Re: KRRS's reservations on WSF

maybe Attac is a fierce opponent of US present policies, but I really would like to know whether Attac is or not anticapitalistic and antipatriarcal. Further, i would like to know, if that is possible, why it was allowed the presence of the Chiapas Governador in the last Porto Alegre Forum, specially in the human rights table, after being accused with strong proofs by the Human Right Organizations of violeting human rights in Chiapas, or the presence of French Minister, responsible for not specially "nice" policy on migration.

And well, just for other small questions, why Attac never appologize for the declarations on the Swiss mobilizations and on the death of Carlo Giovani, where instead of look to the violence of the fascist police, which toture in police stations, which atack even the white hands, ... the declarations were focusing in the violence of the black block?.

Why didn't Attac help at all when in Genova the people were arrested and torture in the police station, and instead given back the only secure building to sleep for the internationalist in Genova the last days, and where all the things of the arrested people were?.For not speaking of the eternal Davos.

Just as a question, why didn't you answer the email of Swamy about the power in the decision making of the NGOs, instead of the grassroot organizations?.

In the last social forum in Ecuador, I really have the feeling on coming back to the old times, when before the big conference the NGOs organize a forum, with the small diference that in many workshops there was let space for social leaders to speak. Of course, indymedia was atacked by the social forum and the coordination was almost not existing between the two comunication centers. And I am understood, Florencia was not so much difference.

Knowing the process that become in the call for the first forum in Porto Alegre, where people from social movements were invited to speak for 3 minutes, and then the documents and conclusions made by the "intelectuals", (when they were allowed to speak, of course), the eternal NGOs and intelectuals speaking in the name (and legitimazing themselves by that) of social movements.

In fact, I am really surprise of receiving an email from you throught the caravan list, that it is part of a PGA European process, accused by ATTAC of being radical and violents. I am very surprise, and I really would like, when it is possible, if you could then explain me what it is the position of ATTAC about capitalist, patriarcy, autonomus movements and PGA.