Marines rumbo a Siria

Centenares de infantes estadounidenses se aproximan a las costas sirias a bordo del buque USS San Antonio, de acuerdo con información difundida por la cadena televisiva CNN.

Los marines forman parte de la 26 Unidad Expedicionaria (MEU), integrada por más de 2 200 militares, que disponen de capacidades de operaciones terrestres y aéreas para intervenir en áreas de conflicto en plazos relativamente breves.

La MEU está formada además por el buque de asalto anfibio Kearsarge, actualmente en el golfo Pérsico, y el de desembarco Carter Hall, que se mantiene en el océano Índico.

Sin embargo, el Pentágono aseguró  que estas fuerzas no forman parte de los planes para una eventual operación contra Siria, que se prevé realizar sin el empleo de unidades terrestres y solo con cohetes crucero Tomahawk, de largo alcance, a bordo de buques norteamericanos en áreas aledañas al territorio sirio, según la CNN.

El USS San Antonio pasó el jueves del mar Rojo al Mediterráneo a través del Canal de Suez y al parecer se dirige a la isla griega de Creta, donde permanecerá hasta finales de octubre.

Washington culpa a Siria por el reciente uso de armas químicas contra civiles. El gobierno de Bashar al-Assad rechazó las acusaciones y las calificó de "pretexto para una acción bélica".

En los últimos días la Armada estadounidense reforzó su presencia en la región del golfo Pérsico con el arribo del portaaviones Harry S. Truman, con dos cruceros coheteriles e igual número de destructores como buques escoltas, que relevarán a la agrupación similar del USS Nimitz, que se encuentra en el área desde marzo pasado.

Sin embargo, el Nimitz permanecerá en la región hasta nuevo aviso, pues su presencia sería vital en la eventualidad de un golpe militar contra Siria. (Con información de PL)
 

La disyuntiva Siria

War on Syria and the West’s Skin-Deep Morality
By Colin Todhunter

Los ciudadanos deberíamos ser capaces de tomar posiciones respecto a lo que ocurre más allá de nuestras fronteras. Por eso no viene mal estar enterados. Si Estados Unidos abre otro frente militar en Siria, y hay que resaltar que la terrible guerra que asola esa región lleva mucho tiempo activa, las consecuencias las pagaremos todos. El artículo de Todhunter va acompañado de numerosas citas.

Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/war-on-syria-and-the-wests-skin-deep-morality/5347043

And here we go again. In Syria, things were getting desperate for Washington. It needed a major made-for-TV, cross-the-red-line incident involving chemical weapons. Unsurprisingly, by hook or by crook – probably crook (1) – it got it. The BBC, British Foreign Secretary William Hague and a multitude of other media outlets and politicians now clamour, or at least strongly imply the need, for direct military action to bolster the illegal ‘indirect’ military intervention from the West and its allies that has already been taking place for a long time.

The story being peddled goes that the (axis of) evil Syrian regime has used a ‘weapon of mass destruction’ to help win a war it was already winning, thereby incurring the wrath of the US. Strange logic indeed.

It’s a case of déjà vu. British MP George Galloway in front of a US senate hearing back in 2005 exposed the ‘pack of lies’ that the US-led invasion of Iraq was built on. Similar forms of deceit have been the foundations for shaping public opinion regarding attacking Libya, Afghanistan, Pakistan and numerous other countries. The presence of WMDs was used to justify attacking Iraq, while ‘humanitarianism’ or ‘fighting terror’ was the excuse used elsewhere.

But what is it about the term ‘weapons of mass destruction’ that provokes a knee jerk reaction from media people and politicians who foam with rage and let seep from their mouths high minded platitudes about morality?

“Morality is simply the attitude we adopt towards people we personally dislike.” Oscar Wilde in ‘An Ideal Husband’.

If in the above quote from Wilde, we replace ‘people’ with ‘regimes’, we may appreciate the nature of the West playing fast and lose with its notions of morality. Supply arms, including chemical weapons, to dictatorial regimes throughout West Asia with atrocious human rights records because, notwithstanding the fact it is great business, they are ‘good friends of ours’ (to coin a highly apt mafia term). Yes, all friends and good ones at that, as long as they remain loyal to the ‘Project for the New American Century’ (2).

The PNAC, or the project for world domination, is partly built on gullible, easily led public opinion, which is (often) fanned by the emotionally laden letters ‘W-M-D’. A Pavlov’s dog public and media, which respond on cue to the moralistic bleatings of condescending criminals that masquerade as respectable politicians and who rely on the public’s ignorance to fuel their barbarity in the name of ‘protecting civilians’ from an impending bloodbath, while going on to cause one in Libya, to ‘defeat terror’, while funding it in Syria, or to ‘support democracy’, while undermining it in Egypt.

These politicians and much of the mainstream media confine the narrative about WMD to a military battlefield, or a threat of outright violent destruction. The term is never to be associated with the US dropping atom bombs on Japan, the West using mini-nukes in the form of depleted uranium or the use of white phosphorous to kill and maim (3). From the cancers caused to the environmental contamination, where is Hague’s, the BBC’s or any other number of media outlets’ moral indignation about this type of mass destruction?

Where too is their condemnation of treacherous economic, trade, food or agriculture policies that blight hundreds of millions across the globe? Where is their condemnation over the criminal manipulation of currency markets, commodities, interest rates and derivatives, or the neo-liberalism and the corporate-financial cartels that conspire to shape trade via the WTO, IMF or the World Bank (4,5,6,7,8)?

That’s right, condemnation of these economic and political weapons of mass destruction and suffering are nowhere to be seen or heard simply because such political figures and media institutions with their skin-deep morality are in place merely to serve the interests of fraudulent capital and its fraudulent policies.

This type of mass destruction and mass misery does not involve headline-grabbing, eye-catching episodes of carnage and death. This violence is structural in form, is arguably ultimately just as destructive and is ongoing and all pervasive (9). In Western countries, this is disguised as a need for ‘austerity’. In poorer countries, it is called ‘development’.

Under the ‘structural adjustment’ policies imposed on poor countries, it has become a case of export or be damned, embrace corporate agriculture or be damned, borrow and build dams or be damned. And, in the process, elites – both foreign and indigenous – prosper, while the people and the environment end up being damned anyhow (10). It’s almost becoming a cliché to mention the hundreds of thousands of farmers in India who ‘embraced’ it all and died. It’s no cliché though, it happened.

It’s no cliché that the petrochemical-backed, corporate-driven ‘Green Revolution’ is raping the environment (11). It’s no cliché to say that genetic engineering is a highly financially lucrative ‘experiment’ that is jeopardising our health and the future of humanity (12). Neither is it a cliché that millions, from Egypt to the US, are bearing the brunt of economic policies that result in misery for the many and record profits for the few.

Perhaps we should look at Hague and his ilk and assess whether they actually do care about the plight of ordinary folk in the manner they claim to. Do they really care about the plight of Syrians? Perhaps we might care to ponder that they clearly do not, given the back door deals and wars they have sanctioned for the benefit of powerful corporations (13,14).

Why should they care so much about people in far off places when they show little for those in their own countries? The post-war Keynesian consensus has been gradually dismantled, leading to the offshoring of much of their own economies and leaving millions in debt, in poverty, thrown onto the scrapheap or used as fodder to fight wars for the rich under the banner of ‘humanitarianism’ or ‘protecting our freedoms’. And, as far as ‘protecting our freedom’ is concern, look to Edward Snowden and especially Hague’s squirming reaction to the revelations to see how hollow this rings.

Moral outrage within certain influential quarters about the latest happenings in Syria might be enough to fool some of the public, but let the record show that this fake outrage runs skin deep and is extremely selective.

Notes

1) http://www.globalresearch.ca/doctors-behind-syrian-chemical-weapons-claims-are-aiding-terrorists/5346870

2) http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1665.htm

3) http://thewe.cc/weplanet/news/americas/us/war_crimes_fallujah.html

4) http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/07/big-banks-criminally-conspire-to-rig-800-trillion-dollar-market.html

5) http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/08/a-cartel-of-big-banks-is-harming-the-world-economy-by-manipulating-derivatives.html

6) http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/06/every-market-is-rigged.html

7) http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/06/the-big-banks-and-commodities-future-trading-commission-conspired-to-hide-speculation-from-congress.html

8) http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/07/if-we-dont-break-up-the-big-banks-they-will-manipulate-more-and-more-of-the-economy-making-us-poorer-and-poorer.html

9) http://www.globalresearch.ca/india-structural-violence-mass-poverty-and-social-inequality/5307173

10) http://www.globalissues.org/article/7/causes-of-hunger-are-related-to-poverty#Increasingemphasisonliberalizedexport-orientedandindustrialagriculture

11) http://sagarmediainc.wordpress.com/2013/06/07/punjab-indias-grain-bowl-now-reels-under-agrarian/

12) http://www.countercurrents.org/todhunter090713.htm

13) http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-eu-free-trade-agreement-a-corporate-stitch-up-by-any-other-name/5339789

14) http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Weapons/Making_Killing_page.html

Siria se desangra

Syria: Obama’s Pretext for War? The “Rebels” are in Possession of Chemical Weapons

By Phil Greaves
Global Research, August 29, 2013
Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/syria-obamas-pretext-for-war-the-rebels-are-in-possession-of-chemical-weapons/5347335

Nota: El texto de Graves puede brindar elementos de juicio sobre la situación en Siria. Por eso lo incluyo sin comentarios propios.
It seems many have forgotten the last two and a half years of western sabre-rattling and covert military aggression against the Syrian state. It is worth reiterating that without the vast amount of military, financial, and diplomatic largesse the west and their regional clients have thrown at the “revolutionary rebels” in Syria – who have now beyond doubt been exposed as sectarian extremists, lead and dominated by Al Qaeda ideologues – the violent insurgency in Syria would have been defeated long ago by the Syrian army.

These extremist-dominated “rebels” were armed and funded by Syria’s enemies – with the tacit approval and coordination of the west – from an early stage in the supposed “Syrian uprising” (read: local protests), to wage a sectarian insurgency upon the Syrian state and its security apparatus on behalf of the US and its various allies.

The US-led military and intelligence alliance comprises of: the United States, Israel, United Kingdom, France, Qatar, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, United Arab Emirates, aswell as numerous Lebanese political and paramilitary factions under the influence of Saudi Arabia. Although individual relationships and objectives have been in flux between this group, elements within all their respective establishments; governments; intelligence agencies; wealthy private donors and military contractors have worked to facilitate the transfer of arms and militants into Syria since the onset of the insurgency in March/April 2011. Although their individual desired outcomes and long-term objectives may differ; this alliance has held one common objective throughout: the destruction of an independent Syrian state.

The pathetic attempt at media “debate” surrounding Obama’s imminent plan to bomb Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack – which morphed from a couple of hours of feigning scepticism straight into accepting unsubstantiated western allegations as fact, and then repeating them verbatim – all have one common theme: that of a reluctant Obama, unwilling to sacrifice “boots on the ground” and desperate to avert wider regional conflict in another endless war in the Middle East. Yet, upon analysing the conflict from a realistic perspective – which was from the onset, a sectarian, foreign-funded insurgency – as opposed to the corporate-media, and western politician’s manufactured fantasy-narrative of a “democratic grass-roots uprising” – it becomes clear that the reluctant facade of Obama has also been manufactured from false media narratives – propagated by the government “sources” that shape them. In contrast to Obama’s apparent reluctance to exacerbate the Syrian crisis; at every periodic occasion that the Syrian opposition have had setbacks – be it on the battlefield; diplomatic theatre; or within public opinion – the US has stepped up its covert militarism with its partners operating on Syria’s borders. For example, we now know that when the much-desired No Fly Zone was blocked by China and Russia in the UNSC the White House made efforts to step up its covert support to the “rebels” through the CIA and Qatar, transitting the shipments through the Turkish/Syrian border. Accordingly, with the increase of militarism; came the increase of death-toll and displacement.

With regard to the early demands for a sovereign states’ President to “step aside”; westerners must first ask ourselves: do any world leaders demand Obama, Cameron, Bush, Blair, or any other variety of western diplomatic mass-murderer “step aside” for killing possibly millions of innocent civilians of countless nations? Or does the “International Community” only frown upon dictators allegedly “killing their own people” with “Weapons of Mass Destruction”? Is this the moral bar for western society as a whole? “Our leaders” can be proven to kill vast numbers in illegal wars anywhere on earth with impunity, but those “our leaders” deem enemies cannot defend allegations, let alone defend their nation from a foreign-funded insurgency?

Even if one finds this repugnant, hypocritical state of affairs as agreeable; how do Obama and Cameron explain their lack of condemnation toward Egypt’s coup-leaders; killing up to a thousand people from mainly peaceful protests in the space of a few days? One suspects any real condemnation of the military coup and subsequent crackdown (justified or not) will only come from the “moral” leaders of the west when and if Sisi and his feloul cohorts decide to cut-off the US’ vital “interests” in Egypt; those “interests” being primarily the protection of Israel; unfettered access (control) of the Suez Canal, and a continuation of the long-standing US-dominant military relationship and billion-dollar contracts. Those US “interests” do not include the lives, much less the “freedom” or “democracy” of the Egyptian people.

Furthermore, how do Obama and Cameron explain their silence or complete lack of “action” regarding their close ally the Al-Khalifa monarchy’s brutal crackdown of protesters and dissidents in Bahrain over the last two years? Of course, the United States does not need regime change from a compliant monarchy in Bahrain that dutifully host its fifth-fleet in one of the world’s most strategic locations. Further still, where is the “moral outrage” regarding Saudi Arabia’s brutal regime and its decades-long sponsorship of terrorism? The Saudi type of terrorism is often purported in the west as in “our interest”. Saudi-sponsored terrorism comes only in the name of supporting “freedom fighters” who at the time may just so happen to be enemies of our enemies, who are then dutifully facilitated, fomented and sponsored by the west; inevitably resulting in small instances of blowback that provide the western security establishment further pretext to encroach upon civil liberties with draconian and over-expansive “anti-terror” laws – a win-win for the National Security State and the Military Industrial Complex.

The west’s proxy-forces in Syria are, in reality, close to defeat. Against the odds, and a considerable multi-national effort to destroy an army and divide a nation; Assad has solidified his core base and territories. In the last few months the Syrian army has made considerable gains on the battlefield, recapturing strategic choke-points along the rebel supply route and utilising its bolstered numbers from the National Defense Forces to protect regained territory. Assad has also maintained his own critical supply lines, both of a military and diplomatic nature and has upheld his side of whatever bargains he has made with international allies. Russia has remained steadfast in its support of Assad up to the point of writing, but this may yet change in the face of a possible world war III scenario.

Russia’s military supplies have been critical to the Syrian army’s success on the battlefield, and its diplomatic efforts in the UN have stalled what has been a determined effort by the west to gain a pretext for military intervention. Moreover, anti-rebel sentiment has been on the rise in Syria for months. An example lies in the border town of Tal Kalakh, which was recently peacefully transferred to army control; not out of any particular love for Assad I must add, but simply due to the fact the extremists had moved on and the locals were more inclined to keep their livelihood and live in peace than face death or imprisonment. In a recent interview Assad also highlighted an increase in defections from the rebels back to the army as a result of government amnesty’s This, and an and added impetus from the Hezbollah-aided victory of Qusair had set the army on a trajectory that would be difficult to stop without massive foreign intervention.

On the other hand, the disparate factions of Bin-Ladenite “rebels” have been bogged down with infighting and internal conflict, which has resulted in a further increase of their brutality toward the civilian population. Just this week the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) executed three Alawite truck drivers on video for the crime of forgetting prayer ritual. A prominent Alawite cleric was also recently executed by “rebels”, the latest in a long line of clerics and religious fficials that have been targeted by the extremists.

The cleric was kidnapped during the ISIS/JaN sectarian onslaught in Latakia; the mass graves that were found as a result of this particular sectarian assault on a civilian area didn’t merit much attention in the western press. Moreover, recent rebel attacks – predominantly ISIS and jabhat al Nusra – on the Kurdish community in the north have taken on a broader and intractable dimension; resulting in the mass exodus of 30,000 Kurds over the border to Iraqi Kurdistan. In relation to the north of Syria where jihadist groups are most dominant; ISIS recently released a message to all international aid organisations to leave the region or be killed. Accordingly, the “rebels” public appeal is arguably at an all-time low. Several defining events throughout the course of the conflict have been imprinted on the minds of millions of people across the globe. From children being forced to behead prisoners; to rebels – from the supposed “moderate western-backed” militants no less – eating the organs of slain Syrian soldiers.

There is little sympathy in the west for the militants western governments support. A recent Reuters poll showed only 9 percent of Americans support any form of US military intervention in Syria. Even if the Assad government were found to be guilty of using chemical weapons that figure only rose to 25% percent. With a resounding 60% percent against. These figures are almost mirrored in the UK and have reflected such opinion throughout the Syrian conflict. Yet if military intervention was to occur, it would undoubtedly be the UK and the US at the forefront of the attacks: that is western “democracy”.

President Assad and the Syrian establishment have long known that they have been on the US’ target list. Indeed, it was public knowledge in the west that during the post-9/11 Bush administration Syria was placed under “the axis of Evil”. During that decade several prominent reports highlighted covert policies the US and its allies were directing at Syria. These covert policies ran parallel to USAID “democracy” programs that the US had implemented in Syria in order to bolster opposition elements and leverage the Assad government – as is the protocol for US subversion.

Many of these same initiatives have formed a part of the US State Department-trained anti-Assad “activists”, so prevalent on social media and often touted as objective sources in the western corporate press. More importantly, Assad has also known for a long time that any use of chemical weapons would undoubtedly result in the west – at the very least – abandoning any pretense of negotiations and reverting to type: the military option. Why would Assad choose now to entice a western military intervention? What can he possibly gain from his own certain downfall? At a time when it was becoming more and more likely that the Assad government would hold on to some sort of power in Syria and the “rebels” and their international alliance were looking increasingly likely to fall apart, why would Assad choose to use chemical weapons? Not only that, we must also remember that the UN team is in Damascus at the Syrian governments request, it simply defies logic that Assad would willingly commit such a grave act right under the nose of the UN, particularly when the trajectory of the war was firmly in his favour?

Conversely, there are multiple logical scenarios in which the “rebels” would benefit from staging a chemical weapons attack. This is plain objective common sense. Since Obama declared his famous “red-line” it has been a casus belli waiting to happen. The “rebels”, and their many international backers, intelligence agencies and private contractors are all in the knowledge that a chemical weapons attack will incur a western military response, resulting in their desired objective: the removal of Assad.

“Rebels” in Possession of WMD

There is already a strong case being made that the “rebels” have deployed a form of sarin in a home-made shell fired on government forces in Khan al-Assal. Russia has provided the UN with evidence to this effect and Khan al-Assal was one of the sites on the list to be visited by the UN inspection team. Moreover, in May this year UN investigator Carla Del Ponte pointed the finger at the “rebels” for the use of chemical weapons, a fact that has been thoroughly whitewashed in both western media and from the duplicitous mouths of western diplomats – who still claim that “rebels” don’t have the capability to launch chemical weapons. Contrary to western diplomats hollow claims; in late May militant cells with links to Jabhat al Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham were found in both Iraq and Turkey with sarin and other chemical weapons materiel in their possession – another fact that received only light attention in western media, and has been virtually ignored in any western diplomats talking points.

Framed in the above context, and with the “evidence” – or glaring lack of it – to date to prove the US’ assertions; it cannot be logically, or honestly implied that the Syrian military has used chemical weapons – or has any intention to, knowing it would be certain suicide. Thus, one can only logically draw the assumption that this latest alleged CW attack is a repeat of previous attempts to incite western intervention, but on a much larger and deadlier scale. It could have any number of culprits, but the Syrian government is possibly the least likely. Yet the United States (arbiter of the world) has dismissed such notions on the premise that the “rebels” don’t have the capability: the United States is quite literally overruling UN investigators in order to carry out regime change to meet its own geopolitical objectives (again).

The clearest signal of this intention came when several members of the Obama administration intentionally misled reporters and stated several times that the Syrian government blocked an immediate investigation into the recent alleged CW attack in Ghouta. This was a blatant lie and the US knew it; it was in fact the UN that held up the investigation through fear for their own safety in a what was a contested area. The Syrian government gave its immediate blessing for an investigation and escorted the UN team to the site for a short time; at which point it was fired upon by unknown snipers and retreated to the safety of an army checkpoint. Another clear indicator of Obama’s aggressive intention is the blatant double-standard being applied; the UN team is inside Syria to specifically investigate alleged CW attacks that occurred 5 months ago, and presumably the US would have accepted its findings.

Not only this, but the UN team does not have a mandate to determine the source of chemical weapons use – only to determine whether they have been used or not. Yet the UN team has been granted access to an alleged CW attack site by the Syrian government only 5 days after the alleged event, and the Obama administration is claiming that any results from the investigation are now “too late to be credible”?

Now why would the Obama administration lie? I thought they were reluctant for war?

Ejercicio y sueño

Bastan unas 3 o 4 sesiones de ejercicio semanales, durante 30 minutos, para mejorar la calidad del sueño. Tales son los resultados de una investigación realizada en personas sedentarias y en torno a los sesenta años. Les dejo la conexión y un extracto. Si les parece bien, pues a moverse un poco.

"A  study published last week in The Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, is that the influence of daily exercise on sleep habits is more convoluted than many of us might expect and that, in the short term, sleep might have more of an impact on exercise than exercise has on sleep. To reach that conclusion, Dr. Baron and her colleagues turned to data from a study of exercise and sleep originally published in 2010. For that experiment, researchers had gathered a small group of women (and one man) who had received diagnoses of insomnia. The volunteers were mostly in their 60s, and all were sedentary. Then the researchers randomly assigned their volunteers either to remain inactive or to begin a moderate endurance exercise program, consisting of three or four 30-minute exercise sessions a week, generally on a stationary bicycle or treadmill, that were performed in the afternoon. This exercise program continued for 16 weeks. At the end of that time, the volunteers in the exercise group were sleeping much more soundly than they had been at the start of the study. They slept, on average, about 45 minutes to an hour longer on most nights, waking up less often and reporting more vigor and less sleepiness."

El otro BOSS

Reconocer un rostro dentro de una multitud es, de momento, empresa casi imposible. Dejará de serlo si el proyecto BOSS sale adelante. Les dejo algo de la información de primera página del NYT. Así que, nos controlan por la declaración de la renta, los datos sanitarios están en línea, si usamos tarjetas de crédito, se sabe hasta el último euro que gastamos, la red es pasto de ciberespionaje, las llamadas telefónicas son GPS personales. En fin que no hay remedio: estamos desnudos e inermes ante el Gran Hermano tecnológico. Y eso sin contar con los chivatos humanos.

Los chuchos, tan feuchos, son las queridas mascotas de la familia Obama. No tienen nada que ver con el proyecto BOSS. O tal vez lleven chips incorporados por mor de la seguridad del Presidente. Nunca se sabe.  Recuerdo un chiste mexicano en el que le preguntaban a un chico qué quería ser de mayor: "perro de gringo", dijo. Pues eso.

"I would say we’re at least five years off, but it all depends on what kind of goals they have in mind” for such a system, said Anil Jain, a specialist in computer vision and biometrics engineering at Michigan State University who was not involved in the BOSS project.

The effort to build the BOSS system involved a two-year, $5.2 million federal contract given to Electronic Warfare Associates, a Washington-area military contractor with a branch office in Kentucky. The company has been working with the laboratory of Aly Farag, a University of Louisville computer vision specialist, and the contract was steered to the firm by an earmark request in a 2010 appropriations bill by Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader.

Significant progress is already being made in automated face recognition using photographs taken under ideal conditions, like passport pictures and mug shots. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is spending $1 billion to roll out a Next Generation Identification system that will provide a national mug shot database to help local police departments verify identities.

But surveillance of crowds from a distance — in which lighting and shadows vary, and faces tend to be partly obscured or pointed in random directions — is still not reliable or fast enough. The BOSS research is intended to overcome those challenges by generating far more information for computers to analyze.

Daiquirí monumental

En "El Floridita" de La Habana han mezclado el "daiquirí" más grande del mundo, en líquido y alcohólico homenaje al gran Hemingway. Y para entrar en la tontorrona guía Guinnes de los records. Para preparar un daiquirí hacen falta buen ron "Habana Club", blanco de cinco años, zumo de limón fresco, azúcar y hielo picado. Las proporciones varían: igual cantidad de zumo que de ron y azúcar. Hemingway lo prefería sin azúcar y posiblemente con el doble de ron. Después los ingredientes se mezclan en una batidora ( o si se prefiere en una coctelera). La consistencia debería ser como la de la nieve. En el "Floridita" ofrecen múltiples permutaciones y variaciones de un cóctel emblemático de Cuba. Entra muy bien y si se toma con moderación reconforta en medio del calorazo tropical.

América Latina no quiere espías

Latin America Condemns US Espionage at United Nations Security Council
By Carla Stea
América Latina ha dejado de ser el paupérrimo patio trasero de Estados Unidos. El siglo XXI es el de las democracias, la lucha por la prosperidad, lo que significa la competencia de nuevos mercados. Por eso la presente declaración contra el ciberespionaje que practica Estados Unidos es significativa. Los países latinoamericanos lo han manifestado en la ONU: rechazan toda injerencia cibernética en sus asuntos. Si les interesa, visiten la URL señalada.

Url of this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/latin-america-condemns-us-espionage-at-united-nations-security-council/5346120

“The United States appears to be destined by Providence to plague America with misery in the name of liberty.” Simon Bolivar
Throughout the day, on August 6, President Cristina Fernandez Kirchner of Argentina chaired a historic United Nations Security Council meeting that revealed a seismic shift in geopolitical consciousness and incipient strength.
The agenda of Security Council meeting 7015 was:  “Cooperation Between the United Nations and Regional and Sub-regional Organizations in Maintaining International Peace and Security.”
The prelude to this meeting was held, the prior day, August 5, at a press stakeout given by Elias Jaua Milano, Foreign Minister of Venezuela, Hector Timerman, Foreign Minister of Argentina,  Antonio de Aguiar Patriota, Foreign Minister of Brazil, Luis Almagro, Foreign Minister of Uruguay and David Choquehuanca Cespedes, Foreign Minister of Bolivia.
They spoke on behalf of Mercosur, the Southern Common Market, following their meeting with United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.  Their remarks focused on the expression of outrage contained in the “Annex to the note verbale dated 22 July from the Permanent Mission of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, which stated:
“Decision rejecting the acts of espionage conducted by the United States in the countries of the region.”  “The President of the Argentine Republic, the President of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, the President of the Federative Republic of Brazil, the President of the Eastern Republic of Uruguay and the President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, having met in Montevideo, Eastern Republic of Uruguay, on 12 July, 2013, within the framework of the presidential summit of the Southern Common Market (MERCOSUR),
Condemning the acts of espionage carried out by intelligence agencies of the United States of America , which affect all countries in the region,
Strongly rejecting the interception of telecommunications and the acts of espionage carried out in our countries, which constitute a violation of the human rights, the right to privacy and the right to information of our citizens, and which also constitute unacceptable behavior that violates our sovereignty and is detrimental  to the normal conduct of relations among nations,
Considering the advisability of promoting a coordinated approach to this issue at the regional level,
Decide to:
Work together to guarantee the cybersecurity of the States members to MERCOSUR, which is essential to defending the sovereignty of our countries,
Demand that those responsible immediately cease these activities and provide an explanation of the motives for and consequences of such activities,
Stress that the prevention of crime and the suppression of transnational crimes, including terrorism, must be carried out in line with the rule of law and in strict observance of international law.
Promote the adoption by the relevant multilateral institutions of standards for the regulation of the Internet which place a particular emphasis on cybersecurity issues, with a view to fostering the adoption of standards that guarantee the adequate protection of communications, in particular to safeguard the sovereignty of States and the privacy of individuals,
Express our full solidarity with all countries, within and outside our region that have been victims of such actions,
Promote the joint efforts of the Ministers for Foreign Affairs to inform the Secretary-General of the United Nations of these incidents and request prevention and sanction mechanisms on the issue at the multilateral level. (Ver URL).