Dedicated to ‘Xicano' culture

[Click photo to enlarge. Article courtesy of My San Antonio.]

By Meredith Canales

Anisa Onofre and Juan Tejeda have been working on their small business — Aztlan Libre Press — for the last year.

Aztlan Libre Press opened in January. The couple said their daughter Maya Quetzalli, is the inspiration for one of the independent publishing company's newest projects, a new coloring book titled, “Aztec Calendar Coloring Book.”

“We decided to do a coloring book based on the Nahuatl language,” said Tejeda.

He added, “We wanted our daughter to know part of her culture, and the symbols looked so simple we thought we could use them for a coloring book.”

Aztlan Libre's first endeavor, a book and tour for celebrated Chicano poet Alurista, went well, said Onofre. They are hoping Aztlan's second project will get off the ground in a similar way.

“Juan saw the Sun Stone in Mexico at the Museo Nacional de Antropología and has always admired those depictions on the stone,” she said. “He wanted a way of introducing the Aztec language, Nahuatl, to children, combining it with Spanish and English to make it easier to understand.”

Tejeda said when he began studying the images, he realized they might easy to teach to his 3 year-old daughter.

“They were so simple and fantastic,” he said.

Nahuatl is not a language Tejeda speaks fluently, and he's aware not many other people in the United States speak it either. He said many people in Mexico still speak Nahuatl.

“I took a class at The University of Texas a while back, and I know a lot of words. This is kind of a process of recovery for one of the many indigenous languages of Mexico,” he said.

Another Aztlan project titled, “Nauhaliiandoing Dos,” is an anthology of poetry in Nahuatl, English and Spanish.

A fourth project, also in the works, is a collection of poems from Reyes Cardenas, whom Onofre said she has greatly admired for years.

“He's been writing for 30 or 40 years, and Juan has known him for quite a while,” she said. “I just got to met him when Alurista was in town. He came to our home for the tour, and we took it from there. We don't think he's received as much attention as he's deserved.”

The couple's passion for art came from their own creativity, said Tejeda.

“Anisa and I are both writers, and she's the director of writers and communities at Gemini Ink,” he said. “It was always a dream of ours to start an independent publishing Chicano publishing company.”

Tejeda added, “We have received so many (written works) that it just proves there's a great need for more Chicano publishing houses to publish our stories, novels, drama and poetry.”

-30-

No jail time for PEC executive

Yes, I used to work for this company. Bennie gets a break from the good ol' boys. Jesus Garza

---

Fuelberg gets probation for stealing from members

• Jacqueline Ingles

The former Pedernales Electrical Cooperative (Johnson City, Texas) executive convicted of stealing from its members will not spend any time behind bars. Jurors in Gillespie County sentenced Bennie Fuelberg to probation, and a $30,000 fine.

Fuelberg's terminally ill wife broke down on the witness stand Monday, asking jurors to be merciful in sentencing her husband on the charges the largest public electricity co-op in the nation. "He loved PEC. He loved PEC," Jeanie Fuelberg repeated tearfully, apologizing to the judge for her strong emotion.

She told the jurors she is terminally ill, suffering from myelofibrosis - a progressive disorder of the bone marrow. She said her 66-year-old husband is her primary caretaker - a role he wouldn't be able fill from prison.

Fuelberg is the former PEC senior manager. PEC is the largest public power co-op in the nation.

Fuelberg was found guilty Friday by a Gillespie County jury of third degree theft, money laundering and misapplication of fiduciary property. The charges stem from the payment of of thousands of dollars of co-op money to relatives of PEC executives between the mid-1990s and 2007. Indictments showed more than $200,000 went to Curtis Fuelberg, Bennie Fuelberg's brother and William Price, a Lampasas attorney and the son of former PEC Director E.B. Price.

Fuelberg could have received up to 20 years in prison for the crimes. A judge will determine the terms of his probation in January.

Walter Demond, the co-op's outside attorney at Clark, Thomas & Winters , an Austin law firm, was also indicted on the same charges.

The prosecution wrapped up its case by 11 a.m., having called John Watson, a PEC member to the stand, Luis Garcia, PEC's general counsel and a fraud investigator with a consulting firm that conducted an audit on PEC that showed mishandling of funds.

Monday morning prosecutors called Todd Lester, director of Navigant Consulting , to the stand in an effort to show the jury Fuelberg disregarded Texas law and profited from a project known as the Texland Electric Cooperative--a failed plan to generate power to Pedernales.

An audit by Navigant Consulting found that Fuelberg was paid $6.3 million between 1998 and 2007.

Lester told jurors his audit showed Fuelberg was funding family trips on PEC money.

"I'd say his wife came with him on about 25 percent of 150 trips," Lester testified.

Lester also estimated Fuelberg used $32,000 of PEC money to pay for his wife's plane tickets to multiple locations, such as Boston.

During cross-examination, attorney Chris Gunter tried to show the jury that other PEC directors were along on these trips and also took their spouses along.

"Did you look for the records recording other PEC directors?" Gunter asked Lester.

"Some of the wives went, and we found expense for hotels and airfare," Lester testified and later agreed that the PEC board, who decided travel policies, did lack oversight on the matter.

Lester also testified that while the co-op did flourish under Fuelberg, the co-op's expenses "outpaced revenue."

Luis Garcia was recalled to the stand by prosecutors. He testified that since the arrest and conviction of Fuelberg, co-op members have lost trust.

"Even if we are making decisions in public at public meetings, there is suspicion," Garcia explained.

PEC member John Watson also testified that during Fuelberg's control of PEC, he was shut out of closed door meetings and members like himself were trying to get involved but were shut out.

Defense attorneys called their first few witnesses to help establish that Fuelberg is a good candidate for probation.

BIll Knight, a Blanco probation officer, was the first to take the stand. Next, Lamont Ramage, a former federal probation officer who used to be a PEC board member took the stand.

Both Knight and Ramage testified that they knew of no reason why Fuelberg would not make his probation terms if given probation.

A few of Fuelberg's Dripping Springs neighbors, his pastor and a former co-worker also praised Fuelberg as a 'trustworthy' and 'good person.'

Demond will be tried separately next year.

-30-

‘Crystal City 1969’ raises awareness about discrimination against Chicanos

Written by Vidwan Raghava The University of Texas at Arlington Shorthorn staff

In 1969, Chicano students in Crystal City, Texas broke out in protest over their school historically denying them an equal chance to participate in school activities.

Today marks the 41st anniversary of Chicano civil rights protests in Crystal City, which began when a Chicano student was barred from becoming the homecoming queen.

Playwright Raul Trevino and producer and director David Lozano co-wrote Crystal City 1969, to illustrate the events of the 1969 walkouts.

The importance of the play lies in addressing issues that have been have downplayed by society, Lozano said. He said many people that lived through this era were seeing it dramatized for the first time.

“You will never find anything about Crystal City in any history books,” Lozano said.

Lozano was pained to find out that Mexican American students weren’t allowed to be homecoming queen or participate fully in sports.

Amongst other things, the school had a policy whereby only one Chicano girl could be a cheerleader, said associate history professor Roberto Trevino.

“In 1969, one student protested this but she was denied permission to be a cheerleader and that triggered a student boycott,” Trevino said.

The student, who was denied, was expelled which led to students protesting the policy.

Twenty-three at the time, Political science professor Jose Gutierrez arranged for a lawyer and got the student reinstated, which raised other students hopes that their protest for equal rights would bear fruit.

Supporting the protest was the Mexican American Youth Organization headed by Gutierrez.

The organization consisted of young adults, who were mostly college graduates and working professionals.

“I graduated from Crystal City,” he said. “I have first-hand experience of the discrimination faced by Chicanos,” Gutierrez said.

On Dec. 9, 1969 the students began their walkouts, which was marked with hundreds of students walking out of class, eventually leading to a shut down of the school.

In January the school board members capitulated and agreed on a compromise, but with clauses allowing them to renege, Gutierrez said.

On Jan. 10, following the compromise, Gutierrez and members of his youth organization started the Raza Unida party.

Raza Unida party members were elected to the Crystal City school board and this ensured the loopholes in the compromise were never used, Gutierrez said.

“There are these wounds, these wounds from being slapped for speaking Spanish, being kicked for being Mexican, being put in shop class in a remedial school just for being Hispanic,” Lozano said

The story is about any person who has felt discriminated against and not solely Hispanics, said actor Priscilla Rice who plays the role of Severita Lara in the play.

“I do this out of a love and respect for the activists and the sacrifices they made,” Rice said.

Gutierrez says he went to see the play last year and felt it did justice to the movement.

“It is historically accurate, but dramatizes certain events, which is fine because its primary purpose is to entertain, “ Gutierrez said.

Irving Arts Center
Dupree Theater 3333 N. MacArthur Blvd., Irving, TX 75062
8 p.m. Today all tickets are $25
8 p.m. Dec. 10 – 11 Students and seniors $10 and general admission $15

Latino Cultural Center, Dallas
2600 Live Oak St. Dallas, TX 75204
8 p.m. Dec. 16 General admission $10
8 p.m. Dec. 17 - 18 Students and Seniors $10 General admission $15

-30-

Wikileaks and Latin America: Same Old Imperious U.S. Diplomats

By Former Senior Research Fellow Nikolas Kozloff

As more and more documents become available from Wikileaks, the public has gotten a novel and close up view of U.S. diplomats and their operations abroad. I was particularly interested to review heretofore secret documents dealing with Latin America, a region which has absorbed the attention of Washington officials in recent years. While it’s certainly no secret that the Bush administration, not to mention the later Obama White House, have both sought to isolate the so-called “Pink Tide” of leftist regimes in South America, the Wikileaks documents give us some interesting insight into the mindset of U.S. diplomats as they carry out their day to day work.

Needless to say, the picture that emerges isn’t too flattering.

Take, for example, a 2005 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Brasilia1 which details a high level conversation which took place between the American ambassador, John Danilovich, and Brazilian General Jorge Armando Felix. A longtime businessman, Danilovich spent 20 years in the shipping industry in London and it was there that the American organized voters for George Bush and his father. A big time GOP donor, Danilovich proved a loyal lieutenant at his post in Brasilia, specifically by opposing the left turn in South America.

In 2005, Hugo Chávez was at the height of his political powers, challenging the unpopular Bush regime throughout the region. Over in Bolivia meanwhile, Washington fretted that an erstwhile coca farmer, Evo Morales, might win his country’s presidential election. For Washington, Brazil had become a country of vital geopolitical importance: if President Lula could be persuaded to drop his support of neighboring Venezuela, then the U.S. would certainly be more successful at halting the region’s leftist advance. In the effort to turn back the Pink Tide, Danilovich was a key figure.

Speaking with the Brazilian daily O Estado de São Paulo, the diplomat accused Chávez of actually funding political forces within Bolivia. Seeking to foster a common U.S.-Brazilian front, Danilovich said the funding was a concern for Washington and ought to preoccupy officials in Brasilia as well. When reporters asked Danilovich whether he was accusing Chávez of directly funding Morales’ campaign, the diplomat would not specify [Morales himself denied the U.S. allegations].

Behind closed doors, Danilovich continued his diplomatic offensive. After lunching with General Felix, the ambassador broached the subject of Venezuela, noting that Chávez was “disrupting Brazil’s efforts to play a leading role politically and economically in South America.” It’s unclear from the cable what Felix might have thought about the ambassador’s comments, though reading between the lines it seems the military man may have been sympathetic toward the U.S. and disagreed with his own government’s official policy toward Venezuela.

Since we don’t have the full text of Danilovich’s cable, it’s unclear whether the diplomat approached other figures in the Lula government about Venezuela, let alone military officials. To be sure, at the time of this meeting Felix was working as Lula’s own Minister of Internal Security and as such no longer occupied an official post within the ranks. Yet, there are some disturbing parallels to the historic past here. Consider that it was not too long ago that Washington collaborated with the anti-Communist Brazilian military which overthrew democracy in a coup. Later, the armed forces hunted down leftists both within the country and abroad through so-called “Operation Condor.”

From Brazil to Argentina

Elsewhere in South America, the U.S. has faced political opposition from some unlikely quarters. Take for example Argentina, up until recently a fairly reliable U.S. ally which followed the Washington economic consensus. With the coming to power of Néstor Kirchner and his wife Cristina Fernández de Kirchner however, U.S.-Argentine relations have taken a nosedive. A fierce critic of the International Monetary Fund, Néstor also pursued an unprecedented diplomatic alliance with leftist Venezuela.2

Wikileaks cables document the deteriorating relationship between Washington and Buenos Aires and show U.S. diplomats as imperious and scheming. Take for example a diplomatic spat between Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State for Hemispheric Affairs Arturo Valenzuela and Argentine officials, an incident that I wrote about at the time.3 An American of Chilean descent and a Chavez critic, Valenzuela made his way to Buenos Aires late last year. Causing a diplomatic firestorm, Valenzuela declared before the local media that Argentina lacked adequate legal protections. When the government protested that such was not the case, Valenzuela clarified that he had personally spoken with representatives of American companies through the U.S. Chamber of Commerce who were upset about management of the economy. They were reluctant to invest due to lack of legal protections, Valenzuela added.

As if he had not annoyed the government enough already, Valenzuela then declared that he personally had detected a change in the investment climate between 1996 [the height of Argentina's flirtation with neo-liberal economics] when “there was a lot of enthusiasm to invest,” and the present day. In a communiqué, the Argentine foreign ministry angrily retorted that the government “had not received complaints from U.S. companies which had interests and investments” in the country.

The irate chorus continued with Interior Minister Florencio Randazzo regretting that some U.S. officials had gone back to “the old practices” even though “there was an expectation in Argentina of the inauguration of a new U.S. foreign policy” during the Obama era. The Minister of Justice added that Valenzuela’s remarks were “very unusual and unjustified.” By far however the most incendiary remarks came from former president Néstor Kirchner who accused Valenzuela of behaving like a “viceroy.”

Far from feeling contrite toward Argentina, U.S. diplomats treated the Valenzuela episode rather flippantly and superciliously. In a cable sent to Washington, recently released through Wikileaks4 , American officials in Buenos Aires wrote that the local press had “sensationalized” and over dramatized the incident. “Once again,” diplomats remarked, “the Kirchner government has shown itself to be extremely thin-skinned and intolerant of perceived criticism.” Downplaying the tenor of Valenzuela’s remarks, the authors added that many Argentines routinely complain about the weakness of governing institutions and the rule of law.

It’s difficult to parse what Washington’s policy might be toward Argentina in the Obama era. Judging from another cable released by Wikileaks5 , U.S. officials are still trying to sort it all out and seek to acquire as much information about the Kirchners as possible. Prior to Néstor’s recent death, Secretary of State Clinton personally wrote to the American Embassy in Buenos Aires, remarking that the U.S. was drawing up “a written product examining the interpersonal dynamics between the governing tandem.”

Clinton added that State had a pretty “solid understanding” of Néstor’s style and personality, but Cristina remained a mystery. Specifically, Clinton wanted to know how Cristina managed “her nerves and anxiety.” Somewhat bizarrely, Clinton then asked her subordinates whether Cristina was taking any medications. Again and again, the Secretary of State pressed for details about Cristina’s psychological and emotional profile.

Though certainly intriguing, the Wikileaks cable fails to answer a vital question: why would Clinton seek a psychological evaluation of Cristina in the first place? Perhaps, the United States government simply lacked information about the Argentine president and wanted to know who it was dealing with in South America. Another darker reading however is that the U.S. does not trust Argentina and is seeking to manipulate Cristina or uncover some dirt. A Machiavellian if there ever was one, Clinton is surely capable of playing political hardball and engaging in diplomatic intrigue.

For far too long, the U.S. public has remained ignorant of its government’s overseas efforts to turn back Latin America’s leftist Pink Tide. Though scant thus far, Wikileaks’ release of documents pertaining to Latin America is telling. From Brazil to Argentina, American officials have emerged as an imperious and cynical lot. Hopefully in the days ahead we may learn more about the Bush and Obama administration’s handling not only of Brazil and Argentina but also Venezuela, Bolivia, and Honduras.

Nikolas Kozloff, Ph.D. is a former COHA Senior Research Fellow and is the author ofRevolution! South America and the Rise of the New Left.

Some of his other posts are available at www.nikolaskozloff.com

-30-

Latino Art Now Video

Click the link below or the header to start a fun-short video on the recent Latino Art Now gathering in Los Angeles. The usual (arts community) suspects were there. My wife definitely enjoyed participating on a panel at the conference. According to Annie, the Latino art lovefest was a resounding success. Maybe I will check out the scene next time ... maybe?

Go to Latino Art Now MP4 Video

Journalist Rubén Salazar’s Death — Accident or Assassination?

[Click on header to go to original story and more photos at Borderzine.com. Click on photo to enlarge.]

Frank Sotomayor

40 Years Later, Questions Persist

Two Mexican cousins are killed by Los Angeles police in a case of mistaken identity. A prominent journalist is cautioned by two LAPD officers about his coverage of the shootings. A short time later, the journalist meets with staffers of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission and tells them he suspects he’s being followed by police. He cleans out his wallet and clears off his office desk. Days later, he is dead. Killed by a 10-inch-long tear-gas projectile fired by a Los Angeles Sheriff’s deputy.

Is this the plot for a crime thriller? It could be. But it is just part of the tragic mystery surrounding Rubén Salazar. The Los Angeles Times columnist and KMEX-TV news director was killed 40 years ago under disturbing circumstances. Law enforcement officials had a chance to resolve the matter at that time, but they dropped the ball. A new generation of law enforcement officials now has a chance to set the record straight by releasing all records relating to the case. For the sake of history and transparency, they must not fumble this opportunity.

I first heard of Salazar in early 1970 when a friend mailed me a few of his columns. I was in the Army in Japan at the time. I was impressed by Salazar’s insight as he explored the often-misportrayed Chicano movement and issues involving education and justice. Following his career as a Times reporter, Salazar became the first Mexican American columnist for a major U.S. newspaper. For me, a young Mexican American during an era with few minorities in the news media, he was an inspiration. I vowed to go to Los Angeles and meet him.

On Aug. 29, 1970, I ended my military service in Oakland, Calif., and looked forward to a Times job interview. Little did I know that on that same Saturday afternoon, Salazar would be killed. Though I never got to meet him, I have continued to celebrate his journalistic work and ponder his death.

A basic question haunts me, just as it disturbs Salazar’s children and many others. Was the fatal shooting of Salazar a horrible accident that occurred under riot conditions? Or was Salazar assassinated to silence his reporting and the work of his KMEX news staff?

Salazar began writing his Times column when he left the newspaper as a reporter in January of 1970 to head up a small news staff at KMEX, one of the nation’s first Spanish-language TV stations. A few days before his death, Salazar met with a priest and two staff members of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission — regional director Philip Montez and Charlie Ericksen, now publisher of Hispanic Link News Service. Salazar told them his KMEX reporting had upset law enforcement, Ericksen recalled in an interview. He wanted it “on the record” that he feared cops would try to frame him with something such as marijuana possession. Salazar’s wife, Sally, later wrote that her husband had been acting nervous and that he had emptied most of his wallet’s contents. At his office, on Aug. 28, Salazar had cleared off his desk and had taken some pictures off his walls.

An Antiwar March

Saturday Aug. 29 began with a peaceful march by an estimated 25,000 Mexican Americans in East Los Angeles. Organized by the National Chicano Moratorium Committee, it protested the Vietnam War and the disproportionate number of Mexican Americans being drafted and dying on the battlefield. Demonstrators came from across the Southwest in a show of unity for the Chicano movement that decried inequities in schools, jobs and the criminal justice system.

After the marchers reached Laguna Park, unruly youths began to steal bottled drinks at a nearby liquor store. When deputies responded, they were pelted by rocks and the bottles. Deputies fired tear gas to clear the park. Families with children and elderly relatives fled while some young men and women continued to fling rocks. The deputies finally pushed away those resisting, often swinging their batons like baseball bats. Protest organizers later said that law enforcement had looked for any pretext to break up the event.

Almost everyone left, disappointed at the sudden end of what had been both a war protest and a cultural celebration. Some young people did not go away quietly. They responded violently, looting and burning businesses along Whittier Boulevard. Deputies and LAPD officers moved in with strength. Before it was over, property damages would exceed $1 million, dozens would be injured and hundreds arrested. Three people would die.

Salazar was covering the day’s events with his station’s news staff. KMEX reporter Guillermo Restrepo later said that Salazar had suspected they were being followed that sweaty afternoon as the two of them walked east along Whittier Boulevard. They entered the Silver Dollar bar to go to the restroom and have a beer. Its location, 22 blocks from Laguna Park, seemed far removed from the rioting at the time. Sheriff’s deputies, however, suddenly appeared outside the dingy bar. Later they said deputies had been told an armed man was inside the bar.

Deputy Thomas H. Wilson fired into the establishment using a torpedo-shaped tear-gas projectile designed to pierce wooden doors and to expel barricaded suspects. Yet, the Silver Dollar’s door was open, with only a small curtain hanging from the top. Salazar, the Sheriff’s Department said, was hit in the temple by the projectile and died. The department, then led by Sheriff Peter Pitchess, insisted that it was just an unfortunate accident.

Complaints from the Chief

In the months beforehand, LAPD Chief Ed Davis had complained to the Times’ leadership and to Salazar personally about his columns. Two officers had talked to Salazar about the KMEX reports concerning the fatal police shootings of the two unarmed Mexican nationals. The officers, Salazar wrote in his column, cautioned him that “this kind of information could be dangerous in the minds of barrio people.”

The LAPD and L.A. County Sheriff’s Department were wary of the passionate rhetoric of young Mexican American activists and their cries of “Chicano power.” But the activists’ main goal was to bring about change to educational and political conditions long neglected.

All these events unfolded during J. Edgar Hoover’s reign at the FBI and Richard Nixon’s residence in the White House. Law enforcement across the nation took harsh action against antiwar protesters and spied on what they called radical or revolutionary elements. Those circumstances fed conspiracy theories, but by themselves, they are inconclusive.

One thing is clear: Salazar was no revolutionary. He believed in the American system but, as a journalist, he saw part of his role as exposing cases of discrimination and injustice.

Los Angeles public officials had a chance to resolve questions about Salazar’s death. But instead, a rarely used procedure was ordered – a nonbinding coroner’s inquest. The televised hearings made for good theater, but they were a farce. Established rules of evidence did not apply. In addition, hearing officer Norman Pittluck asked questions about rioters’ actions and possible links between protest organizers and leftist causes, issues unrelated to Salazar’s death.

Wilson testified that he wanted to get the tear gas quickly into the bar because of the armed man or men believed inside. He aimed for the ceiling with a projectile, he said, and then fired a second round using a “duster” tear-gas canister. Another deputy later fired two additional rounds of tear gas.

‘My Director Is Still Inside’

Inconsistencies and conflicting accounts of what occurred were not resolved. Restrepo gave his reconstruction of events in a somber interview aired by KMEX in 1990. Restrepo recalled that he sat to Salazar’s left at the Silver Dollar, closer to the entrance.

When the first tear gas canister hit inside the bar, Restrepo recalled, “Ruben told me, ‘al suelo’ (‘hit the floor’). I started to get down from my chair [and] I felt something go over my head.” Restrepo said that when he crawled out the rear door, he was met by authorities aiming shotguns at his head. “I told them, ‘My director is still inside.’” He said the authorities replied: “Who cares about your director?” Restrepo said he was ordered to leave the area. Salazar’s death was not announced until hours later.

Wilson had said his first shot was with a missile-like projectile, and a coroner’s official said a projectile of that type could have caused Salazar’s fatal injuries. Restrepo, on the other hand, said Salazar was still alive after the first shot of tear gas. That’s an important inconsistency in a case filled with major conflicts of narratives.

Chicano activists cited another discrepancy: Why were patrons who were standing at the bar’s entrance (documented in a photo by La Raza magazine) ordered to step inside the bar, only to be tear-gassed moments later? Deputies denied the patrons’ account.

After 16 days of inquest hearings, four members of its jury concluded that Salazar had “died at the hands of another.” (What exactly did that mean?) Three other jurors found the death to be an accident. Those murky findings frustrated those seeking clarity.

D.A. Decides Against Trial

A week later, District Atty. Evelle Younger washed his hands of the case, saying he did not think he could win a prosecution of Wilson for involuntary manslaughter, the only charge his office had considered. However, a trial, with its clear rules of evidence, would have provided a better picture of what had happened, regardless of the trial verdict. Younger was running for state attorney general and it seems clear to me that he did not want to go against “law and order.” Younger, who died in 1989, rejected such allegations.

Sherman Block, who followed Pitchess as sheriff, scoffed at the idea that Salazar was killed intentionally. In a 1995 L.A. Times article, Block said: “If you have an intent to shoot somebody, you don’t do it with a tear-gas projectile.” Block also told Times reporter Robert J. López that he recalled inquest testimony showing that the bar’s curtain had deflected the projectile toward Salazar’s head.

The U.S. Justice Department was initially pressed by Mexican Americans to conduct a federal probe. The extent of that investigation is not clear, but officials failed to pursue any federal charges. To some activists, law enforcement’s collective non-action smelled of a cover-up, but Mexican Americans carried little political clout in 1970. Unlike today, there were no Latinos on the Los Angeles City Council or County Board of Supervisors. Nationally, Mexican Americans were dismissed as a small regional minority and were not a force.

Sometime later, Los Angeles County paid Salazar’s widow and three children $700,000 to settle a lawsuit. No amount of money, of course, could compensate for the loss of a husband and a father. When his life was cut short, Salazar was just 42.

The Journalist’s Legacy

Salazar began his journalism career in 1955 at the Herald-Post in El Paso, Texas. Because of his pioneering work at the Times and his role in Spanish-language TV, Salazar was the most important Mexican-American journalist in the 20th century. After his death, schools, parks and libraries were named in his honor. A Salazar commemorative U.S. postage stamp was issued in 2008. His role-modeling inspired Southern California journalists to form the California Chicano News Media Association, which in turn helped establish the National Association of Hispanic Journalists.

Even the release of all relevant documents may not provide a definitive answer to the Salazar mystery. But such action would show that today’s officials have nothing to hide about a 40-year-old case. “I don’t want to believe that Rubén was targeted,” said Los Angeles County Supervisor Gloria Molina, “but I do know that law enforcement followed a pathway that was very anti-Chicano.”

Molina said records dealing with the Sheriff’s Department’s handling of the events at Laguna Park should be disclosed, too. “It was a terrible time,” she said. “The full information needs to come out for those events to be appropriately portrayed.”

Early this year, Thomas Saenz, president of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, filed a California Public Records Act request with Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca on behalf of filmmaker Phillip Rodríguez and himself. In March, Los Angeles Times reporter López had also requested the Salazar files. In early August, Baca balked at releasing the department’s materials. But now, he has given them to the county’s Office of Independent Review, which will prepare a report on the files.

That’s a good start. But for the sake of historical record, all of the Sheriff’s files relevant to Salazar’s death should be made public. Beyond that, all relevant, unredacted records from the District Attorney’s office, the Los Angeles Police Department, the FBI and other federal Justice Department agencies should also be made public.

‘The Reality of the Day’

“Let the chips fall where they may,” Molina told me. “We have a very different Sheriff today. For those who are nervous about what would come out, I think they will have to grin and bear it because that was the reality of the day.”

Lisa Salazar Johnson, the oldest of Salazar’s three children, said: “I am urging Sheriff Baca to release those files because there are so many questions. I want to know why I had to live without a father.”

For too long, what happened on Aug. 29 has been considered only of interest in the Southwest. Filmmaker Rodriguez, whose documentaries have aired on PBS, believes the case is significant nationally, just as it has been important to resolve cases involving civil rights abuses in the South during the 1960s.

Rodriguez, a visiting fellow at the University of Southern California, is making a film on Salazar. He “I have no preconceived ideas about what led to Salazar’s death,” he said, “but I do know how profoundly painful this episode has been for many people. It’s time to give scholars and journalists access to those files.”

This sad chapter of U.S. history needs a clear resolution that only complete transparency can bring.

-30-

Chicana Perk/Latté Mi Corazón forced to close by City of San Diego

Latté Mi Corazón, formerly known as Chicano Perk, will be permanently closing its original location located at 129 25th Street, San Diego, CA 92102 on Friday, November 12th, 2010. After following up on a complaint, the City of San Diego has decided that Latté Mi Corazón does not meet current code compliance. “After 7 years of operating our family business, this is the first time the City of San Diego decides to raise a flag. We have paid for our business permits each year and are completely shocked that the city is doing this to us now,” stated Jerry Guzman-Vergara, co-owner of Latté Mi Corazón.

Latté Mi Corazón is an icon in the Historic Barrio District (Sherman Heights, Logan Heights, Grant Hill, Memorial, & Stockton). It is the only family owned coffee shop in the community that supports local grass roots groups/organizations and provides a comfortable place for students and community members to gather and organize. “In the current state of the economy, we are deeply saddened that the city would request that we close our family business. We are also very disappointed and shocked that it took The City of San Diego over 7 years to come to a conclusion that our business is not in compliance with local zoning guidelines. We feel that the City has let us down,” said Ricardo Medina, co-owner of Latté Mi Corazón.

Following the closing of Latté Mi Corazón, the owners will be looking for a new and permanent space within the Imperial Avenue Business Corridor to once again reopen their doors to the community as soon as possible.

Meanwhile, the Sherman Heights Community Center Board of Directors has pledged to help the small business by offering to house their coffee cart at the Sherman Heights Community Center Facility at 2258 Island Avenue, San Diego, CA 92102. "As a community development corporation, we feel that we need to do our part in the revitalization of our local economy. Keeping our local family owned coffee-shop in business while they find a new home is just the first step in the process," said Venus Molina, President of the Sherman Heights Community Center. Latté Mi Corazón hopes to start operations at its new proposed temporary location no later than January 2011.

For more info please contact Jerry Guzman-Vergara at 619.352.6863 or at jerry [at] lattemicorazon.com.

-30-

Suitable For Printing - Chicano Photographer Sample Photos

[Click photo to enlarge. Copyright 2010 Jesús Manuel Mena Garza. All rights reserved.]

You are invited to download (non-commercial use) sample photos from the Chicano Photographer exhibition. The letter size JPG file are suitable for laser or ink-jet printing. Save the file and ask your photo lab or color laser printer to make a copy or two. Yes, color laser prints always look better than black and white ones.

I typically cut the sheet of photos lengthwise, then distribute the photo strips at my exhibitions and events. Have fun trimming and framing the photos for your personal use. The photos are not for commercial distribution or use.

-30-

Museums unite to chronicle post-war LA art scene

By Zorianna Kit

Reuters

More than 60 California cultural institutions are coming together to tell the story of the birth of the Los Angeles art scene, in the largest such collaboration ever undertaken in the region.

Southern California museums and university programs such as the Getty Museum, the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, the Hammer Museum and the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Chicano Studies Research Center will take part in the 2011-2012 event, titled "Pacific Standard Time: Art in L.A 1945-1980", organizers said on Thursday.

Each of the institutions will make a contribution to the story of art and social change in Los Angeles through simultaneous exhibitions and programs.

"What began as an effort to document the milestones in this region's artistic history has expanded until it is now becoming a great creative landmark in itself," said Deborah Marrow, interim president of the J. Paul Getty Trust, which has initiated the event through grants totaling $10 million.

"We know that this era has had a million moments of impact on arts and culture across the United States and beyond," added Mark Siegel, chairman of the Getty's Board of Trustees.

The event will begin in October 2011 and will run through April 2012 at locations including Los Angeles, San Diego, Santa Barbara and Palm Springs.

The exhibitions, festivals and programs will showcase the influence of post-war California architecture, Pop Art, the emergence of African-American artists and 1970s feminist performance art.

-30-

How Obama Saved Capitalism and Lost the Midterms

By Timothy Egan

New York Times

[Click image to enlarge]

If I were one of the big corporate donors who bankrolled the Republican tide that carried into office more than 50 new Republicans in the House, I would be wary of what you just bought.

For no matter your view of President Obama, he effectively saved capitalism. And for that, he paid a terrible political price.

Suppose you had $100,000 to invest on the day Barack Obama was inaugurated. Why bet on a liberal Democrat? Here’s why: the presidency of George W. Bush produced the worst stock market decline of any president in history. The net worth of American households collapsed as Bush slipped away. And if you needed a loan to buy a house or stay in business, private sector borrowing was dead when he handed over power.

As of election day, Nov. 2, 2010, your $100,000 was worth about $177,000 if invested strictly in the NASDAQ average for the entirety of the Obama administration, and $148,000 if bet on the Standard & Poors 500 major companies. This works out to returns of 77 percent and 48 percent.

But markets, though forward-looking, are not considered accurate measurements of the economy, and the Great Recession skewed the Bush numbers. O.K. How about looking at the big financial institutions that keep the motors of capitalism running — banks and auto companies?

The banking system was resuscitated by $700 billion in bailouts started by Bush (a fact unknown by a majority of Americans), and finished by Obama, with help from the Federal Reserve. It worked. The government is expected to break even on a risky bet to stabilize the global free market system. Had Obama followed the populist instincts of many in his party, the underpinnings of big capitalism could have collapsed. He did this without nationalizing banks, as other Democrats had urged.

Saving the American auto industry, which has been a huge drag on Obama’s political capital, is a monumental achievement that few appreciate, unless you live in Michigan. After getting their taxpayer lifeline from Obama, both General Motors and Chrysler are now making money by making cars. New plants are even scheduled to open. More than 1 million jobs would have disappeared had the domestic auto sector been liquidated.

“An apology is due Barack Obama,” wrote The Economist, which had opposed the $86 billion auto bailout. As for Government Motors: after emerging from bankruptcy, it will go public with a new stock offering in just a few weeks, and the United States government, with its 60 percent share of common stock, stands to make a profit. Yes, an industry was saved, and the government will probably make money on the deal — one of Obama’s signature economic successes.

Interest rates are at record lows. Corporate profits are lighting up boardrooms; it is one of the best years for earnings in a decade.

All of the above is good for capitalism, and should end any serious-minded discussion about Obama the socialist. But more than anything, the fact that the president took on the structural flaws of a broken free enterprise system instead of focusing on things that the average voter could understand explains why his party was routed on Tuesday. Obama got on the wrong side of voter anxiety in a decade of diminished fortunes.

“We have done things that people don’t even know about,” Obama told Jon Stewart. Certainly. The three signature accomplishments of his first two years — a health care law that will make life easier for millions of people, financial reform that attempts to level the playing field with Wall Street, and the $814 billion stimulus package — have all been recast as big government blunders, rejected by the emerging majority.

But each of them, in its way, should strengthen the system. The health law will hold costs down, while giving millions the chance at getting care, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. Financial reform seeks to prevent the kind of meltdown that caused the global economic collapse. And the stimulus, though it drastically raised the deficit, saved about 3 million jobs, again according to the CBO. It also gave a majority of taxpayers a one-time cut — even if 90 percent of Americans don’t know that, either.

Of course, nobody gets credit for preventing a plane crash. “It could have been much worse!” is not a rallying cry. And, more telling, despite a meager uptick in job growth this year, the unemployment rate rose from 7.6 percent in the month Obama took office to 9.6 today.

Billions of profits, windfalls in the stock market, a stable banking system — but no jobs.

Of course, the big money interests who benefited from Obama’s initiatives have shown no appreciation. Obama, as a senator, voted against the initial bailout of AIG, the reckless insurance giant. As president, he extended them treasury loans at a time when economists said he must — or risk further meltdown. Their response was to give themselves $165 million in executive bonuses, and funnel money to Republicans this year.

Money flows one way, to power, now held by the party that promises tax cuts and deregulation — which should please big business even more.

President Franklin Roosevelt also saved capitalism, in part by a bank “holiday” in 1933, at a time when the free enterprise system had failed. Unlike Obama, he was rewarded with midterm gains for his own party because a majority liked where he was taking the country. The bank holiday was incidental to a larger public works campaign.

Obama can recast himself as the consumer’s best friend, and welcome the animus of Wall Street. He should hector the companies sitting on piles of cash but not hiring new workers. For those who do hire, and create new jobs, he can offer tax incentives. He should finger the financial giants for refusing to clean up their own mess in the foreclosure crisis. He should point to the long overdue protections for credit card holders that came with reform.

And he should veto, veto, veto any bill that attempts to roll back some of the basic protections for people against the institutions that have so much control over their lives – insurance companies, Wall Street and big oil.

They will whine a fierce storm, the manipulators of great wealth. A war on business, they will claim. Not even close. Obama saved them, and the biggest cost was to him.

-30-

Boise State MEChA: ‘Grounded in a philosophy, not a nationality’

[Click photo to enlarge]

By Riley Nelson

MEChA stands for Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano-a de Aztlan, or Chicano-a Student Movement of Aztlan. Aztlan is defined as Mexico, but with almost 30 percent more land extending into the United States, this also includes land owned by Mexico before the Mexican-American War.

The club MEChA originated in Santa Barbra, Calif. in 1969. It is now a nationwide network with chapters in junior high schools, senior high schools, community colleges and universities.

“We are an organization that has an interesting history,” senior math major and one of MEChA’s co-chairmen Mario Venegas said. “It came out during the ’60s and ’70s with Mexican-American students protesting for an education.”

MEChA, however, does not simply center on education. It has a broad range of topics, focusing on community, social and political aspects of their culture. Each group member showed appreciation for different aspects of the club and they all agreed community involvement is one of the most important aspects of their club. In the past, MEChA has been involved with several events including the Chicano Art Show at the Cinco de Mayo event and Cesar Chavez Week. They also pass out fliers to encourage people to vote and conduct outreach programs at local high schools.

“What our club does is promote higher education as well as educate ourselves about our culture and our history in general,” said MEChA Treasurer Elizabeth Ortiz said. Ortiz is a senior double majoring in resource management and general business management.

According to a study done by the National Center for Education Statistics, the percentage of Hispanics who drop out of high school is consistently double the percentage of Caucasians or African-Americans. In 2008, 4.8 percent of Caucasian students dropped out of high school, while 9.9 percent of African-American students dropped out of high school. Hispanics topped the charts with a staggering 18.3 percent dropout rate. MEChA aims to drive down this number.

“We want to inspire students to get a higher education, at least a GED,” Co-Chair Nancy Orizaba said. She is a junior majoring in political science.

Because it is a relatively small group, MEChA often partners with other clubs for events on campus. Among these events are the Anti-Columbus Day, which they did in conjunction with the Intertribal Native Council, the Student Diversity Center (formerly known as the Cultural Center) and other student organizations. They are also going to be a part of the Tunnel of Oppression, scheduled for Nov. 6 and 7 in the Hatch Ballroom of the Student Union Building. They highly encourage students to attend.

MEChA members describe themselves as a family. Orizaba says they may not always agree on everything but they have gained a deep respect for one another which is something they all agree is important. They want to encourage everyone to join, especially underclassmen. The group promotes pride in the Chicana-Chicano culture. However, Venegas explained the word Chicana or Chicano is defined not as an ethnicity but rather a state of mind.

“Don’t be intimidated by the name,” Venegas said. “We’re not exclusionist to begin with. Anybody is welcome.”