Pierre
Genevier
813 E. 4th
Place
Los Angeles,
CA 90013-1882
Email:
p_genevier@yahoo.com
Mr. George
W. Bush, President
Mr. Bill
Frist, Mr. Tom Daschle, Senate
Mr. Dennis
Hastert, Mrs. Nancy Pelosi, House of Representative
Mr. William
H. Rehnquist, Supreme Court
Mr. Alan
Greenspan, Federal Reserve Bank
Mr. Michael
Garcia, INS
Mr. Gray
Davis, California
Mrs. Louise
Frechette, United Nations
Mr. Nicholas
Stern, WorldBank
Mr. Ruud
Lubbers, UNHCR
Mr. Ted
Turner, AOL Time Warner
Mr. Bill
Gates, Microsoft
Mr. Kenneth
Roth, HRW
Mr. Richard
Schmalensee, MIT
Mr. Jimmy
Carter, Carter Center
Los
Angeles, January 14th, 2003
Object:
Proposals made to Leaders, ‘large-scale lying’, critical issue, democracy,
weapons of mass destruction, refugee status.
Dear Mr.
President, Dear Madam, Dear Sir,
I take the liberty of writing you to
forward you several letters discussing problems or issues that are important
for the entire humanity. I also must
mention certain difficulties I encounter (ed) here in the US and in other
countries; some of these difficulties are significant of problems the poor are
facing today, and others are due in part to the proposals I made and the
political opinions I expressed while presenting my work. Finally, I would like to make few more remarks
concerning the two proposals and the recent actualities.
Attached documents (letters,
proposals, complaints,…).
In attachment 1, the letter
addressed to country Leaders and I.O. Chiefs, I proposed to limit at 65 the age
to assume the responsibility of country Leader and I.O. Chief and gave several
arguments to justify the establishment of such a limit. In this letter I also mentioned briefly the
proposal to develop a new computer system to improve the transfer and
integration of statistical data at the worldwide level. In attachment 5, you will find a summary
description of this project proposal, the EU evaluation sheet, and some of the
letters of support sent by experts and politicians around the world. In attachment 3, the letter sent to several
University computer sciences’ experts, you will find arguments explaining why
it is an important proposal for the international community and why it would
have a great impact on the fight against poverty.
In attachment 2, the letter sent to
several university Presidents, I presented both proposals and described several
other issues raised by my legal case.
In attachments 5 and 6, the letter sent to the Press (NY Times) and the
letter sent to the Immigration Judge in charge of my application for political
asylum, you can read about what happened to me in France and in the other
countries where I seek asylum (Switzerland and Belgium). In attachment 8, the appeal sent to the
Appeal and State hearing section of California, I described some of the
difficulties I had since I was given the refugee status and after I complained
to obtain all the benefits associated with this status. Finally, in attachment 9, the letter sent to
the Director of the INS Office of Internal Audit, I described the difficulties
I had with the INS.
A serious problem the poor are facing is that the social workers
and other civil servants constantly lie to them to steal them their benefits or
to slow down their effort to come out of poverty or simply to show the power
they have over them and the hate they have toward the poor. This is not a problem specific to the US, in
Belgium I was given a note from the minister of social affairs in which he was
asking the social workers (working in refugee camps or shelters) not to lie to
refugee. Refugee like the very poor
(homeless…) have almost no way of complaining legally (or if they have some in
theory, it is in reality impossible, because of their living condition or the
complexity and length of the procedure), so the people with which they are in
relation show absolutely no respect for them and rob them the little they have
or are entitled to have (this is often referred to as corruption).
Large-scale lying and’ unethical’
behavior.
‘Being lie to’ is, of course, not
happening only to the poor. Mr.
Schmalensee wrote in an article ‘What I understand happened at Worldcom
didn’t involve an ethical problem. It
involved outright, large-scale lying
to investors. It is not a subtle point
to teach that you should not lie…’. No,
it is certainly ‘not a subtle point to teach you should not lie’, Mr.
Schmalensee is very right. In our
information society lying to someone is like poisoning him. Now if the
‘educated and well informed’ investors of Worldcom and other corporations can
be fooled by the lies of a dishonest management, the poor can even more easily
be fooled by the lies of social workers and other persons (lawyer, civil
servants,) they must be in contact with.
And most of the time there is no trace of these lies, even though their
impact can be a matter of life and death.
The rapes of children by catholic
priests and the lies told by the church to cover them are significant of the
strong tendency of the catholic church to lie and to show little respect for
the new generations. The Pope, for
example, shows no respect for the new generations when he refuses to retire
despite his age and illness, and he lies when he says that ‘his life is in
the hand of god’. Not only does he
lie, but he also insults his Swiss guard who protects him, the doctors who took
care of him after he was shot, and the ones who take care of him now that he is
very sick, the scientists who develop the medicine he is taking and the cooks
who prepare his food. Many people who
do not get all the care he receives, in Africa for example, do not even live
until 40 or 50 on the average (and he is 81).
Some other religious communities also have the tendency to lie, and we
have seen the disastrous results of these lies on September 11th
2001 in New York and Washington.
As you have noticed, I had (have
again more recently) informed the press of my proposals and of my
difficulties. They can perfectly
understand the importance of the issues raised by the proposals and by my legal
case, but some of the persons I contacted simply said that they had not
received my letter or did not give me any answer at all. The assistant of the Secretary General of
Amnesty International also pretended that ‘they’ (AI) had not received my
letter in early 2002. She asked me to
send another one, which I did, but she still pretended, she had not seen the
new letter I sent. I asked her to make
some research to find this letter and to contact me back, but she never did
(contact me)! The administrative
officer of the United Nations Foundation refused to forward to the board
members the letters (att. n 1 and 2) I had sent along with a job application,
although I had clearly stated that I was writing also to inform the board
members of these proposals and issues (that are particularly important for the
very poor they are trying to help)!
These lies and behaviors are not
surprising, even though they are to me ‘dishonest’. Every time that a scandal comes out in the press and media like
Enron, WorldCom,, the people closed to the problem like board members… or even
journalists (the CEO of the Financial Times criticized her own journalists for
not having talked about these important financial scandals before!) are often
contacted and asked if they knew about the problem, and, if yes, why they did not
say anything about it. Here every body
understands perfectly that the behavior of older (than 65) leaders is
outrageous (and not just the behavior of Mr. Saddam Hussein, Robert Mugabe,
Fidel Castro, J. Wolfensohn, Ariel Sharon, Yasser Arafat, Jean Paul II,…).
They simply don’t want to hear about
the problem officially, in order not to have a part of responsibility in the
scandal and in the death of the victims of these incompetent leaders,
thousands, hundred of thousands or millions of people (poor mostly). They may also want to avoid to displease
certain older leaders or simply to express their hate for the poor. The fact for example that the Press and
Media have several old well known and very rich Leaders like MM. Rupert
Murdoch, Summers Redstone, Silvio Berlusconi, not long ago Leo Kirch,…, may
explain partly the fact that the Press and Media were more than reluctant to
talk about this problem.
Critical situation, responsibilities and critical issue.
I don’t need to remind you that there are people dying almost
every day in Israel and Palestine because two old leaders (above 70), who have
known only war, show absolutely no respect for the new generations and the poor
by holding on to the highest responsibility.
These two leaders are obviously not competent enough and aware of the
new knowledge and technology that could help them to solve the problems of
their population. It is probably not
surprising also for some of you to hear about the corruption scandal at the
Likoud party or about the general corruption problems in the palestian
authority! It is a form of corruption
to allow an old leader (above 65) to be country Leader or to manage an
International Organization or to be Chief of Justice.
There are also many people (about 6
millions according to some statistics) that may die from hunger in Zimbabwe,
and not just because of the very dry weather they have this year! At a more global level, the statistics are
even more outrageous:
-
There are
millions of people whose life expectancy has dropped below 50 (40 in some
country)
-
There are
great number of people who are sent or forced to go on pre retirement at 55, 60
to leave the place to younger (cheaper and ‘better educated’) people.
-
‘90 %
working age population is not covered by pension schemes capable of providing
adequate retirement income’.
-
The gap
between the rich and the poor has increased, Mr. Larsen from the IMF writes in
one of his recent speeches: ‘It is also true that never before has the gap
between the rich and the poor been as wide as today. And that the gap is continuing to widen.’
-
And there
about 1.2 billion people living with less than one dollar a day and about 3
billions (or 2.8) that lives with less than 2 dollars a day.
Don’t you think that older country leaders and I.O.s Chiefs, particularly
the ones who hold on to the highest responsibility after 65, do have at
least a part of responsibility in this result?
And isn’t it more than fair to ‘question’ the behavior of a more
than 70 years old business leader who has more than 20 billions dollars (or
even ‘1 billion’) in his account and who continues to ‘make deals’ to become
even richer when at the same time he cannot ignore the situation I describe
above?
The problem of limiting the age of high-level Leaders is both a
management (or governance) issue and an ethical issue. Not talking about this issue is simply ‘large-scale lying’ to the people
of the world. Not long ago the NY Times
made a big issue (in an editorial) of the fact that the Augusta National Club
did not accept women as member. This
subject was then discussed by many other news papers and televisions. Later an employee of Mr. Chretien gave a
‘bird name’ to the US President, and the next day every television and
newspaper talked about it, even in Iraq. But no one wants to talk about an age
limit for county Leaders or I.O. Chiefs, an issue that costs the live of a
great number of people around the world every day!
Giving money to help the poor is not
enough. If ‘we’ give money and, at the
same time, act completely stupid or in a dishonest manner, this money will not
benefit the very poor it is intended to help (in fact this is exactly what is
happening, the gap between the rich and the poor has increased these past years
although many efforts were made, debt relief initiative...)! If ‘we’ do not explain clearly what are the
responsibilities of Leaders, and why it is wrong to stay country Leader after
65, the money ‘we’ give looks more like a way to obtain ‘favors’ from these old
Leaders and I.O. Chiefs than a way to help the poor who obviously become poorer
everyday. To establish an age limit for
country Leaders and I.O. Chiefs is a critical issue (and it is urgent that
‘we’ talk about it).
Democracy, fair election and
justice.
And it is not outrageous and not
against the idea of democracy despite the remark of a French Deputy, former
candidate at the French presidential election I contacted (see att. n 2). The United States that is often referred to as the most advanced
democracy, has limited its Presidential Mandate to two terms. The European Court of Human Right has
limited at 70 the age of its judges.
Even some International Organizations limit at 55 the age to apply for
certain jobs, so the establishment of such a limit is not at all against the
idea of democracy. Au contraire, I
believe that one of the important goals of democracy is to make laws that are
in the interest of all the community. And that an election is fair, only if the
people do receive all the information on important issues, and on knowledge and
new technologies available to solve the problems of the community.
Mr. Carter, who travels the world
to, among other things, promote the importance of fair elections and the idea
of democracy, may agree with me. In
Africa, to have a fair election may mean (first) to give an ‘easy and safe’
access to the voting office to the people and to make sure that the votes are
counted right. But in rich countries,
to have a fair election ‘we’ must make sure that the people are honestly
informed on the new knowledge, technology and issues that are important to
improve the life of the people. This is
why I believe the French presidential election was unfair. No one from the press, media or politicians
involved in the election discussed the issue I raised on the age limit for
Leaders although several candidates were above this age limit of 65. The election in Israel will also be unfair,
if ‘we’ don’t talk about it before the election.
The officials (politicians, ) who limited at 70 the mandate of the
judge of the European Court simply addressed some aspects of this ethical and
management issue. It seems that some of
the judges have complained about this limit, but instead they should have complained
about the fact that such a limit was not applied in other professions or
countries. The fact that the US Supreme
Court has three judges above 70 is a very bad example for the world. The French Chief Justice is about 79; this
is wrong, this intellectually and ethically very wrong, but not
surprising. You understand that if you
allow the people who are responsible to say ‘what is right’ and ‘what is
wrong’, justice leaders and religious leaders, to continue working after 65,
they cannot criticize the politicians who behave badly on this matter (and
other matter also like the immunity of the French President).
The fact that there are no laws to limit the age for country
Leaders does not make it right; it simply makes it not illegal. There is in the European Convention of Human
Right an article (7) that says that there can be ‘no punishment without law’. This article is very important of course
since it avoids people to be sentenced on unfair grounds, but it is not really
appropriate for the leaders and politicians who take advantage of the absence
of laws even though they have the possibility and the responsibility to change
or improve the law. We absolutely must
denounce and break this vicious cycle.
Mr. Chirac, who refuses to talk to the justice, was obviously not
willing to do that and to talk about this issue, but the United States, the
most advanced country in the world, may understand the problem better than any
other country.
Weapons of mass destructions, massacres and UN responsibility.
The US and the UN complain about Iraq’s weapons of mass
destruction, which I understand perfectly, but as you know, in our information
society and given the terrible situation of the world (billions of poor, deadly
diseases,) information is also a weapon
of mass destruction that kill every day (much more than Mr. Saddam Hussein’s
weapons of mass destruction); Not
talking about the establishment of an age limit for Leaders is a good example
of this fact. So it would be
fair (and it is important) that we pay a more careful attention to what information
we give to the people through the media, and to what issues should be put
forward first.
I believe that Mr. Saddam Hussein (65) should not be President of
Iraq even if the UN inspectors do not find any weapons of mass
destruction. He has a very poor record
as leader, he made a war to Iran that cost the lives of many people, then he
attacked Kuwait, killed and robbed many other people, and then he paid very
little attention to the international community’s concerns. And finally, now that he has reached 65, he
does not show any respect for the new generations (which is not at all
surprising), but he is not the only one in this situation (or a similar
situation) as you know. So perhaps we
could look at the Iraqi problem as part of a more global problem. The problem of old Leaders who did a ‘bad
job’ and continue to show no respect for the new generations and the poor.
And instead of using first airplanes and bombs, ‘we’ could
use ‘our’ information weapon, ‘information tools’ (TV, Newspaper, Internet,
phone, satellite...), a clear explanation on what are the responsibilities of
Leaders, logical and good sense arguments that apply to everyone, and a
‘significant gesture’ (the immediate resignation of important older Leaders
like Mr. Wolfensohn, Mr. Renhquist, Mr. Annan, Mr. Greenspan, Mr. Johnston,
Pope Jean Paul II …) to explain to the people of world that Mr. Saddam Hussein,
Mr. Arafat, Mr. Mugabe, Mr. Sharon, Mr. Fidel Castro… should step down to bring
more justice and more peace to the
world, to decrease the gap between the rich and the poor and to show more
respect toward the new generations and the poor.
Dr. Brundlandt explained that she will not seek another term
mainly because of her age, she perfectly knows the situation of the world and
feels that she has done a good job as WHO Director General, but she still feels
it is more important at her age to let someone else continue her effort than
holding on to one of the highest positions on the planet. Of course, Mr. Annan, who will reach 65 in
April this year, should have shown the same honesty and respect for the people
of the world, particularly after he admitted publicly the responsibility of the
UN, and more precisely of the Department of Peace Keeping Operation he headed
at the time, in the massacre of 800 000 people in Rwanda.
The UN should have discussed this issue. If the Security Council can impose on Iraq to disarm, it
certainly can recommend or impose an age limit to lead a country. It also could have suggested that I.O.
Chiefs show the example on this matter like Dr. Brundlandt did. I have informed Mr. Annan on this subject
several times, and he perfectly understands that this issue is particularly
important for the people of Africa whose life expectancy has dropped sharply
recently, but it seems that he has decided to close his eyes on this issue like
he did for the massacre in Rwanda. He
also closed his eyes on my computer project proposal that was supported by many
International Organization’s experts, and let me continue to have great
difficulties everywhere I go.
None of the undeserved prices and honors (Nobel Peace Price,
Honorary doctorate degree in law from Northwestern, United Nations Association
price, ) he receives can erase the part of responsibility he has in the massacre
of 800 000 people as former head of the UN Peace Keeping Operation
Department. And he is not a man of
vision, because if he had had the slightest bit of vision, he would have
anticipated the massacre in Rwanda (he is from a country not so far from Rwanda).
There is not one criminal in the US jail who has a part of responsibility in a
crime as terrible as the Rwanda massacre.
And no one is saying anything to him although in America, a man has been
(not long ago) sentenced to 25 years in jail for having stolen 11 dollars. A big corporation has been sentenced to pay
28 billions dollars to a victim who got cancer after using its products.
Another man has been sentenced to stay more than 20 years in jail
and to pay more than 2 billions dollars for having modified the formula of some
medicine that gave the cancer to one of its user. When you hear about these sentences, you feel that the United
States really values life, and that this country believes in the idea of
justice. But if at the same time the US
does not say anything about Mr. Annan responsibility in the Rwanda massacre and
about the retirement age of 65 he has reached, then it is obvious that there is
very little justice in the world when it comes to really important matter. It also makes it easy for people like Mr.
Ousama Ben Laden to recruit their terrorists to commit more terrible
crimes. There are no two good
behaviors, Dr. Brundlandt’s behavior and Mr. Annan’s behavior. Only Dr. Brundlandt’s behavior is right and
appropriate.
Mr.
Turner and Mr. Gates, your donations are very important for the world, but they
will only really help the very poor, if ‘we’ don’t just say ‘I am sorry’
for the Rwanda massacre. I.O. Chiefs
must feel that they have a part of responsibility in what is going on, because
they do. Just like you have something
to do with the creation and the development of CNN and Microsoft, I ‘think’!
Refugee status and compensation.
The subject, issues and proposals that I discussed in this letter
are not ‘just’ important for the entire humanity, they are also important in my
trials against France, Belgium, and my asylum application in the US. Even though you don’t have a lot of details
on my case, you can see that I am constantly victim of errors from the
administrations (even here in the US so far) and you can probably understand
why. For example, here I was given the
refugee status (att. n 7), which was a great relief for me, but now I am not
even sure of that anymore, although I had been told that once you have the refugee
status you have it for your life!
I understand that some of the remarks I make and that some of the
issues raised by case are indirect critic toward certain well-known US Citizens
and toward certain US system of law (like the legal help system,). And I am very sorry for that, but they are
important for everyone on earth and it is my responsibility to make them since
no one seems to understand or to be ready to talk about the problem. And it is also my duty to explain their
importance to the justice (‘you’), if I want to obtain justice and a
compensation for the many undeserved difficulties I encountered in France and
elsewhere. I could have easily talked
about the many strong points of the United States like I have done in the
past. There are surely more to talk
about in this area, but you know that to be fair we must also talk about the
weaknesses of ‘our’ ‘systems’, particularly when they are not specific to one
country.
You will notice that I have first talked to many I.O. and Country
experts and politicians around the world.
I have obtained both direct and indirect support for my proposals
(letters of interest, the decision of Dr. Brundlandt…). I made the effort to base my proposals and
remarks on logical arguments or simple good sense arguments or accepted
knowledge. So I should not be punished,
persecuted and robbed from everything I have and the little I am entitled to
have for my remarks (or for no other reasons either). Au contraire I am entitled to obtain justice and should be
allowed to obtain a job to continue my work, so I am asking you to help me to
obtain justice for me and for the many people who are concerned by the issues
raised by my case. I remain
Yours sincerely,
Pierre Genevier
Attachments:
Att. n 1: Letters sent to G8 Leaders and
I.O.s Chiefs dated December 23rd 2001 (7 pages).
Att. n 2: Letter sent to ‘8’ US University
Presidents dated May 29th 2002 (6 pages).
Att. n 3: Letter sent to several computer
science experts dated October 29th 2002 (3 pages).
Att. n 4: Brief summary of the project
proposal I worked on, one page evaluation from the Inco-Copernicus experts, and some of the letters of support
(16 pages)
Att. n 6: Letter sent to the Immigration
Judge dated August 21st 2002 (9 pages).
Att. n 7: Verification of status from the
INS issued on September 5th 2002 (1 page, DS).
Att. n 8: Appeal sent to the California
appeal court for social rights (5 pages).
Att. n 9: Complaint sent to the Director of
the INS Office of Internal Audit (6 pages).