On January 14th, Batey Urbano and Existence Is Resistance hosted the Occupied Lands, Scattered Diasporas film series. With 120 individuals from both the Palestinian and Puerto Rican communities, the event was a symbol of solidarity. The Batey Urbano is a space where young people from our community can have meaningful discussions about the work around them.

What struck the Batey collective was how much Puerto Rico and Palestine have in common, and with the support and mentorship of one of Humboldt Park’s hip-hop artist, Lah Tere, Batey was able to understand this harsh reality. Colonialism has been the reality of Palestinians and Puerto Rican communities for decades. The occupation of both lands has resulted in the death of thousands; poverty has become a reality for most, and countless artifacts of culture have been destroyed.

In the struggle for freedom, these harsh conditions have created political movements, activists, and revolutionaries that fighting for a common cause. The documentaries “Hip Hop is Bigger than the Occupation,” directed by Nana Dankwa and  “For Those Who Struggle,” a documentary about the campaign to free Puerto Rican political prisoner Oscar López Rivera, who this year will have served his 31st year in federal custody, were shown and invited panelists led a discussion around occupation and what it would take for our lands to be unoccupied.
Batey Urbano is a safe space for all young people, and we strive to be able to provide productive alternatives for them. For more information, visit bateyurbano.net or email bateyurbano@gmail.com.

Jessie Fuentes

 A Don Rafael Cancel Miranda, en su cumpleaños 81

La palabra es una onda
del corazón al oído,
es poderoso sonido
cuando el corazón ahonda.
No permite que se esconda
ni el mal ni el buen sentimiento;
la palabra es aposento
de todo lo que se siente,
dice la verdad o miente,
a veces sin fundamento.

Hay palabras que condenan,
palabras que discriminan,
hay palabras que asesinan
cuando la muerte ordenan.
Hay palabras que resuenan
en cada rincón del ser,
palabras que dejan ver
la maldad y la injusticia,
la avaricia y la codicia
y el abuso del poder.

Pero, hay palabras que al bien
abonan constantemente,
nacen de una voz ferviente
y nos sirven de sostén.
Una palabra, también,
define el más digno oficio,
palabra que es el indicio
de honor y de dignidad,
la palabra libertad,
que requiere el sacrificio.

Esa palabra tan digna
es base en nuestra Nación
de lucha y revolución
y es la más alta consigna.
Si la palabra se indigna
y con frente en alto anda,
si la libertad demanda
y en sí misma se hace hombre,
ese hombre tiene un nombre:
Rafael Cancel Miranda.

Carlos Quiles
18/julio/2011
6:26 p.m., en Río Piedras

“I have only the power of my indignation,
the power of my convictions.”
Danielle Mitterrand

The Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement is stirring and awakening the people’s righteous indignation throughout the nation.  Its call to action is germinating and sprouting like wild flowers (hopefully perennial ones) from Wall Street to the universities and from the ghettoes all the way to the suburbs.  It’s this response of the people that clearly demonstrates the potential it has to radicalize the masses and to find solutions to the prevailing crisis created by Wall Street and the politicians who control the reins of government.

The people are responding because OWS has clearly identified the problems affecting them and the culprits responsible for the crisis and the prevailing pernicious conditions. According to OWS, what are the main problems and who has caused them?  They are: 1). the inequality in the distribution of wealth – one percent controls it and 99 percent has none; 2).  the concentration of capital in fewer and fewer hands; 3). the skulduggery of Wall St.; 4). the corruption of the politicians who control the reins of the government; 5). the government’s inability and refusal to resolve the economic crisis; and 6). the workers, the elderly, parts of the middle class, the minority communities and  the young people who find their dreams deferred and sabotaged.

There’s an organic relationship between Wall Street and the politicians who are in control of the government.  The former controls the finances the politicians need to be elected, and thus determines who’s going to win.  The politician who gets elected owes his seat to Wall St.  or is a big money person whose interest is the same as the others honchos on Wall St.  For the politicians, their most important task is to defend the interest of Wall St.  A good example of the relationship is how the government dealt with the demands of the corporations that were “too big to fail.”  Wall St. claimed there was an economic melt down and that the government had to bail out the corporations that were too big to fail.  The government’s response was immediate.  Billions of dollars were dispensed and the politicians had no qualms or hesitation in answering Wall St. demands.

One of the corporations that the government bailed out was General Motors.  At no moment did the politicians mention the fact that while GM in the U.S. was going broke in China it was one of the most profitable U.S. corporations.  If that was the case, then why not use the money it was generating in China to bail itself out? What’s most interesting about the bail out is that the bulk of the billions of dollars sent to Wall St. ended up in the pockets of the bankers and of the CEO’s of the big corporations.

While the politicians were bailing out the big corporations, the problems of the millions of families who were facing foreclosure, the millions of workers who were unemployed, the students who owed almost a trillion dollars in student loans and couldn’t pay  were totally ignored by them.
The politicians seats were safe because Wall St. was doing what it had to do to protect them.  It had the finances, the lobbying groups, the think tanks, the media and such nepharious entities like the Tea Party and ALEC -American Legislative Exchange Council to make sure the status quo would not be changed at all.  For example, ALEC made sure the neo-liberal legislations needed would be enacted at all levels of government.  That’s how anti-immigration, union busting, and anti-public funding laws were being passed at the state and federal levels.

Fortunately, the OWS movement responded and has seized the moment.  It is challenging the status quo and mobilizing the people.  Instead of idleness, there is movement.  And the movement has the potential to create the necessary changes in the political structure and to find solutions that will lead to a better distribution of wealth and for there to be a more just and better system.  If you aren’t a supporter of OWS or a righteously indignated person, become an occupier.  If you want a better and more just world dare to struggle for it.  Dare to struggle, dare to win. En resistencia y lucha, OLR.

Several years ago, on the historic day of March 10, 2006, hundreds of thousands of students and families took to the streets in protest against Sensenbrenner bill H.R. 4437. This  repressive bill, which was successfully defeated thanks to such protests, sought to  criminalize undocumented immigration and make felons out of any individual or organization convicted of assisting undocumented immigrants.

Since then, Latino and immigrant rights activists have continued to demand comprehensive immigration reform and an end to raids, deportations, and attacks on immigrant communities. This first mega march took place here in Chicago, and spread throughout the country, sparking some of the largest protests in U.S. history. Though Chicago was, and continues to be, central to the national immigration debate, there is a tendency to ignore or forget the city’s contribution.

Fortunately, a recent book documents and analyzes Chicago’s special place in the immigrant rights movement. Edited by UIC professors, political scientist Amalia Pallares and sociologist Nilda Flores-González, ¡Marcha! Latino Chicago and the Immigrant Rights Movement explores the organizations, leaders, politics and identities that gave rise to the megamarches and to the broader politics of Latino and immigrant rights.

On March 31, Batey Urbano and the Puerto Rican Cultural Center (PRCC) hosted a community discussion of ¡Marcha!. Presenters included Flores-González, Pallares, Michael Rodríguez Muñiz, a contributor of a chapter on Puerto Rican participation in the immigrant rights movement, and Jhonathan Gomez, a member of a collective of photographers. Since its release, the book and photography exhibit has traveled to community spaces throughout the city,
stimulating reflection and brainstorming for the future. Given the PRCC’s longstanding involvement in the movement and the fact that two immigrant rights activists took sanctuary on Paseo Boricua, organizers felt an event in Humboldt Park was quite important.

Before a crowd of over 60 people, the presenters and audience engaged in discussion of the immigrant rights movement and prospects for progressive change in the future. It represents a great example of scholarship combining with political activism to carve out new possibilities.

¡Marcha! is published by and
available from the University of
Illinois Press.

REP. GUTIERREZ: Mr. Speaker I rise today to talk once again about Puerto Rico, but this time it’s a little different. I rise to note that Governor Luis Fortuño of Puerto Rico has actually said something that I can agree with.

Speaking about a proposed gas pipeline, the Republican Governor said, “We can’t continue to depend on fossil fuels.  Gasoducto is fossil fuels.”     He went on to say that “tying us down to natural gas for 30 years would be a grave mistake.”

He was referring to the construction of a natural gas pipeline on an island where the beautiful beaches, mountains and rain forests are both irreplaceable natural resources and part of the economic engine that drives tourism — a gas pipeline that sounds like a dubious proposition.

And I agree.

Mr. Fortuño spoke these words two years ago, as a candidate, criticizing his opponent.  Sadly, now that he is safely in office, Governor Fortuño has changed his mind. Now, he enthusiastically supports not just gas pipelines, but a much bigger, more environmentally disruptive and more expensive pipeline.

And how the construction of this gigantic, super-sized pipeline is being handled is another reason I must speak out — again — on the civil rights crisis in Puerto Rico. The ruling party would rather people not notice that Mister Fortuño and Governor Fortuño have opposite positions on gas pipelines.

So they are working hard to move this project forward under the cover of night. Every day – the ruling party answers this question: If you wanted to undertake a potentially dangerous, economically dubious, environmentally disastrous and extremely unpopular project – how would you go about it?

Here’s the ruling party’s answer:  You circumvent feasibility studies.  You avoid environmental impact studies.  You ignore the standard permitting and licensing procedures.  And you take every step possible to eliminate public hearings and public scrutiny.

But how do you proceed without these necessary safeguards and information?    If you are the government of Puerto Rico, and you want to build a 92 mile natural gas pipeline over the mountains; through forests, lakes and rivers; and across critical groundwater systems in Puerto Rico, you would amend a law designed to deal with natural disasters so you can bypass the normal permitting and public process.

What this ruling party does is declare an “energy emergency.”

This government’s “energy emergency” allows the pipeline to proceed — despite warnings from the Sierra Club, the environmental group Casa Pueblo, and even the U.S. Fish and Wildlife service.
— Despite residents’ concerns that it will be constructed near schools, churches and residential areas.

— Despite geologists noting it is near earthquake faults and that there have been 2,500 seismic events in the last 3 years and one felt all over the island just 2 days ago.

The self-declared “energy emergency” also helps hide the fact that you’ve given a ten million dollar contract to a pal of the Governor’s who has no experience at all in constructing gas pipelines.  He does, however, have experience skiing with the governor.  And maybe that’s why you run a slick, taxpayer funded PR campaign that renames the project “The Via Verde” — “the green way.”  So, instead of speaking to the huge financial, human and environmental costs — this Orwellian ad campaign calls a gas pipeline over the mountains and through the woods a “green way.”

Like a lot of people, I think it would be better to name it “Green away”… a magical cleanser you apply to your forests, rivers and lakes, to make them go away…along with millions of green tax dollars. Here’s an even more honest name for the project: the “wrong way.”  Because it’s wrong to spend the people’s money on a project they don’t want and hasn’t been appropriately studied, as the newspaper El Nuevo Día has shown in a series of reports.

Candidate Fortuño was right.  Governor Fortuño is wrong.

To shine some light on this matter, I have sent Freedom of Information Act requests to every and all federal agencies that have addressed the pipeline project.  I will release the results so that the people know who their government is meeting with, what documents exist, and what studies have been done to show the need for this project.

It’s time they stop doing things the “Via Verde” way and start doing things the right way.

Residentes de la ciudad de Chicago junto a egresados del sistema de la Universidad de Puerto Rico (UPR) coincidieron en la actividad realizada en el Paseo Boricua el pasado 11 de marzo por el día mundial de solidaridad con la UPR. La misma consistió de un foro educativo sobre la situación universitaria actual y su contexto en el Puerto Rico de hoy. El propósito del foro fue educar a la comunidad sobre el contexto del Puerto Rico actual, las razones para realizar la huelga y las alternativas que han planteado los estudiantes a través del Comité de Representación Estudiantil (CRE).

Los panelistas fueron: el sociólogo, educador y catedrático de UNESCO, Dr. Manuel Torres Márquez, el sociólogo y abogado sindical, César Rosado; la recién graduada de la UPR y estudiante doctoral, Janitza Montalvo Ortiz; la abogada Jan Susler; y por videoconferencia, uno de los miembros del colectivo de Radio Huelga, Ricardo Olivero Lora. Además, se leyó un mensaje que envió Óscar López Rivera a los estudiantes de la UPR.

Al menos 16 ciudades, entre ellas Boston, Nueva York, Filadelfia, San Francisco, Santo Domingo, Amsterdam, Manchester, Madrid, Santiago de Compostela y Granada, participaron en esta iniciativa internacional en apoyo a los estudiantes puertorriqueños que luchan por defender la educación pública  accesible y de calidad contra las políticas neoliberales del gobierno de Luis Fortuño.

La fecha, además, conmemoró el 40 aniversario de uno de los días más sangrientos en la historia de la UPR. El 11 de marzo de 1971, en un Recinto de Río Piedras ocupado por la Policía de Puerto Rico, confrontaciones violentas segaron las vidas de dos policías y un estudiante. Apenas un año antes, durante una manifestación estudiantil, había muerto la estudiante Antonia Martínez Lagares a manos de un oficial de la Policía.

Vanesa Baerga

Los estudiantes en huelga del Recinto de Río Piedras de la Universidad de Puerto Rico que realizan actos de desobediencia civil sintieron la pasada semana cómo la Policía de Puerto Rico ha intensificado las técnicas de tortura que utiliza para arrestarlos.

Información relacionada y más fotos en páginas centrales Vídeos en www.claridadpuertorico.com

Rodillas sobre la cabeza de los detenidos para presionarlos sobre el pavimento, dejarle caer con fuerza las rodillas sobre sus espaldas, presión intensa en la nuca, debajo de las orejas, en la sien y en la garganta, dobladuras de brazos y manos, entre otras, han sido modalidades de abusos que ha implementado los efectivos de la división de Arrestos Especiales y de la Fuerza de Choque aún cuando los arrestados ya están esposados. Luego arrastran por el piso a los que se niegan a caminar hasta el vehículo que los transportará a los cuarteles, en incluos se ha visto a algunos policías agredir sexualmente a las jóvenes arrestadas que se encolerizan y comienzan a gritar, tocando sus partes íntimas.

Esas han sido las imágenes que la Fuerza de Choque ha intentado que no se documenten, parándose frente a los lentes de los fotoperiodistas y periodistas que buscando el ángulo para ver cómo se realizan los arrestos para luego describirlos, han sido agredidos. Es así es como se han formado los policías en las fuertes confrontaciones con estudiante, llegando incluso a agredir a los trabajadores de la prensa.

La evidente intención de la Policía de causar dolor desproporcionado a los arrestados es lo que exacerba los ánimos de los estudiantes que piquetean frente a sus compañeros desobedientes civiles y presencian el abuso policial.En los actos de desobediencia civil que realizaron los estudiantes el pasado jueves 27 de enero frente al Capitolio, se vio cómo la Policía ha incrementado el uso de técnicas de tortura sometiendo a los estudiantes a varias de ellas a la vez y por varios policías. Hubo el caso de una joven que tras apretarle tan fuerte debajo de las orejas se desmayó y la Policía la esposó aún sin haber recobrado el conocimiento.

Ese día, los huelguistas habían llegado a eso de las 12:30 de la tarde de hasta la Legislatura donde encontraron cerradas las puertas de la entrada principal y policías que se fueron colocando frente a ellos. Al menos 30 estudiantes se sentaron al inicio de las escalinatas del Capitolio para realizar desobediencia civil. Portaron cartelones, algunos que leían “los chavos están en OGP”, o “esto es por mí, esto es por ti, esto es por tu país”. La líder estudiantil Xiomara Caro explicó que los estudiantes fueron a presentar a los legisladores un proyecto de ley por petición que consistía en que los $50 millones sobrantes del Fondo de Estabilización Fiscal (FEF) se asignara al presupuesto de la UPR para así evitar la cuota de $800 y el problema de la accesibilidad a la Universidad, dos de las razones del conflicto universitario. Solicitaban que algún legislador tomara el proyecto “y lo aprueben” como se ha hecho con otros tantos que se han aprobado de la noche a la mañana o fines de semana. Sólo el representante por el Partido Popular Dencrático, Luis Vega Ramos, se acercó a ellos y se comprometió a estudiar el proyecto y presentarlo. Mientras tanto, los desobedientes esperaban por una delegación del Comité de Representación Estudiantil (CRE) que había entrado temprano en la mañana al Capitolio con intenciones de explicar a los legisladores su proyecto. El CRE insiste a su vez en que además de los $50 millones del FEF, la legislatura destine al presupuesto de la UPR los $30 millones en becas legislativas en lugar de a estudiantes individuales, porque así no se incrementarán los costos de estudio. Con esas dos propuestas estudiantiles la UPR recibiría $80 millones, el doble de lo que la administración universitaria espera recibir de la cuota de $800 por estudiante, según ha dicho.

Cerca de las 2:15 pm los estudiantes, que ya habían advertido estar dispuestos a que se les arrestara, movieron su acto de desobediencia civil a la Avenida Constitución, al lado sur del Capitolio, no sin antes escuchar a Caro decir que se retiraban del lugar pero que en la medida en que no había oídos para una solución al conflicto “las manifestaciones y la huelga continuarán”. Otros se sentaron en el Paseo Covadonga, bloqueando el tránsito de todos los carriles en ambos lados. A eso de las 3:00 PM comenzaron a producirse los arrestos en la Avenida Constitución por órdenes del capitán González. Empleados del Capitolio salieron a gritar a los estudiantes “paguen la cuota”, lo que por poco provoca otro motín adicional. Por otro lado, un policía de apellido Cortés, placa 24619, que se encontraba al otro lado de la calle, le quitó el seguro a su arma e hizo amague de desenfundarla contra uno de los estudiantes. Pero un grupo de estudiantes lo siguió hasta que se alejó. Otro policía, de apellido Clemente, placa 30944, le dio con la macana en la mano a una estudiante que le enseñó el proyecto de ley que los estudiantes habían llevado al Capitolio.
A las 3:50 pm la Fuerza de Choque se atravesó en la Ave. Constitución empujando a los estudiantes hacia el Paseo Covadonga donde se encontraba el otro grupo de desobedientes civiles. A las 4:30 PM y tras éstos no ser arrestados, se movieron nuevamente a la Avenida Constitución evadiendo el bloqueo policial. La Fuerza de Choque la emprendió contra ellos con gas pimienta directamente rociada a la cara de los estudiantes. Luego los empujaron con sus escudos y lanzando los gases lacrimógenos. Los estudiantes intentaron evadirlos y les devolvieron con los pies las bombas de humo. También les tiraron algunas botellas de agua y piedras y comenzaron a correr. La Fuerza de Choque, dividida en varias escuadras, atravesó la calle de lado a lado para perseguirlos. Según llegaban más efectivos de la Fuerza de Choque continuaban formándose a todo lo ancho de la calle dejando un amplio espacio entre cada escuadra, penetrando algunos las calles aledañas, lo que se convirtió en un despliegue abarcador. Entonces se colocaron máscaras antigases y se fueron disparando indiscriminadamente con escopetas lanza gases y de balas de goma, mientras a su paso viraban zafacones y rompían bolsas de basura. Los residentes comenzaron a salir a la calle. La directora de un colegio y una égida en esa avenida que se identificó como “hermana Rose Marie González”, cuestionó de frente a la Fuerza de Choque por sus acciones. “Parece que estamos viviendo una dictadura”, les decía mientras explicaba que los estudiantes del Colegio se encontraban en la cancha al momento de los disparos y tuvieron que ser movidos al interior del colegio para tranquilizarlos. Igual reclamó respeto para los residentes de la égida. “Cualquiera diría que estamos en una guerra”, añadió.

Sobre 30 estudiantes fueron arrestados esa tarde, sumándose a los sobre 100 que fueron arrestados la semana anterior por negarse a rendir sus reclamos de que la Policía salga de la Universidad y por una educación superior pública al menor costo posible.

Perla Franco/ CLARIDAD

Ángel “Tito” Medina nació en Toa Baja, Puerto Rico en el 1951 y paso su niñez en Manatí. Lleva más de 40 años radicado en Chicago donde trabajó por mas de 32 años como mecánico industrial. Se define como un Boricua 100%, amante de la salsa y la cultura de la Isla . Recientemente fue electo presidente de la Casa Puertorriqueña  y conversó con La Voz sobre sus planes como líder de la “Casa”.

La Voz-Como surge su interés en la presidencia?
Tito- La  Casa necesitaba un cambio y como estoy retirado decidir postularme para trabajar por la comunidad.

La Voz-Por cuantos ganó la presidencia?
Tito- Gané por 144 votos, fue una campaña dura, pero entendía  que la Casa y la comunidad se merecía respeto, no fue fácil pero al final logramos unificar esfuerzos .

La Voz-Por que era el importante que la gente votara pot usted?
Tito-Porque tengo buenos planes pa’ la Casa. Yo quiero unificar esfuerzos, trabajar con otras organizaciones puertorriqueñas y integrar más a los jóvenes . Vamos a hacer un salón de computadoras y otro de ping pong, gracias a una donación que recibimos y  quiero envolver  a los jóvenes en más actividades de recreación y deportes.

La Voz-Cuales son algunos planes para la Casa Puertorriqueña?
Tito-Sabes que en Puerto Rico están las escuelas de música y bandas municipales, ya tenemos voluntarios para empezar a dar clases de música; hacer un desfile a la altura de la cultura de Puerto Rico y de Chicago con más grupos culturales, bomba  y plena y también integrar La Casa en colaboraciones con otras organizaciones de Chicago.

Marisol Rodriguez

As an educator I see a recurrent problem that troubles me deeply—Youth, specifically young men, missing school to appear at court; Youth, specifically young men, missing out on an education because they are locked up. Can the intelligent, likable young man that sits at his desk, ready to learn, really be such a menace to society? Such a threat to our community’s safety?

Many politicians are quick to campaign on the promise that by locking up the “bad guys” they will keep our community safe. It’s not uncommon to hear our elected officials tell us we will be safer because the blue light just went up on our block, or because there are more police patrolling our streets. Are we really safer or are drug exchanges just pushed to another block that doesn’t have a blue light and what we have are more police readily available to harass our youth on our streets?

The most destructive effect of these “safety” initiatives is more people in our community are being incarcerated. It’s become very easy (and convenient) for our political leaders to equate success with the number of “criminals” they send to prison. In an extremely dehumanizing process the “criminals” are sent off to jail in a far away, isolated place at which point, for the self-righteous leader, they become “out of sight, out of mind.”

But for our community and communities of color throughout the nation it is our loved ones – fathers, sons, cousins, brothers, uncles and students – who are out of sight (out of reach), but never ever out of mind.

In a country that prides itself on “liberty and justice for all,” why are more citizens incarcerated here than in any other country in the world? In a country where “all men are created equal” why are black men six times more likely to be locked up than whites and Latinos almost three times as likely? (source: www.burnsinstitute.org)

These are questions we all need to take time to reflect upon. These are questions we must take to our community leaders.

Recently a group of local community members (a group I was a part of) discussed this grave issue facing our community and brainstormed on how we can work to address it. We talked about educating our community on their legal rights when dealing with the police; documenting how our youth are affected by police harassment and their experiences in jail through testimonials; and interviewing police on their practices.

We have been successful in carrying out at least one of our ideas with the help and organizing initiative of the ¡Humboldt Park NO SE VENDE! campaign in collaboration with Lawyers from the First Defense Legal Aid and Professor Xavier Perez of Saint Xavier University. On September 18 a free educational workshop “Policing Practices and Gentrification” was held at Batey Urbano. Discussion centered on the connection between gentrification and police practices as well as identifying what rights we have when in police custody.

In a short time Chicago will choose a new mayor and as that moment approaches, I encourage you to ask yourself just one thing before you choose a candidate: “Is this going to be the leader that will lock my brother up and throw away the key? Or is this the leader who will open doors to resources and opportunities my community needs to be self-empowered and truly safe?”

During the first week of March, prominent Chicago media outlets, namely the Tribune and Sun-Times, published negative news stories, columns, editorials, and political cartoons about Luis Gutierrez and his family. These reports focused on a range of issues, including Gutierrez’s place of residence, the FBI’s questioning of him, the role he played in securing his daughter’s employment in a state position, and his daughter’s participation in a 26^th Ward affordable housing program.

One set of commentaries pertains to Gutierrez’s residence outside of his Congressional District. While Gutierrez, like many other members of Congress, lives outside of the Congressional District he represents, his commitment to the 4^th District is unwavering. Gutierrez was raised in this District, and he resided within its boundaries for nearly fifty years. Moreover, Gutierrez’s constant community outreach efforts make him a strongly felt presence and continually heighten his awareness of his constituents’ needs and concerns.

Another story focuses on the FBI’s questioning of Gutierrez about his relationship with a real estate developer. Since all of Gutierrez’s dealings with this developer were entirely legal, the most interesting thing to note about this story is that it includes a quotation from Elida Cruz. Some readers of La Voz might recognize this as the name of a contributor to the campaign against the Puerto Rican Cultural Center spearheaded by the FBI and the creators of the libelous newspaper, El Pito. It is no coincidence that Elida Cruz would be linked to both of these stories. The FBI’s Counter Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) has a long history of attempting to defame Gutierrez, and the current story about Gutierrez’s squarely legal relationship with a real estate developer should be understood as a part of this history.

The two stories about Gutierrez’s daughter, Omaira Figueroa, highlight her job with the state and her participation in a 26^th Ward affordable housing program. Figueroa’s previous job experiences as a legislative aid and as an assistant sergeant-at-arms for the City Council justly earned her a position with Illinois Commerce Commission. In terms of the 26^th Ward affordable housing program through which Figueroa purchased a condo in 2008, the income for her family of three allowed her to qualify alongside other participants in a program that former Alderman Billy Ocasio created to provide working families in the Humboldt Park area with the opportunity to purchase condos that they might not otherwise be able to afford. Rather than criticize a family that fairly participated in this program, we should celebrate the presence of a young professional family in a neighborhood that too often loses its longstanding residents. What these negative stories ignore is the remarkable number of affordable housing initiatives spearheaded by Billy Ocasio to keep longstanding residents in the Humboldt Park community. These include the La Estancia Apartments built by Bickerdike, the Teresa Roldán Apartments built by Hispanic Housing, the Single Mothers Housing created by LUCHA, as well as the creation of affordable townhouses for families. Each of these programs took shape under the leadership of former Alderman Billy Ocasio. No other alderman in Chicago has as strong a record of providing affordable housing initiatives.

Together, these reports should be viewed as part of a larger, longstanding effort to discredit Luis Gutierrez. Remember that in 1995 the Chicago Sun-Times, in conjunction with the FBI, destroyed one of the most successful Chicago school reform efforts in history at Roberto Clemente high school. Their false reports about Clemente in 1995 waged countless malicious attacks against many of the same figures targeted in the recent stories described above, namely Billy Ocasio and Luis Gutierrez. For more than fifteen years the FBI has conspired with the Chicago Sun-Times to vilify Gutierrez for his strong positions on controversial issues, such as Puerto Rico’s political status and immigration reform.

Gutierrez has lived outside of his district for more than two years, the FBI questioning primarily took place two years ago, his daughter entered her state job more than five years ago, and that same daughter purchased a condo through an affordable housing program nearly two years ago. None of this is current news, so why would these newspapers publish a barrage of negative stories about Gutierrez now? These stories are running just as Gutierrez has become an increasingly prominent critic of Arizona’s anti-immigrant legislation and immigration reform advocate. The juxtaposition of Gutierrez’s outspoken advocacy for immigrants’ rights with the Tribune’s and Sun-Times’ slanderous, anachronistic stories about him, suggests that these media outlets are more interested in furthering a particular political agenda than disseminating important news to their readers. Instead expending so much energy in their attempts to undermine Gutierrez’s credibility, these newspapers should have worked to provide more coverage of the May 1 immigrants’ rights demonstration in which thousands of Chicagoans exercised their collective democratic voice to demand the reform of a failed, discriminatory policy.

by Jonathan Rosa