Chavez: Uribe fit to be mafia boss, not president of Colombia

[Judi Lynn]

Source: International Herald Tribune/Associated Press

Chavez: Uribe fit to be mafia boss, not president of Colombia

The Associated Press
Sunday, January 20, 2008
CARACAS, Venezuela: Venezuela's Hugo Chavez launched a new volley of insults at Colombian leader Alvaro Uribe on Sunday, calling him a "pawn" of Washington and a coward more fit to be a mafia boss than president.

Chavez also reiterated previous accusations that Uribe's U.S.-allied government tried to sabotage the release of two hostages held by leftist rebels last month, saying the captives' accounts of bombings in the area showed Colombia wanted to "dynamite" the handover.

The two Colombian captives � Clara Rojas and Consuelo Gonzalez � were eventually released by guerrillas to Venezuelan officials Jan. 10 in an operation overseen by the International Committee of the Red Cross. Colombia halted military operations for the successful handover and has denied trying to sabotage the earlier attempt.

"Uribe is a pawn of Bush," Chavez said during his weekly TV and radio program. "That man doesn't deserve to be president ... coward, liar. ... Uribe is suitable to be a mafia boss."



Read more: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/01/20/america/LA-GEN-Venezuela-Colombia.php

---

http://www.ealasaid.com.nyud.net:8090/images/si-laughter-t.jpg

[Joe Chi Minh]

1. Hang on, Ugo, I thought only the US Republicans and CIA were

empowered to anoint capos! But, maybe they're just close friends.

[bluesmail]

2. HA! Mafia boss, HA!

Cheney

[Bacchus39]

3. the people of Colombia would disagree.

n/t

[roody]

4. Some of them anyway.

[Bacchus39]

5. about 62%, how would Chavez know what's best for Colombia?

n/t

[roody]

8. He lives closer to Columbia than I do.

I know that US military and "war on drug" "aid" is not good for people, plants, nor animals in Columbia.

[davidinalameda]

10. so the people who actually live in Columbia would know better than Chavez, right?

using your analogy

maybe Chavez should keep his nose out of the business of other countries

isn't that a big criticism of the Bush administration on here?

maybe Chavez should worry about his own country

[Judi Lynn]

11. You need to break down and start paying attention to current events.

Colombian paramilitaries were found staying in barracks at a ranch owned by Cuban-Venezuelan opposition activist Roberto Alonso, who has openly advocated violence against the Chavez administration. There were over 100 of them. They confessed to authorities when they were discovered after an informant alerted the government that they had been brought to Venezuela to break into a national armory, and take weapons to outfit 1,500 men to overthrow the government in Caracas.

Many of them were released recently by Hugo Chavez who sent them home, saying the plan came from higher levels. These men were in many cases, retired military people from Colombia. Democrats who post here discussed it at length when it happened, and since then, as well.

A plot to assassinate Hugo Chavez was discovered which was hatched in Colombia, involving the head of Uribe's D.A.S., similar to the F.B.I., Jorge Noguera, who immediately took off, ran away, hid somewhere in Europe or Africa until he was caught. This was all revealed last year.

At one point, Alvaro Uribe had a session alone with Hugo Chavez while he discussed and apologized for a plot to kill Chavez which lasted for six hours. That has been discussed here.

There are far more reasons than you seem to grasp which have connected Venezuela and Colombia.

Use some of your priceless time and invest it in getting current in your consciousness of events, the way the Democrats around here do who have been discussing these things, when possible. It really won't hurt one bit. Know what it is you're attempting to discuss.

[Judi Lynn]

13. There's a reference to the connection between Colombia's paramilitaries,

and Venezuela in an article I just posted in this thread:

If one considers how Ronald Reagan and Bush senior's Administrations supported the Contras — also deeply involved in the drug trade — to overthrow the Sandinistas in Nicaragua during the 1980s, then such developments are not without precedent. And remember that Colombian paramilitaries were used in 2004 to try to overthrow the Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez.
(snip)

The director of the nation's secret service, DAS, Jorge Noguera, is in prison for his participation in paramilitary crimes … All the congresspeople who have gone to prison already are Uribistas {supporters of Uribe}. Of the 19 in line for judgement, 17 are Uribistas … The organization ARCOIRIS, with 83 congresspeople from paramilitary-controlled zones — 90 per cent are Uribistas. This is not to say that all Uribistas are , but it does say the phenomenon is that these are friends of the President. This is understood in the exterior, and Democratic Senators in the US like McGovern and Leahy have noticed as much. Leahy said in {the Colombian newspaper} El Tiempo that the US Government must correct its support for Uribe. Leahy said 'someone explain to me who we are working with in Colombia.'

We in the PDA insist that these are political, not just penal, responsibilities for Uribe. He has to explain why so many of his friends are involved. And we also want to know how far is the US involved? The US Embassy is full of CIA, DEA, FBI, and they don't have any idea what is happening with paramilitarism? It is not credible.
(snip)

http://nylatinojournal.com/home/eagles_in_fall,_lions_in_spring/analysis/under_uribe,_the_dark_side_of_colombia.html

[Bacchus39]

26. maybe he can spell ColOmbia, other than that he has no business

interfering in Colombia's affairs.

[Peace Patriot]

31. See my post, below: 2-4 million Colombian refugees in Venezuela!

That - and rightwing death squad activity, U.S./Bush "war on drugs" pesticide spraying, and Colombian military/FARC fighting on the Venezuela/Colombian border, as well as drugs/weapons trafficking, and food smuggling (by criminal enterprises, stealing from Venezuela's stores of subsidized food) - MAKE Colombia's problems Venezuela's problems. If there were a civil war in Mexico, would it be OUR problem? It's certainly OUR problem that there is a global corporate predator war on the poor in Mexico!

[randymaine]

46. Well, Hugo haters seem to know what's best for Venezuela

and he keeps winning elections.

[struggle4progress]

15. " ... Colombia’s electoral process is undermined by paramilitiaries who use

violence and intimidation to determine which candidates can and cannot run in regions under their control and to ensure that their chosen candidates are elected. As the Associated Press noted only two days before the March 12 congressional elections, paramilitary leader Rodrigo Tovar, “who’s accused of several massacres against civilians as well as being a major drug-trafficker, reigned over much of Colombia’s Caribbean coast, deciding who could and could not run for public office.”

An additional factor that aided the paramilitary cause in the congressional elections was the low voter turnout. Preliminary reports show that only 34 percent of eligible voters went to the polls, low even by Colombian standards—42 percent of voters participated four years ago. In one Bogotá precinct, only 80 of the 1,200 registered voters showed up to cast a ballot. The combination of the paramilitarization of the electoral process and the voter apathy evident in many areas not under paramilitary control ensured a victory for pro-Uribe parties.

The paramilitarization of Colombian politics intensified four years ago when it became evident that right-wing paramilitaries were determining which candidates would prove victorious in congressional districts situated in regions under their control. Through a campaign of intimidation and assassination, candidates not supportive of the paramilitaries were eliminated, leaving pro-paramilitary candidates to run unopposed in many districts, often garnering more than 90 percent of the vote. In the paramilitary-dominated department of Magdalena, for example, mayoral candidates ran unopposed in 14 of the 30 municipalities.

Following the 2002 congressional elections, paramilitary leader Salvatore Mancuso claimed that his organization controlled 35 percent of the Colombian Congress. The paramilitary demobilization process that ensued did not diminish the group’s political influence. Having consolidated control in many electoral districts four years ago, paramilitaries were able to utilize their newly gained regional political power to influence the March 12 elections ..."

November 5, 2007
Colombia’s Elections Highlight Democratic Shortcomings
by Garry Leech
http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia231.htm

[Judi Lynn]

17. Outstanding article. Have read about the death squads' control of elections earlier. Classic, isn't

it? We get right-wing idiots telling us how popular Uribe is: how inclined would any one be to tell a faceless voice calling on the phone for a poll that we disapproved of a piece of work like Uribe? You could expect death threats the rest of your life, or until the government changes, which isn't likely, as long as there are fascist scums in Washington happy to keep stuffing tons of U.S. taxpayers' dollars into that vipers' nest.

Love the description of the elections, and the very understated observation that people are simply not voting often there. Yeah, what DO they have to gain, anyway? How many people would dare to go out of their houses and vote for a leftist in Colombia, with death squad members haunting the voting places?

I have read reports which have indicated these clowns have even been known to go right into the voting booth with voters.
Jezus.

[struggle4progress]

16. Colombian Senator: Death Squads Met At Uribe's Ranch

Scandal Over Paramilitary Ties Widens

By Juan Forero
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, April 18, 2007; Page A18

BOGOTA, Colombia, April 17 -- An opposition lawmaker on Tuesday alleged that paramilitary death squads met at the ranch of President Álvaro Uribe in the late 1980s and plotted to murder opponents, an explosive charge in a growing scandal that has unearthed ties between the illegal militias and two dozen congressmen.

Basing his accusations on government documents and depositions by former paramilitary members and military officers, Sen. Gustavo Petro said the militiamen met at Uribe's Guacharacas farm as well as ranches owned by his brother, Santiago Uribe, and a close associate, Luis Alberto Villegas.

"From there, at night, they would go out and kill people," Petro said, referring to the sprawling ranch owned by Álvaro Uribe, who served as a senator from 1986 to 1994 ...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/17/AR2007041702007.html

[Judi Lynn]

6. Colombia’s Right-Wing Paramilitaries and Splinter Groups

Colombia’s Right-Wing Paramilitaries and Splinter Groups
Author: Stephanie Hanson, News Editor

Colombia’s civilians have been caught in the middle of turf battles between leftist guerilla groups and right-wing paramilitary organizations for decades. In 2003, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe took a step to quell the violence associated with at least one of those actors when he signed a peace deal with the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, or the AUC, the country’s largest paramilitary group. Over thirty thousand combatants have demobilized since the agreement, and judicial proceedings to try top commanders are in process. Yet political scandals revealing the extent of paramilitary infiltration of Colombian security forces and the upper ranks of the government have rocked the country. In addition, new criminal organizations have emerged in the wake of the AUC that bear a striking resemblance to their paramilitary predecessors. Colombia has long received significant assistance from the United States, primarily for counternarcotics, but the paramilitary scandals have prompted legislative scrutiny of this aid, as well as of a proposed free trade agreement.

History of Paramilitaries
The most notorious of Colombia’s paramilitaries, the AUC, was formed in 1997 as an umbrella organization to consolidate local paramilitary groups. Such groups, however, had existed in loose form since the late 1960s, when legislation was passed that allowed for the formation of local self-defense groups. Some paramilitaries emerged directly from these groups, while others were formed by drug lords, local political and economic elites, and organized crime. All paramilitaries sought to protect their own interests—whether land, a business, or political office. Most also operated under the ostensible ideological banner of combating members of the leftist guerrilla groups the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (known by its Spanish acronym, FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN). While paramilitaries liked to position themselves as a necessary counter to Colombia’s leftist insurgents, ordinary Colombians were often victimized—instead of protected by—the paramilitaries. The armed groups displaced indigenous communities from their land, massacred civilians, and kidnapped political figures. As human rights groups have documented, some paramilitaries even charged “taxes” in local areas and regulated how citizens could dress.

The AUC unified what had been a disparate array of paramilitary groups. Under the leadership of Carlos Castano, the organization expanded in numbers and diversified its revenue streams. It also became increasingly entwined with the drug trade. For instance, some leaders of Los Pepes, a collection of drug traffickers formed in the early 1990s to fight the legendary kingpin Pablo Escobar, later assumed high-level positions in the AUC. Within three years of its formation, the AUC’s numbers had doubled (to roughly eight thousand combatants) and it had made significant inroads into the cocaine trade. It tapped fuel pipelines to sell oil on the black market, extorted payments from multinational corporations such as Chiquita, and expanded into the gambling and construction industries. In 2001, the U.S. government designated the AUC a foreign terrorist organization. By 2003, when Uribe signed a peace deal with the AUC, it had penetrated over seven hundred of Colombia’s roughly eleven hundred municipalities.

The Promise and Pitfalls of Demobilization
Since 2003, approximately thirty-one thousand paramilitary members have been disarmed. Between 2003 and 2005, violence committed by paramilitaries dropped sharply; for instance, assassinations dropped from 1,240 to 329, according to a research organization in Bogota. But it’s unclear if the underlying operating structures of these groups has been crippled. In February 2006, a senior U.S. military official told the International Crisis Group that many paramilitaries maintained control over drug trafficking and illegal assets.

The legal framework under which the paramilitaries were demobilized has been strongly criticized. The AUC agreed to a peace deal because the government promised to restrict the legal action that could be taken against its members. The original law submitted by Uribe to Colombia’s congress, however, did not meet international humanitarian standards. After lengthy congressional debate, the Justice and Peace Law passed in 2005. It allowed for the possibility that those who committed serious crimes could escape prosecution, obstructed efforts to dissolve paramilitary structures, and did not guarantee victims’ rights to reparations and truth.

After its passage, Amnesty International suggested that by providing de facto amnesties for human rights abusers, the law may even make things worse. A New York Times editorial said it should be called the “Impunity for Mass Murderers, Terrorists and Major Cocaine Traffickers Law.”

More:
http://www.cfr.org/publication/15239/colombias_rightwing_paramilitaries_and_splinter_groups.html?breadcrumb=%2Fissue%2F135%2Fterrorism

[Sam Ervin jret]

7. Wow !Name calling among the ruling "class". Maybe Uribe should try "I'm rubber your glue...."

It's nice to see that our great American President George W. Bush's "Leadership BY Example" is alive and well in the hemisphere.

[ToeBot]

9. Mafia boss? No doubt. But it will take more than Mark Penn and company to rehabilitate that image.

Unless of course Clinton wins, then it's business as usual. I doubt he'd even notice Bush wasn't around anymore.

[Judi Lynn]

12. Under Uribe, The Dark Side of Colombia

Under Uribe, The Dark Side of Colombia
RODRIGO ACUÑA
Wednesday, April 18, 2007

http://nylatinojournal.com.nyud.net:8090/home/images/stories/uribe1.jpg

WHY IS THIS MAN SMILING?
Despite a speckled past, Colombian President Álvaro Uribe Vélez sailed into a second term of office. Photo: AP


A recent article by Paul Richter and Greg Miller in the Los Angeles Times has again brought international attention on Colombian President Álvaro Uribe Vélez. At the center of the LA Times article is a leaked report from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), which claims that Colombian army chief General Mario Montoya and a paramilitary group carried out an operation against Marxist rebels in 2002, that left 14 people dead and 'dozens more disappeared in its aftermath.'

Given the nature of the activities of paramilitary groups in Colombia and Uribe's 'long and close association' with Montoya, the revelation adds to a scandal which, Richter and Miller say, 'already has implicated the country's former Foreign Minister, at least one State Governor, legislators and the head of the national police.'

Bush considers Uribe a “personal friend” and one of his closest allies in Latin America. However, Uribe’s other relationships include Colombia's drug cartels and paramilitaries.

The Colombian President's papá, Alberto Uribe Sierra, may not have set the best example. During the 1970s, Uribe Sierra lived in a middle-class neighborhood in the Colombian city of Medellín and was heavily in debt. However, as Forrest Hylton notes in his excellent history, Evil Hour in Colombia, by a 'strange reversal of fortune' Uribe Sierra became a 'political broker, real-estate intermediary, and recognized trafficker.'

Having also become a huge cattle rancher, Uribe Sierra was part of a group of narco-speculators who purchased cheap land where Left-wing guerrillas were active. In 1983, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia — the guerrilla group commonly known by their Spanish acronym FARC — decided to pay Uribe Sierra a visit and he was killed after a failed kidnapping attempt. When the younger Uribe became aware of his father's death, according to Hylton, he flew to his father's ranch in the private helicopter of Medellín's cocaine kingpin Pablo Escobar.

Escobar and Uribe Sierra had become good friends after the latter had been involved in 'fund raising' for a project known as 'Medellín without slums' — most likely another one of Escobar's countless scams to launder his huge empire's drug money.

More:
http://nylatinojournal.com/home/eagles_in_fall,_lions_in_spring/analysis/under_uribe,_the_dark_side_of_colombia.html

[Judi Lynn]

14. I heard about Uribe connections to drug-dealing death squads a long time ago,

from a Colombian person living in the U.S., who decided he had to move away from his homeland, who knew of Uribe years, and years ago, as well as his father, as did so many Colombians.

If the story finally is allowed to survive outside the country, in the country whose taxpayers are footing the third largest foreign aid package in the world for Colombia, (Colombia's whose displaced population crisis is only 2nd as catastrophic as the one in the Sudan, due to the civil war) people will start taking this absurd, deadly situation a lot more seriously, just like some of our Democratic Congressmen, going back all the way to Paul Wellstone.

May 24, 2004

President Uribe’s Hidden Past

by Tom Feiling

Colombia’s President Alvaro Uribe is, by his own admission, a man of the right. Unlike most recent Colombian presidents, Uribe is from the land-owning class. He inherited huge swathes of cattle ranching land from his father Alberto Uribe, who was subject to an extradition warrant to face drug trafficking charges in the United States until he was killed in 1983, allegedly by leftist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrillas. Alvaro Uribe grew up with the children of Fabio Ochoa, three of who became leading players in Pablo Escobar’s Medellín cocaine cartel.

President Uribe’s credentials are impeccable. He was educated at Harvard and Oxford, is as sharp as a tack, and a very able bureaucrat. At the tender age of 26 he was elected mayor of Medellín, the second-largest city of Colombia. The city’s elite in the 1980s was rich, corrupt and nepotistic, and they loved the young Uribe. But the new mayor was removed from office after only three months by a central government embarrassed by his public ties to the drug mafia. Uribe was then made Director of Civil Aviation, where he used his mandate to issue pilots’ licenses to Pablo Escobar’s fleet of light aircraft, which routinely flew cocaine to the United States.

In 1995, Uribe became governor of the Antioquia department, of which Medellín is the capital. The region became the testing ground for the institutionalization of paramilitary forces that he has now made a key plank of his presidency. Government-sponsored peasant associations called Convivir’s were “special private security and vigilance services, designed to group the civilian population alongside the Armed Forces.”

Security forces and paramilitary groups enjoyed immunity from prosecution under Governor Uribe, and they used this immunity to launch a campaign of terror in Antioquia. Thousands of people were murdered, “disappeared,” detained and driven out of the region. In the town of San Jose de Apartadó for example, three of the Convivir leaders were well-known paramilitaries and had been trained by the Colombian Army’s 17th Brigade. In 1998, representatives of more than 200 Convivir associations announced that they would unite with the paramilitary organization, the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), under its murderous leader Carlos Castaño.
(snip/...)

http://www.colombiajournal.org/colombia185.htm

[Pavulon]

18. Doesn't chavez have enough problems with traitor

farmers who sell their land to worry about.

Time for him to ride off into the sunset of "we dont give a shit what you say"..

[Judi Lynn]

19. What is it you're attempting to say? Please clarify, if you're able.

Why not provide a link to give information, once it's possible to know what it is you're attempting to share.

[Pavulon]

20. Link..One guy in red shirt saying dumb stuff..

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/01/20/venezuela.farms.ap/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

those traitor farmers need crushing..

[Judi Lynn]

21. Asking the farmers to sell to their own countrymen who have a food shortage is not crushing them.

Not long ago, people like you were bitching and moaning not long ago about the food shortage in Caracas, really chewing up the scenery about it.

Can't have it both ways.

[Pavulon]

22. Still have a food shortage

that whole foreigners are evil thing is working well in zimbabwe.

People like me who are tired of chavez?

[Judi Lynn]

23. What difference does it make if right-wing Americans are "tired of chavez?" Who cares?

It was the Venezuelan population voting him into office which mattered, and still does.

When they don't want him to be their president, meaning the MAJORITY, not the racist, fascist, European-descended assholes, then they will vote for someone else.

[AlphaCentauri]

24. price manipulation is behind the food shortage

many times in latin america merchants hide products like sugar and corn to fake shortage and impose sky rocketing Prices.

[Bacchus39]

27. Chavez is the one who instituted price controls

its little wonder farmers are looking for markets, outside of Ven, where they can make a profit.

[AlphaCentauri]

48. of course in response to fake shortages

The sporadic disappearance from supermarkets of many basic foods - such as milk, sugar, eggs, cooking oil, black beans and meat - is widely accepted as one of the main causes of Mr Chávez's defeat in a referendum over constitutional change last month.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2c03a630-c88f-11dc-94a6-0000779fd2ac.html

[Judi Lynn]

39. Measures to alleviate the food shortage: 800 tons of food to distribute on weekends

Venezuela: Pdval will have 800 tons of food to distribute on weekends
Posted: 2008/01/22

Maracaibo, Jan 21 ABN.- Food distribution operatives will be carried out on weekends by the Food Pdvsa Company (Pdval) in order to offer them in 30 places of the country.

The announcement was made by the Minister of People's Power for Energy and Oil, Rafael Ramírez, from Lagunillas municipality, Zulia state, regarding of the Pdval Company's launching.

Furthermore, the Minister announced that everyday, en 15 places of the country, they will carry out permanent food distribution operatives.

Ramírez said that they will inform at the proper time the addresses of the food distribution activities.

He added: 'we have our own Pdval' slogan and we will announce in the regional press more details about the distribution activities.'

He also said: 'all the government: the Armed Forces, social organizations, missions and Pdvsa' workers, is working to overthrow the shortage of supplies.'

More:
http://mathaba.net/rss/?x=578986

[AlphaCentauri]

47. hard to find that info in the cable news

not even the hispanic media show them.

[Bacchus39]

28. is expropriating their land and sending in the army "crushing" them

I would argue yes.


from the link:

In that case the farm must be expropriated," Chavez said, adding that the government could also take over milk plants and properties of beef producers.

"I'm putting you on alert," Chavez said. "If there's a producer that refuses to sell the product ... and sells it at a higher price abroad ... ministers, find me the proof so it can be expropriated."

Addressing his Cabinet, he said: "If the army must be brought in, you bring in the army."

[Peace Patriot]

25. Bush's pet, Uribe, a mafia boss? Yup, like owner, like dog...

Chavez tells it like it is - unlike most of our Bush/corporate ass-licking politicians.

And we need to understand who the Chavez bashers are allying themselves with, and what the stakes are...for us and for the people of South America:

"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

And you thought he was "retired."

My prediction: Oil War II: South America, U.S. military intervention in support of fascist thugs (allied with those in Colombia), before the end of Bush's term. Rumsfeld's likely first target, Bolivia, where the rich rural landowners (location of Bolivia's oil, gas and other resources) and their militias intend to split off the rural provinces from the central government of Evo Morales (the first indigenous president of Bolivia) in order to deny any benefit from the country's resources to the vast poor indigenous population. Rumsfeld thus gains a second fascist launching pad for regaining Exxon-Mobile & co. control of the larger oil deposits in Venezuela and Ecuador (also with leftist - majorityist - governments). The fascist war in Colombia to regain control of the oil region for Occidental Petroleum (and other interests - Chiquita, Monsanto, the World Bank, the big drug lords)--against FARC (leftist guerrillas)--will be expanded, and is already being edged across the border into Venezuela, with U.S.-funded pesticide spraying of small peasant farmers (killing food crops and animals and harming human DNA), and rightwing death squad killings.

Real democracy has been prevented in Colombia. You raise your head in Colombia, and try to form a union on Chiquita farms, for instance, and it gets chopped off - literally. In Colombia, rightwing death squads, with close ties to the Colombian military, chainsaw union leaders and throw their body parts into mass graves. Thousands of union leaders, small peasant farmers, community organizers, political leftists, human rights workers and journalists have been tortured and killed in Colombia by the Colombian security forces and associated rightwing paramilitaries* - funded with billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars. This is WHY Colombia has a large leftist guerrilla army (FARC), which controls a third of the country.

And don't ya know, escalation of this war on the poor is Rumsfeld's doing, to begin with, and achieving its purpose - restoration of fascist/corporate control of the oil and other resources in the Andes democracies (and elsewhere in South America) - is his "retirement" project (and I think payment for continued immunity from prosecution for war crimes). In their obsession with Mideast oil, the Bush Junta has "lost" South America - where a peaceful, democratic rebellion against U.S./corporate rule has swept the continent - and they are fast losing strategic military ground there. (The new leftist president of Ecuador, for instance, has promised not to renew the U.S. military base lease in Ecuador this year.) Thus, they will try to pick off a Chavez ally like Bolivia, where their destabilization plans are gaining traction (which have failed, repeatedly, in Venezuela), and try to draw Chavez (and Bolivian leftists) into a bloody war. They will also enmesh the next U.S. president in a foothold situation (with the U.S. propping up a second fascist government, in addition to Colombia) in which there are no good choices (a la Vietnam). This will also initiate a huge political fight over the legitimacy of a split-off rightwing government in Bolivia. Another impact will be the poor in the fascist-run portion of Bolivia will flee - adding to the already serious Colombian refugee problem.

Rumsfeld is nothing if not a chaos creator. He thrives on civil disorder, pain and death. To him, these are opportunities for profit. Look at Iraq! When I saw this Rumsfeld op-ed in the Washington Post last month, ice chills went down my spine. The fucker is planning another war (having been denied Iran), in which the U.S. will "act swiftly," as he says, in support of "friends and allies" in South America. The Bush Junta has no friends in South America except the violent, rightwing fascist elites.

The psyops/disinformation we see in our corporate press, about the South American left, and Chavez in particular, are a preliminary to war. It is difficult to make sense of them otherwise.** And once you understand that Rumsfeld is involved, the pieces start to fall into place.


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

*Amnesty International attributes 92% of the violence against union organizers in Colombia, to Colombian security forces and associated paramilitaries:
http://www.amnesty.org/en/alfresco_asset/26e626d7-a2c0-11dc-8d74-6f45f39984e5/amr230012007en.html

**For an alternative view of the South American left (alternative to our war profiteering corporate news monopolies, which have colluded with the Bush/CIA on an intense campaign of disinformation, psyops, black ops and dirty tricks, in particular against Hugo Chavez, I recommend: www.venezuelanalysis.com.

[Bacchus39]

29. hands off Colombia Chavez!!

mind your own business.

[Peace Patriot]

33. Hands off Colombia...Bush, Cheney, Rice, Negroponte, Rumsfeld!!!

And hands off Bolivia, and Ecuador, and Argentina, and Nicaragua, and Venezuela! HANDS OFF THE VAST POOR MAJORITY OF THIS WORLD, THERE AND HERE!

You echo THEIR line, Bacchus39 - the Bushite/global corporate predator line - that THEY have a "right" to interfere - and to torture and kill and steal - anywhere in the world where there are resources and slave labor pools that they want to profit from - while local, elected, democratic leaders with widespread popular support are supposed to SHUT UP, and ignore their greedy and bloody interference.

Let me hear you say "Hands off Colombia, Bush!" - and "Hands off Venezuela, Bush!" - and maybe I'll gain some respect for your opinions on this subject. The Bushites are pouring billions of our tax dollars into stoking up the Colombian civil war, and propping up its rightwing government, and into rightwing political groups and destabilization plots against its leftwing (majorityist) government neighbors. Do you support this? Tell us. And if you don't, why don't you say, "Hands off Colombia, Bush!" - "Hands off Latin America!" But no, you repeat the Bush/global corporate predator line - and Rumsfeld's line - on Chavez. It is the Bushites who have no "rights" in South America, and Chavez - as a native, as the transparently elected president of Venezuela, with a 70% approval rating in his country, and widespread support among the leaderships and peoples of neighboring countries, and who is the founder of regional institutions such as the Bank of the South, and is the a successful peace negotiator who managed (where all others have failed) to get two hostages released from FARC captivity - and whose country is heavily impacted by the Colombian civil war - who has the right to speak and to act to protect his country's interests, and to promote peace and and prosperity and self-determination in the region?

Let us hear you speak to this: Bush vs. Chavez - who has more right to be concerned about what happens in Colombia? And, whose interests do each of them serve? And then tell us: Whose "hands" need to be "off" Colombia?

[Bacchus39]

34. anyone can be "concerned" about what happens in Colombia

Colombians decide who their leaders are though. Self-determination you know??

yes, I know Chavez was elected. Ven. is stuck with him. However, its their decision. I was happy to see they rejected his power grab in December though through the referendum. The power of the people, good to see.

[Peace Patriot]

36. Colombia is a rightwing paramilitary dictatorship. Can't you read?

Colombians do NOT "decide" who their leaders are. Rightwing paramilitary death squads decide who runs and who wins. Here, we have Diebold and ES&S. There, they still use bullets to "decide."

The Bushites' one victory in South America - amongst their many failures - with massive USAID/NED and covert funding, their fascist allies managed to convince 10% of Venezuelans to sit on their hands, in a constitutional referendum that the Chavez government lost by a hair (49.7% vs. 49.3%). With lying ads - such as the one that said, if the amendments pass, the government will take children from their mothers - and other nefarious activities in Venezuela - and with the Chavistas making political mistakes (too many amendments on the ballot), and underestimating the fascist Catholic prelates' opposition to women's and gay rights (one of the amendments proposed), the Bushites and their allies defeated the amendments, and thus, for the moment, removed the threat of Chavez running (and winning) again, in 2012--as FDR did (who ran for and won four terms in office!)--and having control of the central bank, when the World Bank barracudas make their move.

Yes, I'm sure Rumsfeld shares your smugness over this "victory"--although it shows him and all Chavez-bashers to have been liars all this time, with their mantra that Chavez is a "dictator." A "dictator" who puts things to a VOTE OF THE PEOPLE. A "dictator" who supports women's and gay rights. A "dictator" who wants a shorter work week, so ordinary people can participate in civic life. A "dictator" who yields to the will of the people even in a hairsbreadth-thin defeat. A "dictator" whose government conducts elections that put our own to shame for their transparency.

Rumsfeld: "How to defeat tyrants like Chavez."

Great bedfellow you've got there, Bacchus.

[Bacchus39]

37. 62% of Colombians say you're wrong

and it was 50.7% not 49.7%. 50.7% + 49.3% = 100%

[Peace Patriot]

42. You're right about the second stat - 50.7% vs. 49.3%. My mistake.

What is the source of the first stat?

And how can proper polls be conducted, and votes held, with rightwing paramilitary hit squads murdering political leftists, and controlling regions with intimidation and threats, one third of the country under FARC control, and 2 to 4 million people fled to Venezuela?

I don't think proper polls and votes can be conducted in those circumstances. And, anyway, you don't even say what 62% was measuring, or WHO it was measuring, or WHERE: Did they include Colombia's vast poor population? Did they include the Colombian refugees in Venezuela? Did they include the folks in FARC territory (one third of the country)? (Aren't they Colombians, too?). Was it measuring Colombians' feelings of safety and good civil order when they go to vote? And how can you measure that, in circumstances of rightwing intimidation? How did the pollsters weight the poll for fearful people lying in their answers? Was it measuring votes for Uribe, or his popularity? And did they weight for "Stockholm Syndrome"? (During the heinous Stroessner dictatorship in Paraguay, Stroessner regularly did well in polls and votes, because some people were terrified of saying or voting otherwise, and others fell prey to the fear that Stroessner sold them, that only a fascist dictator could protect them.)

So, what does this 62% prove? If it's Uribe popularity, it probably only proves that Uribe has popularity among the well-off, in Uribe-controlled areas--and even there, 38% are unsure, don't know what they think of him, or oppose him?

Who did the poll? How did they handle these significant issues--who they polled, where they polled, and fear of rightwing paramilitaries so intense that one leftist politician I know of has to wear a bulletproof vest and surround himself with armed guards, so as not to be assassinated, and thousands of leftists - union leaders, political organizers, peasant farmers, human rights workers, journalists - have been slain?

[Bacchus39]

44. it was the last election

I don't know if the FARC lets people vote or not. I would dispute that the FARC controls one third of the territory. I imagine that would include remote areas where the FARC run unchecked and NOT one third of the population.

[lakeguy]

50. who certified the election?

or is it like in the US where we are such honorable people that international observers are not allowed because honorable people do not cheat.

[Peace Patriot]

30. 2 to 4 million Colombian refugees in Venezuela - not Chavez's problem?

Someone upthread touted the uninformed opinion that Chavez ought to stay out of Colombia's business.

The Colombian civil war gravely affects Venezuela (which borders Colombia) in many ways. One of the them is the flood of Colombian refugees into Venezuela.

"Chavez reaffirmed that he is disposed to continue working towards the liberation of all the hostages held by the FARC. He added that he did not want to interfere in Colombia's internal affairs, but that the problem has gone beyond that nation's borders and that after Colombia the country most affected by the conflict was Venezuela - fighting between guerrilla groups and the Colombian military and rightwing paramilitary groups has often spilt over into Venezuelan territory and some 2 to 4 million Colombian refugees are estimated to live in Venezuela."

Venezuela's Chavez: No Military Solution to Colombian Conflict
January 15th 2008, by Kiraz Janicke - Venezuelanalysis.com
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3070

The civil war has also spilled over Venezuela's borders, where U.S.-backed Colombian security forces and associated rightwing paramilitary death squads are TRYING to escalate the conflict into a war in Venezuela. That is the real reason why the Bushites are pouring billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars into military aid to Colombia - to turn a civil war into a region-wide oil war. See my post above, re Donald Rumsfeld's op-ed.

Another informative article on the Venezuela/Colombia border problems - which include food hording/smuggling and rightwing paramilitary drug trafficking (bottom half of the article):
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3087

[Bacchus39]

32. is it Chavez business who the Colombian people elect?

that's the issue, not bilateral relations between countries.

[Peace Patriot]

35. Is it the Iraqis' business who the American people "elect"?

Damned right it is! If you have a war raging in your country - or threatening to spill over into your country - instigated by Bushites, you damn well DO have the right to be concerned, the right to an opinion about that leadership, and the right to speak and act in your peoples' interest. Chavez has 2 to 4 million displaced, disenfranchised Colombians in his country, and more arriving every day. And it's not "his business" who is heading the Colombian government, and what that leader's relations are with the Bush Junta, and drug traffickers, and weapons traffickers, and rightwing death squads - who have been hatching plots to assassinate Chavez and other leaders?

Get real. And get smart, Bacchus39. Really, what a stupid statement - that Chavez has "no business" being concerned about Uribe!

Furthermore, how would you like to be a leftist political organizer in Colombia, trying to oppose Uribe, when you know that thousands of leftist political organizers, community organizers, union leaders, small peasant farmers, human rights workers and journalists have been tortured and killed by rightwing paramilitaries with very close ties to the Uribe government? Try mounting a political opposition in those circumstances. We really don't know who the leadership of Colombia would be, if elections were held without this kind of intimidation and fear, and without the billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars propping up the Uribe regime. Can any polls or votes be trusted in these circumstances? I think not. The huge refugee problem - from Colombia into Venezuela - is very telling. It means that people are afraid. It means they don't have a say. It means that they know if they raise their heads, and try to have say, their heads will be chopped off - as has happened to union leaders.

The status of union organizing in a country is a good measure of its political/government culture. And the status of union organizing in Colombia is that you take your life in your hands if you dare to raise the most minimal issues of workers' rights. As with union organizing, so with political organizing. It is extremely perilous. So don't talk to me about who the Colombian people have supposedly "elected" - until all those responsible for the heinous crimes against union organizers and other poor people have been brought to justice, and the government and U.S.-sponsored violence has been stopped, and peace has been negotiated in the civil war. No election system is free and honest when leftist politicians - and exposers of rightwing corruption - have to wear bulletproof vests and surround themselves with armed guards.

There is also violence from FARC on the left - kidnappings, bombings - although AI stats show that 92% of the violence against union organizers is committed by Colombian security and associated paramilitary forces (and only 2% by FARC, which AI says is most likely violence against people who collude with the rightwing death squads). But why is there a FARC (armed leftist guerrillas) in the first place? Because there are people in Colombia who see no hope of reform - especially with the billions of dollars pouring into Colombia's fascist government from the Bushites - and who have seen what happens to those who TRY to engage in civil political life. The truth is that MOST of the people in Colombia - the poor, the majority - have little or no representation in government, and little or no hope of achieving any, in these circumstances (vast rightwing power and corruption).

And the answer to THAT - to leftists having taken up arms - is a REGIONAL peace settlement, in which the OAS or the UN sponsors elections. That's what has to happen. FARC is not about to give up the one third of Colombia that it controls. They've been fighting the rightwing government for over 30 years. And now we see Donald Rumsfeld plotting to turn it into a regional war. If the U.S. support of this fascist regime is withdrawn - including U.S. money and military activity - THEN we have a FAIR situation, in which the countries of the region can work out a settlement and hold elections in peaceful and safe conditions, to determine who the people Colombia really want as their leaders.

This is what Chavez and others are trying to achieve. How can you say that it is not Chavez's "business" to seek peace in Venezuela's border region, and in its neighbor country, return of the millions of Colombian refugees to a safe environment, and proper, self-determined, independent leadership for Colombia?

It IS "his business." It is very much "his business." It is in his own personal interest - since Uribe's pals have been plotting to assassinate him (no doubt with Rumsfeldian in-put). It is in the interest of Venezuela and the Colombians in Venezuela. It is in the interest of regional peace and prosperity.

It is the Bushites and their global corporate predator puppetmasters (Exxon Mobile, Occidental Petroleum, the World Bank et al) who have no right to be interfering, politically or militarily, in South America. And it is in the interest of South Americans to achieve regional solidarity, peace, good leadership and political and economic cooperation amongst themselves. Chavez has tried, time and again, with Uribe, and Uribe has only ended up stabbing him in the back every time--including during the recent hostage negotiations--because Uribe is controlled by the Bush Junta. Is that good for Colombia? It is not. Nor is it good for Venezuela or other South American countries.

The Bushites are showing every sign of plotting another oil war. They like war. They profit tidily from it - and they don't care how many people they kill to get access to more oil. The region needs PEACE - the end of the civil war in Colombia, and the end of the endless, failed, corrupt, murderous U.S./Bush "war on drugs." The Bushites have only military solutions to ANYTHING. That is how they think. They are bullies and killers. And it is very much in the interest of South Americans to rid themselves of this constant U.S. interference, bullying and support for fascists, and find their own way toward their own solutions.

[Bacchus39]

38. well, lets cut to the chase, do you think Chavez should decide who serves as Colombia's president?

n/t

[Peace Patriot]

40. Is that the "chase"? I think the "chase" is Bush and Rumsfeld and their

nefarious schemes for looting other countries and killing whoever gets in their way. And with their pals in the paramilitary death squads killing off candidates, and terrifying voters, who can say what the people of Colombia want?

Uribe's legitimacy is as tenuous as Bush-Cheney's, and he has made a very great mistake in allying Colombia so closely with them. I think Colombia needs outside help, but not theirs - the OAS or UN - or a group of Colombia's neighbors - to broker a peace agreement, and hold elections under better conditions.

I think the U.S. should get out - out of Colombia, out of South America - before we have a second Iraq on our hands. The U.S. has done nothing but harm there - often egregious harm. And the U.S./Bush Junta's "war on drugs," massive military funding, horrid "free trade" deals, and ill intentions on every front are a grave economic and political threat to the region.

Chavez is an important, highly respected, and very much supported player in the region - by right of his position as president of Venezuela and by earned right, in his leadership of the region moving it away from global corporate predator domination, and infusing new independence and pride in the Latin American political atmosphere. Yeah, he mouths off a lot, sometimes to his own detriment, but I like his attitude and his lip, on the whole. Time our own leaders started telling the truths he's telling, about our own servitude to transnational corporations, who clearly...CLEARLY... have no loyalty to us - to the American people - and have royally fucked us over. I'll take mouthy Chavez to our mealy-mouthed corporatists and sneaky "have it both ways" warmongers any day. And he's right about Uribe. The guy is a tool. And he has NOT done well by his people - they're all fleeing into Venezuela!

Colombia needs to have clean elections, in safe conditions, and it needs to establish its INDEPENDENCE - as the Bolivarian states are doing. South America could be - and is going to be - an economic powerhouse, and Colombia's going to be LEFT OUT. Becoming an economic powerhouse requires local control of local resources, people development - education, medical care, help for small and local business enterprises, good labor laws - development of LOCAL manufacturing and other infrastructure development, and pulling together, as an economic block, to get the most advantage that you can for your region. That is what Venezuela is doing, and Bolivia, and Ecuador, and Argentina, and Brazil, and Uruguay, and, to some extent, Chile, and now Paraguay (which joined the Bank of the South). Uribe is colossally wrong, as a politician, to have allied with the Bushites, and to have gone for the easy money - the U.S. "milk train." That train is de-railing, due to gross Bushite mismanagement of the economy, malfeasance and grand theft. And Uribe and his pals have committed the same kind of crimes as the Bushites - including huge neglect of what makes a country viable and prosperous - its work force - and, in Uribe's case, tolerating heinous violence against union leaders. And I think, for Colombia to come out of all this, and have a decent future, Uribe needs to go.

That's my opinion. I have no say in who Colombians want to lead them. That's up to them. But I don't see adequate - let alone optimal conditions - for free and fair elections there. And the only way to change THAT is collective regional intervention. Colombia presents a similar problem to Argentina when it went into World Bank/IMF-induced economic meltdown in 2001. If you have a basketcase on your border - whether from outside economic looting, or civil war - you need to DO something about it, for the welfare of your own people and the region. Venezuela did so, with regard to Argentina. It provided the easy-term loans Argentina needed to get out of debt to the World Bank/IMF, with its ruinous terms--the seed of the Bank of the South. Argentina is now on the mend--well on its way to recovery. Venezuela thus helped to create a healthy trading partner for itself, Brazil and other countries.

Colombia isn't an economic basketcase YET (although its reliance on billions of U.S. tax dollars could turn it into one, fast), but it IS a political basketcase. This civil war has been going on for more than thirty years. 2 to 4 million people have fled the country, and are refugees in Venezuela. And its alliance with the Bushites has made it unreliable and devious, and a bad actor, whom other leaders are rightfully suspicious of. The best solution is a peace settlement, with some outside entity sponsoring safe elections. That seems to me to be what Chavez and others are aiming at. Uribe is nothing if not a survivor. He might get himself actually elected - but without paramilitary intimidation of voters, I doubt that he can. But that is neither here nor there. My point is that with the Bush Junta - and Donald "Iraq Disaster" Rumsfeld - meddling in the region, infusing billions of dollars into rightwing military and political activity, and doing their best to "divide and conquer" - the best solutions for Colombia and the region are difficult to pursue, and probably impossible to achieve.

How long is this civil war going to go on? Another thirty-plus years? And how long are U.S. taxpayers going be footing this huge bill, when we're already looking at a $10 trillion deficit, and we're already funding two other corporate resource wars?

I think that what nettles Chavez is that he offered the hand of friendship to Uribe - he met with him and accepted his apology for Uribe's pals and their assassination plots against Chavez - and even went ahead, and got two of the FARC hostages released, despite every manner of obstruction and backstabbing from Uribe (under orders from the Bushites, I'm sure), and he can't understand how any leader, with his peoples' interests at heart, could act like this. He was willing to work with Uribe, and achieve things that would be a credit to Uribe as well as Chavez, he was willing to forgive and forget the personal affront of the assassination plot, and put his own socialist political beliefs aside, and achieve something, together, with a rightwing leader, no matter how that leader was elected or (s)elected. He was trying to "turn" Uribe, to bring him on board for the regional cause. And he appears to have failed. And, Chavez, being who is, doesn't hide his disappointment in Uribe.

But Chavez is right, on this. A regional solution is needed - for all of their economies, and for Colombia's endless conflict and dependence on Washington. He's right, Bacchus. Even if you despise him, he's right. Colombia cannot thrive as Washington's puppet. And that is the "cutting to the chase" that is needed.

[Bacchus39]

41. yep, its up to Colombians to decide

"I have no say in who Colombians want to lead them. That's up to them."


o I see you agree to the point I have been making the entire thread. and it is NOT Chavez who decides who leads Colombia.

that wasn't so hard was it???

[Peace Patriot]

45. No, you are miscontruing my point. It is of vital interest to Venezuela and

the region who leads Colombia, and what that means as to U.S./Bush interference, and other policies (the "war on drugs," "free trade," etc). Chavez spoke about it, but I'm sure that many leaders are concerned. Ecuador, for instance, is on the border with Colombia, and doesn't want to see Colombia's civil war, OR Bush's "war on drugs," spill over into Ecuador. The new leftist president of Ecuador has already stated that he will not renew the U.S. military base lease in Ecuador, because he does not trust the intentions of Bush's "war on drugs," and also considers it a sovereignty issue (the two issues are joined). Venezuela has the same border problem - plus the refugee problem. And Bolivia's Evo Morales also opposes the Bush "war on drugs." It is via the "war on drugs" that Colombia is receiving billions of dollars in U.S. military aid. That is a threat to the region.

So Chavez and other South American leaders have these, and many other legitimate concerns, about who rules Colombia - and also are involved as member nations in the OAS, which monitors elections - so they have a rightful say, and a responsibility, in regional election policy, and with regard to clean, fair, safe elections. There are circumstances that could lead to Colombia's economic deterioration, and to worsening conditions in its civil war. Those are general threats to all the countries in the region - and they are determined by Uribe policy - as dictated by the Bush Junta.

I am just a U.S. citizen, far from these events - but I DO bear responsibility for what my government does and who it supports, in my name. And I do what I can about that, although we are almost as helpless as Colombians - or Iraqis - as to controlling our own fate, and having any say HERE. Further, this unbelievably profligate spending that the Bushites have done - much of it military and police state spending - will affect me and my loved ones and friends personally. It already has. And our economy shows every sign of getting worse, under this great war profiteer burden, among other gross malfeasance and theft.

I am not have a say in Colombia. I am not a Colombian citizen and voter. But I do have a right to an opinion, given all these ways, and more, that U.S./Bush policy in Colombia and in South America affects me. I also have a right as a citizen of the world - a human being - to an opinion, and to activism, with regard to human rights violations by the Uribe government and others.

But Chavez and other leaders in the region have a direct RESPONSIBILITY for the safety and welfare of their own people, and their collective safety and welfare. No, he does not live in, or vote in, Colombia - but he has a rightful say in how Colombia conducts elections, in human rights violations (as a member of the OAS Human Rights Commission), and in policies that affect them all - such as this endless civil war in Colombia, funded by the Bushites.

The point you misconstrued is that I was talking about ME, not Chavez.

[ohio2007]

43. Hugo must be on drugs...oh wait .....

Venezuela troops to block food smuggling to Colombia

CARACAS (Reuters) - Venezuela has sent 1,200 troops to the border with Colombia to prevent food from being smuggled out of the country, a Venezuelan general said, the latest step in President Hugo Chavez's campaign to stem food shortages.

snip

http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSN2255355320080122?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews
inflation must be tearing the country apart. How long til Hugo confiscates all farms and food production?

He is going to go down the same road as Zimbabwe with only 16 months left to his "Rule by Decree".

Of course,
he could make it all work as well as it does on the drawing board ;)

[AlphaCentauri]

49. food shortages we are expert at it, don't we?

may be some one is offering them more money for their food in Colombia so they rather sell it to other countries than sell it to their own.