application in the Philippines and Porto Rico, and, as this guaranty is one of the must fruitful in causing litigation in our own country, provision was naturally made for similar controversy in Porto Rico. Indeed, provision is made for the consideration of constitutional questions coming on appeal and writs of error from the Supreme Court of the Philippines, which are certainly not incorporated in the Union. Judicial Code, 248 (Comp. St. 1225a).

On the whole, therefore, we find no features in the Organic Act of Porto Rico of 1917 from which we can infer the purpose of Congress to incorporate Porto Rico into the United States with the consequences which would follow.

This court has passed on substantially the same questions presented here in two cases, People of Porto Rico v. Tapia, 245 U.S. 639 , 38 Sup. Ct. 192, and People v. Muratti, 245 U.S. 639 , 38 Sup. Ct. 192. In the former, the question was whether one who was charged with committing a felonious homicide some 12 days after the passage of the Organic Act in 1917, could be brought to trial without an indictment of a grand jury as required by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. The United States District Court of Porto Rico, on a writ of habeas corpus, held that he could not be held to answer and discharged him. In the other case, the felony charged was alleged to have been committed before the passage of the Organic Act, but prosecution was begun afterwards. In that, the Supreme Court of Porto Rico held that an indictment was not rendered necessary by the Organic Act. This court reversed the District Court in the Tapia Case and affirmed the Supreme Court in the Muratti Case, necessarily holding the Organic Act had not incorporated Porto Rico into the United States. These cases were disposed of by a per curiam. Counsel have urged us in the cases [258 U.S. 298, 314] at the bar to deal with the questions raised more at length in exposition of the effect of the Organic Act of 1917 upon the issue, and we have done so.

A second assignment of error is based on the claim that the alleged libels here did not pass the bounds of legitimate comment on the conduct of the Governor of the island, against whom they were directed, and that its prosecution is a violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution, securing free speech and a free press. A reading of the two articles removes the slightest doubt that they go far beyond the 'exuberant expressions of meridional speech,' to use the expression of this court in a similar case in Gandia v. Pittingill, 222 U.S. 452, 458 , 32 S. Sup. Ct. 127. Indeed, they are so excessive and outrageous in their character that they suggest the query whether their superlative vilification has not overleaped itself and become unconsciously humorous. But this is not a defense.

The judgments of the Supreme Court of Porto Rico are

Mr, Justice HOLMES concurs in the resuit.

[ Footnote 1 ] Sec. 5. That all citizens of Porto Rico as defined by section seven of the act of April twelfth, nineteen hundred, 'temporarily to provide revenues and a civil government for Porto Rico, and for other purposes,' and all natives of Porto Rico who were temporarily absent from that island on April eleventh, eighteen hundred and ninety-nine, and have since returned and are permanently residing in that island, and are not citizens of any foreign country, are hereby declared, and shall be deemed and held to be, citizens of the United States: Provided, that any person hereinbefore described may retain his present political status by making a declaration, under oath, of his decision to do so within six months of the taking effect of this act before the district court in the district in which he resides, the declaration to be in form as follows:

'_____, _____, being duly sworn, hereby declare my intention not to become a citizen of the United States as provided in the act of Congress conferring United States citizenship upon citizens of Porto Rico and certain natives permanently residing in said island.'

In the case of any such person who may be absent from the island during said six months the term of this proviso may be availed of by transmitting a declaration, under oath, in the form herein in provided within six months of the taking effect of the act to the executive secretary of Porto Rico: And provided further, that any person who is born in Porto Rico of an alien parent and is permanently residing in that island may, if of full age, within six months of the taking his majority or within or if a minor, upon reaching his majority or within one year thereafter, make a sworn declaration of allegiance to the United States before the United States District Court for Porto Rico, setting forth therein all the facts connected with his or her birth and residence in Porto Rico and accompanying due proof thereof, and from and after the making of such declaration shall be considered to be a citizen of the United States.

Fuente: Find Law, a Thomson Reuters business

miércoles, 19 de noviembre de 2008

Descubrimiento de Borinken.

Descubrimiento de Puerto Rico, día feriado, día libre, día de celebrar ¿Qué?.

Que idílico!

Me enferma.

“Nadie pueda amasar una fortuna sin hacer harina a los demás.”

Los Alimentos estan Caros

El costo de los alimentos sube cada semana y mi salario esta igual desde hace tiempo.

¿Que hago?

Que joropeta!

martes, 18 de noviembre de 2008

Noviembre es el Mes Nacional de la Diabetes

La diabetes es una de las causas principales de insuficiencia renal, ceguera, amputaciones, así como también de enfermedades cardíacas y de accidentes cerebro vascular. Aproximadamente 24 millones de estadounidenses tienen diabetes y cerca de una cuarta parte de ellos (5.7 millones) no sabe que tiene la enfermedad. Además, otros millones de personas tienen riesgo de contraer diabetes.

La diabetes es una enfermedad que ocasiona muchos gastos debido a las complicaciones graves y muertes prematuras. Esta afección es una de las causas principales de enfermedades cardíacas y accidentes cerebro vascular, así como también de amputaciones de piernas y pies no atribuidas a lesiones, insuficiencia renal y nuevos casos de ceguera en adultos.

Cada 24 horas:

• más de 4,000 adultos reciben un diagnóstico de diabetes;

• cerca de 40 niños y adolescentes reciben un diagnóstico de diabetes tipo 1;

• 10 niños y adolescentes reciben un diagnóstico de diabetes tipo 2;

• aproximadamente 200 personas mueren a causa de la diabetes;

• a cerca de 200 personas con diabetes se les realizan amputaciones no traumáticas de las extremidades inferiores;

• unas 130 personas con diabetes sufren de insuficiencia renal;

• aproximadamente 50 adultos quedan ciegos.

Fuente: Centros para el Control y la Prevención de Enfermedades.

domingo, 16 de noviembre de 2008

Jazzeando, que placer!

Fuimos a un concierto de latin/jazz en una biblioteca publica. Wao! Que placer! Fue desconectarse del mundo por un rato y vivir y sentir el jazz, ese jazz que te habla, que te mueve al son del ritmo que solo el, el jazz, te provoca.

El grupo que toco fue Enclave: Rebecca Cline, Hilary Noble, Fernando Huergo y Steve Langone. Hilary estudio en EU y Cuba; Rebecca en EU, Cuba y Puerto Rico; Fernando y Steve en EU. Han estudiado y/o tocado con grandes musicos como Bobby Sanabria, Giovanni Hidalgo, Luis Marin, Chucho Valdes, Paquito D'Rivera, David Sanchez, y Miguel Zenon, entre otros.

Como suele pasar compramos los dos cds que tenian a la venta y, por supuesto, autografiados, dos mas para la coleccion. Nos gusto mucho pues la gran mayoria de las composiciones son originales del grupo.

Ellos viven en Boston, Massachussetts, y algunos son profesores en la prestigiosa Berklee College of Music.

Lo disfrutamos mucho!

Aqui va una muestra:

Don Segundo y Doña Bianca

jueves, 13 de noviembre de 2008

El texto de la Sección 7 del Artículo III de la Constitución del Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico, así como del Art. 6.012 de la Ley Electoral.

Artículo III - Del Poder Legislativo
Sección 7

Cuando en una elección general resultaren electos más de dos terceras partes de los miembros de cualquiera de las cámaras por un solo partido o bajo una sola candidatura, según ambos términos se definan por ley, se aumentará el número de sus miembros en los siguientes casos:

(a) Si el partido o candidatura que eligió más de dos terceras partes de los miembros de cualquiera o ambas cámaras hubiese obtenido menos de dos terceras partes del total de los votos emitidos para el cargo de Gobernador, se aumentará el número de miembros del Senado o de la Cámara de Representantes o de ambos cuerpos, según fuere el caso, declarándose electos candidatos del partido o partidos de minoría en número suficiente hasta que la totalidad de los miembros del partido o partidos de minoría alcance el número de nueve en el Senado y de diecisiete en la Cámara de Representantes. Cuando hubiere más de un partido de minoría, la elección adicional de candidatos se hará en la proporción que guarde el número de votos emitidos para el cargo de Gobernador por cada uno de dichos partidos con el voto que para el cargo de Gobernador depositaron en total esos partidos de minoría.

Cuando uno o más partidos de minoría hubiese obtenido una representación en proporción igual o mayor a la proporción de votos alcanzada por su candidato a Gobernador, no participará en la elección adicional de candidatos hasta tanto se hubiese completado la representación que le correspondiese bajo estas disposiciones, a cada uno de los otros partidos de minoría.

(b) Si el partido o candidatura que eligió más de dos terceras partes de los miembros de cualquiera o ambas cámaras hubiese obtenido más de dos terceras partes del total de los votos emitidos para el cargo de Gobernador,y uno o más partidos de minoría no eligieron el número de miembros que les correspondía en el Senado o en la Cámara de Representantes o en ambos cuerpos, según fuere el caso, en proporción a los votos depositados por cada uno de ellos para el cargo de Gobernador, se declararán electos adicionalmente sus candidatos hasta completar dicha proporción en lo que fuere posible, pero los Senadores de todos los partidos de minoría no serán nunca, bajo esta disposición más de nueve ni los Representantes más de diecisiete.

Para seleccionar los candidatos adicionales de un partido de minoría, en cumplimiento de estas disposiciones, se considerarán, en primer término, sus candidatos por acumulación que no hubieren resultado electos, en el orden de los votos que hubieren obtenido y, en segundo término sus candidatos de distrito que, sin haber resultado electos, hubieren obtenido en sus distritos respectivos la más alta proporción en el número de votos depositados en relación con la proporción de los votos depositados a favor de otros candidatos no electos del mismo partido para un cargo igual en otros distritos.

Los Senadores y Representantes adicionales cuya elección se declare bajo esta sección serán considerados para todos los fines como Senadores o Representantes por Acumulación.

La Asamblea Legislativa adoptará las medidas necesarias para reglamentar estas garantías, y dispondrá la forma de adjudicar las fracciones que resultaren en la aplicación de las reglas contenidas en esta sección, así como el número mínimo de votos que deberá depositar un partido de minoría a favor de su candidato a Gobernador para tener derecho a la representación que en la presente se provee.
Representación de Partidos de Minoría

Artículo 6.012
Después que la Comisión haya practicado el escrutinio general y determinado los candidatos a miembros del Senado y de la Cámara de Representantes que hubieren obtenido el mayor número de votos en la elección, en número de once (11) senadores por acumulación y once (11) representantes por acumulación, dos (2) senadores por cada distrito senatorial y un (1) representante por cada distrito representativo, ésta procederá a hacer la determinación del número y de los nombres de los candidatos adicionales del partido o partidos de minoría que deban declararse electos si alguno, con arreglo a las disposiciones de la Sección 7 del Artículo III de la Constitución del Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico , y declarará electos y expedirá el correspondiente certificado de elección a cada uno de dichos candidatos del partido o partidos de minorías.

(1) A los efectos de implementar el apartado (a) de dicha sección, se hará la determinación de los Senadores o Representantes adicionales que corresponda a cada uno de dichos partidos en la siguiente forma:

(a) Dividiéndose número de votos emitidos para el cargo de Gobernador por cada partido de minoría por el número total de votos depositados para el cargo de Gobernador por todos los partidos de minoría; luego

(b) Multiplicándose el resultado de la anterior división por nueve (9) en el caso de los Senadores, y por diecisiete (17) en el caso de los Representantes; y

(c) Restándose el resultado de la multiplicación que antecede, el [sic] número de Senadores o Representantes que hubiere elegido cada partido de minoría, según el escrutinio general antes referido.

El resultado de esta última operación de resta será el número de Senadores o Representantes adicionales que se adjudicará a cada partido de minoría hasta completarse el número que le corresponda, sin que el total de Senadores o Representantes adjudicados bajo esta fórmula pueda exceder de nueve (9) en el Senado o diecisiete (17) en la Cámara de Representantes.

(2) A los efectos de las disposiciones establecidas en el apartado (b) de la Sección 7 del Artículo III de la Constitución de Puerto Rico, si hubiere dos o más partidos de minoría, la determinación de los Senadores o Representantes que correspondan a cada uno de dichos partidos de minoría se hará dividiendo el número de votos emitidos para el cargo de Gobernador por cada partido de minoría, por el número total de votos depositados para el cargo de Gobernador para todos los partidos y multiplicando el resultado por veintisiete (27) en el caso del Senado, y por cincuenta y uno (51) en el de la Cámara de Representantes. En este caso se descartará y no se considerará ninguna fracción resultante de la operación aquí establecida que sea menos de la mitad de uno. El resultado de la operación consignada en este inciso constituirá el número de miembros del Senado o de la Cámara de Representantes que le corresponderá a cada partido de minoría, y hasta este número se deberá completar, en lo que fuere posible, el número de miembros del Senado o de la Cámara de Representantes de dicho partido de minoría. Disponiéndose que, los Senadores de todos los partidos de minoría no serán nunca más de nueve (9) ni los Representantes más de diecisiete (17). De resultar fracciones en la operación antes referida, se considerará como uno la fracción mayor para completar dicho número de nueve (9) Senadores y de diecisiete (17) Representantes a todos los partidos de minoría y, si haciendo ello no se completare tal número de nueve (9) o de diecisiete (17), se considerará entonces la fracción mayor de las restantes, y así sucesivamente, hasta completar para todos los partidos de minoría el número de nueve (9) en el caso del Senado y de diecisiete (17) en el caso de la Cámara de Representantes.

Al aplicar el párrafo antepenúltimo de la Sección 7 del Artículo III de la Constitución del Estado Libre Asociado de Puerto Rico, se descartará y no se considerará fracción alguna que sea menos de la mitad de uno; y en el caso que resulten dos fracciones iguales, la Comisión Estatal de Elecciones procederá a hacer la determinación en cuanto al candidato que debe certificarse elector, [sic] mediante sorteo en la forma dispuesta por la Comisión mediante reglamento.
Ningún partido de minoría tendrá derecho a candidatos adicionales ni a los beneficios que provee esta sección, a no ser que en la elección general obtenga a favor de su candidato a Gobernador y bajo su propia insignia, un número de votos equivalentes a un tres (3) por ciento o más del número total de votos depositados en dicha elección general a favor de todos los candidatos a Gobernador votados en la misma.

Fuente: La Comisión Estatal de Elecciones.

Día Mundial de la Diabetes

El Día Mundial de la Diabetes fomenta la concienciación sobre el hecho de que todas las personas con diabetes o con riesgo de sufrirla merecen la mejor educación, prevención y atención posibles. Este año, la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y su asociado en este terreno, la Federación Internacional de la Diabetes, han elegido el tema "Atención contra la diabetes para todos".

Fuente: Organización Mundial de la Salud.
World Diabetes Day. Org.

miércoles, 12 de noviembre de 2008

Nacimiento de Alejandro Tapia y de Jose Gautier

*Nacimiento de don Alejandro Tapia y Rivera en San Juan en el 1882.

Alejandro Tapia fue escritor, dramaturgo, Fue uno de los fundadores del Ateneo Puertorriqueño.

Entre sus obras se encuentran La Cuarterona, Cofresí y La Sataniada.

* Nacimiento de José Gautier Benítez en Caguas en el 1880.

Fue iniciador del romanticismo poético en puerto Rico. Su poesia un canto de exaltación a la Patria.

“! Borinquen! nombre al pensamiento grato
Como el recuerdo de un amor profundo;
Bello jardín, de America el ornato,
Siendo el jardín, America, del mundo”.

Los 80 de Carlos Fuentes

Felicidades Don Carlos Fuentes en su cumpleaño numero 80.

“La imaginación latinoamericana está muy viva. La imaginación es parte de la realidad”.

Carlos Fuentes.

martes, 11 de noviembre de 2008

Cita de Ramón Emeterio Betances

“Yo consagraría gustoso mi vida a salvar este pedazo de tierra de la codicia extranjera.”

Ramón Emeterio Betances

lunes, 10 de noviembre de 2008

Declaraciones de Ricardo Santos.

Los diarios en Puerto Rico imputan unas declaraciones a Ricardo Santos, ex presidente de la Unión de Trabajadores de la Industria Eléctrica y Riego(UTIER), donde dice:

“El pueblo trabajador no se equivoco cuando eligió el pasado martes como gobernador a Luis Fortuño”.

“Yo creo que el pueblo votó como entendió debía de votar, no creo que el pueblo se haya equivocado, ni mucho menos, todo lo contrario”.

Esta noticia me puso el cabello como el de Don King. Que Joropeta!

Necesito un té tilo.

Libros recibidos.

Gracias por los libros.

Disfrutaremos su regalo.

domingo, 9 de noviembre de 2008

Ley 182 del 22 diciembre de 1997, Sobre la relacion de los abuelos con sus Nietos Menores no Emancipados:

La Ley 182 del 22 de diciembre de 1997, reconoce legitimación jurídica a los abuelos a acudir a los tribunales para ser escuchados con relación a los derechos de visitas de sus nietos(a) menores no emancipados.

Esta Ley reconoce al tribunal la facultad para regular las relaciones entre abuelos(as) y nietos(as) cuando las circunstancias del caso lo requieran, tomando en consideración los mejores intereses del menor y la menor.

El Estado no pretende de forma ni manera alguna, interferir con la obligación de los padres de velar por sus hijos(as) menores siempre y cuando cumplan con sus deberes ni interfiere con el derecho de custodia y patria potestad que por sentencia dicta el tribunal.

Se reconoce mediante esta Ley que los abuelos (as) juegan un papel importante dentro del núcleo familiar del (la) menores y que contribuyen al desarrollo físico, social y emocional de sus nietos(as).

1. ¿En qué circunstancias los abuelos(as) pueden hacer uso de esta Ley ?

Los abuelos(as) pueden hacer esta solicitud, luego de la ruptura del núcleo familiar, ya sea por:

*Muerte de uno de los padres
*Nulidad de matrimonio o separación
*Cuando el padre, madre o tutor que ejerza la patria potestad se oponga injustificadamente a que su hijo(a) se relacione con sus abuelos(as)

1.¿Es automático el derecho de los abuelos(as) con sus nietos(as)?

No. El tribunal evaluará cada caso tomando en consideración el mejor bienestar del (de la) menor y resolverá si concede o no el derecho de visita a los abuelos(as), de no haber oposición del padre o madre que ejerza la patria potestad y custodia.

1.¿Puede el(la) abuelo(a) solicitar relacionarse con un nieto(a) producto de una relación extramarital?

Cuando se trata de un (una) menor emancipado(a) producto de una relación extramarital tampoco podrá el padre, la madre o tutor que ejerza la patria potestad y custodia sobre él (la) menor impedir, sin justa causa, que éste(a) se relacione con sus abuelos(as).

1.¿Qué deben hacer los(las) abuelos(as) cuando el padre, la madre eviten que ejerza la patria potestad o el(la) tutor(a) se oponga a que se relaciones con sus nietos(as)?

Los abuelos(as) tienen el derecho de recurrir al tribunal para solicitar ser escuchado por el Juez, quien evaluará las circunstancias particulares de cada caso y los intereses y bienestar del (la) menor dentro del marco jurídico establecido por esta ley.

1.¿Por qué es importante fomentar las relaciones con los abuelos(as) y nietos(as)?

Es importante que los (las) niños(as) experimenten el amor, la seguridad y aceptación que brindan las figuras de los abuelos(as). Estos proveen apoyo en la crianza de los niños(as), tanto en el aspecto físico como emocional. Durante la separación o divorcio de los padres, el contar con la figura de apoyo y amor de los abuelos(as) puede ayudar a los niños(as) a reducir el impacto de esta experiencia y a superar el dolor de la pérdida.

Mientras más personas participen en la vida del (de la) niño(a) brindándoles amor y atención, mayor será su estabilidad emocional.

Fuente: Tribunal Supremo de Puerto Rico

viernes, 7 de noviembre de 2008

El primer nombramiento de Obama

“Barlovento, Barlovento sopla el viento”… así dice la canción de Adres Jiménez.

Con este nombramiento ya se comienza a tener un cuadro por donde andará la presidencia de Obama.

November 6, 2008
The New Team
Rahm Emanuel
By Carl Hulse

As he prepares to take office, President-elect Barack Obama is relying on a small team of advisers who will lead his transition operation and help choose the members of a new Obama administration. Following is part of a series of profiles of potential members of the administration.

Name: Rahm Emanuel

New job: Has accepted Mr. Obama's offer to be the White House chief of staff.
Will bring to the job: An unusual hybrid of high-level experience as a top adviser to President Bill Clinton together with proven expertise as a Congressional leader and political strategist. Mr. Emanuel is also a close friend of Mr. Obama, a fellow Chicagoan.

As the No. 4 Democrat in the House and an architect of the Democratic majority, Mr. Emanuel knows Congress from the inside out after winning his seat in 2002. In the Clinton administration, he was aggressive, frequently profane and instrumental in shaping domestic policy on issues like health care, welfare and trade.
He earned the nickname Rahmbo for his determination and take-no-prisoners approach — an advantage when trying to bring a thorny issue to resolution, but a style that can be off-putting to those accustomed to gentility. In resigning his seat, Mr. Emanuel will be relinquishing a promising House career and aspirations to become speaker.
Is linked to Obama by: His Second City roots (Mr. Emanuel represents a slice of the north side of Chicago and adjoining suburbs) and his ties to the family of Mayor Richard M. Daley, which has been a source of support, guidance and experience for Mr. Emanuel, who was initially known for his fund-raising skills.

Mr. Obama has been close to Mr. Emanuel since arriving on Capitol Hill; Mr. Emanuel considers David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s chief strategist, to be one of his closest friends. The three share a common policy view and would make a formidable triumvirate in the White House. Mr. Emanuel found himself under pressure during the Democratic presidential primaries to back Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, given his relationship with her husband. But he stayed neutral and ultimately endorsed Mr. Obama.

In his own words: “We’re going to put in front of the American people the fundamental question of this election: Who’s going to change the economic policies in Washington that resulted in a lower standard of living for middle-class families?” From an Obama campaign conference call with reporters on Sept. 12, 2008.
Used to work as: An investment banker for three years after leaving the White House and before being elected to the House. He banked $16 million while handling mergers and acquisitions with an emphasis on utilities. In his youth, Mr. Emanuel badly cut a finger on a meat slicer while working at an Arby’s. The wound became infected, and he lost half of the middle finger on his right hand. The shortened digit is something of a trademark.

Carries as baggage: Mr. Emanuel’s stint in high finance and his experience in the banking world opens him to some criticism of being too allied with Wall Street, not the image Democrats want to cultivate these days. Critics have asserted he was only able to succeed in the banking world because of his political connections. Since he is part of the Daley circle, Mr. Emanuel’s appointment as chief of staff could also create the appearance of a White House that is too Chicago heavy. His manner can also create enemies, and Mr. Emanuel has ruffled the feathers of many on Capitol Hill, particularly black and Hispanic lawmakers.

Is otherwise known for: Training as a ballet dancer. And his brother, Ari Emanuel, a Hollywood agent, is the model for the abrasive agent Ari Gold in the HBO series “Entourage.”

Biography includes: Born Nov. 29, 1959, in Chicago ... liberal arts degree from Sarah Lawrence College, masters from Northwestern ... married to Amy Rule, three children ... a regular swimmer and a voracious reader, using his hours aboard airplanes to consume books ... served briefly as a civilian volunteer on an Israeli military base during the Persian Gulf war of 1991.

Fuente: The New York Times

jueves, 6 de noviembre de 2008

Fortuño gano porque muchos Populares no votaron

He escuchado y leído en varios medios que el Partido Nuevo Progresista arrasó con las elecciones y que muchos populares votaron por el PNP. Bueno, esto es lo que los números dicen:

Voto Integro












Entre el 2004 y el 2008 no hay un aumento significativo entre los votantes íntegros del PNP. Sin embargo, si hay una diferencia de 165,514 votantes entre el 2004 y el 2008 bajo el PPD. Eso si es significativo. Si estos votantes se hubiesen movido al PNP, los números de ese partido serían mucho más altos. Sobrepasarían el millón de votos. ¿Qué paso? Solamente hay una explicación, los votantes del PPD no salieron a votar. No estaban de acuerdo con el candidato de su partido, pero tampoco estaban de acuerdo con el del PNP. Se abstuvieron al voto.

Ni siquiera los votos que Fortuño saco individualmente reflejan un numero alto como para adjudicarlos a los votantes del PPD. De hecho, todavía no se tienen las estadísticas de los votos mixtos para decir que dichos votos provienen del PPD, hay que esperar. La diferencia entre los votos íntegros del PNP, esto es 938,414 y los votos por el gobernador Fortuño, 978,133, representan una diferencia de 39,719 votos que provienen de votantes que no son PNP. Estos son votos mixtos o por candidatura, pero no se pueden adjudicar completamente a los populares. Aun así, esos 39,719 votos que Fortuño obtuvo por encima de los votos íntegros de su partido no representan el número tan alto de votantes populares que no votaron, esto es de 165,514 votantes, basada en la diferencia de votantes populares entre el 2004 y 2008.

Solo le pido a Dios

Letra de León Gieco
Musica de León Gieco

Solo le pido a Dios
que el dolor no me sea indiferente,
que la reseca muerte no me encuentre
vacío y solo sin haber hecho lo suficiente.

Solo le pido a Dios
que lo injusto no me sea indiferente,
que no me abofeteen la otra mejilla
después que una garra me araño esta suerte.

Solo le pido a Dios
que la guerra no me sea indiferente,
es un monstruo grande y pisa fuerte
toda la pobre inocencia de la gente.

Solo le pido a Dios
que el engaño no me sea indiferente,
si un traidor puede mas que unos cuantos,
que esos cuantos no lo olviden fácilmente.

Solo le pido a Dios
que el futuro no me sea indiferente,
Desahuciado está el que tiene que marchar
a vivir una cultura diferente.

Nota:Esta letra la interpreta magistralmente doña Mercedes Sosa.

miércoles, 5 de noviembre de 2008


Estoy celebrando!!!!!!!!!!!!! Que emocion!!!!!!!!!!!! Ganamos!!!!!!!! Esperamos en Dios que todo salga bien y que siga ganando la diversidad y los derechos. El Sueño se hizo realidad!!!!!!!!

"I have a dream," and now I am leaving that dream!!!!!!!!!!

martes, 4 de noviembre de 2008

Obama el presidente numero 44

Barack Obama fue electo presidente de los Estados Unidos será el presidente numero 44 con 306 delegados a las 11:15 PM.

El pueblo salio a las calles a celebrar, llenaron parques y calles en NYC, Chicago y otros estados. Habían un semillero de personas blancas, negras, latinas y de otras razas, todos celebrando.

En todos años que vivo en Estados Unidos nunca había visto una cosa así.

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I have a dream today!”

Dr. Martin Luther King

Ejerci mi voto

A las 8:05 PM(hora local) fui a votar, y lo que nunca me había encontrado, había una fila, tuve que esperar para firmar y luego esperar para poder votar en la maquina.

Nunca había visto tanto joven en el centro de votación. Siempre era un lugar solitario, solo con los funcionarios.

Dato curioso, en el tiempo que esperé solo vi a una persona votando en las maquinas destinadas a los republicanos, en las de los demócratas que esperar.

La funcionaria del partido demócrata me indico que Obama estaba adelante en Pensilvania y Vermont, dos estados republicanos.

El Pueblo en el que resido es de blancos republicanos, y los funcionarios tenían una cara de zozobra y pesadumbre, y los del lado demócrata estaban con buen ánimo.

Que será lo que pasará, pronto lo sabremos.

¿Por quien votar?

Esa es la pregunta clave en estas elecciones, ¿darles el voto a John McCain y Sarah Palin?. Ellos son del partido republicano, así que la respuesta es súper rápida: "jamás, puedo vivir sin ellos dos". Por lo cual votaré por Barack Obama, el demócrata, y dicho sea de paso, el negro o el blanco, la disyuntiva que muchos se plantean.

Obama es negro, sí, por el color de su piel, porque su padre era africano; pero Obama es blanco por su lado materno, y fue criado por blancos, entre blancos, en una comunidad de blancos, pues su abuelo y su abuela materna eran de Kansas City, pero que vivieron en Hawai y Obama fue criado allí. El conoció más sobre la comunidad negra cuando se mudó a Chicago y luego que se casó con Michelle. Para mi Obama es blanco y negro a la vez.

Hay muchas personas que están buscando en su catalogo de excusas, la excusa—valga la redundancia—para no darle el voto a Obama. Lo sorprendente es que hay muchos hispanos, negros, blancos, liberales, demócratas, cuya excusa es el hecho de que Obama es negro, lo que es ser racista, y se inventan otras como que el es musulmán porque el nombre es similar al hombre mas buscado por las autoridades federales, y así hay muchas otras mas excusas entre otras canalladas.

Yo no comparto con muchas de las ideas del Obama blanco y creo que ha metido las patas muchas veces. Se bien que Obama no traerá grandes cambios porque su marco de acción será limitado. Los políticos profesionales, el congreso, los cabilderos y los medios no le permitirán al Obama negro impulsar los cambios que la sociedad norteamericana necesita.

Pero, ya no aguantamos más el partido republicano y sus actos. Además, las propuestas que trae McCain son peligrosas, sin sentido y muchas son la continuidad de la política de esta administración. Por otro lado, el candidato a vicepresidente es *&*^&^^%^%%^$^, lo cual los convierten en un arma letal.

Se bien que el sistema electoral de los Estados Unidos es un sistema antidemocrático, pero hay que salir a ejercer ese derecho.

Tengo hasta las 9:00 PM para ir a votar.

Ejerci mi Derecho al Voto

Una de las experiencias mas emocionantes que tengo en esta vida es ir a votar. Es una sensacion de satisfaccion bien grande saber que tu voto cuenta, que tu opinion cuenta. A lo mejor mi voto con el voto de otros que hacen la misma seleccion gana y, definitivamente, la satisfaccion se convierte en una alegria descomunal. A lo mejor mi voto con el voto de otros no gana; sin embargo, aunque no celebre, aun la satisfaccion de que ejerci mi derecho es grande y satisfactoria. Eso es democracia, porque la democracia tambien incluye aceptar que la mayoria gana y que debo aprender a respetar y no sabotear ese derecho.

LLegue temprano, eran las 8:00 am. Entre a la estacion de bomberos, que es donde esta ubicado el centro donde me corresponde votar. Habia dos mesas, una para los del norte de la region y otros para los del sur. Como siempre, me confundi, ¿de donde soy, del norte o del sur?. Pregunte y me dijeron que soy del sur de la region. Les dije mi nombre, no me pidieron identificacion, pues tan pronto uno firma, ellos comparan que las firmas sean iguales y entonces te dicen: "puede pasar a votar". Entro a la casetilla y escojo a los candidatos. Termino y me voy contenta con la sensacion de haber ejercido un derecho universal. Wao! Que clase de sensacion!

Llego a la universidad donde trabajo, porque aca se trabaja el dia de las elecciones, y veo que hay carteles por doquier donde se indica los lugares donde los estudiantes pueden ir a votar. Las clases tambien continuan, ellos van y votan en su tiempo libre y la vida de estudio y trabajo sigue normal.

Tengo el periodico abierto y a la misma vez escucho Radio Isla porque tanto aca en Estados Unidos como en Puerto Rico las elecciones de este año son inmensamente emocionantes. Tengo que estar pendiente. La adrenalina esta en todo su apogeo. ¿Que pasara? Estoy loca porque llegue la noche y mañana y mañana y mañana.

Claro, tambien estoy consciente de que si mis candidatos no ganan, no podre celebrar, pero aun asi, EJERCI MI VOTO, Y ESA ES UNA GRAN SATISFACCION.

The Gluten Syndrome-Gut, Skin and Brain

The Gluten Syndrome-Gut, Skin and Brain
By Dr. Rodney Ford MD

The Gluten Syndrome refers to the cluster of symptoms that you experience if you react to gluten. Gluten can affect your gut, your skin, and your brain. It applies to any reaction that is caused by gluten. It includes celiac disease, along with the myriad symptoms that can be experienced throughout your gastro-intestinal tract in response to gluten. It also includes many other symptoms that do not stem from your gut. These include brain and behavior disorders, irritability and tiredness, skin problems, muscular aches and pains and joint problems.

The effects of gluten are wide ranging and are now brought together under the term Gluten Syndrome. In most instances, a simple blood test (the IgG-gliadin antibody test) can identify those people who are affected.

10% Affected by Gluten
The Gluten Syndrome affects about one in ten people. However, most people who are affected are unaware that their life is being hindered by gluten. The gluten symptoms are most likely to be caused by damage to the nerves and brain. The earlier the problem is identified, the better the response to a gluten-free diet will be.

Tummy Pains and not Growing
Jonti is 3 years old. His gluten story is typical. His mother brought him to see me because she was concerned about his poor growth, and his distressing abdominal pains. His blood tests showed a high gluten test (His IgG gliadin was 94 units. This test result is usually less than 15 at this age). Other tests, including the gene test for celiacs, showed that he did not have celiac disease.

I suggested that he go on a gluten-free diet. Within days he began to eat better, and his tummy pains went. He is now growing again on a gluten-free diet. His mum wrote:

“I really haven’t found the gluten-free diet that difficult. I found people to be incredibly helpful actually, both in the supermarket and in restaurants. In the supermarket there is a lot of normal type food that is gluten-free and it is all clearly labeled that it is gluten-free. Even if you go to the delicatessen department they will tell you which luncheon sausage is gluten-free. There are gluten-free sausages all labeled and it’s normal food that tastes great.

For the baking mixes and bread mixes, you don’t even have to go to the specialist health food shops. I go to no other shops other than the supermarket to get food for him and I haven’t really found it that difficult.”

Amazed how Jonti has Adapted
I have been amazed, actually, by how easily Jonti has adapted to the gluten-free diet. I tell him it is special food for him and that it won’t hurt his tummy. We have got nice biscuits from a bakery and he is allowed to choose which one he wants for morning tea. He still has normal foods like chips and sweets. He is not missing out and the other biscuits he hasn’t even really asked for. The only thing is the bread! I have yet to perfect the making of the bread. Toast is about the only thing he asked for. You can get specialist cornflakes and cereals, porridge he loves, again, at the supermarket. It has been surprisingly easy actually

I’m so pleased that he is now well again. Gluten-free has made such a huge difference.”

The Main Points:
• The Gluten Syndrome refers to the cluster of symptoms that you experience if you react to gluten. It can affect your gut, skin and nerves.
• Medical practitioners accept that gluten causes celiac disease (gut damage) but often resist the notion that gluten can cause a wider spectrum of illness.
• Celiac disease, gluten intolerance and gluten sensitivity are all part of The Gluten Syndrome.
• Rapidly accumulating medical evidence shows that gluten is now creating a massive health problem throughout the Western world. However, woefully few people are aware of the catalogue of harm that gluten is causing. About one in ten people—that is millions of people—are affected by The Gluten Syndrome.
• Gluten could be responsible for one-third of all cases of chronic illness and fatigue. People suffering from these conditions are currently just tolerating their symptoms, unaware that gluten is the culprit. This is because the link to gluten is not yet recognized by the medical community.
• Gluten-containing products are being added to our food chain in increasing amounts. Our wheat is being engineered to have even higher gluten content. This gluten overload is occurring without our communities being unaware of the harm that this is causing.
• Gluten can cause malfunctions of the brain and neural networks of susceptible people. The incidence of mental, neurological and brain disorders is on the rise. However, the diagnosis of gluten-sensitivity is seldom made.
• The community is already embracing the notion of gluten-sensitivity. More and more people are opting for a gluten-free lifestyle. These people are looking for a term to identify their illness. Their search is over. They have been affected by The Gluten Syndrome.
• A strong gluten-free movement is developing globally in response to the knowledge that going gluten-free can be so beneficial to so many people. What has been missing up until now is a name that captures the gluten problem. The missing name is The Gluten Syndrome.

Get Your Blood Tests

The Gluten Tests
Gluten is a protein that is found in wheat grains. This protein has a number of components, one of which is called gliadin. People who get sick from gluten are usually reacting to the gliadin component.

You are a Long Tube
To understand what the blood tests mean, first you need to know a little more about your immune system. It is the job of your immune system to protect you from the outside world. It protects you from the invasion of microbes (viruses and bacteria), and it also protects you from the toxins and poisons in the food that passes through your gut. Your gut is a long tube inside you that travels from your mouth to your anus. This is your gastrointestinal tract, also called your bowel. Even though it is inside your body, the contents of this tube are still on the ‘outside’ from your body’s point of view. Lots of your immune cells coat the skin (called the mucosa) of this tube and work hard to protect you from anything that might prove to be harmful.

Gluten (Gliadin) can be Toxic
Gliadin, the toxic component of the gluten protein, is one such harmful substance. Your immune system defends your body strongly against gliadin using weapons called antibodies and the gliadin is repelled. The outcome of your immune system’s fight against gliadin is the production of antibodies that are specifically targeted towards gliadin: these are called anti-gliadin antibodies.

Gliadin Antibodies
Anti-gliadin Antibodies (commonly called the IgG-gliadin antibody) are weapons that have been made specifically to fight against gluten in the diet. Remember, gliadin is a component of the gluten protein. This antibody is very sensitive. It is made very specifically by your immune system to fight against gliadin. However, a high level of this antibody does not necessarily mean that you have any gut damage, so it is not very accurate in assisting the identification of patients with celiac gut damage. On the other hand, tests for this antibody are nearly always strongly positive in people with celiac disease who are not on a gluten-free diet. Once people are placed on a strict diet, these antibodies will fall to normal levels within a period ranging from few months to a year or two.

Gluten Tests Not Getting Done
There is a problem. Unfortunately, this gluten blood test (the IgG-gliadin antibody test) is no longer available from most community laboratories. This year many laboratories have decided to discontinue this test. Their opinion is that it is worthless (for detecting celiac disease).
I disagree with their decision. My latest data shows that huge numbers of people remain undiagnosed with serious symptoms because of the misinterpretation of this gluten test result. At the moment it is difficult to get the medical labs to do your gluten test. They are unwilling to consider that gluten causes a wide spectrum of illness that has been written up in the international medical literature. They have turned a blind eye to the problem. If you can’t test for gluten reactions, then you will not be able to make the diagnosis!

A Diagnosis at Last!
Mandy wrote this letter to me: “Hi Dr Rodney Ford, for many, many, years I have been to doctors complaining of a bloated tummy, extreme cramping pains, and diarrhea (to the point I had no time to get to the toilet). I have recently had some blood test for celiacs done by my GP. My results showed: the tTG was negative; and the IgG-Gliadin result strongly positive. He could not explain it to me, but he said that I did not have celiac disease.”

“I have no idea what these tests mean. Although I got no answers, I had to try something. I was at the end of my nerves! My bad health has always been upsetting my social and working life. I often have to rush home to the toilet.”

Amazing on a Gluten-free Diet
“So I decided to try a gluten-free diet! I have now been gluten-free for a month. It is amazing! Already I feel like a different person! No more bloating, just the odd stomach cramp. Also, all my headaches have gone. But I still feel really tired and not sure how to overcome this. Can you help me please by explaining my blood test results—and should I have anymore tests? What else I can do to help myself? I hope you can help me Dr Ford. Gluten, up to now, seems to have made my life a misery. Even though I feel so much better already, I want to get even better. Kind regards, Mandy.”

The Gluten Syndrome
I replied: “Thanks. I am glad that you are feeling a lot better off gluten. From your story and your blood test results, you have gluten-sensitivity. You do not have celiac disease (your low tTG level shows that you do not have any gut damage from gluten). But you are still getting sick from gluten (your high IgG-gliadin level shows that your body reacts to gluten). The good news is that it takes many months to get the full benefits of a gluten-free diet. I expect that you will continue to feel better over the next few months. You should be taking some additional iron and a multivitamin supplements because you will be relatively iron deficient—that will be making you tired.”

The Time has Come
The history of science and medicine is littered with vehement arguments against any new idea that runs contrary to traditional beliefs. Ironically however, it takes new ideas to make progress. It was George Bernard Shaw who said that “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man.”

Thousands Convinced
Many people are joining the ranks of the gluten-free. There are thousands of people like you who have read this information and who are concerned about how gluten might be affecting them; there a millions of people who are sick and tired of being ignored and who are looking for more energy and vitality; there are the practitioners in the field of complementary medicine who are aware of the concept of gluten-sensitivity; there are the laboratories who have developed the gliadin antibody test and know that their tests are specific for gluten reactions; there are the gluten-free food manufacturers who have recognised that there is an ever-increasing demand for gluten-free products; there are the networks of people in the health food industry who appreciate the value of high-quality food and a gluten-free diet; and there are the supermarkets and grocery stores that are sensitive to the demands of their customers.

Who Might Oppose this Trend?
As previously discussed, medical practitioners are wary of overturning tradition. They do not want to be seen as alternative and want to avoid acting outside of the recommended clinical guidelines. In addition, there are the grain-growers and the bread-makers who make their living from gluten, and the pharmaceutical companies who make their living from the sick and unwell.

Bad Behavior on Gluten
Kimberley is 12 years old. She has The Gluten Syndrome and her behavior gets disturbed with gluten. She does not have celiac disease but she does have a high gluten test. (Her IgG-gliadin level was 55 units—It should be less than 20.)

Her mum said: “It is interesting about how behavior troubles are linked to gluten! Our youngest, Kimberley, is now 12 years old. She had her IgG-gliadin measured and it was high. She was clearly a lot better when she was off gluten. However then she decided to ‘try’ gluten again. Rodney suggested a small amount but she went for it—big time!”

By the end of a week, two other parents had asked what was wrong with her. Another parent asked “what on earth’s the matter with her” she seemed so different and stroppy. She admitted she felt “absolutely awful” but really didn’t want to admit it as she knew it meant she’d have to completely give up gluten.”

Anyway, after a lot of talking, she agreed it wasn’t in her best interests to eat gluten. From that day she has been gluten-free ever since, with the odd very long envious glance at French bread! With our support she’s very compliant with being GF now, which I think is remarkable for her age. Clearly she now understands and gets the benefits of GF. But I was really shocked at how affected her behavior was after a reintroduction of gluten.”

Could You Have The Gluten Syndrome?
One in every ten people is affected by gluten. If you have chronic symptom (feeling sick, tired and grumpy) then you should get checked for The Gluten Syndrome.

Fuente: 10/22/2008 - This article appeared in the Autumn 2007 edition of's Scott-Free Newsletter.