Tag Archives: news activist

El Paso Times Censors Own Article into FBI Probe of DA Jaime Esparza

Posted by Martín Paredes on May 3, 2012 3 comments

Screen capture of mobile version of the article

Yesterday at about four in the afternoon the El Paso Times published an article titled; “El Paso lawyer in DA primary wants inquiry into allegations against Jaime Esparza”. Within half an hour the article by Times’ reporter Diana Washington Valdez had been pulled from the Internet. This action by the El Paso Times raises many questions regarding El Paso Corruption, journalistic integrity, manipulation of the electorate and possible criminal wrongdoing.

The published article, that was later removed, states that District Attorney candidate James D. Lucas “asked the FBI and two state agencies to investigate his allegations against District Attorney Jaime Esparza which he had posted on a website this week”. The article that was removed by the Times, quotes Lucas as stating that the reason he asked for the investigation “is that I wanted people to know about the expenditures in the district attorney’s office”. Lucas added, according to the retracted article that; “(t)he expenditures are all a form of taxpayer money”.

Google results for the article

The removed article adds that Lucas had sent letters asking for an investigation of Jaime Esparza to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Texas Attorney General Office and the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. The article quotes FBI Special Agent Martha Terrazas, a spokeswoman for the FBI office in El Paso as stating that “agents are looking at the website”, adding that they have nothing further to say”.

Times search results for the article

The article further adds that the State Attorney General’s Office has the letter from Lucas and the “matter is under review”. According to the now removed article, no one from the comptroller’s office was available to comment.

The article, before it was removed by the El Paso Times quotes Jaime Esparza as stating that he saw the website on Tuesday, May 1, 2012 and denies the allegations. Esparza is quoted by the article as stating that the allegations levied against him by Lucas are “not true” and that they are “political” in nature.

The now removed article seems to comply with the basics of journalism integrity as it presented both sides of the issue, the topic is relevant as it involves a political race about to be decided in the next few weeks, it quotes sources that have confirmed the accuracy of an initial probe of the allegations against a sitting district attorney by at least two investigative agencies, the FBI and the State Attorney General and most important it involves allegations of public corruption in a city involved in a far-reaching corruption investigation.

El Paso Times removes the article

The censoring of the article by the El Paso Times begs the question, why was it removed?

All elements of a public need to know are present in the article that is written by a well-respected journalist and it is current and relevant information important to the community. Who benefits from the censoring of the article and more importantly who caused the Times to censor its own article?

The El Paso Times is a private corporation that, in my opinion, has the right to choose what they report and how they do that. The problem is that the action of self-censoring raises questions about whether the El Paso Times is an unbiased reporter of information for the citizens of El Paso or is it an editorial vehicle for vested interests in the community. Not only does the censoring of the article raise the question of whether the El Paso Times has the integrity to be the newspaper of record for the city but also whether the censoring of the article is, in itself, a corporate donation to a political activity, a violation of Texas law?

On August 13, 2011, the El Paso Times reported that District Attorney Jaime Esparza disclosed that he had launched an investigation into allegations that Pastor Tom Brown may have violated a Texas State law during the attempted recall of Mayor Cook. The Texas Election Code referenced in the allegation states that corporations are prohibited from making a political contribution or political expenditure in connection with an election. The El Paso Times is a corporation.

The article, which has now been removed by the El Paso Times, involves two candidates involved in a political race about to be decided by voters of the community. It appears that someone within the El Paso Times, a corporation, decided to censor an article that would have an impact on the upcoming election results. The article itself meets all the requirements of fairness in that it reports information relevant to the community, it expresses facts about the status of an investigation and it gives both sides an opportunity to state their relevant positions, yet it was removed, for no apparent reason other than because it seemed to hurt one candidate directly.

As a corporation, has the El Paso Times not influenced the outcome of an election by first choosing to publish an article and then remove it? Would this action not be a violation of the Texas Election code relevant to corporations contributing to political causes in Texas?

Who is tasked with investigating a violation of the Texas law in question? Who makes the determination of whether an action warrants an investigation for this law?

Jaime Esparza makes the determination on whether an investigation is launched against a corporation for violations of the Texas election laws. Notwithstanding the recent Supreme Court ruling in regards to corporate political participation the Texas law has recently been employed to launch an investigation on at least one occasion. It stands to reason that Jaime Esparza was most likely to be hurt by the publication of the article that has now been removed.

Is there likely to be an investigation launched against the El Paso Times for a possible violation of the law? Probably not, as the likely investigator would be the very same person that may have benefited by the activity that allegedly would be a violation of the law in the first place.

Regardless of whether an investigation is ever launched what is more important to El Paso is whether the El Paso Times can be trusted to inform the community ethically and without outside undue influence.

How many articles has the El Paso Times chosen to censor? What reasons are used to make the determination of whether the community should be informed about current and relevant information? Who makes that determination? Who instigated the removal of the article? Does this mean that the El Paso Times allows itself to be influenced by outside forces as to what issues it covers or not?

Is this the type of news coverage the citizens of El Paso deserve? Can you trust the El Paso Times to report unbiased news free of outside influences important to the community, especially in light of the multiple corruption probes going on in the city today? Likely not as the El Paso Times self-censors articles whenever it likes.


The El Paso Forum is Back!

Posted by Martín Paredes on February 13, 2012 1 comment

Politics makes for strange bedfellows, todays amigos are tomorrow’s enemies. Keep your friends close and your enemies even closer. My enemy’s enemy is my friend. I could go on and on with clichés that all end up with the fact that politics is just about the dirtiest and grimiest endeavor anyone can get involved in. Tie that with the fact that sensational headlines sell newspapers and accepting that The El Paso Times is the slimiest newspaper in the world all leads to one indisputable fact; that El Paso’s corruption is enabled by an entrenched political machine allowed to operate by a news media that trips all over itself trying to make news rather than to report it.

With that in mind plus the frustration that is El Paso corruption I have brought back the El Paso Forum for political discussion, dissection and outright dissention. I fully expect all of the political operatives to attempt to make the El Paso Forum their own platform for their message, it is par for the course, but what I really want and what I crave is for the frustrated and disenfranchised masses to have a sounding board to quickly get their anger off their chests with quick drive-by messages to the world.

Will it solve the political crisis? No. Will it server a greater good, probably not. But it should at least give the oppressed a small outlet to work through the morass of political shenanigans in the community.

It is no secret that I believe the El Paso Times is corrupt and easily manipulated. My comments aren’t directed at the majority of the reporters because they are hampered by the corporate bureaucracy that sees El Paso as an insignificant little corner in world that generates no real revenues for the corporate owners. It also doesn’t help that print media revenues are under continuous assault by the new media that is the Internet. That is why it is no surprise that Bob Moore has once again been directed to run the El Paso operation as his shenanigans have no real impact on the corporate owners and it keeps them from having to fire him and deal with the legal ramifications of that.

It is incredulous to me that all major institutional organizations in the world, including political and security operators universally agree that the El Paso-Cd. Juárez corridor is a major transit point for the majority of illicit drugs that enter the American market, yet El Paso is a ‘safe’ city. Yet, the death merchants are waging a bloody war on the Mexican side of the border and the politicians on the American side of the border proclaim that it is one of the ‘safest’ cities in the United States. They would have us believe that once the drugs get past the border they magically disappear and no one knows how.

Of course, if that were my only argument then it would be just a crazy notion on my part. But we also have a former city representative, now running for Congress, Beto O’Rourke, who not only has publically advocated for drug legalization but has also written a book in support of it. Some of you would probably argue that it’s his opinion and he should be entitled to it. Sure, but like everything else follow the money.

O’Rourke doesn’t only advocate drug legalization but his mother pleaded guilty on behalf of her company to illegally hiding money from the government. Why would someone want to structure cash? The only people looking to structure large amounts of cash and thus hiding it from government oversight are those looking to avoid taxes or most likely, avoid having to explain to the government where the money came from. Hmmm, sounds to me like money laundering.

Let’s see, money laundering and a politician looking to take office at the federal level where drug legislation can be manipulated. Oh yea, let’s not forget that the local police department had to be put on probation because its drug laboratory failed basic standards and a police department that currently has officers being indicted for falsifying public records and the same police department that had a former high-ranking administrator accuse the department of colluding with drug dealers. Yes, that is the department that trumpets the loudest how safe the city is.

Oh, and I almost forgot, a former director of the local FBI incarcerated for hiding a friendship and receiving economic benefits from a businessman from Mexico without properly documenting it to the authorities. As if that wasn’t enough, a former County Judge, Dolores Briones, pleading guilty to corruption, a former El Paso Chamber of Commerce and non-profit darling, Bob Jones in jail for defrauding the federal government and thus the taxpayers. And the list goes on and on.

And through all this, the local political shenanigans involves an advocate of legalizing drugs, funded by big money with everything to gain and O’Rourke groupies; a sitting city representative, Susie Byrd, who co-wrote the book on drug legalization with O’Rourke, another sitting representative, Steve Ortega who has no business in Mexico documenting how long it takes to cross the border on the only day of the week that city representatives are required to meet and a married county judge who sees nothing wrong with getting drunk with Beto O’Rourke on a night out on the town and slapping him on the ass all tripping themselves trying to ingratiate themselves into O’Rourke’s friend circle.

And, we are expected to believe that drug dealers are so afraid of the local policing and government efforts of El Paso that they dare not bring their violence across the border? Please!

Or, as is more likely, the city of El Paso is so corrupt that the drug dealers don’t even have to bother to pay extortion fees on the US side, they just put the people friendly to them in office. With friendlies in government there is just no need to bring violence across the border as their drugs just mysteriously disappear into the rest of the United States. Why create a problem if there is no need to do so?

Through all this, and I’ve only mentioned a very small portion of the evidence of corruption rampant within the community, where has the El Paso Times been? When Bob Jones was the darling of the city, his corrupt money trickled down to the advertising sold in the paper and now that he’s in jail, what does the local paper need? Another benefactor to feed it. Would proper investigative journalism do the trick? Hmmm, no that might bite the hand that doles out the little money for advertising in a city where corruption rules.

Follow the money! Who’s vying for office and who’s funding campaigns? Who benefits the drug dealers? Who advocates for drug dealers? And, who does the local paper support? It can’t be plainer than that.

And what about the Diario de Juárez? The Diario is so inept that news is nothing more than skimpily dressed women gracing its pages. Its El Paso operation is a disgrace to its Juárez counterpart because the local leader is too afraid to aggravate anyone lest he’s ignored by the powers-that-be at the local country clubs. He’s too busy ingratiating himself with the PDNG that he’ll throw his own father under the bridge if it means he’ll get a smile at the club house.

For those just tired of the political diatribe but too busy to get involved to make the community better or too afraid to mess with a hornet’s nest of corruption, the El Paso Forum is for you. Enjoy and make the best of it, at worst it just becomes another gripe outlet or at best it shines a light on the cockroaches that hide in the darkness enabled by the El Paso Times. It’s your playground. Enjoy!

http://www.elpasoforum.com

 


Commentary: Freedom of speech and the Internet – Twitter & the UK

Posted by Martín Paredes on May 27, 2011 Comments Off

Freedom of speech, more specifically the ability that denies the government the right to keep certain things secret, is sacrosanct to a free democracy. The Internet has given the people new tools by which to limit the government’s ability to keep secrets meant for public consumption. And this power has many governments looking for ways to limit the Internet’s ability to allow people freedom to challenge their authority.

There is a place and a time that governments should be allowed to keep certain secrets for the collective good of the society that they represent. The Osama Bin Laden operation to bring him to American justice is an example of where government properly limits information to allow for the operation’s successful completion. Had the US government shared the, then upcoming operation, with the people it would have resulted in the operation’s failure to bring Osama to justice. This is an example of a properly applied instance of the limiting of information by the government. But for each power allowed to the government, the people should consistently challenge the status quo in order to rein in the power wielded by government.

Recently, in the United Kingdom, the power for government to determine what is for public consumption and what is not has been taken to the Internet resulting in a battle being waged online creating jurisdictional battle lines for anyone interested and supportive of government limitations.

Under United Kingdom law, an individual may petition the UK courts to issue a super injunction. A super injunction, under UK law, is a form of court injunction that prohibits anyone from reporting, or talking about certain facts or individuals in public or through the media. Even the existence of the super-injunction is not allowed to be discussed publically. Although designed to protect victims of crimes such as offenses against children, the super injunctions started to be used by celebrities or other entities to protect their privacy from the public’s prying eyes.

The use of super-injunctions to protect the privacy of an entity first became known in October 2009, when The Guardian newspaper revealed that it was prohibited from discussing the Trafigura affair for a limited time because of a gag order. Trafigura was involved in an embarrassing debacle involving waste dumping in Côte d’Ivoire (Ivory Coast).

The latest controversy started on May 8, when a Twitter user posted the name of soccer player Ryan Giggs as someone who had obtained a super-injunction to protect him from publicity in an affair he is alleged to have had with Imogen Thomas. Giggs sought prosecution of Twitter but eventually dropped the case when his actions actually increased the publicity surrounding him as other Twitter users rose to the defense of the original poster by posting his name over and over again.

On May 23, using “parliamentary privilege”, basically a protection against prosecution for politicians, John Hemming named the soccer player once again. Using this tactic, Fred Goodwin, a banker was also named as holding a super-injunction. Although the issue of privacy and super injunctions is raging within England and should eventually be settled there, another issue that should be discussed is how this impacts the Internet and judicial interests.

Super-injunctions are a UK injunction enforced by British courts over those it has authority over. Twitter is a United States corporate entity. Putting aside the question, for a moment, of the appropriateness of a super-injunction to protect celebrities from public scrutiny the issue that must be addressed is whether Twitter is subject to the super-injunction, more importantly, are they required to divulge the name of the user who broke the name of Giggs? Laws are created for a specific jurisdiction to maintain some semblance of social stability. Some laws, such as murder are normally universal. But as jurisdictional instruments, laws have two sides to them, the implementer, in this case the UK government and the subjects to whom it applies to, in this case British subjects. Although this is a rather simplistic explanation it applies to most instances.

As Twitter is neither a British subject nor, to my knowledge, it has accepted British jurisdiction by establishing a presence in England, the question then becomes are they compelled to release the user’s identity to a British court?

Although, at first look, the answer seems no, the issue is a little more complicated than that. Should a British court decide to make an example of Twitter it could conceivably issue orders detrimental to Twitter. For one, it could issue injunctions, after appropriate British oversight, blocking Twitter access in Britain. Notwithstanding the technical implications of this, it could affect Twitter’s access in Britain and any British territory.

But even more importantly, any Twitter executive, or employee transiting or vacationing in the UK could come under British jurisdiction and be subject to detention and punitive sanctions against them. So far, Britain seems to have shown restraint when dealing with Twitter, and in fact, British subjects themselves seems to be rebelling against this limitation to free speech.

On the other hand, this latest example of social activism via the Internet opens up interesting legal jurisdictional dilemma that empowered people may have to eventually face head on. The vehicles, Twitter and Facebook and the servers on where blogs reside, are ultimately owned and controlled by public corporate entities not interested in limiting market share by antagonizing governments. That, is where the Achilles’ heal to this new found activism outlet resides.

As with anything, it can be abused, but the power of the state should always be challenged in order to keep the state from overreaching its authority over the populace. Activism should be encouraged but the sad reality is that money ultimately controls even the Internet. Hopefully, on this, I turn out to be wrong but experience has shown me that governments love the façade of free speech, up until people actually avail themselves of it.


Social Media challenges traditional news organizations

Posted by Martín Paredes on May 8, 2011 Comments Off

How you get your news is exponentially changing on a daily basis. This change threatens traditional news outlets while making access to the news that interests you better. As Napster changed the music industry, FaceBook and Twitter are forcing the news media to change or be left behind. President Obama’s announcement that the United States got its man with the announcement of Osama’s death spread like wildfire through Twitter and FaceBook before the traditional media had, had time to react.

The Huffington Post writes that those celebrating the demise of Osama rushed to an impromptu celebration in front of the White House, not from media reports but from the rather simple message that “Osama is DEAD” across the social media spectrum.

According to a Forbes blog by Mark Pasetsky, the tweet that is credited for alerting the traditional media outlets was Keith Urbahn’s tweet, “So, I’m told by reputable person they have killed Osama Bin Laden”. Urbahn is the former chief of staff for Donald Rumsfeld. Earlier, a non-reporter from Abbottabad, Pakistan, where Osama was killed, accidently started the news flowing by reporting that a helicopter was hovering near his house. Sohaib Athar’s tweet about the helicopter started an avalanche of news reaching across all borders, most of it driven by citizen reporters.

And this is only the beginning. Even now, after the traditional media is reporting the events to the public, the social networkers are past that and concentrating on such issues as the reaction from different sectors of the Muslim community and other countries, and even within the US. Not only are we privy to macro-level politics but with each new post we get to see the worldwide reaction from person to person and neighborhood to neighborhood. The macro view is now the micro view of world events, at the speed of the keyboard.

For those that argue that professional media does not report until the news is accurate and thus confirmed, ignore a simple fact about the social media generation. The same concentration of individuals that spread the news is also the same group that holds everyone accountable. So, although a rumor may manifest itself initially, the network mob will step in to correct the record just as fast.

This is the vanguard of the news media revolution and it’s your turn to be part of it. Any news, no matter how insignificant it may be, could just be the post that screams the next headline across cyber-space. Athar’s post about a helicopter over his neighborhood signaled the news that people had been waiting to hear for over ten years. Sign up and participate in the news of the future by contributing your observations to the world. Sign up today by clicking here and start reporting as a citizen news reporter.


Please welcome Sonny Lopez

Posted by El Paso News on April 28, 2011 Comments Off

Please help us welcome Sonny Lopez to the El Paso News Organization!


Politics of Protest: Taming the Internet Beast

Posted by El Paso Tribune Archive on January 7, 2003 Comments Off

Social activists have embraced the Internet as their tool of choice. Long gone are the clandestine printing presses and the hushed discussions in quiet bars. Zeros and ones have replaced the shadow work of those who dare to challenge the establishment. Grassroots action is now only a keystroke away. For social activism, the Internet cannot be beat. Email lists reach millions of individuals instantly at no or little cost. Global information dissemination now reaches across the globe and into the homes of millions who might care today or in the future. The cost of organizing and protesting has been reduced to virtually nothing giving rise to all types of cyber-guerillas intent on empowering themselves and fighting perceived injustices.
The targets of the so-called cyber-vigilantes will attest to the empowerment the Internet has given the nonconformists. The activists will tell tales of battles won and the wonder of it all, but will always credit the Internet as the catalyst to the new revolution. Instant communication and cybermobilization can get the message to the world much faster than any government can respond. All is good, or so the activists think.

Now that the US Congress has implemented the Department of Homeland Security, cyber-activism is going to wake up with a migraine that can make bygone activism a dream of the past. The provision; “Total Information Awareness” of the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DAPRA) is an all-encompassing surveillance system that is intended to collect, catalogue and archive every piece of electronic information available on all American citizens. Flashes of George Orwell’s “Big Brother” are in order here. Bank records, travel records, medical records, driving records and even school records are fair game to the system. Any record maintained in any electronic form could conceivably become part of your permanent “electronic” fingerprint.

Virtually any electronic communication that traverses the information highway is vulnerable to government scrutiny. Although most citizens tend to label those that worry about “Big Brother” as paranoid, the fact is that our world has dramatically changed since 9/11. Current uncertainty in our lives and frazzled nerves makes us all suspect those funny looking neighbors down the street. The USA Patriot Act has galvanized all of us into defacto government spies always on the lookout for strange events.

Although the road to “Big Brother” is well on its way, the threat to cyber-activism is still only a possible scenario. The freedom in activism that the Internet has unleashed is the mechanism that can begin to reign in the erosion of personal freedoms. Once empowered, a citizen is harder to disarm. The right to assemble and challenge the government is a right that all people are born with, the only difference today, is that it is much easier and faster to organize then it was before. The cry for equality is now only a mouse click away. With ever-vigilant cyber-activists manning their keyboards, the attacks on freedom are sure to be checkmated well before too much freedom is lost. But our vigilance must not waver, the price of freedom is to important to ignore the erosion of the right to question government action or inaction.


A Resounding NO to Briones

Posted by El Paso Tribune Archive on October 23, 2002 Comments Off

Greg Freyermuth, on his radio talk show, KTSM 690AM brought up a novel approach to taking back control of local government. Today is the 3rd day of early voting for the November 5 elections and it is still not to late to take control of future politics in El Paso. Freyermuth’s solution to an immediate problem is slick and effective.

By purposely skipping past Briones’ name while filling out your ballot will not force Briones out of office but will send a strong message to both her and the stagnant electoral in the community. Even those who vote straight party tickets can contribute to the subtle rebellion by manually checking your party’s candidates while skipping over Briones’ name.

No matter which local publication you read, whether print or on online, you always encounter someone bemoaning the state of affairs in the city. These individuals always preface their resentment with a complaint about why this city doesn’t progress or why this city is backwards. Supporters of one group will attack and vilify detractors of the vision. El Paso lacks a sense of community involvement and has no understanding of social activism. This has created the city we live in today and has set the foundation for the government that decides the future of the community. With a local electorate participation of less then 30% and a community ignorant of community responsibility it is no wonder that El Paso has stagnated in the 19th century.

The 17th largest city complains about the lack of opportunity and points to the apparent brain drain as the source of community strife. The self-proclaimed defenders of the status-quo, writing for El Paso’s only print daily, trip over themselves by pointing to imagined foes wrapped in the standard “good ole boys club” mantra of bygone days. The reality in our community is much simpler than the rhetoric spewed forth by our monopolistic newspaper – the lack of community participation.

Our government manifested in the form of County Commissioner Dolores Briones is a direct result of the community’s failure to take responsibility for our own actions. Dolores Briones did not lie to the community or steal an election in order to propel herself to power, she did what any El Paso politician will do – she counted on El Paso’s lack of patriotism in order to take control. By relying on the daily’s sense of superiority and the community’s lack of understanding, Briones casually walked into a new term of office. Having secured her next 4 years in office, Briones wasted no time in slapping the community across the face by demanding a higher salary. Fortunately there are still some community members willing to exercise their right to government and soundly refused this outrageous request.

Unsatisfied and with the realization that the community is too blind to act, Briones didn’t bother to wait until the elections were over in order to exercise her agenda over the population by solving one of her biggest headaches in her upcoming political ventures, the issue of an empty Ascarate Park. By forcing the issue of the Arena’s location, Briones hopes to be able to come back and tell us how wonderful she was in bringing this great Arena into our homes. El Paso’s short political memory will assure that the demise of Western Playland , the loss of county revenue and the increase in taxpayer liability will be a distant thought. Fortunately it is not too late to teach Ms. Briones a lesson or two on community activism.

Change can only happen, if we as a community were to take responsibility for our own future. Responsibility comes in many different forms but all have the same result, control of our own futures. Obviously the place to start is at the polls. By voting, the community forces the politicians to work for the community instead of for themselves. Voting gives the community the ultimate weapon against tyranny and self-serving interests. Voting works both ways; it serves to elect a representative as well as to admonish an errant public servant.
The time for community activism is here. Subtle or public, community activism is an effective tool for the public scolding of wayward servants. No agenda driven publication or ineffective mass media can stifle the voice of public activism. Voters who are tired of the abuse of power, our embarrassing local government and have decided that it is time for a change should take control of their government and state unequivocally that enough is enough by purposely “undervoting” for Briones. When the tally comes in with a record voter turnout and a majority repudiation of Briones, a chastised Briones will have only one recourse and that is that she serves at the discretion of the electorate.