ANEDOTA / À espera do combóio

Uma senhora vai ao Ikea comprar um armário novo. Para que lhe saia mais barato, compra um em kit. Ao chegar a casa, monta-o e fica perfeito. Nesse momento passa o comboio (ela mora junto à estação de comboios) e o armário desmonta-se todo. Monta novamente o armário. E este volta a cair com o passar do comboio. À terceira tentativa falhada, telefona para a Ikea e exige a presença de um técnico. O técnico chega, monta o armário, e quando passa o comboio, desmonta-se todo. O técnico monta novamente o armário, passa outro comboio e, armário novamente desmontado. Então, o técnico tem uma brilhante ideia:
- Escute, minha senhora, eu vou montar novamente o armário, meto-me lá dentro e espero que passe o comboio para ver porque é que o armário se estás desmontar.
E assim fez. Nisto o marido entra no quarto e diz:
- Querida, que armário tão bonito! - e abre a porta.
Ao ver o técnico da Ikea pergunta:
- O que é que você faz aí?
Este responde:
- Estou quase tentado a dizer-lhe que vim comer a sua mulher. Porque, se lhe digo que estou à espera do comboio, não vai acreditar.

Fernando Madail/DIARIO DE NOTICIAS

O mais velho antifascista, o maquis da lendária resistência francesa, o amigo de Humberto Delgado, o fundador da LUAR, o presidente temporário do PPD, o apoiante do PS , após uma vida estendida por três séculos, partiu, ontem, aos 105 anos, para o "Oriente Eterno", como os seus irmãos maçons designam a morte. Emídio Guerreiro foi "uma mistura de Dom Quixote e de Che Guevara", na expressão do advogado conimbricense, fundador do PS e grão-mestre do Grande Oriente Lusitano (GOL), António Arnaut.

O centenário professor de Matemática faleceu no lar de Guimarães que tinha o seu nome, mas o velório será feito, a partir desta manhã, no Palácio Maçónico, em Lisboa. O "Lenine", nome simbólico que escolheu quando foi iniciado, em 1927, na loja Revolta, de Coimbra, era um Príncipe Rosa- -Cruz, pois tinha atingido há muito o grau Sete do Rito Francês (que corresponde ao 18 e seguintes do Rito Escocês). Aliás, numa cerimónia em 2003 foi-lhe entregue (e, também, ao seu amigo Fernando Valle, médico de Arganil e fundador do PS) o Grande Colar Maçónico - Ouro, distinção para quem complete 50 anos de vida maçónica "activa, devotada e impoluta".

Na sexta-feira, depois do féretro passar ainda pela Associação 25 de Abril (de que era actualmente o único Sócio de Honra distinguido em vida, uma honra que também partilhou com Fernando Valle), seguirá para a sua cidade natal, onde as suas cinzas serão depositadas no jazigo que a autarquia vimaranense lhe ofereceu no Cemitério da Atouguia.

Filho de uma família republicana, Emídio Guerreiro nasceu em Guimarães, a 6 de Setembro de 1899. Voluntário para combater na I Grande Guerra, acabou por não ser integrado no Corpo Expedicionário Português. A presença em Portugal permitiu-lhe participar numa das revoltas contra a ditadura de Sidónio Pais, o "presidente-rei", em 1917.

Contestatário do Golpe do 28 de Maio, não só seria um dos participantes da Revolta do 7 de Fevereiro de 1927, que podia ter acabado com a recente ditadura militar - se as guarnições de Lisboa se tivessem sublevado, não deixando os sediciosos do Porto isolados -, Emídio Guerreiro nem sequer ligou ao seu estatuto de assistente de Matemática na Faculdade de Ciências e, aquando da visita de Carmona à Invicta, em 1932, imprimiu um panfleto a exortar a população a receber o Presidente da ditadura com "merda, muita merda, merda às mãos-cheias".

Preso e torturado, acabaria por fugir do Aljube e exilar-se em Espanha, onde se envolveria, com o grupo dos "Budas de Madrid" (Jaime Cortesão, Moura Pinto e Jaime de Morais), na fracassada "revolução dos tanques", conforme relatou ao seu biógrafo Encarnação Viegas. Vivendo em Santiago de Compostela, seria surpreendido pelo golpe militar franquista em Vigo, onde se deslocou a pedido do alcaide, ali assistindo, impotente, ao fuzilamento do autarca. Um seu aluno, embora adepto dos falangistas, protegeu o professor, conseguindo-lhe um contacto com o cônsul inglês, que, perante as dificuldades de um irmão maçon, lhe garantiu o embarque num cargueiro para Gibraltar, de onde o português partiria para França.

Logo a seguir, retornava a Espanha, para se bater ao lado dos republicanos contra os falangistas, voltando a passar a mesma fronteira na "leva" dos derrotados. Adoeceu no campo de refugiados, mas conseguiu evadir-se dali, acabando por entrar na clandestinidade e aderir à resistência contra a ocupação nazi. O "capitão Hélio", seu nome de código, foi reconhecido como herói gaulês no fim da II Guerra Mundial, sendo integrado na forças armadas francesas com o posto de capitão e condecorado com a Cruz de Combatente Voluntário na Segunda Guerra Mundial. Desde essa época e até ao fim do Estado Novo, fixou-se em França, onde seria um dos professores que introduziram as matemáticas modernas no ensino liceal.

Mas manteve sempre a sua actividade de oposicionista ao salazarismo. Na Frente Patriótica de Libertação Nacional, criada após a fraude eleitoral de 1958, seria um dos amigos fiéis de Humberto Delgado no exílio do "General sem Medo". E também uma das primeiras vozes a denunciar o seu assassínio pela PIDE. E na Liga de União e Acção Revolucionária (LUAR), que criou para dar legitimidade política à luta interna do grupo de Palma Inácio - com quem, pouco depois, trocaria acusações sobre o destino do dinheiro do assalto da Figueira da Foz.

Regressado a Portugal, foi um dos fundadores do PPD, assumindo mesmo a liderança, em 1975, quando Sá Carneiro se afastou para, depois, regressar em triunfo ao partido - de onde sairia Emídio Guerreiro, que, anos volvidos, dava o seu apoio ao PS. Quando alguém lhe dizia que tinha sido do PSD, lembrava ao DN Vasco Lourenço, nome da Revolução dos Cravos e membro da maçónica Loja 25 de Abril onde ambos pisavam o mesmo "pavimento em mosaico", o velho oposicionista sublinhava "Nunca fui do PSD; fui do PPD."

Agraciado com a Ordem da Liberdade (como comendador, com a faixa entregue por Eanes em 1980, e com a Grã-Cruz, que Sampaio lhe colocou ao pescoço em 2000), manteve até ao fim a mesma jovialidade com que recebeu os convidados que festejaram o seu centenário na Estufa Fria. E depois de se ter uma vida tão longa e de se cumprirem os deveres para com a comunidade - conclui o grão-mestre do GOL, para definir o sentido do luto maçónico -, "tudo está certo e perfeito".

ANGELI / Ele tem cada economia

FALLACI / Prophet of Decline

An interview with Oriana Fallaci

TUNKU VARADARAJAN
The Wall Street Journal

NEW YORK -Oriana Fallaci faces jail. In her mid-70s, stricken with a cancer that, for the moment, permits only the consumption of liquids--so yes, we drank champagne in the course of a three-hour interview--one of the most renowned journalists of the modern era has been indicted by a judge in her native Italy under provisions of the Italian Penal Code which proscribe the "vilipendio," or "vilification," of "any religion admitted by the state."

In her case, the religion deemed vilified is Islam, and the vilification was perpetrated, apparently, in a book she wrote last year--and which has sold many more than a million copies all over Europe--called "The Force of Reason." Its astringent thesis is that the Old Continent is on the verge of becoming a dominion of Islam, and that the people of the West have surrendered themselves fecklessly to the "sons of Allah." So in a nutshell, Oriana Fallaci faces up to two years' imprisonment for her beliefs--which is one reason why she has chosen to stay put in New York. Let us give thanks for the First Amendment.

It is a shame, in so many ways, that "vilipend," the latinate word that is the pinpoint equivalent in English of the Italian offense in question, is scarcely ever used in the Anglo-American lexicon; for it captures beautifully the pomposity, as well as the anachronistic outlandishness, of the law in question. A "vilification," by contrast, sounds so sordid, so tabloid--hardly fitting for a grande dame.

"When I was given the news," Ms. Fallaci says of her recent indictment, "I laughed. Bitterly, of course, but I laughed. No amusement, no surprise, because the trial is nothing else but a demonstration that everything I've written is true." An activist judge in Bergamo, in northern Italy, took it upon himself to admit a complaint against Ms. Fallaci that even the local prosecutors would not touch. The complainant, one Adel Smith--who, despite his name, is Muslim, and an incendiary public provocateur to boot--has a history of anti-Fallaci crankiness, and is widely believed to be behind the publication of a pamphlet, "Islam Punishes Oriana Fallaci," which exhorts Muslims to "eliminate" her. (Ironically, Mr. Smith, too, faces the peculiar charge of vilipendio against religion--Roman Catholicism in his case--after he described the Catholic Church as "a criminal organization" on television. Two years ago, he made news in Italy by filing suit for the removal of crucifixes from the walls of all public-school classrooms, and also, allegedly, for flinging a crucifix out of the window of a hospital room where his mother was being treated. "My mother will not die in a room where there is a crucifix," he said, according to hospital officials.)

Ms. Fallaci speaks in a passionate growl: "Europe is no longer Europe, it is 'Eurabia,' a colony of Islam, where the Islamic invasion does not proceed only in a physical sense, but also in a mental and cultural sense. Servility to the invaders has poisoned democracy, with obvious consequences for the freedom of thought, and for the concept itself of liberty." Such words--"invaders," "invasion," "colony," "Eurabia"--are deeply, immensely, Politically Incorrect; and one is tempted to believe that it is her tone, her vocabulary, and not necessarily her substance or basic message, that has attracted the ire of the judge in Bergamo (and has made her so radioactive in the eyes of Europe's cultural elites).

"Civilizations die from suicide, not by murder," the historian Arnold Toynbee wrote, and these words could certainly be Ms. Fallaci's. She is in a black gloom about Europe and its future: "The increased presence of Muslims in Italy, and in Europe, is directly proportional to our loss of freedom." There is about her a touch of Oswald Spengler, the German philosopher and prophet of decline, as well as a flavor of Samuel Huntington and his clash of civilizations. But above all there is pessimism, pure and unashamed. When I ask her what "solution" there might be to prevent the European collapse of which she speaks, Ms. Fallaci flares up like a lit match. "How do you dare to ask me for a solution? It's like asking Seneca for a solution. You remember what he did?" She then says "Phwah, phwah," and gestures at slashing her wrists. "He committed suicide!" Seneca was accused of being involved in a plot to murder the emperor Nero. Without a trial, he was ordered by Nero to kill himself. One senses that Ms. Fallaci sees in Islam the shadow of Nero. "What could Seneca do?" she asks, with a discernible shudder. "He knew it would end that way--with the fall of the Roman Empire. But he could do nothing."

The impending Fall of the West, as she sees it, now torments Ms. Fallaci. And as much as that Fall, what torments her is the blithe way in which the West is marching toward its precipice of choice. "Look at the school system of the West today. Students do not know history! They don't, for Christ's sake. They don't know who Churchill was! In Italy, they don't even know who Cavour was!"--a reference to Count Camillo Benso di Cavour, the conservative father, with the radical Garibaldi, of Modern Italy. Ms. Fallaci, rarely reverent, pauses here to reflect on the man, and on the question of where all the conservatives have gone in Europe. "In the beginning, I was dismayed, and I asked, how is it possible that we do not have Cavour . . . just one Cavour, uno? He was a revolutionary, and yes, he was not of the left. Italy needs a Cavour--Europe needs a Cavour." Ms. Fallaci describes herself, too, as "a revolutionary"--"because I do what conservatives in Europe don't do, which is that I don't accept to be treated like a delinquent." She professes to "cry, sometimes, because I'm not 20 years younger, and I'm not healthy. But if I were, I would even sacrifice my writing to enter politics somehow."

Here she pauses to light a slim black cigarillo, and then to take a sip of champagne. Its chill makes her grimace, but fortified, she returns to vehement speech, more clearly evocative of Oswald Spengler than at any time in our interview. "You cannot survive if you do not know the past. We know why all the other civilizations have collapsed--from an excess of welfare, of richness, and from lack of morality, of spirituality." (She uses "welfare" here in the sense of well-being, so she is talking, really, of decadence.) "The moment you give up your principles, and your values . . . the moment you laugh at those principles, and those values, you are dead, your culture is dead, your civilization is dead. Period." The force with which she utters the word "dead" here is startling. I reach for my flute of champagne, as if for a crutch.

"I feel less alone when I read the books of Ratzinger." I had asked Ms. Fallaci whether there was any contemporary leader she admired, and Pope Benedict XVI was evidently a man in whom she reposed some trust. "I am an atheist, and if an atheist and a pope think the same things, there must be something true. It's that simple! There must be some human truth here that is beyond religion."

Ms. Fallaci, who made her name by interviewing numerous statesmen (and not a few tyrants), believes that ours is "an age without leaders. We stopped having leaders at the end of the 20th century." Of George Bush, she will concede only that he has "vigor," and that he is "obstinate" (in her book a compliment) and "gutsy. . . . Nobody obliged him to do anything about Terri Schiavo, or to take a stand on stem cells. But he did."

But it is "Ratzinger" (as she insists on calling the pope) who is her soulmate. John Paul II--"Wojtyla"--was a "warrior, who did more to end the Soviet Union than even America," but she will not forgive him for his "weakness toward the Islamic world. Why, why was he so weak?"

The scant hopes that she has for the West she rests on his successor. As a cardinal, Pope Benedict XVI wrote frequently on the European (and the Western) condition. Last year, he wrote an essay titled "If Europe Hates Itself," from which Ms. Fallaci reads this to me: "The West reveals . . . a hatred of itself, which is strange and can only be considered pathological; the West . . . no longer loves itself; in its own history, it now sees only what is deplorable and destructive, while it is no longer able to perceive what is great and pure."

"Ecco!" she says. A man after her own heart. "Ecco!" But I cannot be certain whether I see triumph in her eyes, or pain.

As for the vilipendio against Islam, she refuses to attend the trial in Bergamo, set for June 2006. "I don't even know if I will be around next year. My cancers are so bad that I think I've arrived at the end of the road. What a pity. I would like to live not only because I love life so much, but because I'd like to see the result of the trial. I do think I will be found guilty."

At this point she laughs. Bitterly, of course, but she laughs.

Mr. Varadarajan is editorial features editor of The Wall Street Journal.

Copyright © 2005 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

.

CERVEJA / Muito importante!

AS IMPERIAIS da Sagres vão passar a ser servidas três graus abaixo da actual temperatura, passando para os 3ºC. Para tal, vai instalar 2500 refrigeradoras e 500 colunas em cafés, bares e restaurantes de todo o país.

STAR WARS / The lost clip

Here.

ANGELI / O cara do bongó

FUTEBOL / Coisas de jogadores

O rapazes não tem piedade dos jornalistas! Senão, ouça:

As caganeiras do Marcinho.

As punhetinhas do Dadá Maravilha.

Cortesia do SirHaiva

PORTUGAL / The police and Che Guevara

Police officers dressed in black Che Guevara T-Shirts show their badges during a demonstration, in Lisbon, 22 June 2005. Thousand members from several security corps gathered to protest against government's intention of raising retirement age from 60 to 65 year and the loss of their own health program. AFP PHOTO

BRASIL / Los guerrilleros al poder

RIO DE JANEIRO - La nueva jefa del gabinete ministerial brasileño, Dilma Rousseff, reivindicó con orgullo su pasado guerrillero, en una entrevista divulgada este martes por el diario Folha de São Paulo, en la que narró también los métodos de tortura a los que fue sometida.

Rousseff, de 57 años, nombrada el lunes al frente del gabinete del presidente Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, se unió en 1969 a la maoísta Vanguardia Armada Revolucionaria (VAR-Palmares), del guerrillero Carlos Lamarca, un capitán del ejército contrario al golpe militar de 1964.

"Teníamos una generosidad inmensa y creíamos que era posible crear un Brasil más igualitario. Yo tengo orgullo de mi generación, de que hayamos luchado y de haber participado en todo un sueño de construir un país un Brasil mejor", reveló Rousseff en la entrevista, realizada en 2003 por Luiz Makluf, autor del libro "Mujeres que fueron a la lucha armada".

Por sus acciones como militante activa fue detenida el 16 de enero de 1970 y llevada a un centro de torturas de Sao Paulo, donde fue sometida a golpes y choques eléctricos y fue colgada de pies y manos.

"Aplicaron choques (eléctricos). Muchos choques, pero de verdad, muchos choques. Me acuerdo de los primeros días, estaba tan exhausta físicamente que me quería desmayar, no aguantaba más tanto choque. Comenzé a tener hemorragias", recordó.

Durante los tres años que estuvo en prisión, Rouseff aprendió a dominar el "arte" de mentir para aplacar a sus torturadores.

"Tenía que tener una historia. En la relación del torturador con el torturado, la única cosa que no puede pasar es decir 'no hablo'. Si uno dice 'no hablo' en cinco minutos puede ser obligado a hablar, porque ellos saben que uno tiene algo que decir. Si uno dice 'no hablo' (...) les entrega un arma para que te torturen y te pregunten", recordó.

Los torturadores también dejaban a los presos sin comer, desnudos, en salas manchadas de sangre en las que los ponían hasta una nueva sesión de maltratos. "Llega un nivel de dolor en que uno desconecta, en que uno no aguanta más. El dolor tenía que ser controlado por ellos", narró.

La actual ministra se forjó en la lucha armada una reputación fuerte, que le valió que sus fiscales la conocieran como la 'Juana de Arco de la guerrilla'. Pese a las torturas, no delató a sus compañeros.

"Aguanté. No dije ni donde vivía ni quien era Max (su compañero de entonces, Carlos Franklin Paixão de Araújo) ni entregué a Breno (Carlos Alberto Bueno, otro de sus correligionarios) porque tenía mucho dolor (...), vi mucha gente destruida y no quería que mis compañeros estuvieran en una situación de aquellas", afirmó.

Rousseff planificó junto con Paixão de Araújo el robo de una caja fuerte que el gobernador paulista Adhemar de Barros, identificado como un símbolo de la corrupción, escondía en la casa de una amante en Rio de Janeiro, el 18 de julio de 1969. Adentro había 2,5 millones de dólares, un récord para una acción guerrillera hasta ese entonces.

Rousseff se formó luego como economista; en 2003, con la llegada del Partido de los Trabajadores al poder, fue nombrada ministra de Minas y Energía por Lula, quien el lunes la designó para sustituir a José Dirceu, quien renunció a la jefatura del gabinete en medio de denuncias de pago de sobornos.

ARMENGOL / Zánganos y avispas

TIAGO / Campeão

Terceiro lugar no Gran Prix de F1 dos Estados Unidos

Tiago Monteiro

Este artigo foi publicado no dia 28 de Setembro de 2003 no El Nuevo Herald

MONTEIRO, SIN MIEDO A LA MUERTE

Adrenalina. "Adrenalina pura. Eso es lo que nos hace correr", manifestó Tiago Monteiro, uno de los novatos este año en la Serie Champ Car, piloto oficial de la escudería del bicampeón de Fórmula Uno, Emerson Fittipaldi.

No le tiene miedo, asegura. A la Muerte, por supuesto. Eso es.

De hecho, en lo cual no piensa mientras maneja un Ford administrado por la escudería Fittipaldi-Dingman. Fittipaldi es, por supuesto, Emerson Fittipaldi, quien ayer por la tarde le dijo a El Nuevo Herald que Monteiro es su niño querido y que posiblemente sea uno de los vencedores de la carrera de hoy.

"No me asusta eso. No, no, no. . . El lo hace y lo logrará", dijo Fittipaldi, cuando se enteró que Monteiro no clasificó para la pole position, porque posiblemente, "los ángeles no están con él".

Es posible. Porque después de todo, Monteiro es originario de Oporto, al norte de Portugal, donde sus habitantes son más pragmáticos que religiosos, y de donde han salido los grandes campeones de automovilismo en el país ibérico. "Soy portugués, no hay una presión particular. A mí lo único que me interesa es la carrera", puntualizó.

Se nota. Las varias conversaciones que tuvimos fueron interrumpidas por los técnicos, deseosos de que no revelara particulares interioridades. No lo hizo. Pero se quejó amargamente del circuito de Miami. "Es el peor que he corrido en mi vida. Las irregularidades hacen del circuito uno de los peores. Es malo. Vivo en Miami, y lamento que nuestro circuito sea así", subrayó.

La crítica está basada en el hecho de que el piso es bastante irregular, mal cuidado y malo como pista. "Podían haberlo mejorado. El año pasado se lo advertimos [los pilotos] pero no nos hicieron caso", añadió.

Monteiro es un joven portugués producto de la democracia en el país. Nació en 1976 en Oporto, dos años después del advenimiento de la democracia. Se adaptó a uno de los deportes más elitistas sin ningún complejo sino con unas ganas tremendas de divulgarlo.

"Corro porque corro. Mi madre siempre está preocupada. Pero no pienso en el accidente, ni en la muerte sino en el carro de enfrente y la curva que me espera", enfatizó.

Las curvas son las obsesiones de los pilotos. "Arranco. En la primera tengo que pensar cómo doblarla a 200 kilómetros por hora. Y después la otra, y la siguiente...".

"No pienso en la muerte. Ni en accidentes, ni en lo que me espera. Si lo hiciera, jamás correría, nunca estuviera aquí", añadió.

"¿Quieres saber por qué lo hago?", nos pregunta. "Porque quiero correr en Miami, pero también porque es mi vida. Ah, y soy portugués", concluyó.

- Rui Ferreira

DEFEDE / For Cuba, U.S. remains focus of tough talk

Jim DeFede The Miami Herald

HAVANA - Ricardo Alarcon sank into a chair in a meeting room at the National Assembly. Two aides sat across from him as the drone of an air conditioner -- a sign of power and prestige -- filled the room with noise. As everyone settled in, a young woman entered the room with a tray full of tall glasses of watermelon juice.

''OK,'' he said to me, signaling the start of our interview. As the current president of the National Assembly, as well as Cuba's former ambassador to the United Nations, Alarcon is one of Cuba's most recognizable and powerful figures behind Fidel Castro.

He has waged rhetorical war against the United States for decades, and the two hours we spent talking in English earlier this month was no exception.

The primary focus of his assault was Luis Posada Carriles, the man Alarcon says masterminded the bombing of a Cubana airliner in 1976, killing 73 people. The Cuban government also accuses Posada of orchestrating a series of bombings inside Havana hotels and other tourist sites in 1997 that killed an Italian tourist. At the time, Posada openly bragged about the bombings, although he later recanted part of his story. Today he refuses to discuss the bombings.

Posada snuck into the United States three months ago and is seeking asylum. Venezuela wants Posada extradited to Caracas so he can be tried on the Cubana bombing. (Posada was acquitted once by a military panel in Venezuela, but that verdict was set aside and he escaped from prison in 1985 while a retrial was still pending.)

As we began to talk, Alarcon opened a folder full of international treaties on terrorism and read from each one, starting with The Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation, drafted in 1971 in Montreal.

The United States has signed all of these treaties. The language is almost always identical. They state that if a country refuses to extradite an accused terrorist, then that country is ``obliged, without exception whatsoever and whether or not the offense was committed in its territory, to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution.''

In other words, he says, if the United States refuses to extradite Posada to Venezuela, the United States must try Posada for the Cubana bombing.

The United States ''knows about these documents,'' Alarcon said. ``They are ignoring all these conventions, and that is a very grave situation. There is no option. It is the language in every convention. Either you extradite or you prosecute. There is no third way.''

Isn't Cuba being hypocritical, since it harbors dozens of suspected terrorists?

''Give me one name,'' he shot back.

I offer him the name U.S. officials frequently cite: Joanne Chesimard, a Black Panther militant known in Cuba as Assata Shakur, who was sentenced to life in prison for murdering a New Jersey state trooper. She escaped prison in 1979 and has lived in Cuba for the past 20 years.

''Is she an international terrorist?'' Alarcon replied. ``Has she been accused of anything after she escaped from prison? She is not conspiring from Cuba to invade the U.S. or plant bombs there.''

But she has been convicted of murder, I said. Posada hasn't been convicted of anything.

''She was accused of some shooting,'' he said dismissively.

''Of killing a police officer,'' I interrupt.

''Yes,'' he said, ``and this is not terrorism. This is a violent act allegedly committed in which she was involved. But in your country this happens every day, at primary schools or on any corner. That's wrong, that should be punished, but it is not international terrorism.''

How about the members of ETA (Basque separatists) and Colombian guerrillas, including members of the FARC who are known to be in Cuba?

''The ETA people came here at the request of the Spanish government,'' Alarcon argued. ``Each time the Spanish government is asked that question they will tell you the same thing. The Colombians? How many times does the Colombian government have to tell you that they have no problem with Cuba regarding that. That Cuba has been helping them with the peace negotiations and that they have participated in meetings with those people in Cuba.''

During my visit to Cuba, I told Alarcon I've received many e-mails from angry Cuban Americans.

''I saw some letters published in The Herald,'' he grinned.

1994 TUGBOAT SINKING

Many of those e-mails talk about the 1994 carnage aboard the 13 de Marzo, a tugboat crowded with 71 people that tried to escape Havana harbor and come to the United States. Three Cuban ships attacked the tugboat, ramming it and using high-pressured water cannons to douse those on deck until the tugboat capsized. Forty-one people, including 23 children, drowned.

I asked Alarcon a question I've been asked in recent days: When will the families of those victims have their day in court? When will the crew responsible for the deaths of those 41 men, women and children be placed on trial?

Alarcon stares at me for a moment, rolling a cigar between his fingers.

``Do you really believe that we deliberately sunk a tugboat in Havana harbor just to kill those people?''

''There are many people in Miami who believe just that,'' I said.

''So what? They think many things. They think we eat children,'' he replied. He changed the subject. He moved on to ripping the United States, saying it's out of step with the rest of the world, increasingly isolated for its policies.

I stuck to the tugboat. Survivors say it was clear to them the Cuban vessels were intent on sinking the tugboat. Some of them describe standing along the side of the boat, holding some of the children in their arms, so the Cuban officers on those vessels would see that there were children on board. But it didn't matter.

''What happened?'' I ask.

''An accident, clearly an accident that we deplore very much,'' he said. ``But it has been overplayed in Miami along with other alleged incidents that have been invented in Miami.''

Are you referring to the shoot-down of the Brothers to the Rescue planes?

''Of course,'' he said. ``Some day we will declassify what we have on Brothers to the Rescue, and then the rest of the world will understand.''

He makes no mention of the U.N. investigation that found the Cuban government's actions outrageous and that the shooting occurred in international waters. It's clear he was done with these subjects.

Several times during our talk, Alarcon made reference to how the United States ''enjoys the First Amendment,'' sarcastically arguing that Americans are wildly misinformed about the world.

I brought up the 75 dissidents, including many independent journalists, arrested in 2003 and given lengthy prison terms.

Can Cuba not tolerate the freedoms embodied in the First Amendment?

''First have the U.S. get off of our shoulders,'' he said sternly. ``Have the United States abandon its policy of provocation against Cuba, which is part and parcel of their aim to dominate Cuba. That's the real issue.''

SHIFTING BLAME

I suggested Cuba likes having the United States as an enemy. That the Cuban government wants the embargo in place so it can blame its food shortages and economic problems on us rather than on its own failed policies.

Many people believe, I said, that every time the United States seems on the verge of easing sanctions or the embargo, Cuba does something provocative to keep the embargo in place -- like downing the Brothers to the Rescue planes.

Alarcon laughed.

''What is the logical conclusion to that argument?'' he said. ''Free the Cuban Five'' -- referring to the Cubans in American prisons for espionage -- ''and arrest immediately Roger Noriega, Sen. Jesse Helms, Congressmen Dan Burton, Ileana Ros Lehtinen and Lincoln Diaz Balart'' -- historically the embargo's biggest supporters -- ``because they are the Cuban agents. They have been doing, according to that theory, what is in our interest. They are the real agents sent by Cuba to establish that policy that will help us.''

It's a non answer, albeit a clever one.

''Lift the embargo. Lift the excuse. Let's do this: Lift the embargo for one year, and let's see what happens. One year without this excuse,'' he added. ``I have spent much of my life denouncing it. What shall I do with no more embargo? Well, I will write my memoirs. . . .

``If you think we are using Mr. Posada, simply abide by these laws and extradite him or prosecute him and that's the end of it.''

I asked him why Cuba has been cutting back on economic reforms it instituted in the early 1990s, such as individuals operating their own small businesses.

''When we introduced those measures, we said clearly we didn't like them,'' Alarcon said, adding that now the economy is improving.

''Thanks to Mr. Chávez,'' I said, referring to Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, who has significantly bolstered Cuba's poor economy by sending Cuba up to 90,000 barrels of oil a day on highly favorable financial terms.

''No, no, no,'' Alarcon said. ``You see that's an example of American perception.''

He argued there were ''many factors,'' including Cuba discovering more oil of its own, nickel production at an all-time high and a recent trade agreement with China.

EARLIER REFORMS

Is Cuba pulling back on the earlier reforms because it fears economic freedom will lead people to demand political freedom as well?

''Well, I do not agree that more economic freedom will make people want more political freedom,'' he said.

What happens to Cuba when Fidel Castro dies?

Alarcon says there's a succession plan. Then he said President Bush often talks about how the United States will ensure a ''free Cuba'' in a post-Castro world.

Alarcon predicts an American intervention when Castro dies.

A military intervention? You don't believe that do you?

''You have,'' he said, ``an unbelievable government.''

STOP THE PRESSES / Pulitzer winner Gene Miller of The Miami Herald dies at 76

MARTIN MERZER/The Miami Herald

This is one of the last things Gene Miller wrote. We rarely re-wrote Gene and we certainly are not going to now. He died Friday.

Gene worked at The Herald for 48 years as a reporter and editor. His reporting saved at least two lives, won two Pulitzer Prizes and served this community.

He was the soul and the conscience of our newsroom, a somber place the day he died.

He coached novice reporters. He turned butter-fingered writers into prize winners. He challenged senior editors when he thought they were wrong, which was pretty often.

So, here is one of the last things Gene wrote. He left a sealed version of it in our clip file. We had to trim a bit of it -- he always said any story could trim -- but we changed nothing else. We only filled in the spaces he left for age, day, place and cause.

**********

Gene Edward Miller, 76, newspaperman, died 9:12 a.m. June 17, 2005, at home. Cause: cancer, the family said. Noted Gene: "Excellent health . . . except for a fatal disease."

Self-portrait: Born in Evansville, Indiana, Sept. 16, 1928, grandson of a Utah railroader and a grandma who could outshoot the sheriff. Pre-kindergarten firebug. Hid under bed as firemen from Engine 15 extinguished grass fire.

As a $12 a week copyboy, misfiled clips in the morgue of The Evansville Press. Look for "assassination'' under "assignation."

Oboist, gold medal (plated). Indiana University, '50, AB journalism, where purchased for 4 cents The Chicago Tribune's ''Dewey Defeats Truman.'' Never again, right? Overpaid at $50 a week at first newspaper job, The Journal-Gazette, Fort Wayne, Indiana, 1950.

Secret agent in Army Counter Intelligence Corps, 1951-53. On surveillance, forgot where parked car.

Fired from The Wall Street Journal in 1954. Lacked respect for price of crude cottonseed oil. Reporter on The News Leader, Richmond, Virginia, 1954-57. Departed after motorist failed to pay 5 cent toll and guard shot at him. Managing editor didn't think it was news because publisher and his neighbors owned the bridge.

Reporter and editor at The Miami Herald from 1957 to 2001 until tax-deferred buyout from Knight Ridder ($287,365.28), then contracted as a newsroom ``vendor.''

Over the years: Everything from the JFK assassination to Elián with the presidential follies in between, Nixonian Watergate to Clintonian Starr Report.

At the factory on the bay, silkpursed the ears of sows, mountained molehills, thumbed dikes, and unscrewed things when things got screwed up.

Covered: Yarmouth Castle fire, Birmingham and MLK, Murf-the-Surf, Bluebelle, Beatles, Clay-Liston, Candy Mossler, Mackle kidnapping, Apollo, Chappaquidick, Kent State, Dolphins Perfect Season, Three Mile Island, Patty Hearst, My Lai and Lt. Calley, Attica, Elvis, Ted Bundy, Gary Gilmore, Guyana suicides, McDuffie, George Wallace, Larry Flynt, Dangerous Doctors, assorted riots and airline crashes, hurricanes from Donna to Andrew, Fountain Valley massacre, some of which seemed important at the time.

Made FBI's ''no contact'' list. Pulitzer Prizes for malfunctions of justice, common enough in Florida: Joe Shea and Mary Katherin Hampton in 1967 and Freddie Pitts and Wilbert Lee in 1976.

From the citation: ". . . for persistent and courageous reporting over eight and one-half years that led to the exoneration and release of two men who had twice been tried for murder and wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death in Florida."

Son Tom, a smart aleck, asked, "Know why you have two, Dad? Because everyone else gets a good job after the first.''

Editor for two more, Edna Buchanan in 1986 and Sydney Freedberg in 1991. Peripheral contributor: 1993 and 1999. Collected newsroom interns, 1981-2004.

Accolades: Heywood Broun, National Headliners, George Polk, Edgar Allan Poe, Robert F. Kennedy, Florida Bar, and Honorary LL.D, Indiana University.

Married 41 years to Electra Yphantis (1923-1993), Bostonian, Greek, Harvard and Johns Hopkins, and begat four children, Janet Nostro, Theresa Miller, Thomas Raphael, Robin Travis. Eight grandchildren.

In 1998, married Caroline Heck, federal prosecutor, University of Chicago and Harvard Law, mother of Daniel.

Along the way: Nieman Fellowship; couple of out-of-print books (83 Hours Till Dawn

and Invitation to a Lynching); and a successful copyright infringement lawsuit against Universal Pictures, the scoundrels.

Swam a thousand yards daily with the grace and beauty of a floating log. Pacemaker installed for slow heart beat and afib. Treated in 2000 for malignant tumor with predicted 5% chance of future problems. Ha! In lieu of flowers, have a martini. Try Boodles gin. Parting words: Great run! Much joy! For sexual escapades, see addenda.

**********

That was how Gene ended his own obituary.

He called himself a ''dinosaur,'' and in a way he was.

As you can tell from his candor in the item above, he didn't need a master's degree or focus group to tell him what to put in the newspaper.

His philosophy: Put everything in the newspaper, unvarnished. Just ask questions, write down the answers and put them in the newspaper. Pretty simple.

''He died as he lived, fighting the bad guys and always believing that he would win,'' Herald Publisher Alberto Ibargüen said Friday.

''Every publisher should have a Gene Miller who, by dint of his passion and lifetime of achievement, had the right to grouse about corporate policies, but also to advise on them and on what a publisher might do to make the paper better,'' Ibargüen said. ``I will miss his wonderful presence, but I will keep his conscience in my life forever.''

Gene's first byline appeared in The Herald on Nov. 9, 1957, the day after he came to work. In that story, a BBC executive said, ''There is no substitute for news.'' It became Gene's creed.

''Publish! Journalistic cowardliness and/or soft-headedness is as evil as censorship and is just as harmful to a free society,'' Gene wrote in 1984 when a Herald editor made the mistake of sending him a questionnaire about dicey journalistic situations.

Gene served for many years as The Herald's associate editor for reporting. He was a thunderstorm of story ideas, a bolt of lightning here, a burst of thunder there, a sudden shower on the other side of the room.

He read The Herald, every inch of it, every day.

He loathed the unasked question or unexplored angle. He lamented the inelegant phrase or absent detail. He lavished praise on a job well done.

Reporters working a tough story one day often came in early the next, hoping to hear him bellow, ``Good copy, champion!''

An example of his own championship copy, from Nov. 14, 1965, page 1A, about a passenger ship in trouble:

The moment before she vanished, the Yarmouth Castle burned in an ungodly inferno, as if in a circle of fire from hell itself.

''What's keeping her afloat?'' our pilot asked.

Then abruptly and suddenly, within 40 seconds, the flat ocean surface took its prey.

''Gene lived life out loud,'' said Herald Executive Editor Tom Fiedler. "He had a booming laugh and no tolerance for the intolerant and the pompous.

"He was, and will continue to be, an inspiration to those who learned so much from him and those who share his sense of conscience.''

This past Memorial Day, as Gene's health diminished, Fiedler lured him to the newsroom for a small ceremony, which is how Gene wanted it. There and then, the room in which twice-a-day news meetings are conducted was named The Gene Miller Conference Room.

Gene's first Pulitzer came in 1967 for two investigations that freed from prison Shea and Hampton, convicted of separate murders. They were innocent, and they got out because of Gene's dogged reporting.

His second Pulitzer was even more noteworthy. It came in 1976 after eight years of reporting about the case of two Death Row inmates, Pitts and Lee.

The two black men were charged in 1963 with the murders of two white gas station attendants in the Florida Panhandle town of Port St. Joe.

The cops had no evidence, so they beat confessions out of the pair. As a result, Pitts and Lee were sentenced to death on Aug. 28, 1963.

Pitts, about to be led away in shackles, stopped to hug his mother. ''I didn't do it,'' he sobbed. ``I didn't do it.''

A third man ended up confessing, and polygraph expert Warren Holmes brought the case to Gene's attention. During the next eight years, The Herald published 130 articles about the case. Gene wrote nearly all of them.

Ultimately, Robert Shevin, then Florida's attorney general, and Reubin Askew, the governor, read a collection of the stories. They also read the proofs of Gene's book about the case, Invitation to a Lynching.

In 1975, they freed Pitts and Lee.

Dec. 19, 1975, Page 1A, by Gene Miller:

RAIFORD, Fla. -- At 12:15 p.m. Thursday, the usual command crackled over the prison speaker: ''Count time. All inmates on the floor with the door locked.'' Freddie Pitts and Wilbert Lee didn't move.

They sat in a borrowed office at Florida State Prison and waited patiently as the last 24 hours of 12 lost years dragged to an end.

Patience they have learned since the lost years began on a hot summer night in 1963, when they drove into a Mo-Jo gas station in the Florida Panhandle.

''Gas 23.9,'' the sign said.

Gene's work also produced considerable reaction in Port St. Joe. In 1975, a relative of one of the victims sucker-punched Gene in the mouth as he walked out of the courthouse.

He had many other adventures and many other triumphs, and his work often brought him into contact with literary, political and other stars.

He counted among his friends and close acquaintances writers John Gregory Dunne, Joan Didion, Calvin Trillin and Tom Harris, many judges and lawyers, the late Ann Bishop of WPLG-ABC 10, and former U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno. Her late father, Henry Reno, was a Herald police reporter. Her late mother, Jane, was a feature writer for the Miami News.

After Bill Clinton was elected president, his first two choices for attorney general struck out because they violated income tax or immigration laws when they employed household help.

When the White House turned to Reno, Miller helpfully offered: ``If anyone in Washington inquires, I can testify that no maid has been inside your house in 20 years.''

In his later years, Gene often served The Herald as a phantom rewrite man, the person desperate editors turned to when their computer screens seemed to be displaying a story inside out or upside down.

In the end, his name was nowhere near the story, but his work made that story approachable, comprehensible, maybe even a touch entertaining.

He also was a writing coach. Reporters who couldn't write their names on paper bags came out of his office a day or a week or a month later with fingers like Hemingway's. They had been ``Millerized.''

He taught them to penetrate quickly to the heart of the matter or the person under examination.

He taught them to write in crisp, colorful, declarative sentences.

He taught them to invest a moment or three and reexamine every word, probing for a more active verb, a more vivid description.

Then, when he and the writer had the story right where they wanted it, Gene shielded it from meddlesome editors by typing this warning atop it: ``any changes, see gene miller please.''

Everyone, writer and editor, got the message.

Gene leaves his wife, Caroline Heck Miller; children Janet Nostro, Theresa Miller, Thomas Miller and Roberta Travis; step-son Daniel Hillman Heck; eight grandchildren; and a universe of close friends, grateful colleagues, better reporters and writers, and more informed readers.

A memorial service will be held Wednesday at 11 a.m. at Plymouth Congregational Church, 3400 Devon Road, in the Coconut Grove area of Miami.

In all likelihood, many colorful stories will be told.

In lieu of flowers, the family suggested contributions to The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 1101 Wilson Blvd., Suite 1100, Arlington, Va., 22209.

FUNERAL / Álvaro Cunhal

Som 1 Som 2



Som cortesia da TSF e RTP

CASTRO / Opina sobre Saramago

Saramago llega a La Habana el miércoles

LA HABANA - Un libro de un periodista argentino presentado aquí divulga la opinión del presidente Fidel Castro acerca del laureado escritor portugués José Saramago, quien rompió con Cuba en el 2003, pero ahora visita la isla como invitado oficial.

"Realmente nos duele que no hubiese entendido (Saramago) una palabra de las realidades que viven Cuba y el mundo", expresó Castro en una entrevista con Miguel Bonasso en mayo del 2003 y publicada en el libro "El instante fugitivo", lanzado el sábado.

Saramago hizo entonces sonadas críticas a la isla y aseguró sentirse "defraudado", tras la detención de disidentes y la ejecución de una sentencia judicial de pena de muerte para tres secuestradores de una lancha con rehenes, en medio de una crisis migratoria.

"El debió expresar su desacuerdo, pero no debió pronunciar ni una sola palabra que alimente la agresividad del gobierno de Estados Unidos contra Cuba, ni ofrecer argumentos que recibe con delicia el brutal sistema imperialista", dijo Castro. "Pienso que se dejó llevar por un arranque de ira y contrariedad que le obnubiló su capacidad de razonar".

"Algo más, tal vez un rasgo pasajero de autosuficiencia y vanidad, nada extraordinario en un buen comunista acostumbrado durante muchos años a la calumnia y la diatriba, que ha sido de repente elevado al Olimpo de un premio Nobel", agregó. Saramago ganó el Nobel de Literatura en 1998.

Castro comparó la reacción del escritor con la de una ganadora del Nobel de la Paz, la guatemalteca Rigoberta Menchú, a quien consideró siempre "leal'' a la causa de "los explotados''.

"De todas formas, por el valor maravilloso de sus obras literarias, los libros de Saramago seguirán siendo publicados y leídos en Cuba'', pronosticó Castro.

Saramago llegó aquí la noche del martes, invitado por el Ministerio de Cultura, y fue recibido por el titular de esa cartera, Abel Prieto.

De 82 años de edad, el escritor portugués participará de la presentación de una reedición del libro suyo "El Evangelio según Jesucristo'', se reunirá con personalidades en la Universidad de La Habana y visitará la Casa de las Américas.

A principios de año, Saramago ya había limado asperezas con Cuba y firmó una declaración de cientos de intelectuales en contra de una moción crítica del gobierno de la isla presentada ante la Comisión de Derechos Humanos de Ginebra.

A su llegada al aeropuerto capitalino, el narrador exigió además la extradición a Venezuela de Luis Posada Carriles, un anticastrista violento detenido por Estados Unidos. [AP]

JACKO / Waco...

Michael Jackson's lawyer said today that the singer will no longer share his bed with young boys. Speaking a day after the star was cleared on all counts at the end of a four-month child molestation trial in Santa Maria, California, Thomas Mesereau said: "He's not going to do that any more. He's not going to make himself vulnerable to this any more."

Really???????????????????

OTAGES / Florence Aubenas raconte sa vie d'otage

De la sortie de leur lieu de détention au décollage de Bagdad, le récit de la libération de notre envoyée spéciale et son guide.

SARAMAGO / Lamenta perdas de poeta maior, de patriota puro e de político lúcido

O escritor José Saramago lamentou a perda de Eugénio de Andrade, "um poeta dos maiores", Vasco Gonçalves, um "patriota dos mais puros" e Álvaro Cunhal, "um político dos mais lúcidos e fiéis a si mesmos".

"Morreu um poeta, morreu um general reformado, morreu um comunista retirado. Isto dirão alguns. Perdemos um poeta dos maiores, perdemos um patriota dos mais puros, perdemos um político dos mais lúcidos e fiéis a si mesmos. Isto digo eu, tal como dirão muitos outros", sublinha Saramago.

E se Eugénio de Andrade "entrou na história da Literatura Portuguesa e aí ficará para sempre", quanto a Vasco Gonçalves e a Álvaro Cunhal, o escritor comenta que "não faltará quem os queira ver rapidamente esquecidos depois de bem enterrados".

A sugestão de Saramago para "esses e todos os demais" é de "aproveitar este abalo e pensar um pouco no presente e no futuro do infeliz país que se chama Portugal, quase novecentos anos de História que não sabem aonde ir".

"Para estes três mortos só tenho uma palavra: obrigado, Eugénio, obrigado, Vasco, obrigado, Álvaro", conclui a mensagem.

EINSTEIN / Why Socialism?

by Albert Einstein

Is it advisable for one who is not an expert on economic and social issues to express views on the subject of socialism? I believe for a number of reasons that it is.

Let us first consider the question from the point of view of scientific knowledge. It might appear that there are no essential methodological differences between astronomy and economics: scientists in both fields attempt to discover laws of general acceptability for a circumscribed group of phenomena in order to make the interconnection of these phenomena as clearly understandable as possible. But in reality such methodological differences do exist. The discovery of general laws in the field of economics is made difficult by the circumstance that observed economic phenomena are often affected by many factors which are very hard to evaluate separately. In addition, the experience which has accumulated since the beginning of the so-called civilized period of human history has—as is well known—been largely influenced and limited by causes which are by no means exclusively economic in nature. For example, most of the major states of history owed their existence to conquest. The conquering peoples established themselves, legally and economically, as the privileged class of the conquered country. They seized for themselves a monopoly of the land ownership and appointed a priesthood from among their own ranks. The priests, in control of education, made the class division of society into a permanent institution and created a system of values by which the people were thenceforth, to a large extent unconsciously, guided in their social behavior.

But historic tradition is, so to speak, of yesterday; nowhere have we really overcome what Thorstein Veblen called "the predatory phase" of human development. The observable economic facts belong to that phase and even such laws as we can derive from them are not applicable to other phases. Since the real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development, economic science in its present state can throw little light on the socialist society of the future.

Second, socialism is directed towards a social-ethical end. Science, however, cannot create ends and, even less, instill them in human beings; science, at most, can supply the means by which to attain certain ends. But the ends themselves are conceived by personalities with lofty ethical ideals and—if these ends are not stillborn, but vital and vigorous—are adopted and carried forward by those many human beings who, half unconsciously, determine the slow evolution of society.

For these reasons, we should be on our guard not to overestimate science and scientific methods when it is a question of human problems; and we should not assume that experts are the only ones who have a right to express themselves on questions affecting the organization of society.

Innumerable voices have been asserting for some time now that human society is passing through a crisis, that its stability has been gravely shattered. It is characteristic of such a situation that individuals feel indifferent or even hostile toward the group, small or large, to which they belong. In order to illustrate my meaning, let me record here a personal experience. I recently discussed with an intelligent and well-disposed man the threat of another war, which in my opinion would seriously endanger the existence of mankind, and I remarked that only a supra-national organization would offer protection from that danger. Thereupon my visitor, very calmly and coolly, said to me: "Why are you so deeply opposed to the disappearance of the human race?"

I am sure that as little as a century ago no one would have so lightly made a statement of this kind. It is the statement of a man who has striven in vain to attain an equilibrium within himself and has more or less lost hope of succeeding. It is the expression of a painful solitude and isolation from which so many people are suffering in these days. What is the cause? Is there a way out?

It is easy to raise such questions, but difficult to answer them with any degree of assurance. I must try, however, as best I can, although I am very conscious of the fact that our feelings and strivings are often contradictory and obscure and that they cannot be expressed in easy and simple formulas.

Man is, at one and the same time, a solitary being and a social being. As a solitary being, he attempts to protect his own existence and that of those who are closest to him, to satisfy his personal desires, and to develop his innate abilities. As a social being, he seeks to gain the recognition and affection of his fellow human beings, to share in their pleasures, to comfort them in their sorrows, and to improve their conditions of life. Only the existence of these varied, frequently conflicting, strivings accounts for the special character of a man, and their specific combination determines the extent to which an individual can achieve an inner equilibrium and can contribute to the well-being of society. It is quite possible that the relative strength of these two drives is, in the main, fixed by inheritance. But the personality that finally emerges is largely formed by the environment in which a man happens to find himself during his development, by the structure of the society in which he grows up, by the tradition of that society, and by its appraisal of particular types of behavior. The abstract concept "society" means to the individual human being the sum total of his direct and indirect relations to his contemporaries and to all the people of earlier generations. The individual is able to think, feel, strive, and work by himself; but he depends so much upon society—in his physical, intellectual, and emotional existence—that it is impossible to think of him, or to understand him, outside the framework of society. It is "society" which provides man with food, clothing, a home, the tools of work, language, the forms of thought, and most of the content of thought; his life is made possible through the labor and the accomplishments of the many millions past and present who are all hidden behind the small word “society.”

It is evident, therefore, that the dependence of the individual upon society is a fact of nature which cannot be abolished—just as in the case of ants and bees. However, while the whole life process of ants and bees is fixed down to the smallest detail by rigid, hereditary instincts, the social pattern and interrelationships of human beings are very variable and susceptible to change. Memory, the capacity to make new combinations, the gift of oral communication have made possible developments among human being which are not dictated by biological necessities. Such developments manifest themselves in traditions, institutions, and organizations; in literature; in scientific and engineering accomplishments; in works of art. This explains how it happens that, in a certain sense, man can influence his life through his own conduct, and that in this process conscious thinking and wanting can play a part.

Man acquires at birth, through heredity, a biological constitution which we must consider fixed and unalterable, including the natural urges which are characteristic of the human species. In addition, during his lifetime, he acquires a cultural constitution which he adopts from society through communication and through many other types of influences. It is this cultural constitution which, with the passage of time, is subject to change and which determines to a very large extent the relationship between the individual and society. Modern anthropology has taught us, through comparative investigation of so-called primitive cultures, that the social behavior of human beings may differ greatly, depending upon prevailing cultural patterns and the types of organization which predominate in society. It is on this that those who are striving to improve the lot of man may ground their hopes: human beings are not condemned, because of their biological constitution, to annihilate each other or to be at the mercy of a cruel, self-inflicted fate.

If we ask ourselves how the structure of society and the cultural attitude of man should be changed in order to make human life as satisfying as possible, we should constantly be conscious of the fact that there are certain conditions which we are unable to modify. As mentioned before, the biological nature of man is, for all practical purposes, not subject to change. Furthermore, technological and demographic developments of the last few centuries have created conditions which are here to stay. In relatively densely settled populations with the goods which are indispensable to their continued existence, an extreme division of labor and a highly-centralized productive apparatus are absolutely necessary. The time—which, looking back, seems so idyllic—is gone forever when individuals or relatively small groups could be completely self-sufficient. It is only a slight exaggeration to say that mankind constitutes even now a planetary community of production and consumption.

I have now reached the point where I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society. The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence. Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple, and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.

The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labor—not by force, but on the whole in faithful compliance with legally established rules. In this respect, it is important to realize that the means of production—that is to say, the entire productive capacity that is needed for producing consumer goods as well as additional capital goods—may legally be, and for the most part are, the private property of individuals.

For the sake of simplicity, in the discussion that follows I shall call “workers” all those who do not share in the ownership of the means of production—although this does not quite correspond to the customary use of the term. The owner of the means of production is in a position to purchase the labor power of the worker. By using the means of production, the worker produces new goods which become the property of the capitalist. The essential point about this process is the relation between what the worker produces and what he is paid, both measured in terms of real value. Insofar as the labor contract is “free,” what the worker receives is determined not by the real value of the goods he produces, but by his minimum needs and by the capitalists' requirements for labor power in relation to the number of workers competing for jobs. It is important to understand that even in theory the payment of the worker is not determined by the value of his product.

Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.

The situation prevailing in an economy based on the private ownership of capital is thus characterized by two main principles: first, means of production (capital) are privately owned and the owners dispose of them as they see fit; second, the labor contract is free. Of course, there is no such thing as a pure capitalist society in this sense. In particular, it should be noted that the workers, through long and bitter political struggles, have succeeded in securing a somewhat improved form of the “free labor contract” for certain categories of workers. But taken as a whole, the present day economy does not differ much from “pure” capitalism.

Production is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that all those able and willing to work will always be in a position to find employment; an “army of unemployed” almost always exists. The worker is constantly in fear of losing his job. Since unemployed and poorly paid workers do not provide a profitable market, the production of consumers' goods is restricted, and great hardship is the consequence. Technological progress frequently results in more unemployment rather than in an easing of the burden of work for all. The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labor, and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned before.

This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career.

I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society.

Nevertheless, it is necessary to remember that a planned economy is not yet socialism. A planned economy as such may be accompanied by the complete enslavement of the individual. The achievement of socialism requires the solution of some extremely difficult socio-political problems: how is it possible, in view of the far-reaching centralization of political and economic power, to prevent bureaucracy from becoming all-powerful and overweening? How can the rights of the individual be protected and therewith a democratic counterweight to the power of bureaucracy be assured?

Clarity about the aims and problems of socialism is of greatest significance in our age of transition. Since, under present circumstances, free and unhindered discussion of these problems has come under a powerful taboo, I consider the foundation of this magazine to be an important public service.

This essay was originally published in the first issue of Monthly Review (May 1949)

GITMO / Inside the Interrogation of Detainee 063

TO GET THE "20TH HIJACKER" TO TALK, THE U.S. USED A WIDE RANGE OF TACTICS. A SECRET LOG REVEALS THE FIRST DOCUMENTED VIEW OF HOW GITMO REALLY WORKS

By ADAM ZAGORIN, MICHAEL DUFFY

The prisoner known around the U.S. naval station at Guantanamo Bay as Detainee 063 was a hard man to break. Defiant from the start, he told his captors that he had been in Afghanistan to pursue his love of falconry. But the young Saudi prisoner who wouldn't talk was not just any detainee. He was Mohammed al-Qahtani, a follower of Osama bin Laden's and the man believed by many to be the so-called 20th hijacker. He had tried to enter the U.S. in August 2001, allegedly to take part in the Sept. 11 attacks. But while Mohammed Atta, the eventual leader of the hijackers, was waiting outside in the Orlando, Fla., airport parking lot, al-Qahtani was detained inside--and then deported--by an alert immigration officer who didn't buy his story.

More than a year later, after al-Qahtani had been captured in Afghanistan and transferred to Gitmo's Camp X-Ray, his interrogation was going nowhere. So in late November 2002, according to an 84-page secret interrogation log obtained by TIME, al-Qahtani's questioners switched gears. They suggested to their captive that he had been spared by Allah in order to reveal the true meaning of the Koran and help bring down bin Laden.

During a routine check of his medical condition, a sergeant approached al-Qahtani and whispered in his ear, "What is God telling you right now? Your 19 friends died in a fireball and you weren't with them. Was that God's choice? Is it God's will that you stay alive to tell us about his message?" At that point, the log states, al-Qahtani threw his head back and butted the sergeant in the eye. Two MPs wrestled al-Qahtani to the ground. The sergeant crouched down next to the thrashing terrorist, who tried to spit on him. The sergeant's response: "Go ahead and spit on me. It won't change anything. You're still here. I'm still talking to you and you won't leave until you've given God's message."

The interrogation log of Detainee063 provides the first internal look at the highly classified realm of Gitmo interrogations since the detention camp opened four years ago. Chief Pentagon spokesman Larry DiRita tells TIME that the log was compiled by various uniformed interrogators and observers on the Pentagon's Joint Task Force at Gitmo as the interrogation proceeded. It is stamped SECRET ORCON, a military acronym for a document that is supposed to remain with the organization that created it. A Pentagon official who has seen the log describes it as the "kind of document that was never meant to leave Gitmo."

The log reads like a night watchman's diary. It is a sometimes shocking and often mundane hour-by-hour, even minute-by-minute account of a campaign to extract information. The log records every time al- Qahtani eats, sleeps, exercises or goes to the bathroom and every time he complies with or refuses his interrogators' requests. The detainee's physical condition is frequently checked by medical corpsmen--sometimes as often as three times a day-- which indicates either spectacular concern about al-Qahtani's health or persistent worry about just how much stress he can take. Although the log does not appear obviously censored, it is also plainly incomplete: there are numerous gaps in the notes about what is said and what is happening in the interrogation booth beyond details like "Detainee taken to bathroom and walked for 10 minutes."

Despite the information gaps, the log offers a rare glimpse into the darker reaches of intelligence gathering, in which teams that specialize in extracting information by almost any means match wits and wills with men who are trained to keep quiet at almost any cost. It spans 50 days in the winter of 2002-03, from November to early January, a critical period at Gitmo, during which 16 additional interrogation techniques were approved by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for use on a select few detainees, including al-Qahtani.

By itself, the log doesn't make clear how effective the interrogations were. The Pentagon contends that al-Qahtani has been a valuable source of information: providing details of meetings with bin Laden, naming people and financial contacts in several Arab countries, describing terrorist training camps where bin Laden lives and explaining how he may have escaped from Tora Bora in December 2001.

Pentagon officials tell TIME that most of the intelligence gleaned from those sessions was recorded in other documents. But the interrogation log gives a rare window into the techniques used by the U.S. military, suggesting at least in this case that disclosures were sometimes obtained not when al-Qahtani was under duress but when his handlers eased up on him.

The case of Detainee 063 is sure to add fire to the superheated debate about the use of American power in the age of terrorism. The U.S. has been criticized for mistreating Gitmo prisoners and denying their rights at a facility Amnesty International has controversially called the "gulag of our time." Along with lawmakers and human-rights groups, former President Jimmy Carter has called on Washington officials to shut the camp down. Even President George W. Bush told Fox News last week that his Administration was exploring alternatives to the detention center.

How should a democratic nation proceed when it captures a high-value prisoner like al-Qahtani, when unlocking a mind might save lives? Experts acknowledge that brute torture generally doesn't work because a person will say anything to stop the pain. So what, exactly, is effective? And when do the ends justify the means?

From the moment Mohammed al-Qahtani stepped off a Virgin Atlantic flight in Orlando back in August 2001, immigration officials noticed something troubling about him. He had arrived on a one-way ticket yet carried only $2,800 in cash, barely enough to buy his return. When an official pressed him for details about his destination, al-Qahtani was hostile and evasive. With an interpreter's help, the immigration agent questioned al-Qahtani for 90 min. and then sent him packing. Al-Qahtani's parting words: "I'll be back."

From London, al-Qahtani made his way to the United Arab Emirates and then to Afghanistan to fight against the U.S. He was captured fleeing Tora Bora in December 2001. When he was shipped to Guantánamo two months later, officials had not yet realized he was the presumed 20th hijacker. For weeks, he refused to give his name. But in July 2002, the feds matched his fingerprints to those of the man who had been deported from Orlando and marked him for intensive interrogation. Al-Qahtani, explains Pentagon spokesman DiRita, was "a particularly well-placed, well-connected terrorist who was believed capable of unlocking an enormous amount of specific and general insights into 9/11, al-Qaeda operations and ongoing planning for future attacks." But the initial questioning by the FBI went poorly. "We were getting nothing from him," a senior Pentagon official says. "He had been trained to resist direct questioning. And what works in a Chicago police precinct doesn't work in war."

That's where things stood in late November 2002, when the log obtained by TIME begins. At that point, tag teams of interrogators are putting al-Qahtani through a daily routine designed to drain the detainee of his autonomy. They wake him every morning at 4 and sometimes question him until midnight. Each day--and sometimes every hour--is shaped around standard Army interrogation techniques, with code names like Fear Up/Harsh, Pride/Ego Down, the Futility Approach and the Circumstantial Evidence Theme. Each day, the interrogators seem to be trying to find those that work best. They promise better treatment; they show him pictures of 9/11 victims, particularly children and the elderly. They talk about God's will and al-Qahtani's guilt. They tell him that he failed on his mission and hint that other comrades have been captured and are talking about his role in the plot. They play on his emotions, saying he should talk if he ever wants to see his family or friends or homeland again.

For days, al-Qahtani stonewalls his handlers and maintains that he went to the U.S. to get into the used-car business. "You are working with the devil," he tells his captors. The interrogators respond by forcing him to stand or sit immobile on a metal chair. He tries to deflect questions about where he went in Afghanistan with answers apparently drawn directly from an al-Qaeda handbook, given to terrorists, about how to resist interrogations. When al-Qahtani resorts to a handbook answer, his handlers reply that it amounts to another admission of guilt.

Yet in other ways, al-Qahtani emerges as an innocent abroad--uneducated, almost from another era. He asks whether the sun revolves around the earth. He wonders about dinosaurs and is told of their history and demise. He confides that he would like to marry someday--apparently not realizing how unlikely that goal now is.

The first break in al-Qahtani's facade comes with a long-delayed call of nature. When a hunger strike he has launched fizzles, he starts refusing water. That becomes a battle of wills--and teeth. Al-Qahtani quickly becomes so dehydrated that medical corpsmen forcibly administer fluids by IV drip. He tries to fight them off with his hands and is restrained. Another time, al-Qahtani tries to rip the IV needle out; when he is cuffed to his chair, he turns his head and bites the IV line completely in two. He is then strapped down and given an undisclosed amount of fluids. An hour or so later, around 9:40 a.m., al-Qahtani tells his guards that he would be willing to talk if he is allowed to urinate. The log notes he is given 312 bags of IV fluid. He starts to moan and asks again to be allowed to relieve himself. Yes, but first he must answer questions:

Interrogator: Who do you work for?

Al-Qahtani: Al-Qaeda

Interrogator: Who was your leader?

Al-Qahtani: Osama bin Laden

Interrogator: Why did you go to Orlando?

Al-Qahtani: I wasn't told the mission

Interrogator: Who was with you on the plane?

Al-Qahtani: I was by myself

That answer frustrates the interrogator--You're wasting my time, he says--and when al-Qahtani requests his promised bathroom break, he is told to go in his pants. Humiliatingly, he does. The log notes 30 minutes later, "He is beginning to understand the futility of his situation ... He is much closer to compliance and cooperation than at the beginning of the operation."

But things appear to move slowly after that. It is not clear from the log's terse entries that increased pressure is leading to new disclosures. The interrogators keep juggling techniques--giving extra sleep some days, offering a home-cooked Arab meal on another (al-Qahtani refuses it). Later that day, when a video of the destruction of the Twin Towers is played, al-Qahtani becomes so violent, he has to be restrained. "We can't say, Because we did this, we got that," a senior Pentagon official says. "If we did know what worked, we'd know exactly which pressure points to apply and when." Even al-Qahtani seems to understand that: "If you interrogate me in the right way and the right position," he taunts his questioners, "you might find some answers."

A secondary battle appears to be under way over Ramadan. At various points during the Muslim holy month, al-Qahtani claims to be either on a hunger strike, refusing all food and water, or fasting during daylight hours, as Ramadan requires. According to the log, the interrogators tell al-Qahtani he cannot pray--a religious obligation--unless he disregards another by accepting water. So he declines to pray.

Al-Qahtani's resilience under pressure in the fall of 2002 led top officials at Gitmo to petition Washington for more muscular "counter resistance strategies." On Dec. 2, Rumsfeld approved 16 of 19 stronger coercive methods. Now the interrogators could use stress strategies like standing for prolonged periods, isolation for as long as 30 days, removal of clothing, forced shaving of facial hair, playing on "individual phobias" (such as dogs) and "mild, non-injurious physical contact such as grabbing, poking in the chest with the finger and light pushing." According to the log, al-Qahtani experienced several of those over the next five weeks. The techniques Rumsfeld balked at included "use of a wet towel or dripping water to induce the misperception of suffocation." "Our Armed Forces are trained," a Pentagon memo on the changes read, "to a standard of interrogation that reflects a tradition of restraint." Nevertheless, the log shows that interrogators poured bottles of water on al-Qahtani's head when he refused to drink. Interrogators called this game "Drink Water or Wear It."

After the new measures are approved, the mood in al-Qahtani's interrogation booth changes dramatically. The interrogation sessions lengthen. The quizzing now starts at midnight, and when Detainee 063 dozes off, interrogators rouse him by dripping water on his head or playing Christina Aguilera music. According to the log, his handlers at one point perform a puppet show "satirizing the detainee's involvement with al-Qaeda." He is taken to a new interrogation booth, which is decorated with pictures of 9/11 victims, American flags and red lights. He has to stand for the playing of the U.S. national anthem. His head and beard are shaved. He is returned to his original interrogation booth. A picture of a 9/11 victim is taped to his trousers. Al-Qahtani repeats that he will "not talk until he is interrogated the proper way." At 7 a.m. on Dec. 4, after a 12-hour, all-night session, he is put to bed for a four-hour nap.

Over the next few days, al-Qahtani is subjected to a drill known as Invasion of Space by a Female, and he becomes especially agitated by the close physical presence of a woman. Then, around 2 p.m. on Dec. 6, comes another small breakthrough. He asks his handlers for some paper. "I will tell the truth," he says. "I am doing this to get out of here." He finally explains how he got to Afghanistan in the first place and how he met with bin Laden. In return, the interrogators honor requests from him to have a blanket and to turn off the air conditioner. Soon enough, the pressure ratchets up again. Various strategies of intimidation are employed anew. The log reveals that a dog is present, but no details are given beyond a hazy reference to a disagreement between the military police and the dog handler. Agitated, al-Qahtani takes back the story he told the day before about meeting bin Laden.

But a much more serious problem develops on Dec. 7: a medical corpsman reports that al-Qahtani is becoming seriously dehydrated, the result of his refusal to take water regularly. He is given an IV drip, and a doctor is summoned. An unprecedented 24-hour time out is called, but even as al-Qahtani is put under a doctor's care, music is played to "prevent detainee from sleeping." Nine hours later, a medical corpsman checks al-Qahtani's pulse and finds it "unusually slow." An electrocardiogram is administered by a doctor, and after al-Qahtani is transferred to a hospital, a CT scan is performed. A second doctor is consulted. Al-Qahtani's heartbeat is regular but slow: 35 beats a minute. He is placed in isolation and hooked up to a heart monitor.

The next day, a radiologist is flown in from Roosevelt Roads Naval Air Station in Puerto Rico, 600 miles away, to read the CT scan. The log reports, "No anomalies were found." Nonetheless, al-Qahtani is given an ultrasound for blood clots. For the first time since the log began, al-Qahtani is given an entire day to sleep. The next evening, the log reports that his medical "checks are all good." Al-Qahtani is "hooded, shackled and restrained in a litter" and transported back to Camp X-Ray in an ambulance.

Over the next month, the interrogators experiment with other tactics. They strip-search him and briefly make him stand nude. They tell him to bark like a dog and growl at pictures of terrorists. They hang pictures of scantily clad women around his neck. A female interrogator so annoys al-Qahtani that he tells his captors he wants to commit suicide and asks for a crayon to write a will. At one stage, an Arabic-speaking serviceman, posing as a fellow detainee, is brought to Camp X-Ray for a short stay in an effort to gain al-Qahtani's confidence. The log reports that al-Qahtani makes several comments to interrogators that imply he has a big story to tell, but interrogators report that he seems either too scared or simply unwilling, to tell it. On Jan. 10, 2003, al-Qahtani says he knows nothing of terrorists but volunteers to return to the gulf states and act as a double agent for the U.S. in exchange for his freedom. Five days later, Rumsfeld's harsher measures are revoked after military lawyers in Washington raised questions about their use and efficacy.

It's unclear how al-Qhatani's interrogation proceeded from that point and whether it is still continuing. Senior Pentagon officials told TIME that some of his most valuable confessions came not during the period covered in the log or as a result of any particular technique but when al-Qahtani was presented with evidence coughed up by others in detention, especially Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, or KSM, the alleged mastermind of 9/11. The intelligence take was more cumulative than anything else, says a Pentagon official. Once al-Qahtani realized KSM was talking, the official speculates, al-Qahtani may have felt he had the green light to follow suit.

Al-Qahtani has never been charged with a crime, has no lawyer and remains in detention at Guantánamo. But his case is already the subject of several probes in Washington. A year ago, a senior FBI counterterrorism official wrote the Pentagon complaining of abuses that FBI agents said they witnessed at the naval base. The agents reported seeing or hearing of "highly aggressive interrogation techniques." The letter singles out the treatment of al-Qahtani in September and October of 2002--before the log obtained by TIME begins--saying a dog was used "in an aggressive manner to intimidate Detainee #63." The FBI letter said al-Qahtani had been "subjected to intense isolation for over three months" and "was evidencing behavior consistent with extreme psychological trauma (talking to non existent people, reporting hearing voices, crouching in a cell covered with a sheet for hours on end)." The Justice Department and the Pentagon have opened separate investigations into the charges. A Pentagon official tells TIME he expects that many of those charges will prove to be unfounded.

Interrogators eventually compelled al-Qahtani to focus on his fellow detainees at Guantánamo. In that process, he implicated more than 20 other Gitmo prisoners as members of al-Qaeda or associates of bin Laden's, according to the Los Angeles Times. A military board has since used al-Qahtani's identification as a factor in prolonging the detention of some of them. Whether he has won more favorable treatment in return for his cooperation is unknown. But at least one of those he named, a Yemeni, is now claiming in a U.S. federal court that al-Qahtani's statements about him are unreliable because they "appear to have been obtained by the use of torture."

President Bush has said the U.S. would apply principals consistent with the Geneva Conventions to "unlawful combatants," subject to military necessity, at Guantánamo and elsewhere. The Pentagon argues that al-Qahtani's treatment was always "humane." But the Geneva Conventions forbid any "outrage on personal dignity." Eric Freedman, a constitutional-law expert and consultant in some of the growing number of federal lawsuits challenging U.S. treatment of these detainees, says, "If the techniques described in this interrogation log are not outrages to personal dignity, then words have no meaning." Then again, in the war on terrorism, the personal dignity of a fanatic trained for mass murder may be an inevitable casualty.

--With reporting by Brian Bennett, Timothy J. Burger, Sally B. Donnelly and Viveca Novak/Washington

Extracts from an Interrogation Log
The document titled "Secret ORCON: Interrogation Log Detainee 063" included the following entries


23 November 2002
0225: The detainee arrives at the interrogation booth a Camp X-Ray. His hood is removed and he is bolted to the floor. SGT Alarcon and SGT Roberts are the interrogators. A DoD linguist and MAJ Leso (BSCT) are present

0235:
Session begins. The detainee refuses to look at SGT A "due to his religion. This is a rapport building session.

0240: Detainee states he's on hunger strike. SGT A explains the affects of a hunger strike on the body. SGT A runs "love of brothers in Cuba" approach.

0320: The detainee refused to answer whether he wanted water. SGT R explained with emphasis that not answering disrespects SGT A and embarrasses him. The detainee said no, he didn't want water. The detainee continues to say he's on hunger strike.

0345: The detainee dozed off during a break. SGT R woke him up.

0355: SGT R wakes up detainee again.

0450: Interrogators take a break. Detainee goes to the bathroom

0520: Interrogations resumes. The detainee refuses food and water.

0540: SGT A begins 9/11 theme. The detainee asks to pray and is refused.

0550: Detainee drinks bottle of water and states after this he is on strike, he refuses food.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

13 December 2002
1115: Interrogators began telling detainee how ungrateful and grumpy he was. In order to escalate the detainee's emotions, a mask was made from an MRE box with a smily face on it and placed on the detainee's head for a few moments. A latex glove was inflated and labeled the "sissy slap" glove. The glove was touched to the detainee's face periodically after explaining the terminology to him. The mask was placed back on the detainee's head. While wearing the mask, the team began dance instruction with the detainee. The detainee became agitated and began shouting.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20 December 2002
1115: Detainee offered water—refused. Corpsman changed ankle bandages to prevent chafing. Interrogater began by reminding the detainee about the lessons in respect and how the detainee had disrespected the interrogators. Told detainee that a dog is held in higher esteem because dogs know right from wrong and know how to protect innocent people from bad people. Began teaching the detainee lessons such as stay, come, and bark to elevate his social status up to that of a dog. Detainee became very agitated.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

21 December 2002
2223: As I began to inform the detainee of the changes the Saudi government has been making in order to support the efforts of peace and terror free world I began to engage closeness with the detainee. This really evoked strong emotions within the detainee. He attempted to move away from me by all means. He was laid out on the floor so I straddled him without putting my weight on him. He would then attempt to move me off of him by bending his legs in order to lift me off but this failed because the MPs were holding his legs down with their hands. The detainee began to pray loudly but this did not stop me from finishing informing the detainee about the Al Qaeda member, Qaed Salim Sinan al Harethi aka Abu Ali, that was killed by the CIA.

PORTUGAL / Alvaro Cunhal

1913 - 2005

A Capital

MADEIRA / Os desabafos de um filho da piiiiii

A notícia dos impropérios proferidos pelo Exmo. Senhor presidente do Governo Regional da Madeira, Dr. Alberto João Jardim, referindo-se às reacções desencadeadas pela sua pensão de reforma, surgiu a altas horas, na noite de sexta-feira passada. Disse então Sua Ex.ª: «Há aqui uns bastardos na comunicação social do Continente - digo bastardos para não ter que lhes chamar filhos da puta... - que aproveitaram este ensejo para desabafar o ódio que têm sobre a minha pessoa». No dia seguinte, nos noticiários televisivos da hora do almoço, as estações voltaram ao assunto. E os telespectadores que fizeram «zaping» tiveram oportunidade de verificar que, enquanto as privadas, SIC e TVI, emitiram as declarações de Sua Ex.ª tal como Sua Ex.ª as disse, já a RTP optou por substituir o impropério pelo som «piiii...». Por momentos, GENTE pensou estar a ver a RTP Memória e a reposição de «O Tal Canal», de Herman José. [EXPRESSO]