Journal of Alternative Complementary & Integrative Medicine Category: Medicine Type: Mini Review

Political Manipulation of the Strike at UNAM 1999-2000. Corrected and Enlarged Version

Alejandro Cuevas-Sosa1*
1 Centro de Prevención y Tratamiento de la Violencia Sexual e Intrafamiliar, Mexico

*Corresponding Author(s):
Alejandro Cuevas-Sosa
Centro De Prevención Y Tratamiento De La Violencia Sexual E Intrafamiliar, Mexico

Received Date: Sep 18, 2023
Accepted Date: Sep 29, 2023
Published Date: Oct 06, 2023


National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), strike 1999-2000. BEL communications of 11/15-19/2015. We invited the BEGs of the main actors Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de Leon ex-president of Mexico (12/01/1994 to 11/30/2000), Francisco Jose Barnes de Castro (ex-rector; 1997-1999), Guillermo Soberon Acevedo (ex-rector; 1973-1981), Octavio Rivero Serrano (ex-rector; 1981-1985), Marcela Meneses Reyes, and Soberon’s daughter-in-law. Once again, we emphasize that the one who wanted to decline the invitation to the biocommunications that let us know about it. As usual, all the BEGs accepted the invitation. All invited BEGs agreed that their names and comments could be published.


Biomaterial-bioenergemal universes; Bioenergemal communication; Bioenergeme; Mexico City; National Autonomous University of Mexico; Neuromindego; Strike


BELC: Bioenergemal Communication

BML: Biomaterial

BEL: Bioenergemal

BEG: Bioenergeme

UNAM (acronym in Spanish): National Autonomous University of Mexico

CDMX (acronym in Spanish): Mexico City

NMEGO: Neuromindego


Ernesto Zedillo: did you provoke the strike in the UNAM of 1999-2000? He affirms with his head and says: “Yes, I accepted that they burst into the UNAM persons foreign to that Institution, to the UNAM, to break the academic activities for the purpose of discrediting it. Committing an outrage against her labour and academic life, and after seeing interested persons in appropriating of her, nationals and foreigners. What these persons were claiming was to dogmatize her.” What do you want to say to the university students of the UNAM? “The BEG of Ernesto Zedillo says to them that I admire them, I respect them and value the fact that they belong and feel proud of the UNAM. That many of them excel without pretensions, which develop their capacities for the benefit of humanity. And that also many of them, in situations similar to those that I lived and in that I grew, could have gone out forward with simplicity, with the effort that the same Institution transmits. On the other hand, it shames me and I apologize before all the university students who had to leave the Institution when my stupid NMEGO braked the UNAM. Leading them to go to other private schools to conclude their studies.” Ernesto Z, and those that stopped studying for not being able to pay a private school: what do you say to them? “That I regret very much having removed that opportunity in their studies in a way that they could support them”. In what country had you liked having been born? “If I should ask my NMEGO, it would say to you that in China, Japan, the United States, but in no country she would feel satisfied. Namely, the desire of my neuromindego to have been born in another country is understood better if it is explained that the neuromindego wants to deny the reality of its existence.”6 Ernesto Z: do you recognize as yours these answers of the BEL communication of October 11, 2008? “Yes, doctor.” We retake the current BEL communication. Ernesto Z: were Francisco Barnes and you colluded to push on strike the UNAM from April 20, 1999 to, let us say, April 24, 2000, approximately one year and days of conflict? “Yes, we were agreeing, there was that implied agreement.” Francisco Barnes, at the beginning of the strike, surrounded by journalists, without coming to the case you declared that the strike would not be brief, that you were prepared for a strike that was going “for length” [sic] [1-3]. As it was. I mean, not asked explanation. Did Francisco B come to the case that declaration? “Not, doctor, because there I demonstrated or my BEG made clear the plan that was had against the UNAM.” In the past, I never thought of treating this problem in the BEL research, until now that I intuit it for the motive, I hope it is clear. Let me know any inaccurate fact about it [1,2].


Convinced of the coarse political handling of the general strike of the UNAM’s members, from my part in August 21 of 1999 and, one month later, in September 25 of 1999, I published two articles [4,5] in the English medical journal The Lancet. And in October 7 of 1999, by invitation, I published an article in the English scientific journal Nature.6 In those three articles, I denounce the political manipulation of the strike in the UNAM; I did call the international scientific community to protest for the strike and to rescue the UNAM. And, besides, in the article published in Nature I make responsible the university authorities of then of being colluded with the Zedillo government to call on and support this long and poisonous strike of the members of the university institution. Approximately a pair of weeks after the article was published in Nature and more than six months after the strike started, 1) ex-rectors Guillermo Soberon A and Octavio Rivero S, according to memory, they came to a television newscaster to be pronounced in relation to this strike in the UNAM. 2) In addition, two weeks after the previous event, precisely in November 12, 1999, one month after the article in Nature, hastily and with clear mitigation for him and for all, Francisco Barnes resigned to the rectory. And, 3) rapidly, on the following week, November 19, 1999, five weeks after the article published in Nature, Juan Ramon de la Fuente Ramirez, then Secretary of Health of the government of Zedillo, was appointed rector (1999-2007). Juan Ramon could calm people down because they were much irritated. I only make to notice two precedents, 1.- that in August 5, 1999, two weeks before the first article in The Lancet, Barnes threatened indicating that if the strike was continuing, the UNAM should “close its doors indefinitely.”3 Was it like that, Barnes? “It was that way and fortunately was not realized, doctor.” And 2.-, that between August 25 and 28, 1999, only one week after the first article published in The Lancet, Ernesto Z changes his distant and evasive speech on the university conflict into one in which sends an ultimatum to the strikers to finish the unemployment before using methods of the State. Was it like that, Ernesto Z? “It was this way, doctor.” As soon as the articles begun being published, we could send multiple letters abroad with copy of one, two or three articles in every envelope. We addressed to diverse international organisms and personalities. Some of them did not answer, but from others, very kind, we received supporting answers. Ernesto Z: did any representatives of international organisms or personalities comment to you anything on this matter in Mexico? “Directly to me not, simply I did that to come [sic; Spanglish?] to the Foreign Secretary at that moment, this notification was done and that one was informing them what was regarding the strike. In another moment, indeed they said to me on the strike in an international meeting, that is why it was pressing to give an answer and that the problem was solved.” Any comment that biorremember in particular? “Someone mentioned that the maximum academic institution is in problems and, when this happens, the country breaks: ‘put beams to it and good foundations to your institution otherwise your country collapses’, they said to me.” Rosario Green Macias, being Foreign Secretary (SRE, 01/05/1998 to 11/30/2000) you have to inform yourself and inform the interested parties about the letters and copies of the articles that we send abroad during the strike in the UNAM of 1999-2000. Was it like that, Rosario? “Yes, doctor, this way was.” Did you biorremember some event in particular? “Not, doctor, especially not.” And in general: how was your experience on this matter? “Suddenly calls from other countries began coming on the internal complexity in the UNAM and we realized how they had been informed. The question of some was why you were sending the letters like reporting in a personal way and simultaneously worried by the university community. Since in some countries it usually is different, their declaration usually is collective and that was attracting attention of them. We had only to give a brief answer and of solution, because they wanted to know what to answer you. But we did not know exactly what could imply a more serious and formal movement. Now we realize that the transcendence was major.” Rosario presents to us a bioscene in which the SRE receives a fax with the information that we sent abroad. Very kind, Rosario. “Yes, doctor” [1]. 

Ernesto Z: what grade of influence was there from the international financial organisms to attack the UNAM with the strike of 1999-2000? “Principally of two countries, doctor, one of this continent and another European.” It is never missing who comes here –in complicity with some local politicians– to provoke confrontations between the strata of our population and to plunder the goods of Mexico. Is it true? “Very true, very true, doctor.” Ernesto Z: did you authorize that, fortunately, six months after calling on strike, Guillermo Soberon and Octavio Rivero go to a news TV program to make public their pronouncement? “Yes, we do not deny it, doctor.” Was it like that, Guillermo S and Octavio R? “This way it was, doctor.” Ernesto Z: did you decide that F. Barnes resigned from the rectory of the UNAM on November 12, 1999? “Yes, doctor.” Was it like that, Francisco Barnes? “Thus, it was, doctor.” I specify that in November 10, 1999, two days before the resignation, 64 (sixty-four) members of the University Advice supported Barnes and only 10 (ten) were against his plan.3 Namely, there were many that, in appearance, turned out to be involved, for omission or for commission, in the problem. True F. Barnes? “True, doctor.” Ernesto Z: how did the ex-rectors behave with you, as for example Guillermo S and Octavio R, during the strike? “As allied, doctor.” Explicit? “Not, rather as concealed, not to be so, obvious.” Guillermo Soberon and Octavio Rivero, we suppose that none of the two would act against the interests of the UNAM and that the political pressures are many. Clarify for us: was it like that, as Zedillo affirms? “Yes, doctor, it was this way.” Ernesto Z: did you influence so, that they appointed Juan Ramon de la Fuente Ramirez as rector of the UNAM? “Yes, because it would have to arrange now what had already gone away of our hands and someone who could act politically … of way … so, that it was not harming anybody.” Was it like that, Juan Ramon? “Yes, doctor, this way was.” Ernesto Z, inside the undeniable effervescence of the different university sectors in favour of the UNAM: what so, much could have influenced the three articles that I published, so, that two, four and five weeks after published the article in Nature, respectively, the three events that I have described triggered? (1.- The visit of Guillermo Soberon and Octavio Rivero to the television news program, 2.- Barnes resignation and 3.- appointment of Ramon de la Fuente). “Yes, doctor, completely, there was an alarm on a global scale and it led that this was stopped, otherwise it had continued. Especially that many students of the UNAM had been awarded a scholarship in England and other countries.” Ernesto Z: did you send to me from the Department of the Interior a mom dressed in –masculine– jacket of the UNAM, with her adolescent daughter [my BEG shows them the bioscene], in fact to maraud, but according to this investigating triteness? “Yes, doctor, there was this indication so, that from the UNAM they were finding out. You were already known and there was a sufficient information” [sic; Spanglish?]. Did these three articles influence on your government to help soften and end up failing and spoiling your stubbornness against the UNAM and your opportune obedience to external and internal influences too? “Yes, doctor, is as you precisely describe it.” Guillermo Soberon: did you summon your pals so, that they were protesting in Nature for my article? “Yes, doctor, although there was no answer as I had waited.” Guillermo S: does not it seem incongruous to you as you behaved? “Yes, doctor, completely.” Do you mention, Guillermo S, this matter of the strike in the UNAM of 1999-2000 in your recent memoirs’ book or not? “Not, doctor, I comment it of a collateral way but not in specific.” What do you reproach yourself, Guillermo S, at 15 years of the strike in the UNAM? “Having acted without responsibility and having left that the things be complicated more. To try to pass for a connoisseur of a matter of organization, let us say academic, it is very difficult to compare it with the political diligence.” Did you overestimate yourself? “Yes, yes I overestimated myself, doctor; because I was feeling the support of other politicians but later, I remained alone.” Octavio Rivero Serrano: what do you reproach yourself at 15 years of the strike in the UNAM? “My mistake on having supported to meaningless projects.” Marcela Meneses, what does it look like to you these aspects related to the strike in the UNAM of 1999-2000? “For me, doctor, is like a gold-mine that is discovered, that is necessary to take care of it to prevail [3]”. 

Ernesto Z, that the Preventive Federal Police (PFP) entered in the University City (CU) and that they arrested some young students was only a coarse and violent manoeuvre to calm the running high feelings between the university community and to end with the disturbances that you and your accomplices armed so, that this way finally everything was returning to normality. Or what were you chasing with these manoeuvres? “Yes, doctor, you correctly interpret the manipulation that was doing to hide the purpose that existed behind the whole intimidation exceeded in the CU.” Ernesto Z: did you give instructions so, that the PFP be moving back (it entered in February 6, 2000) from the university enclosure in April 23, 2000 so, that the problem was definitely concluded? “It had to be like that, doctor.” Ernesto Z, fifteen years after the event: what do you opine of having promoted that strike? “A frank error in which I had to demonstrate the favour to the Polytechnic one (National Polytechnic Institute, IPN) and not favour to the UNAM, and where also I did clearly the political alliances to spoil the UNAM and that was drooping.” F. Barnes, fifteen years later: what do you say on your collusion in this outrage of the government of Zedillo against the UNAM? “A treachery to the UNAM and of course to Mexico.” Ernesto Z: to what does it owe that when the internal problems of Mexico are announced abroad, it is when the government hurries to correct them? “Because it goes to have an evaluation and there is evidence from which the things are not resulting and that it might hide, and it discredits you so, much economic as politically. Especially, as in this case, it becomes clear to a country that does not have in that moment interest to support the presidents, but he is a leader and promoter of the culture, science and education.” To what country do you refer? “England.” Ernesto Z: did it embolden you –together with others– the biocollapse of Octavio Paz, happened in April 1998, to arm this offence against the UNAM? “Yes, doctor, partly that happened and my NMEGO is not very skilful either to anticipate the conflicts and the consequences of the same ones.” Is this allegiance to the Institution the one that attracts your attention on the graduate ones from the UNAM, Ernesto Z? “Yes, doctor, and that they show it wherever that they go.” Octavio Paz: would you have protested as the authorities of the moment before that strike did not obviously do it, on time and with steadfastness –or on time and form–? “Yes, doctor, of course, it is already known that Mexican and graduated from the UNAM defends it. The one who supposes to be foreigner and does not defend it, has sold or is a traitor, they will obviously not going to do it.” We missed you, Octavio; this has not ended. “Yes, doctor, this has not ended and simply your work now is persuasive with the authorities of the UNAM.” Ernesto Z: do you suppose having supported the Polytechnic in everything that you might have? “Not, doctor, I did not do it.” What stopped you? “I do not know it, possibly the conditions... Well, motives there could be many, but simply I did not do it, doctor.” Then, was there real favouritism to the Polytechnic or not either? “Seeing it like that, doctor, not either.” You never felt satisfied belonging to the IPN: is it true? “True, doctor.” Do you tend to lie Ernesto Z? “Yes, doctor, I recognize that yes.” To the point of recognizing and accepting you as dysfunctional ignorant and bioenergeme-parasite? “Yes, doctor.” Yes, what is it, Ernesto Z? “I consider myself this way, Doctor.” Do you like to add anything else? “Not, doctor.” Jorge Saldaña: what do you say about this offence of the strike in the UNAM of 1999-2000? “Unfortunate for our alma mater, although it is true the politicians are always taking part in it, also we are and will be some who cautiously we keep on supporting for benefit of the same one.” Very kind all of you [1]. 

BELC 12/13/2015. Ernesto Z: did you order that the three articles that we published and the letters that we sent abroad were not mentioned nor much less the international effect that they caused? “Not specifically the articles, but yes it was an order that the publications had to be authorized … Only the publications of authorized newspapers.” Was everything censured this way? “Yes, doctor.” Juan Ramon de la Fuente R: did you find out about the three articles that we published and of the letters that we sent abroad? “Yes, doctor, yes I found out.” What was the indication that you received regarding them? “That they were neither considered nor diffused.” Where did that indication come from, Juan Ramon? “From Soberon.” Specifically? “Yes, specifically, doctor.” Was it like that, Guillermo S? “It was this way, doctor.” What led you to censuring that way the articles, Guillermo S? “Such a forceful form in which it is spoken about the events.” What impressed you of that forcefulness, Guillermo S? “The clarity and the certainty with which you express yourself.” Did you think of doing anything to end with the problem of the strike? “Not like what you did, doctor.” It spent six months without you doing something: is it true? “True, doctor.” Will it be that what in fact troubled you and perhaps it still troubles you is the fact that we have done what you were not allowed to do by yourselves? “In effect, that troubled me, doctor.” What had you liked to do during the strike, Guillermo S? “To have taken this initiative and forcefulness so, that of the UNAM neither the image was deteriorating nor much less [sic] the process carried out that I was taking during that year. The publication of the articles had not happened if we had denounced shortly after it began the strike and could have braked the events. And this had been a moment to be remembered” [3-6]. Had the wise move been for you, Guillermo S, and not for us? “I had liked that way, doctor.” Did you think that in fact it was simple to do it? “Yes, I thought that in some moment, doctor.” Juan Ramon: did you mention these articles in your conversations with Ignacio Solares published recently? “Not that I remember, doctor.” Ignacio: do you mention anything regarding these articles in the book-dialogue that recently you announced? “Not, doctor.” Ignacio Solares: were you informed about the three articles that we published abroad and of the letters that we send to foreign institutions and personalities? “Not, doctor, was not informed.” What do you say about the existence of these documents? “Very valuable, especially that gave opportunity to be known what really happened inside the Institution.” What do you opine that they have been omitted? “Deplorable because information that was clarifying the events of the strike was omitted.” In what condition does your recent book on the strike in the UNAM of 1999-2000 remain, Ignacio? “It remains incomplete and unimportant this way.” Juan Ramon: what do you say that we have published these articles and sent those letters? “Fortunately, doctor, you paid attention to your BEG indeed and announced the events as they were presenting before themselves and hence the problem has been solved, since it was spoken with the right persons so, that the problem was solved and was considered concluded.” Juan Ramon: what do you reproach yourself 15 years after the strike? “Doctor, seemingly not at all, but reflecting now I realize that I was not sufficiently convinced to be able to do anything more for the UNAM.” Octavio Rivero and Guillermo Soberón: what do you opine that I have published the three articles in England and that we have sent multiple letters abroad? Octavio R: “It does not surprise me, doctor, because you have always behaved that way. Resolute with the conviction of support to the UNAM and anything just to support.” Guillermo S: “It was a blow to my ego, doctor, because you were making clear the circumstances and the events that were preceding to the strike.” Guillermo S, I suppose that you were not hoping that the UNAM was paralyzed: or was it indeed? “I was not waiting for it, doctor, nevertheless I would lie if I say that it was going … that an aftereffect was not occurring against the UNAM after everything that was happening.” What has been more important to you: the UNAM or your NMEGO? “It has been the NMEGO, doctor.” How could you have tried to defend the image of the UNAM having condescended with Ernesto Zedillo? “What you say is true, doctor. It would fall down in contradictions if I say something different. To be on the defensive.” Had you been easy to be uninterested of the spiteful Zedillo: do you agree? “Yes, also, doctor, I agree.” And what spiteful are you Guillermo S? “Much, doctor. I am a man that not even tolerate myself. I always justify my actions and decisions.” What made you like that? “Perhaps that there was always in the family a status that it was propitiating that the power was happening, but it was not of the hand with the best human conditions. With the best principles or human values … there were disloyalty, abuses, disappointments.” Guillermo Soberon accepted to have been sexually abused from six to seven years of age on behalf of an employee of the family. The abuse ended because his mother discovered it and his parents made responsible him. “There were some occasions of abuse,” he affirmed, “but the strongest thing was not that experience but the form in which they suppressed me, they reprimanded me … First she was my mother and she informed my dad and the two got angry very much, but they did not do anything. And it always was this way.” What aftermath do you consider that these abuses left to you? “My mother discovered me masturbating, she simply told off me; the bully did not return. Then, that experience left to me a consequence of injustice that I have taken myself all over, doctor. Thanks for asking me because I had not spoken it with anybody this way, sincerely. That is why I am considered to be inadequate and to be justifying my acts, my decisions that I know myself that they are, that they were inadequate. That is why my NMEGO is not interested in the others.” Was it like that, Galo Soberon? “Yes, doctor, it was this way.” Galo S: what did you want to say to your son? “That we are proud of him and regret not having listened to him at the moment when we must have done it.” Guillermo S: have you had a dream in which a religious figure or something similar appears? “Yes, doctor, sometimes I have had dreams with figures, with religious figures … I remember one in which I was in a church and a religious figure was falling down on me and was waking up … Perhaps san Martín de Porres, someone like that.”… Guillermo S: was mulatto the subject that sexually abused at you as a child? “Yes, doctor.” What do you suppose that it made me intuit it? “Not, I do not locate it, doctor. What did it make you intuit it, doctor?” What was falling down on you in a dream? “A personage of these characteristics.” Did you already relate it? “Yes, doctor, thank you” [BELC 06/12/2016]. Was he very believer? “Yes, he was very believer. Very attached to the church” [BELC 08/02/2016]- Are you corrupt Guillermo S? “Yes, doctor.” Are you Tartuffe Guillermo S? “Yes, doctor, also.” Do you recognize and accept yourself as dysfunctional ignorant and bioenergeme-parasite, Guillermo S? “Yes, doctor, also accept me like that.” Did you receive any economic advantage on having supported the Zedillo aggression at the UNAM? “Not, doctor, principally was a political support. A support, indeed, of political type. As to have moored there the stay in the University and in the government.” Was it like that, Zedillo? “Yes, doctor, thus was.” Soberon's daughter-in-law: what do you opine about Guillermo’s behaviour during the strike in the UNAM of 1999-2000? “Doctor, since it is something that must not have happened … but it was easy to find the corruption and not the solution … but I find out that, with your help, doctor, it was carried out, to recover the UNAM” [1]. 

BELC 08/27/2023. When Luis Echeverría Álvarez was Secretary of the Interior of Mexico, he asked Guillermo Soberón Acevedo, rector of the UNAM at that time, to give him a law degree in the name of Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, then president of Mexico. Obediently, Soberón did so. Guillermo Soberón Acevedo's behavioral decomposition never had limits. It was also said that in advance the Autonomous University of Puebla had already given a similar gift to Gustavo Díaz Ordaz. 

Guillermo Soberon: 1) what do you say about the BEL research? “It is an investigation sui generis. Coming from you it is … it goes in agreement with the innovative thoughts that you have raised, doctor, from your beginnings up to now.” 2) What do you opine about the BEL communication? “It is notable the participation and glad that a BEG can show. Be whatever the topic that is stating.” 3) Is in the style of the answer noticed that the BEL communication indeed corresponds to the BEG invited? “Yes, doctor, yes corresponds the answer to the BEG invited.” Octavio Rivero. 1) “Doctor, is an investigation that supports very much the credibility of the BEG. Which does that we project what of ourselves we could not know.” 2) “I like it, doctor; I like the form in which we can know of ourselves and of the others without having to lie to us or walk with concealments nor to damage us.” 3) “Yes, doctor, yes is evident.” Juan Ramon de la Fuente R. 1) “That is a very innovative procedure and that it was necessary to have it so, that a lot of the information that we do not know or not even it is possible to know, let us know of it.” 2) “That is a way of knowing us, of interacting by means of the BEG. It is lucky to have it.” 3) “Yes, doctor, it corresponds this way” [1]. 

Ernesto Z, because of the way in which you involved the university authorities during the strike, you tried to make them responsible for what you were the intellectual perpetrator abusing your president’s profitable position: was it like that? “Yes, doctor, this way was.” Is it your habitual style that the others execute what your face is unable to confront? “Completely, doctor.” Ernesto Z, you conceal your problems, hide after third persons, like the university authorities that in that time you manipulated. Has it been like that, Ernesto Z? “This way it has been, doctor.” On having wanted to stain the UNAM, you dignify it. On having renounced Mexico, you show yourself. What do you say? “They are the exact words on how I feel and how I act, doctor.” What gives to your existence that anxious dissatisfaction that ends up at your upset visage? “The maltreatment of which I was an object and the sexual abuses and of all kinds of which I was an object.” Were you treated as illegitimate son? “Yes, doctor, this way was.” Have you sexually abused minors of age and/or adult persons? “Yes, children attract me very much and I like handling them and also to young people, only males” [BELC 10/11/2008]. Ernesto Z: what do you say about the BEL research? “That is the contribution to humanity that it was necessary to have.” And what do you opine about this contribution? “Excellent.” What do you say about the BEL communication? “It is a way for the biocommunication between BEGs and to explain ourselves of what it consists.” Is in the style of the answer noticed that the BEL communication indeed corresponds to the BEG invited? “Yes, doctor” [BELC 12/13/2015] [1]. 

We invited the BEG of Luis Echeverria Alvarez (ex-president of Mexico; 1970-1976). Luis: did you induced to be invited to CU in March 14, 1975 or they invited you? “I induced to be invited.” And who had to invite you, Luis? “The arrangement was between the Secretary of Interior [Mario Moya Palencia] and rector Guillermo Soberon.” Was like that Guillermo S –rector at that moment–? “Yes, doctor, this way was.” Was it like that, Mario Moya Palencia? “Yes, doctor.” Luis: did you orchestrate the blow against the cooperative of the newspaper Excelsior that culminated in July 8, 1976? “Yes, doctor, this way was.” Luis: what motivated that you were taking that decision? “There were political motives and of disapproval of some of the members of the newspaper.” Was it specifically against Julio Scherer García? “Yes, doctor.” What do you want to say to the members of the cooperative, collaborators and readership of the newspaper Excelsior of then? “I want to say to them that I am very much sorry about the events and to have affected all with the events and only with the idea of having to give a lesson to one of their partners.” To whom do you refer? “To Scherer.” To Julio Scherer Garcia: what do you want to say to him? “That I am sorry about the event and not to have been more political and to have taken the things of a different way without having to harm anybody.” And to the people of Mexico what do you want to say to it? “That I committed a lot of stupidities. Absurd decisions that did that also I was suffering.” Luis, without trying to attenuate your responsibility in these facts: what has had you so, angered during your existence? “The difficulty that I have had to lead and of carrying out actions of academic type.” Have you been tragediogenic during your political performance (October 2, 1968; June 10, 1971; July 8, 1976, threatening the people with the least pretext, for example to Julio Scherer García)? “Yes, doctor.” Luis: have you perceived yourself as short of understanding? “Yes, doctor, this way I have perceived myself.” Has this been your problem? “Yes, doctor.” Are you a mythomaniac and Tartuffe Luis? “Yes, doctor.” Do you recognize and accept yourself as dysfunctional ignorant and bioenergeme-parasite? “I consider myself like this, doctor” [1]. 

What do you want to comment about the affirmed by Luis Echeverria Alvarez? Julio Scherer Garcia: “Since to think [sic] that a prepared man who was taking decisions for other reasons rather than for having clear the idea of directing a country.” Vicente Leñero: “Since that, doctor, nothing justifies the fact itself of betraying the Homeland. And to have had always to be hiding and resting on people who wanted to demonstrate rather its power.” Miguel Angel Granados Chapa: “Very well, doctor, Luis’ BEG can affirm what pleases and what seems necessary to say to him, but of course he is still tortured, what is different now is that he could feel overdraft and he cannot already deny what he has done earlier.” Other BEGs of members of the cooperative, collaborators or readership of that newspaper Excelsior: “Doctor, also it is necessary to admit that at that time it was easier to keep silent to the journalists because also it was considered that they had more information. And there were many others that were leaders of movements of social struggle. Therefore, on behalf of the politicians who were feeling with more power they were acting arbitrarily. Luis was imposed because it had covering certain profile that the previous politicians wanted. Not because the country needed it this way.” Was it like that, Gustavo Diaz Ordaz? “Yes, doctor, this way was.” Who imposed it on you? “It was a recommendation that we choose between several” [1].

Pernicious Guillermo Soberon Acevedo

BEL communication of 11/18/2015. Together with other BEGs that have already taken part, we invited the BEGs of Miguel de la Madrid (economist; 1934-2012) ex-president of Mexico (1981-1985), Jose Lopez Portillo (lawyer; 1934-2012) ex-president of Mexico (1976-1982), Galo Soberon y Parra (physician; 1896-1992) and Fernando Ortiz Monasterio (physician; 1923-2012) [1]. 

Guillermo Soberon, when Secretary of Health you tried to modify the General Hospital of Mexico, without success: was it like that? “Yes, doctor, this way was.” What were you pretending Guillermo S? “To affect the General Hospital.” Miguel de la Madrid: were you supporting this soberonist motion in the General Hospital? “Yes, doctor, really it was not important for me what it happened to the General Hospital. The questions were focused towards other institutions, like Pemex, not the health sector, not the Secretary of Health.” Are you saying that Soberon was acting motu proprio? “Not precisely that, but yes it had this support of my part.” And what do you opine now about the actions of Soberon? “That was a negligence of my part.” And of the Soberon intentions? “That was acting mistakenly and that at the end of accounts damaged to the country.” By then, I published a journalistic article: The medico-social function of the General Hospital. El Día, p. 21, October 30, 1985. Guillermo: did this article have any influence in your plan? “Yes, doctor, yes there was influence of this article that you wrote.” What did you decide? “To break the plan.” What do you say now about that plan that you had? “That it was better that you wrote that article and that the events could have been braked.” Guillermo: did you write these aspects in your book of memoirs? “This way not, doctor.” Is it confirmed, then, that it is a book with half-truths content? “Yes, doctor, is correct.” Soberon's daughter-in-law: what do you say about what you listened of Guillermo? “Doctor, since independently the truths that he handles, is inevitable that when a NMEGO accepts acting that way, it forbids itself to live peacefully. Let’s say that he has his own sanction, is a man who permanently lives oppressed.” Guillermo: did you involve Jaime Martuscelli Quintana in your corruptions? “Somehow, although not completely.” Was it like that, Jaime M? “Doctor, is yes or not, and I left that I was involved or allowed to involve me.” And what do you opine of having allowed to involve you, Jaime M? “Since it is the … that was unfortunate, doctor.” Guillermo, you have been flattering Jaime M: true? “True, doctor.” Are you afraid of something Guillermo? “No, doctor.” What do you opine Jaime M, will be Guillermo afraid of something? “Of course, yes, doctor, because he knows that has corrupted many people and the truth is always known.” Is he afraid that you speak? “Yes, he is afraid that I speak.” Is it like that Guillermo? “Yes, doctor.” Galo Soberon y Parra: what do you opine about these actions of your son Guillermo? “That with regard to what he has done I do not judge him, but it seems to me that he could have taken decisions more according to what he usually said, be more consistent and supportive with the country.” Octavio Rivero: did you know about the article that I published in favour of the General Hospital? “Yes, doctor, I went so, far as to find out after you published it.” How did you know of the article, Octavio R? “I knew of it in a fortuitous way, doctor, because I found the publication on the office of a colleague.” Much BEL: does it not seem to you Octavio R? “Yes, doctor, now we can understand that I had to find out and that finding out was relevant. And I mentioned to my colleague that you use to write that way.” What do you opine about the article? “It seems very punctual and very direct to me on having indicated what happened with the hospital.” For his part, the BEG of Fernando Ortiz Monasterio clarified that, being director of the General Hospital Manuel Gea Gonzalez and in agreement with Guillermo Soberon, secretary of Health, he propitiated actions in relation with another institution. Fernando: what do you say about what you promoted? “Doctor, not only I am sorry about what has happened for my intervention but also, I assume the responsibility of having promoted that the INER (National Institute of Respiratory Diseases) be affected and even some of our colleagues” [1]. 

Miguel de la Madrid: what do you opine about your answer before the earthquake of September 19, 1985 in Mexico City? “Doctor, was faltering, I admit it, I did not know myself what to do nor even what indications it was necessary to follow.” Did not your secretaries and advisers know what to do either? “Yes, doctor, yes they knew what to do, but sometimes I was not listening to them.” What do you consider now you could have done immediately then? “I do not know [sic], doctor, accentuate perhaps a help alarm so, that we all were protected.” You were beginning your six-year period. “Yes, doctor, was beginning the six-year period.” Were you afraid to have assumed the responsibility of president of Mexico? “Yes, doctor, this way was.” What did you scare of that responsibility? “Doctor, I scared non-knowing what to do, if the decisions were going to be appropriated to the moment, which I was myself afraid, I can easily be influenced.” Miguel: why did you accept to be president? “Because it was a very attractive offer, doctor.” Was the earthquake of ‘85 what did it mainly scare you? “Yes, doctor, it clearly was a very difficult moment, perhaps the most difficult, even on a global scale.” That as we have commented, the international look results of a lot of weight. Is it true? “Yes, it is this way, doctor.” According to your current BEL opinion: in what does it lie that the international attention be of so, much weight for the leaders of Mexico and their observance of the agreements? “Because of the report that the exterior receives it is going to imply the economic and political relations that are established and, simultaneously, if the foreign companies are going to invest or not. And also, on that depends what so, much they demand.” Jose Lopez Portillo: what made you decide on Miguel de la Madrid? “Some agreements that we had with some politicians and businessmen.” And later that you saw him operating? “It was already too late.” What impression gave you, his performance? “That his character was very weak and that was difficult for him to take firmer decisions and that were not risky.” As for what? “As for the public policies and administration.” Did your own decisions leave you somewhat handcuffed? “Yes, also doctor” [1]. 

In replacement of Juan Ramon de la Fuente R, Ernesto Zedillo did not name a physician as secretary of Health. Was the Health sector unimportant to you as for Miguel? “Yes, doctor.” Are some financial experts thus, that only the macroeconomic issue seems relevant to them? “Yes, doctor, is a characteristic.” What do you opine about this characteristic? “Doctor, since hardly we can locate and land our ideas.” What prevents it? “We are always digressing, daydreaming and doing slightly realizable proposals. Thinking more about a project, about the budget and about the profit, which in targets.” Are you taught to behave that way? “Yes, doctor, and practically this position eliminates, omits the persons.” Do you mean that it annuls you as individuals? “Yes, doctor.” Hence, some of you behave as a nullity. “Yes, also, I had not located it this way, but this way it is, doctor.” To the extreme that at the end of your period you did that on a television company they prepared a video alluding to your six-year management in which your scarce achievements are considered and your multiple errors are omitted: was it like that? “Yes, doctor, this way was” [1]. 

As it can be supposed, I have insisted on these events because I have written with regard to some of them and, for the same, they are events that precede, some ones, to the BEL research, and, others, they are collateral to the same one… I do not know if someone of the bioassembly wants to comment [1]. 

Spontaneously, Javier Barros Sierra and many other related university members: “Doctor, it is a pleasure for us that bioenergemally refers to what justice is. Since it is not only to recognize the work that you have done, but it also is important for the motto of the Institution, the UNAM, which if in this moment it is in an outstanding role is because we are graduated and have been formed by the idea of taking in each of us the guiding principles with which as professionals we have been formed. Therefore, it will be necessary to transmit it also towards the work place and for the sake of the country.” They all applaud… We invited the BEG of Bernardo Castro Villagrana Joublanc: “Doctor, I am very proud to take part also in this BEL communication and to let know how important the population is. The people need of help and we are those that we can organize and propitiate that they trust in that our preparation level is adapted for the ends in which we are in every institution. And it is deplorable when this does not happen, and moreover that other authorities allow it.” Ruth mentions that the Mexican real eagle of the badge of the UNAM begins flying and emits its characteristic called.” Octavio Paz: “Doctor, there is a tenuous line between the truth and the simulation.” What easy for the politicians to keep the appearances? “Yes, doctor, true.” Ruth mentions that some BEGs of those who were part of the Mexican newspaper El Día are present, sisters Carmen and Magdalena Galindo, Alberto Beltran, etc.: “We are satisfied. Now we understand that in the BEL events there is no time.” You published the articles. It was of great help. “They were very well-known, polemic publications in its moment and that, like everything, ‘be forgotten’, in inverted commas, and only the BEL memory is the one that allows demonstrating, with BEL evidences also, the implications of the events.” The affected ones by the blow to the newspaper Excelsior join them, Miguel Angel Granados Chapa and Julio Scherer Garcia are there, who note down, “Doctor, now we understand why it is important to remain with the actions that we consider to be correct for all. It is an experience that is indelible and shared.” Justo Sierra: “Doctor, education as health, it have always been a target of inadequate decisions. It is known that the intention is to affect it because on her the growth of a country depends. What a pity that for it sometimes are elected or those that are chosen they sell themselves and take advantage of these institutions.” Lucy Jimenez: “Doctor, as the ground of a marsh, in this one the water hardly will be clear as in the open and solitary sea, where life is appreciated in detail and sighing. This is the contrast between human proceedings. We like how you appreciate life, intuiting and speaking clearly.” Juan Ramon de la Fuente Ramirez: “It is so, good that have voices that are pronounced when others we keep silent about, but that we also support. Congratulations!” [1] 

End of the BEL communication of 11/15/2015. As always, a hug for all and that be very well. Ruth: “On having said goodbye, we all are giving hugs between ourselves and the sparrow-hawk that we saw today in the forest settles on your left shoulder.” How do our BEGs appear? “Very satisfied, very stable, very calm. Much satisfied of the work that the BEL communication implies.” End of the BEL communication of 11/17/2015. Ruth: “All, say goodbye very much enthusiasts, likewise the past time, with a hug. Again, the sparrow-hawk appears, but bigger, like goshawk, and it settles on your left shoulder.” End of the BEL communication of 11/18/2015. Ruth: “We all are bio-observing the real Mexican eagle, the calmness with which also she is bio-observing everything from the top of a mountain placed on a tree, calling.” End of the BEL communication of 11/19/2015. Ruth: “The eagle continues on her natural place, calm, expresses her called one.” I mention to them that the real Mexican eagle of the badge of the UNAM achieved her freedom [1].               

Extra BEL communication of August 22, 2016. Guillermo Soberon: are you proprietor of a factory of condoms? “I am partner, doctor.” Majority shareholder? “Yes, doctor.” What do you say about this activity Guillermo? “I do not understand your question… Since I directed more to the commercial aspect of the business more than the academy making use of my situation… Say us economic to take advantage of the others, benefiting from the others.” Guillermo S: what initial investment was there to found this factory? “Since it is a quantity… since important.” How much? “We speak about millions of pesos… Perhaps twenty or twenty-two millions of pesos.” Where did you get that money? “Of savings that I had… Since, doctor, of loans and my savings but also, of some favours… of political interests.” Do you speak about this matter in your memoirs? “No, doctor.” Soberon’s daughter-in-law: what do you say about this business of Guillermo S? “That are respectable, but I do not agree… Because they finally are actions that only ‘benefit’, in inverted commas, to a few. There are actions where the persons are corrupted and once it begins it already has no solution” [1]. 

All the BEGs that took part in these bioexperiences, those who have taken part in one or several BEL communications during the twenty-five years of BEL research agreed with collaborating, and that their answers, comments or questions could be published [07/19/2016] [1]. 

BELC 05/26/2017. What do they think about the corruption soberonista? –Justo Sierra: “Doctor, was very unfortunate.” –Javier Barros Sierra: “It was deplorable that could do that with the UNAM.” –Bernardo Castro Villagrana J: “Well since that that affected the UNAM in many senses, academic and administratively” [1].


BELC dated 09/07/2022. Georges Dreyfus Cortés, what do you say of the corruption at UNAM? “Doctor, it is unfortunate that it continues, that corruption expands, only the desire for power and higher income prevails.” And what do you opine about what you wrote in Nature, denying everything? "Which is also done for more lucrative purposes than by conviction." Do your ideas have a price? "Yes doctor. No one should have it, but my actions give me away.” Is this how you always prostituted yourself? "Always, doctor." 

Guillermo Soberon Acevedo (GSA). What do you say now of the atmosphere of corruption that you fostered at UNAM? "Doctor, it is very unfortunate that they have continued with it, it has been destructive to UNAM." Jaime Martuscelli Quintana, what do you opine now of the environment of corruption that GSA fostered at UNAM? “Well, very unfortunate, doctor, that this corruption has been encouraged, that we have allowed it to continue.” GSA, what do you opine that they are now trying to cover up that corruption that you imposed on UNAM? "Well, what does it mean that they have not wanted to realize and do nothing to stop exploiting the UNAM." Jaime M, what do you say about it? "Doctor, very unfortunate." GSA, what would you recommend to your cover-ups? "I would recommend that they not follow my example and instead dedicate themselves to seeing that UNAM grow professionally, academically... as the university that Mexico requires." Do you want to add something else? "No, doctor, thank you."

Updating of Information

BEL communications on February 5 and June 12 &14, 2020. In the rectory of the UNAM is Enrique Graue Wiechers, who, competing with Barnes, is emerging as the most negligent and toxic predator to ever occupy that position. He held back a bit in his first quadrennium, but in the second term he sank into despair. Well known public facts suggest that he has finished organizing a gang of hooded men whose BEG assured they are paid with cash or drugs. Drug addicts are those who carry out the most violent and destructive operations against university students, men and women, and against the facilities, leaving most of them useless. But now, Graue is desperate because these cloaked men have already gotten out of control, annoying the community without any restraint and occupying schools and colleges at the time they want and even disregarding the order to hand them over, pressuring them to give more money and/or drugs. All with absolute impunity, they are untouchable, neither the UNAM nor the local government promote any action to stop them. The manipulated autonomy of the university is the perfect parapet [7].

Misconduct of Enrique Graue Wiechers

Graue’s BEG accepted that the Ophthalmology Institute that he built in front of The American British Cowdray Hospital in CDMX, was partly built it by diverting resources from the UNAM; in this regard he stated: “I shouldn’t have done it, doctor”. He also admitted owning a “construction company,” which is “in the name of a relative”. It would not be difficult for this to be the one in charge, at UNAM, of the restorations. The formula is very simple: build => destroy => rebuild => huge profits by inflating prices. Graue has had a meteoric career at UNAM, so I affirmed that it appeared that everything was fixed, and Jaime Martuscelli Quintana’s BEG pointed out: “That everything was bought”. Graue, in the BELC of December 19, 2021, accepted that this was the case. If he bought the positions he has had and the one he has now, he will feel an uncontrollable urge to get his money back, and even more, before this second four-year term is over [7].

Enrique Graue Impertinence

Graue had stated several times “I am not afraid” (nor feels guilty; just like a sociopath). But finally, his BEG landed him and he said he felt “discovered”, that he feels “the need to” slow down; and to UNAM and Mexico he says: “I feel trapped, discovered and scared; it is not easy to deceive others. We are not an example to follow, as we are also a fraud. I owe a lot [to Mexico] and I am very sorry to have deteriorated the image of UNAM” (fake, almost a psychopath). In case something is missing, the BEGs of the drug dealers who thrive on the University Campus affirmed that Graue: “He agrees with the negotiations for the sale of drugs in the faculties. He doesn’t get involved, but he’s involved” He didn’t deny this either. Regarding a possible anger with the UNAM, the BEG of Graue asserted: “I have no anger with the UNAM, it is an anger with myself. It is a dissatisfaction with hoarding power and the need to benefit materially”. Because people close to him: “They came to less and came to commit fraud”. He went through hardships, then. Graue’s BEG let us know that he has been taking high doses of tranquilizers for more than two decades, which, ignorant of the side effects, have damaged his kidneys, causing, as a first warning, high blood pressure. So, he takes antihypertensive drugs, by doing so, the message to his kidneys is that he does not understand the warning and continues to self-destruct. And he claims to be a physician. Scientific research does not interest him. Without a doubt, money is more addictive than drugs and together they form a ‘social nitroglycerin’ that holds humanity in check. UNAM is a non-profit educational institution in which 60% of the students receive a financial support scholarship. Graue remarked: “It bothers me to deal with screwed up people”. A glaring contradiction. Graue will leave the Pumas soccer team (from UNAM) immersed in the worst crisis in its history, a crisis it is already going through [8].


1) In a BELC performed on December 19, 2021 Guillermo Soberon Acevedo declared: “Doctor, it is a pleasure to greet you ... Whoever is in power loses the objective of his function at UNAM, as others we have lost it”. At UNAM, he had an influence: “[regarding] mismanagement and the loss of its essence in the training of critical professionals”.

2) Invited to the same BELC, the BEG of Matthew Walker, expert on sleep neurophysiology, stated: “Doctor, it is a real delight, it is a pleasure to be intuiting, that our BEGs have biocommunicated”.

3) In some cases, forensic investigation might also rely heavily upon BELC.

4) As a whole, BEGs share and bioenergemally interact through an exchange of intuitions, giving rise, on the one hand, to intuitional knowledge or bioenerscience (or the gift of anticipation) and, on the other, to an intuitional language that I have called Intuilish. This leads us to wonder if intuitions travel the fastest in the UU; and to consider whether (or all) quantum entanglement might be mediated by an intuitional energy.1-4 Erwin Schrödinger: “Your intuition is very important and true. And this would lead to suggest that intuitions aren’t so simple moments of lucidity, but are complex BIFL processes that not only produce ideas but also products of life and bioenergemization -fill with BEL energy-. Very interesting.” Abdus Salam: “Intuitions seen this way, transcend as processes and events that explain the existence of things, thoughts and life. And that they participate or are derived from a BIFL process more important than we can suppose. This intuition that you share with us gives life more life, and existence has more meaning” [7,8].


I acknowledge Ruth A. López-Téllez for her clever assistance and permanent help.

Conflicts of Interest



Citation: Cuevas-Sosa A (2023) Political Manipulation of the Strike at UNAM 1999-2000. Corrected and Enlarged Version. J Altern Complement Integr Med 9: 394.

Copyright: © 2023  Alejandro Cuevas-Sosa, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Herald Scholarly Open Access is a leading, internationally publishing house in the fields of Sciences. Our mission is to provide an access to knowledge globally.

© 2024, Copyrights Herald Scholarly Open Access. All Rights Reserved!