Archives du Réseau for May5-98

Mercier Charles wrote:
>
> J'ai entendu parler d'une conference qui sera donnee bientot a l'UQAM par
> le dissident chinois recemment libere. Est-ce que quelqu'un pourrait me
> donner la date, le local et l'heure de cette conference? Merci d'avance.
>
> Charles Mercier

Return to Contents

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

Date: 5 May 1998 12:42:25 -0400
From: "jgouriou"
Subject: Urgence Etudiants turques urgence

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

Etudiants d'Ankara, torturés et emprisonnés.
Ils risquent jusqu’à 18 ans de prison pour avoir protesté pacifiquement
contre les nouvelles conditions qui leur étaient imposées. ( dont
l’augmentation de 350 % des droits d’inscription ).

La date de leur procès est fixée au 18 mai.

Réagissez ! Aidez-les !
Signez la pétition. Faites-là circuler.

Retournez-la au plus tôt à : Amnesty International
(coordination Turquie)
4 rue de la Pierre Levée
75553 Paris Cédex 11

Ecrivez directement aux autorités dont voici les adresses !

Premier ministre *
Prime Minister Mr Mesut Yilmaz * Office of the Prime Minister * Basbakanlik
06573 Ankara, Turquie * Télécopie : 90 312 417 0476
Ministre de la Justice
Minister of Justice * Mr Oltan Sungurlu * Adalet Bakanligi
06659 Ankara, Turquie * Télécopie : 90 312 425 4066 et 90 312 417 3954
Ministre de l'Intérieur
Minister of the Interior * Mr Murat Baseskioglu * Icisleri Bakanligi
Ankara, Turquie * Télécopie : 90 312 417 2390
ministre d’état chargé des droits de l'Homme
State Minister with responsibility for Human Rights
Mr Hikmet Sami TŸrk * Office of the Prime Minister * Basbakanlik
06573 Ankara, Turquie * Télécopie : 90 312 417 0476
Président de la Commission parlementaire des droits de l'Homme
President of Parliamentary Human Rights Commission
Doctor Sema Piskinsut * Insan Haklari Inceleme Komisyonu Baskani
TBMM * Ankara, Turquie * Télécopie : 90 312 420 539 ( ou 5394 )
Président du Parlement turc
Président of the Turkish Parliament
Mr Hikmet Cetin * TBMM Baskani * TBMM * Ankara, Turquie
Télécopie : 90 312 420 5165 et 90 312 420 6941

Vous pouvez aussi adresser des messages ou des cartes postales de
soutien et d’amitié aux 5 étudiants qui sont encore en prison. Restez très
“vagueî, amitié et encouragements suffisent, ne parlez ni de tortures, ni
de conditions de détention, etc...
à l’adresse suivante : nom de l’étudiant
Cankiri Kapali Cezaevi
Cankiri
Turquie

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

MAHMUT YILMAZ, B†LENT KARAKAS, ïZG†R T†FFEK‚I, AHMET ASKIN
DOGAN, METIN MURAT KALYONCUGIL (emprisonnés),
NURDAN BAYSAHAN, DENIZ KARTAL, ELIF KAHYAOGLU
(remis en liberté en attendant leur nouveau procès)

Monsieur le Ministre,

Le 18 mars dernier, la neuvième Chambre de la Cour d'appel d'Ankara a
décidé la révision du procès des étudiants accusés d'appartenir à une
organisation illégale en Turquie, organisation dont l’existence n’est mme
pas établie . Ces étudiants qui avaient milité de manière pacifique en
faveur d'une réforme du système éducatif ont été condamnés à la suite d'un
procès inéquitable. Ils affirment avoir fait des aveux sous la torture.
Aussi je vous prie de bien vouloir faire libérer immédiatement et sans
condition les cinq étudiants toujours emprisonnés et je vous demande
d'ouvrir une enqute impartiale et approfondie sur les tortures qu'ils ont
subies, et que des poursuites soient engagées contre les responsables. je
vous prie de croire, Monsieur le Ministre, à l'expression de ma très haute
considération.

NOM ADRESSE
SIGNATURE

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________________________________

Return to Contents

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

Date: 5 May 1998 14:13:27 -0400
From: "jgouriou"
Subject: Re: Karapatan

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL COORDINATION DES ACTIONS URGENTES
R u e Renée Aspe 3 1 0 0 0 Toulouse
TELEPHONE 33/(O)5 61 23 53 73 Télécopie 33/(0)5 61 23 53 90
TRADUCTION : AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL EDITIONS FRANCOPHONES (EFAI)
PUBLIC SF 98 U 0303 (ƒFAI - 980292) AMR 41/22/98
CETTE ACTION VOUS EST ENVOYEE DANS LE CADRE DU RESEAU FEMMES.

Action complémentaire sur l'AU 115/98 (AMR41/21/98) du 15avril 1998

"Avertissement: Amnesty International défend des individus sans prendre
position ni sur leurs idées ni sur les organisations auxquelles ils
pourraient adhérerî

PRISONNIERS D'OPINION PROBABLES / CRAINTES POUR LA SƒCURITƒ
MEXIQUE 190 femmes indigènes de la communauté de Tanîperla
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -----------
Amnesty International est préoccupée par la sécurité de 190 femmes
indigènes de la communauté de Taniperla, municipalité d'Ocosingo (état du
Chîapas). Ces femmes auraient été menacées de viol par des membres du
Movimiento lndigena Revolucionario Antizapatista (MIRA, Mouvement indigène
révolutionnaire antizapatiste), groupe paramilitaire qui entretiendrait des
relations étroites avec les autorités de la région.
Ces femmes sont menacées depuis l'arrestation par les forces de sécurité
mexicaines, les 11 et 13 avril 1998, de 13 habitants de la communauté de
Taniperla (cl. l'AU 115/98, AMR 41/21/98 du 15 avril 1998). Ë la suite de
ces interpellations, la majorité des hommes de Taniperla se sont réfugiés
dans les montagnes environnantes pour éviter toute confrontation avec le
MIRA ou les forces de sécurité. Selon des informations reçues par
l'Organisation, les menaces de viol seraient destinées à contraindre ces
hommes à se rendre.

ACTION RECOMMANDƒE : télégramme / aérogramme/ lettre par avion / fax:
- - cherchez à obtenir l'assurance que la sécurité des 190 femmes tzeltal
sera garantie;
- - insistez pour qu'une enqute soit ouverte sans délai sur les menaces de
viol imputables au Movimiento lndigena Revolucionario Antizapatista (MIRA,
Mouvement indigène révolutionnaire antizapatîste ), présenté comme un
groupe paramilitaire opérant dans la région, et pour que les responsables
de tels agissements soient traduits en justice ;
- - continuez de demander que les 13 personnes arrtées les 11 et 13 avril
1998 à Taniperla, dans la municipalité d'Ocosingo (ƒtat du Chiapas), soient
dûment inculpées ou libérées immédiatement et sans condition ;
- - dites-vous préoccupé par la persistance des agissements dont seraient
responsables des groupes paramilitaires dans I'ètat du Chiapas.

Gouverneur de l'ƒtat du Chiapas
Lic. Roberto Albores Guillén / Gobernador del Estado de Chiapas
Palacio de Gobierno, Piso 1 / Col. Centro, 29000 Tuxtla Gutiérrez
Estado de Chiapas / Mexique
Télégrammes -. Gobernador del Estado, Chiapas, Mexique
Fax : (52) 961 2.0918
Formule d'appel : Monsieur le Gouverneur,

Procureur général de l'ƒtat du Chiapas /
Lic. Jorge Hernàndez Aguilar / Procurador General de Chiapas
Procuraduria General de Chiapas / Tuxtla Gutiérrez / Estado de Chiapas
Mexique
Télégrammes : Procurador del Estado, Chiapas, Mexique
Fax : 52 961 65376 (si quelqu'un répond, dites “me puede dar tono de fax,
por favor È)
Formule d'appel : Monsieur le Procureur,

COPIES

Organisations de défense des droits humains :
Comite de Derechos Humanos "Fray Lorenzo de la Nada"
Parroquia San Jacinto, Ocosingo / Chiapas, 29950
Mexique

"Fray Bartolomé de las Casas"
Francisco Leàn 5, Barrio de Santa Lucia
San Cristobal de las Casas, Chiapas, 29250
Mexique

Ambassade du Mexique : 9, rue de Longchamps 75116 PARIS

tarifs postaux pour le Mexique : Aérogramme; 5 fr. lettre "prioritaire"
(20 gr): 4 fr 90

PRIERE D'INTERVENIR IMMEDIATEMENT. SI VOUS RECEVIEZ CET APPEL AVEC RETARD,
NE PLUS INTERVENIR APRES LE 2 JUIN 1998, MERCI.

- ----------
> De : Jean-Guy Aubé
> A : reseau(at)lists.nothingness.org; act-mtl@concordia.ca
> Objet : Karapatan
> DateÊ: lundi 4 mai 1998 15:17
>
> OMCT: mex 210498/violence against women/Mexico
> From:karapatan@bigfoot.com,Internet
>
> >>>VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
> >>>Case MEX 210498.VAW
> >>>
> >>>The International Secretariat of OMCT requests your URGENT
> >>>intervention in the following situation in Mexico.
> >>>
> >>>Brief description of the situation :
> >>>The LIMEDDH, (Mexican League for the Defence of Human Rights), a
> >>>member of the network, has expressed its grave concern over the
> >>>harassment suffered by 190 women from the community of Taniperlas,
> >>>State of Chiapas.
> >>>
> >>>According to information received, the 190 women, members of the
> >>>"Asociacion Rural de Intereses Colectivos Independiente (ARIC
> >>>Independiente) have denounced that members of a paramilitary group
> >>>named "Movimiento Indigena Revolucionario Antizapatista" (MIRA) - with

> >>>the support of the Public Security police, the judicial police and the

> >>>national army - have threatened them with rape in order to force their

> >>>children and husbands to come out of their hiding places.
> >>>
> >>>The information further alleges that the men decided to leave their
> >>>community fearing further violence. On 11 April 1998, a joint action
> >>>had already been launched by the police and the army.
>
> >>>Action requested:
> >>>Please write to the Mexican authorities urging them to:
> >>>i.guarantee the physical and psychological integrity of the women
> >>>from the community of Taniperlas, State of Chiapas, .
> >>>ii.conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into the rape
> >>>threats in order to identify those responsible, bring them to trial
> >>>and apply the civil, penal and/or administrative sanctions provided by

> >>>legislation;
> >>>
> >>>iii.put an end to the activities of paramilitary groups, cease all
> >>>protection or assistance presumably granted by some authorities and
> >>>bring to trial and inflict penal sanctions on those responsible for
> >>>violations of human rights;
> >>>
> >>>iv.ensure in all circumstances the full respect of human rights and
> >>>fundamental freedoms in accordance with national and international
> >>>standards.
> >>>
> >>>Addresses:
> >>>S.E. Dr. Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de León, Presidente de la Repœblica,
> >>>Palacio Nacional, C.P. 06065, Mexico, D.F., Mexico. Fax (+ 52 5) 515
> >>>57 29 ó/or 516 57 62 Lic. Francisco Labastida Ochoa, Secretario de
> >>>Gobernación, Secretar’a de Gobernación, Bucareli 99, 2¼ piso, Col.
> >>>Juarez, Mexico, D.F., Mexico Fax (+ 52 5) 546 53 50 ó/or 547 03 21
> >>>o/or 546 Dr. Jorge Madrazo Cuellar, Procurador General de la
> >>>Repœblica, Procuradur’a General, Violeta y Reforma s/n 2¼ piso, Col.
> >>>Guerrero, México, D.F. CP 06300 México. Fax: (+ 52 5) 626 44 19 Lic.
> >>>Mireille Roccatti Velásquez, Presidenta de la Comisión Nacional de
> >>>Derechos Humanos, Periférico sur 3469, Col. San Jerónimo L’dice,
> >>>Deleg. Magdalena Contreras, C.P. 10200, Mexico, D.F., Mexico. Fax.: (+

> >>>52 5) 631 26 33 E-mai: cndh@laneta.apc.org Lic. Carlos Peredo Merlo,
> >>>Procurador General de Justicia del Estado de Morelos, Fax (52 91-73)
> >>>17 02 50 Lic. Cuauhtemoc Lopez Sanchez, Presidente de CEDH del estaddo

> >>>de Chiapas, Fax (961) 25505 Sr. Roberto Albores Guillen, Gobernador
> >>>del estado de Chiapas, Fax: (961) 20917
> >>>
> >>>Geneva, 21st April 1998
> >>>
> >>>Kindly inform us of any action undertaken quoting the code number of
> >>>this appeal in your reply.
> >>>The World Organisation Against Torture
> >>>Case Postale 119
> >>>37-39 Rue de Vermont
> >>>CH1211 Geneva 20 CIC
> >>>Switzerland
> >>>Fax 4122 733 1051
> >>>Ph 4122 733 3140
> >>>OMCT is: l'Organisation Mondiale contre la Torture
> >>> The World Organisation Against Torture
> >>>
> >>>OMCT@IPROLINK.CH
> >>>http://www.omct.org/
> >>>OMCT - The World Organisation Against Torture is the Worlds largest
> >>>network of human rights organisations fighting against all forms of
> >>>torture, cruel inhuman or degrading treatment, forced disappearances
> >>>summary execution or other more subtle forms of violent repression.
> >>>
> >>>OMCT has consultative status with the UN, The ILO and the
> >>>African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> KARAPATAN (Alliance for the Advancement of People's Rights)
> 23-D Mabuhay St., Central District, Diliman, Quezon City, PHILIPPINES
> Tel. Nos. (++632) 434-1865 / 435-7828
> Permanent Web Address: http://www.bigfoot.com/~karapatan
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>

Return to Contents

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

Date: 5 May 1998 14:32:18 -0400
From: "jgouriou"
Subject: Re: APPEL URGENT DE SOLIDARITE AVEC LE CHIAPAS

Action complémentaire sur l'AU 115/98 (AMR41/21/98) du 15avril 1998

"Avertissement: Amnesty International défend des individus sans prendre
position ni sur leurs idées ni sur les organisations auxquelles ils
pourraient adhérerî

COPIES

Organisations de défense des droits humains :
Comite de Derechos Humanos "Fray Lorenzo de la Nada"
Parroquia San Jacinto, Ocosingo / Chiapas, 29950
Mexique

"Fray Bartolomé de las Casas"
Francisco Leàn 5, Barrio de Santa Lucia
San Cristobal de las Casas, Chiapas, 29250
Mexique

Ambassade du Mexique : 9, rue de Longchamps 75116 PARIS

tarifs postaux pour le Mexique : Aérogramme; 5 fr. lettre "prioritaire"
(20 gr): 4 fr 90

PRIERE D'INTERVENIR IMMEDIATEMENT. SI VOUS RECEVIEZ CET APPEL AVEC RETARD,
NE PLUS INTERVENIR APRES LE 2 JUIN 1998, MERCI.

- ----------
> De : cef@technologist.com
> A : Reseau contre le Neoliberalisme ;
Collectif Ya Basta -Paris- ; CSPCL ;
Chiapas ou le pays de Mayas
> Objet : APPEL URGENT DE SOLIDARITE AVEC LE CHIAPAS
> DateÊ: lundi 4 mai 1998 22:03
>
> Nous demandons une action internationale en réponse à l'attaque récente
du gouvernement mexicain contre la municipalité autonome de Ricardo Flores
Magón, dans Taniperla, Chiapas, les arrestations illégales de 17 citoyens
mexicains, la déportation de 15 étrangers et d'autres opérations militaires
massives. Le gouvernement mexicain veut nous faire croire que les forces de
l’ordre ne font rien que de faire respecter la loi. Cependant, Luciano, un
porte-parole de la communauté de Polhó, a déclaré que le vrai but du
gouvernement est de retirer tout étranger "pour faire en sorte d’éliminer
> les témoins gnants, afin que les forces de l’ordre puissent faire un
autre massacre du mme genre
> que celui d’ Acteal, ici mme, dans notre région".
>
> Le gouvernement a également prouvé qu'il est disposé à faire taire les
observateurs mexicains par l'emprisonnement et en les accusant des crimes
sérieux.
>
> Il est urgent que la communauté internationale réagisse pour supporter
les victimes de la répression
> au Chiapas. Nous proposons une réponse en trois parties aux arrestations
illégales des citoyens mexicains et à la campagne xénophobe d'expulsion des
étrangers.
>
> D'abord, nous vous demandons d'appeler, d’envoyez des fax, E-mail ou
d’aller en personne aux ambassades ou consulats mexicains pour condamner
les arrestations et pour exiger la libération immédiate des mexicains
injustement emprisonnés: Tomas Sánchez Gómez, Luis Menéndez Medina, Nicolás
López Vásquez, Justino Sánchez López, Sebastián Chulin González, Antonio
López
> Vásquez, Mateo González López, Nicolás Mazariego Pérez, Sergio Valdés
Ruvalcalba, Tomas Sánchez López, Miguel Hernández Pérez, Antonio Rodr’guez
Jiménez, Fidelino Cruz Mendoza, Manuel Hernández Pérez, Andrés Gutiérrez
Hernández, César Rodrigo Nuñez, y José Alfredo
> López Méndez. (Voir La Lettre Jointe)
>
> Comme deuxième action, nous lançons " la campagne de retour à la maison
avec des vols gratuits"
> pour résister aux tentatives du gouvernement mexicain d'enlever tous les
témoins de l'escalade de
> répression. Notre roposition, c'est que pour chaque étranger expulsé, les
organisations des droits
> humains et les groupes de solidarité dans chaque pays envoient 10
nouveaux volontaires internationaux au Chiapas comme observateurs-trices
dans les municipalités autonome zapatistes .
> Ces volontaires devraient tre disposés à tre expulsés et ne pas partir
jusqu'à ce qu'ils aient leur
> "vol gratuit de retour à la maison".
>
> Cette campagne a un objectif double:
>
> 1) fournir une présence constante d’observateurs internationaux dans
les communautés autonomes menacées.
>
> 2) prouver au gouvernement que leur tactique ne nous effraye pas et
n'empchera pas le rôle nécessaire des observateurs internationaux dans ce
conflit. En fait, nous tirerons profit de leur générosité en payant le
billet d’avion du vol de retour!
>
> En conclusion, le gouvernement mexicain a publiquement déclaré que les
observateurs internationaux
> peuvent facilement obtenir un visa et qu'ils sont bienvenus pour visiter
Chiapas. Mettons-le à l' essai!
> Menons une campagne bien organisée pour inonder les ambassades et les
bureaux consulaires avec
> des demandes de visas d'observateur (FM-3) et organiser des réponses bien
documentée.
> Contrairement à leur rhétorique, beaucoup d'applications FM-3 ont été
rejetées ou indéfiniment
> retardés.
>
> Le but du gouvernement mexicain est de cacher sa guerre sale contre les
peuples du Chiapas et du Mexique. Nous devons denoncer et condamner cette
répression au niveau international.
>
> Nous avons une lettre modele vous faciliter la tache. Faites toutes les
modifications que vous pensez
> nécessaires. Car la situation au Chiapas évolue rapidement, vous pourriez
vouloir ajouter ou changer
> l'information qu'elle contient...
>
> -------------
>
> Lettre modèle:
>
> Monsieur, Madame,
>
> Je vous écris pour exprimer mes inquiétudes et mon indignation face à la
campagne grandissante de
> violence dirigée par le gouvernement contre les municipalités indigènes
autonomes dans le Chiapas.
> Le nombre de personnes détenues par le gouvernement mexicain a atteint 32
dans le passé.Il y a
> quatre jours, 17 citoyens mexicains et 15 observateurs internationaux ont
été arretés. Ce nombre ne
> tient mme pas compte des 59 prisonniers politiques organisés dans la
"Voz de Cerro Hueco". Nous
> vous demandons maintenant d’ arrter cette vague de répression et de
libérer tous les prisonniers
> politiques de l’ƒtat du Chiapas.
>
> Le 11 avril, 1998, après l'inauguration de la municipalité autonome
Ricardo Flores Magon, des
> membres de l'armée mexicaine et de la police, du ministère de
l'immigration, et de la police
> juridiciaire de l'état et du gouvernement fédéral ont attaqué la
communauté de Taniperla, Chiapas.
> Neuf citoyens mexicains ont été arbitrairement détenus et accusés des
dommages à la propriété
> privée, d'usurpation d'autorité, d'association illégale, et de vol. Le
commandant de la police a frappé
> une personne. Les détenus furent détenus sans avoir la possibilité de
communiquer avec leurs
> proches ou un avocat pendant un certain nombre d'heures, avant d'tre
transférés à San Cristobal de
> las Casas. Ils sont actuellement détenus dans Cerro Hueco, la prison
d'état à Tuxtla Gutierrez.
>
> Le 12 avril, la police et l'armée mexicaine ont lancé des projectiles et
ont jeté des grenades de gaz
> lacrymogène aux paysans lors d’une manifestation. Cette attaque a fait
deux blessés. Trois membres
> de la Communauté et quatre défenseurs des droits humains ont été
également détenus.
>
> Les organismes de droits humains Fray Pedro de la Nada et Fray Bartolome
de Las Casas
> dénoncent l'appréhension illégale des détenus. Je joins leur appel en
exigeant:
>
> 1. La garantie de l'intégrité et de la sécurité physiques des
personnes détenues.
>
> 2. La libération immédiate des prisonniers.
>
> 3. Une enqute sur la détention arbitraire des personnes mentionnées
ci-dessus et la
> sanction des responsables.
>
> 4. Une fin à l'offensive politique, militaire et policiere contre
les 32 municipalités
> existantes et toutes les futures municipalités autonomes dans l'état
de Chiapas.
>
> Sincèrement,
>
> -----------------
>
> En plus d'appeler et d'envoyer des fax à votre consulat mexicain local,
vous pouvez également envoyer des fax aux numéros suivants au Mexique:
>
> Presidente de la Republica
> Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de León
> fax (52 5) 515 17 94 ou (5 25) 277 23 76
>
> Secretaria de Gobernación
> Lic. Farncisco Labastida Ochoa
> fax (52 5) 546 53 50
>
> Procuraduria General de la Republica
> Dr. Jorge Madrazo Cuellar
> fax: (52 5) 626 4419 ou (52 5) 626 4147
>
> Procuraduria General de Justicia del Estado de Chiapas
> Lic. Carlos Rodolfo Soto Monzon
> fax (52 961) 65373 o (52 961) 65376
>
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Chiapas en français
> http://www.welcome.to/cef
> ou
> http://www.cef.home.ml.org
> -----------------------------------------------------
> Get free personalized email at http://email.lycos.com
>

Return to Contents

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

Date: 5 May 1998 14:39:50 -0400
From: "jgouriou"
Subject: Mexique urgence Femmes

Action complémentaire sur l'AU 115/98 (AMR41/21/98) du 15avril 1998

"Avertissement: Amnesty International défend des individus sans prendre
position ni sur leurs idées ni sur les organisations auxquelles ils
pourraient adhérerî

COPIES

Organisations de défense des droits humains :
Comite de Derechos Humanos "Fray Lorenzo de la Nada"
Parroquia San Jacinto, Ocosingo / Chiapas, 29950
Mexique

"Fray Bartolomé de las Casas"
Francisco Leàn 5, Barrio de Santa Lucia
San Cristobal de las Casas, Chiapas, 29250
Mexique

Ambassade du Mexique : 9, rue de Longchamps 75116 PARIS

tarifs postaux pour le Mexique : Aérogramme; 5 fr. lettre "prioritaire"
(20 gr): 4 fr 90

PRIERE D'INTERVENIR IMMEDIATEMENT. SI VOUS RECEVIEZ CET APPEL AVEC RETARD,
NE PLUS INTERVENIR APRES LE 2 JUIN 1998, MERCI.

Return to Contents

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

Date: 5 May 1998 21:06:43 -0400
From: JGA@eureka.qc.ca (Jean-Guy Aubé)
Subject: News on Mai negotiations

MAI Progress Report
"some individual corporations are less enthusiastic about the MAI
because the agreement has attracted such negative publicity that
could spill over and damage other parts of the corporate agenda"

Forwarded message........

From: Mark Vallianatos, Friends of the Earth US
Update on MAI Negotiations

I. OECD Ministerial statement on the MAI
II. update on future of negotiations

I. MINISTERIAL STATEMENT ON THE
MULTILATERAL AGREEMENT ON INVESTMENT (MAI)
1. Ministers regard investment, like trade, as an engine of economic growth,
employment, sustainable development and rising living standards in both
developed and developing countries. They re-affirm the importance they attach
to achieving a comprehensive multilateral framework for investment with high
standards of liberalisation and investment protection with effective dispute
settlement procedures, and open to non-member countries. They also recognise
the importance of the public debate on the implications of globalisation.

2. Ministers welcome the Report by the Chairman of the Negotiating Group on the
progress made since the Ministerial meeting of May 1997 in developing a
Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI).

3. Taking into account the positive results produced by the Negotiating, Group,
as well as the remaining difficulties and the concerns that have been
expressed, Ministers decide on a period of assessment and further consultation
between the negotiating parties and with interested parts of their societies,
and invite the Secretary-General to assist this process. Ministers note that
the next meeting of the Negotiating Group will be held in October 1998.
Ministers direct the negotiators to continue their, work with the aim of
reaching a successful and timely conclusion of the MAI and seeking broad
participation in it. In the same spirit, they support the current work
programme on investment in the WTO and once the work programme has been
completed will seek the support of all their partners for next steps towards
the creation of investment rules in the WTO.

4. Ministers recognise the need to complete work on MAI disciplines and
exceptions with a view to achieving a high standard of liberalisation and a
satisfactory balance of commitments, which takes full account of economic
concerns and political, social and cultural sensitivities. A solution is also
needed for particular issues relating to extraterritoriality.

5. Ministers confirm that the MAI must be consistent with the sovereign
responsibility of governments to conduct domestic policies. The MAI would
establish mutually beneficial international rules which would not inhibit
the normal non-discriminatory exercise of regulatory powers by governments
and such exercise of regulatory powers would not amount to expropriation.

6. Ministers note the increased convergence of views on the need for the MAI to
address environmental protection and labour issues, and the broad support for
including a strong commitment by governments not to lower environmental or
labour standards in order to attract or retain an investment.

7. Ministers are committed to a transparent negotiating process and to active
public discussion on the issues at stake in the negotiations.

8. Ministers welcome the full participation as Observers of Argentina; Brazil;
Chile; Estonia; Hong Kong, China; Latvia; Lithuania and the Slovak Republic
with a view to their becoming founding members of the MAI. Ministers are
committed to pursue an active dialogue with non-members, including on their
development interests, particularly with those non-members willing and able to
meet the obligations of the agreement.
___________________
II. Update on future of MAI negotiations
The MAI was one of the items on the agenda of the 1998 ministerial meeting of
the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), held in Paris
on the 27th and 28th of April. The agreement was scheduled to have been
finished earlier this year in time to be signed at the ministerial meeting. It
has been increasingly clear for the past few months that disagreements between
governments and public opposition would prevent OECD governments from
completing the MAI on time. The most likely option was some kind of extension
of negotiations.

The ministers did issue a declaration on the MAI that extended negotiations,
but in a tentative manner, with a pause in negotiations and no set deadline.
This makes the future of negotiations even more uncertain
that they had been. Governments are still publically committed to finishing the
MAI but their failure to meet the April deadline and widespread public
opposition have drained momentum from negotiations.

Below are some questions the answers to which could determine what
ultimately happens in negotiations over the medium to long term. I have
started to try and address them and lay out various possibilities. It
would be great to read what others think/ have heard.

To editorialize a little: MAI critics are in a good position, with time to
extend outreach, press home our positions at OECD negotiations and in other
forums where investment liberalization talks are underway or planned, and use
some of the momentum of the stalling/crippling of the MAI to advocate
alternative rules for regulating foreign investment/capital flows. There is
always the risk of a behind-the-scenes breakthrough in negotiations, but at
least in eyes of the media, governments and corporations, we're winning by a
large margin. Everyone involved in international and national campaigns against
the MAI can take credit and feel good about the work that's been done.

What is the plan for future negotiations?
Negotiations were extended without a deadline. This is in contrast to last
year's ministerial meeting, when negotiators received a one year extension.
Negotiations will slow down from the current 1-2 weeks per month negotiating
schedule. There will be a pause in negotiations, what the ministerial statement
calls "a period of assessment and further consultation" The next negotiating
group meeting will be in October. This is a pleasant surprise. As recently as
March US officials were stressing the importance of holding a negotiating
meeting in May to avoid giving the appearance of a stall. Last week US
negotiators told us that there would be negotiations in July.

What are the chances that negotiations will be completed within a year?
The question is whether despite the slow-down of formal negotiating sessions
governments still hope to complete the MAI in time for next year's ministerial
meeting. This would require finishing negotiations in December 1998 or in the
spring of 1999. With less negotiating meetings, progress would have to be made
1) at smaller, more informal meetings between some of the key countries;
and
2) at home in capitals, by narrowing lists of reservations, refining the
MAI's environmental and labor rules in an effort to mute domestic
opposition, etc. Momentum is clearly running against this option.

How strongly are governments committed to finishing the MAI?
Governments commit in the ministerial statement to a "successful and timely
conclusion of the MAI." But there are varying levels of support from
governments. A few weeks ago sources were saying that all countries favored
completion with the possible exception of the US which was not revealing its
ultimate intentions. At the ministerial meeting, though, there was more open
dissent. Canada pushed for investment negotiations to be halted at the OECD but
accelerated in the WTO. France reportedly favored ending MAI negotiations all
together. Germany and some of the smaller EU countries still favored completion.

What participation will there be by non-OECD countries?
Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia are joining Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Hong Kong
and the Slovak Republic as official non-OECD observers of negotiations. We had
heard that non-OECD countries might be allowed to participate in negotiations
rather than just being observers, but there is nothing in the ministerial
statement that suggests this will happen. It is important to keep in mind that
the countries observing negotiations will not automatically join the MAI if the
agreement is finished. Argentina and Brazil, for example, reportedly have some
problems with the MAI's rules.

The pause in negotiations will give OECD countries the opportunity to increase
outreach to developing countries. This may be a key factor in the fate of the
MAi 97 the possibility of a large sign-on by developing countries could be the
one incentive that would drive countries to persevere in the face of the
difficulties of negotiations.

Who will be the new chairperson of negotiations?
Franz Engering of the Netherlands plans to step down as chair of negotiations
following the ministerial meeting. The choice of a new chairperson could signal
where negotiations are heading. (For example, the Netherlands is one of the
most pro-MAI of European countries). The US and Japan are vice chairs of
negotiations but will not necessarily take over the chair. US negotiators do
not want the US to be chair, probably because the main disputes in negotiations
are between the US and EU and the US would not be seen as a neutral arbiter.

What is the relationship between MAI negotiations and possible investment
negotiations at the WTO?

The ministerial declaration states that OECD governments "support the current
work programme on investment in the WTO and once the work programme has been
completed will seek support of all their partners for the next steps towards
the creation of investment rules in the WTO." This reflects a balance between
European countries, which want to start negotiations for WTO investment rules
as soon as possible, and the US, which has long believed that the OECD
countries could negotiate a more pro-investors agreement than ever could be
reached at the WTO.

The WTO's current work programme referred to in the declaration is a working
group established at the 1996 WTO ministerial after developing countries
blocked attempts by Europe and Canada to initiate negotiations on investment
rules. The working group extends until December 1998. At the May 1998 WTO
ministerial meeting countries will decide which issues should be included in
the next round of trade negotiations scheduled to start in 1999-2000.
Investment is one option for these "millennial round" of negotiations. The OECD
calling for the acceleration of investment talks at the WTO AFTER the work
group ends makes it somewhat less likely that investment will make it into the
millennial round, but this is worth keeping a close eye on.

Whether or not the MAI is completed in the OECD and no matter how quickly
investment discussions proceed at the WTO, MAI negotiations are a testing
ground for the wealthy countries to attempt to reach a consensus that can be
transplanted to WTO negotiations as a joint position of the developed world.

What are the remaining difficult issues that are holding up negotiations? The
main unresolved issues have not changed much in the past years, with the
exception that governments have started to pay more attention to environmental
and labor rules.

1. the large number of reservations that governments plan to take from the
MAI's rules, especially:

* the European Commission's desire for a exemption for REIOs (regional
economic integration organizations) that would allow EU governments to
retain preferential treatment for other EU members if the policies are
part of the EU's integration program but that the US opposes.
* the US country specific reservations carving out all government procurement
and subsidies, opposed by European countries.

2. Environmental/ Labor Provisions
Governments are discussing a number of old and new environmental and labor
provisions. They are already claiming that these provisions would ensure that
the MAI does not threaten domestic regulatory capacity. Three of the potential
changes are:

* There is support to make the provision on not lowering standards
binding, with the trade off that it will be narrowed so governments would
only be forbidden to lower labor/ environmental standards to attract "AN"
investment- so overall lowering of standards to improve the "business
climate" would not be actionable. The US government has not yet accepted
a binding clause.

* Expropriation/ general treatment- The MAI's expropriation section could
be changed by replacing the broadest category of governments actions for
which compensation is required - "measures having equivalent effect..[of
expropriation]" with language from NAFTA- measures "tantamount to
expropriation." (Of course the Ethyl and Metalclad lawsuits both
proceeded under the tantamount' language.) There may also be an
explanatory footnote to the effect that regulations should not typically
be considered expropriations.

* GATT article XX-style environmental exception- Some European countries
favor adding a general environmental exception along the lines of a
GATT/WTO provision that allows governments to take measures "necessary to
protect human, animal or plant life or health" or "relating to the
conservation of exhaustible natural resources if such measures are made
effective in conjunction with restrictions on domestic production or
consumption." The recent WTO dispute panel decision that found a US
restriction on imports of shrimp harvested in ways that kill sea turtles
shows that dispute panels can interpret this kind of exception narrowly.
US negotiators have said recently that the turtle shrimp decision has
somewhat deflated European governments hopes that an article XX style
exception in the MAI would be a =91silver bullet' solving the MAI's
environmental flaws.

3. Extraterritorial investment restrictions.
There is specific reference to extraterritoriality in the ministerial
declaration, which a polite way of saying that the dispute over US
sanctions on foreign companies that invest in Cuba and Iran still must be
resolved, and MAI negotiations is one of the forums where governments are
trying to resolve it. Hopefully, what a US negotiator said a few months
ago still is true: there can be a solution to the Helms-Burton law without
an MAI, but there can't be an MAI without a solution to Helms-Burton.

Are the other provisions of the MAI "locked-in"?
There was some interest among governments to "lock in" parts of the MAI
that had been agreed upon, so as to signal the progress made and to focus
future negotiations solely on unfinished provisions. There was not
consensus for there to be a declaration at the ministerial meeting that
parts of the MAI were complete. US government rhetoric on this, for
example, is that "nothing is finished until it's all finished." The main
principles of the agreement are unlikely to change much. For example,
there have been indications that some governments are concerned with the
investor to state dispute resolution rules and we heard that there could
be room for a kind of "screening" mechanism (for example, home governments
having to approve lawsuits brought by their investors against host
countries.) But the only proposal on the table is an undefined French
proposal for some kind of appellate body.

What is the position of Business interests?
The level of continuing support for the MAI from multinationals will help
determine if governments think they can win support for the agreement. For
months corporate lobbying groups have argued that the MAI's environmental
and labor provisions are getting too strong and that the MAI will not
force enough up front liberalization (because there are so many
reservations). As it stands, much of this is posturing and business
organization still support the MAI. It is unclear if any of the
environmental/ labor provisions being discussed would cause business
groups to oppose the agreement. There are a few things they want that
would cement this support. US representatives of multinationals in
particular would like to see many developing countries sign the MAI and
want full application of the agreement's rules to privatizations. There
is word of mouth evidence that some individual corporations are less
enthusiastic about the MAI because the agreement has attracted such
negative publicity that could spill over and damage other parts of the
corporate agenda internationally.
.................
Bob OlsenTorontobobolsen@aracnet.net (:-)

For MAI-not subscription information, posting guidelines and
links to other MAI sites please see http://mai.flora.org/

Return to Contents

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

Date: 5 May 1998 21:08:19 -0400
From: JGA@eureka.qc.ca (Jean-Guy Aubé)
Subject: Leonard Peltier Updtate

Leonard Peltier Parole update

May 4th parole hearing
According to Leonard Peltier, yesterday's parole hearing was a set up. He
said that they made some amazing statements like, "the government can't
prove who is responsible for the agent's death; someone has to pay." "We
spoke with one of the agent's wives and she wants you to die in here. You
will not receive another parole hearing until 2008 then we'll take it from
there." Representing him was Carl Nadler, Jim Leonard, Ramsey Clark, and
Mamie Rupnicke of the Prairie Band Potawatomi. None of his attorneys were
allowed to speak. Leonard said it did not matter who was representing him,
it was a set-up.

The attorneys are filing for a rebuttal now. I have not spoken to them
yet, but when I do I will let you know what has been said.

The government has admitted again that they do not know who killed the
agents! And of course they never mention Joe Stuntz, they only remember
the deaths of the agents.

Show your outrage on June 27th at DC. 12-5 at Ellipse Park. Leonard has
no faith in the system. Neither should we. It is up to us to get him out.
Step up the fight!

- -Leonard Peltier Defense Committee

Return to Contents

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

Date: 5 May 1998 21:17:16 -0400
From: JGA@eureka.qc.ca (Jean-Guy Aubé)
Subject: Cambior Slapp suit and class action against Cambior

Fwd: Cambior
From:placepub@cam.org,Internet
To:Jean-Guy Aubé

Dear Friend:

On Saturday, April 25, the tailings dam at Boliden Ltd.'s Spanish zinc
mine gave way. Within hours over 4 billion litres of toxic mining waste had
contaminated the Spanish country side, threatening the sensitive Donana
Park. And already there are allegations Boliden knew it had a serious
environmental catastrophe looming as early as 1996. Boliden fired the
whistle blower.
But no matter how horrifying the Spanish images are, tragically it's
not an isolated case. In three years, there have been three major environmental
catastrophes at Canadian mining operations in developing countries. Despite
compelling evidence that these disasters were preventable, little was done to
protect the environment and human health.

"No reputable mining company responsible to shareholders
and international banks for its financing can ignore
environmental concerns. I and all my directors and
management care as much about protecting and preserving
our environment as any 'green group.'"
Cambior CEO Louis Gignac, 1993

Sometimes a feeling of helplessness is natural in the face of
multi-national mining companies, but now you can help stop reckless Canadian
mining practices.
In June, Québec's Superior Court will hear a Motion to Authorize a
Class Action lawsuit against Cambior Inc. for the damages resulting from a 3.2
billion litre toxic spill in the heart of Guyana's rainforest ó enough toxic
waste to fill 25 000 railway tank cars. While estimated clean-up costs for the
Spanish spill are as high as $2 billion; Cambior has not spent a cent to
determine even the extent of environmental damage from its toxic waste. Like
Boliden, this disaster could have been prevented if Cambior had cared. But like
too many mining companies, Cambior's profit was more important than its
environmental rhetoric.

NOW YOU CAN SAY ENOUGH IS ENOUGH
"environmental monitoring programme was minimal
even at the start of mine operation and
its effectiveness only decreased further."
United Nations Mission Report

This case is precedent setting. It's why we need your help. This is
the first time that victims of an environmental catastrophe in a third world
country have tried to hold a Canadian mining company to its word ó in
Canada. Over 23 000 Guyanese live in what was declared "an ecological
disaster zone" following the Cambior disaster. To date they have received a
bottle of water and an apology. Despite a resolution of the Guyana
government, there has never been an environmental audit to determine the
full extent of this environmental disaster. If Canadian mining companies
know that the only price to pay is a bottle of water, there's little, if
any, incentive for safe mining practices.

SLAPP SUIT ó HOW FAR CAMBIOR WILL GO
But Cambior was not only ready to run from its poisoned legacy in
Guyana, it also wanted to hide from its record in Canada. On August 19, 1997,
two years to the day of the disaster, Cambior filed an application for a
permanent injunction against Recherches Internationales Québec (RIQ).
Cambior wants to tell the public to sit-down, shut-up and mind its own
business. But the environment is our business, not Cambior's.
Observers are comparing this injunction application with a U.S. style
SLAPP suit (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation). SLAPP suits are
filed by multi-nationals to use their economic muscle to tie-up citizens in
costly court battles. It's a direct attempt to intimidate the public. But
it's also an attack on your rights: as a citizen, consumer and investor to
make your own choices.

"with proper monitoring and appropriate
preconstruction geological information,
the dam failure could have been predicted if not prevented."
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

The Cambior case isn't just about corporate responsibility. It's also about
a fundamental principle: he who pays calls the shots and when things go
wrong pays the price. It's about establishing the principle that in a global
partnership all peoples must have an equal right to defend themselves on an
equal level.

"It is clear that the Omai tailings dam
as designed and constructed was bound to fail. . .
We are at a loss to explain why the design and
construction of these critical elements of the dam,
whose importance to its safety were evidently
recognized and understood, were executed so inadequately."
Final Report on Technical Causation Omai Tailings Dam Failure

HELP !
Every dollar you give will go directly to winning this precedent setting case.
No one is collecting a salary or a fee. There are no administration
costs. Your generous support will allow the world's poorest to stand-up to
Cambior and other mining companies and make it clear that Canadians want our
legacy to world development to be foreign aid, not toxic waste dumps.

Sincerely,
Dermod Travis

PS: "Canadian citizens have a responsibility to other citizens around the
world if we are talking about global partnership. And it is not
up to us who are in debt, weak, trodden and really not equal partners in the
exchange to defend ourselves alone. It's the responsibility of Canadians to
do this. Progressive, fair thinking Canadians have a business to ensure that
their corporate citizens behave responsibly."
Jocelyn Dow, National Committee for Defense Against Omai, January, 1998

(514) 281.1177 Fax 281.1321, E-Mail pira@axess.com,
http://www.geocities.com/RainForest/265

Return to Contents

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

Date: 5 May 1998 21:24:10 -0400
From: JGA@eureka.qc.ca (Jean-Guy Aubé)
Subject: Urgence, Etudiants Turques

Urgence Etudiants turques urgence

> AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
>
> Etudiants d'Ankara, torturés et emprisonnés.
> Ils risquent jusqu’à 18 ans de prison pour avoir protesté pacifiquement
> contre les nouvelles conditions qui leur étaient imposées. ( dont
> l’augmentation de 350 % des droits d’inscription ).
>
> La date de leur procès est fixée au 18 mai.
>
> Réagissez ! Aidez-les !
> Signez la pétition. Faites-là circuler.
>
> Retournez-la au plus tôt à : Amnesty International
> (coordination Turquie)
> 4 rue de la Pierre Levée
> 75553 Paris Cédex 11
>
> Ecrivez directement aux autorités dont voici les adresses !
>

>Premier ministre *
>Prime Minister Mr Mesut Yilmaz * Office of the Prime Minister * Basbakanlik
> 06573 Ankara, Turquie * Télécopie : 90 312 417 0476
> Ministre de la Justice
> Minister of Justice * Mr Oltan Sungurlu * Adalet Bakanligi
> 06659 Ankara, Turquie * Télécopie : 90 312 425 4066 et 90 312 417 3954
> Ministre de l'Intérieur
> Minister of the Interior * Mr Murat Baseskioglu * Icisleri Bakanligi
> Ankara, Turquie * Télécopie : 90 312 417 2390
> ministre d’état chargé des droits de l'Homme
> State Minister with responsibility for Human Rights
> Mr Hikmet Sami TŸrk * Office of the Prime Minister * Basbakanlik
> 06573 Ankara, Turquie * Télécopie : 90 312 417 0476
> Président de la Commission parlementaire des droits de l'Homme
> President of Parliamentary Human Rights Commission
> Doctor Sema Piskinsut * Insan Haklari Inceleme Komisyonu Baskani
> TBMM * Ankara, Turquie * Télécopie : 90 312 420 539 ( ou 5394 )
> Président du Parlement turc
> Président of the Turkish Parliament
> Mr Hikmet Cetin * TBMM Baskani * TBMM * Ankara, Turquie
> Télécopie : 90 312 420 5165 et 90 312 420 6941
>
> Vous pouvez aussi adresser des messages ou des cartes postales de
> soutien et d’amitié aux 5 étudiants qui sont encore en prison. Restez
très
> “vagueî, amitié et encouragements suffisent, ne parlez ni de tortures,
ni
> de conditions de détention, etc...
> à l’adresse suivante : nom de l’étudiant
> Cankiri Kapali Cezaevi
> Cankiri
> Turquie
>
>
>
>
>
> AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL
>
>
> MAHMUT YILMAZ, B†LENT KARAKAS, ïZG†R T†FFEK‚I, AHMET ASKIN
> DOGAN, METIN MURAT KALYONCUGIL (emprisonnés),
> NURDAN BAYSAHAN, DENIZ KARTAL, ELIF KAHYAOGLU
> (remis en liberté en attendant leur nouveau procès)
>
> Monsieur le Ministre,
>
> Le 18 mars dernier, la neuvième Chambre de la Cour d'appel d'Ankara a
> décidé la révision du procès des étudiants accusés d'appartenir
à une
> organisation illégale en Turquie, organisation dont l’existence n’est
mme
> pas établie . Ces étudiants qui avaient milité de manière pacifique
en
> faveur d'une réforme du système éducatif ont été condamnés à la
suite d'un
> procès inéquitable. Ils affirment avoir fait des aveux sous la torture.
> Aussi je vous prie de bien vouloir faire libérer immédiatement et sans
> condition les cinq étudiants toujours emprisonnés et je vous demande
> d'ouvrir une enqute impartiale et approfondie sur les tortures qu'ils ont
> subies, et que des poursuites soient engagées contre les responsables. je
> vous prie de croire, Monsieur le Ministre, à l'expression de ma très haute
> considération.
>
>
>NOM ADRESSE
>SIGNATURE
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
>

Return to Contents

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

Date: 5 May 1998 23:11:00 -0400
From: norbert@uni.de
Subject: LES RENCONTRES MONDIALES DE DÉVELOPPEMENT LOCAL

Bonjour,
Je vous transmets cette information intéressante concernant les
prochaines rencontres mondiales de développement local. Un appel à
participation et échanges d'expériences est lancé à cette occasion.

Christine
(relayée par Norbert)

Yvon Poirier wrote:
>
> ANNONCE
> LES RENCONTRES MONDIALES DE DƒVELOPPEMENT LOCAL
>
> Les Rencontres mondiales se tiendront du 22 au 23 octobre 98 à Sherbrooke,
> Québec, Canada.
>
> Le travail s'étant amorcé à des rencontres précédentes, les Rencontres
> mondiales aideront à globaliser les alternatives au développement économique
> traditionnel ou tout autre “développementî qui n'est pas centré sur le
> bien-tre de tous (les peuples).
>
> Nous ne prétendons pas représenter le monde entier, ni solutionner les crises
> de la finance, ni de l'emploi avec ce seul événement. Nous espérons seulement
> contribuer de façon signifiante à la construction d'une société globale basée
> sur la solidarité.
>
> Dans ce but, nous suggérons ces actions immédiates :
>
> - établir le plus de contacts possibles entre les organisations tentant de
> construire une économie démocratique et solidaire
>
> - partager nos idées et nos expériences
>
> - réfléchir ensemble sur le développement économique communautaire
>
> - former des réseaux de coopération multilatéral à travers les régions et les
> différentes nations du monde
>
> Pour en apprendre plus sur cet événement visitez notre site internet :
> http://www.ifdec.qc.ca
>
> Si vous ne pouvez accéder à notre site, mais que vous avez accès à un courrier
> électronique, vous pouvez demander de l'information à l'adresse suivante :
> rmdl@ifdec.qc.ca
>
> Les Rencontres mondiales du développement local sont organisées par l'Institut
> de formation en développement économique communautaire (I'IFDƒC) au Québec et
> l'Union Nationale des acteurs et structures du développement local (UNADEL) en
> France.
>
> Yvon Poirier
> 346 10ième Rue
> Québec, QC, G1L 2M7
>
> Tel. 418-522-4647
> Fax. 418-522-0942
> ypoirier@riq.qc.ca
- --

* *
\ /
*-- * --*
/ \ This was TMTM (The Megabyte Text Magician)
/ * ------------------------------------------
/ norbert@uni.de
/ http://www.globenet.org/periph
/
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| stop the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal |
| if you agree copy these 3 sentences in your own sig |
| more info: http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/spg-l/sigaction.htm |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+

Return to May. Index