Ecuador, Venezuela Demand Condemnation

[bemildred]

Source: LA Times

CARACAS, Venezuela -- Venezuela is starting to block billions of dollars in Colombian imports and investment under orders from President Hugo Chavez, threatening economic havoc in both nations in response to a Colombian military attack on rebels hiding in Ecuador.

Chavez and Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa demanded international condemnation of Colombia's U.S.-allied government on Wednesday night, while Chavez predicted a sharp fall in the $6 billion in annual Colombia-Venezuela trade: "That's coming down."

"We aren't interested in Colombian investments here," Chavez said, standing beside Correa. "Of the Colombian businesses that are here in Venezuela, we could nationalize some."

He said Venezuela will search for other countries like Ecuador, Brazil and Argentina to replace products imported from Colombia. Noting that Colombia traditional supplies food to Venezuela, he said now "we can't depend (on Colombia) not even for a grain of rice."


Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-colombia-venezuela,1,7768212.story?ctrack=3&cset=true

---

Venezuelan Troops Patrol Border

SAN ANTONIO, Venezuela -- Soldiers toting assault rifles trudged through sugarcane fields, pausing occasionally to gaze across the river that separates Venezuela from Colombia.

Suddenly, a dozen children dressed in school uniforms emerged from a thicket and asked the soldiers for permission to cross the river. Carefully, they jumped from stone to stone and into Colombia, splashing and playing.

These Venezuelan soldiers, who are permanently assigned to guard the border, are being joined by 10 battalions -- about 9,000 troops -- in reinforcements following President Hugo Chavez's order to increase the military presence on the Colombian border amid the two nations' worst diplomatic standoff in years.

Chavez also severed relations with Colombia's U.S.-backed government this week after President Alvaro Uribe launched a commando raid that killed a key rebel leader and 23 other Colombian guerrillas at a base in neighboring Ecuador last weekend.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-colombia-venezuela-border,1,2355100.story?ctrack=4&cset=true

A Mexican rebel in Ecuador?

MEXICO CITY -- Lucia Morett survived the attack Saturday by the Colombian military on a rebel base in Ecuador, an act that has brought three South American countries to the brink of war.

Since then, many have wondered what the 26-year-old Mexican drama student was doing in a base led by the No. 2 commander of Colombia's largest guerrilla group.

On Wednesday, Morett remained in a hospital in Quito, Ecuador, recuperating from wounds suffered in what appeared to be an aerial bombing, she said. Her public statements have shed little light on the mystery.

Her story is being cast in Mexico City as an espionage tale involving Mexican students and local support networks sympathetic to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-rebel6mar06,1,5477786.story?ctrack=5&cset=true

[Warren Stupidity]

1. Is this the off balancing distraction?

The Colombian government does not initiate a cross border military action (more commonly referred to as 'an act of war') without the consent and cooperation and most likely at the direct orders of the United States government. The crises of the endless and bankrupting military debacle in Iraq, the collapsing dollar, the looming recession/depression, and the still unacknowledged onset of peak oil driven geopolitical instability does not bode well for the neocon/neolib coalition that has ruled the US since 1980 and that has dominated the planet since the collapse of the soviet union. A distraction, a military crises in our own backyard with a convenient boogeyman involved, with all the comfortable red-baiting lingo from before 9-11 would appear to be an ideal way to frame the bloated ex-pow 'war-hero' as just what our population of idiot mouse potatoes needs for these troubled times. More of the same with Bomb-Bomb McCain? Or the 3AM phone call answering ancient warrior to lead us through yet more troubled times?

[bemildred]

2. I don't think so.

I think this came from the hostaqe releases. It was an attempt to shift the debate back to terrorism and the drug war and that sort of thing instead of Chavez and FARC successfully negotiating and working to get hostages released. I think the possibility of Betancourt being freed might have been an element too.

Chavez has been pushing at Uribe and the US for some time, partly for domestic reasons, partly because that's who he is politically. This was an attempt to push back.

So far it appears to me that it is the usual Bushite ignorant folly, but it's far from over yet. I am glad to see that it looks less like war and more like an embargo. I don't think anyone has really thought over what happens if Ecuador and Venezuela decide to embargo Colombia. Maybe soon we will have a "Bogota Airlift".

It does seem clear that the rest of Latin America, although largely wishing it would go away, is unified behind the idea that what Colombia did is unacceptable, and they do not much care whether Uncle Sugar likes it or not.

[Peace Patriot]

3. I agree that it is far more than a distraction. I think it's Rumsfeld-orchestrated

and I think what we have just seen, with Bush puppet Uribe's bombing of Ecuador, guided by U.S. surveillance, is the opening shot of Oil War II: South America.

First, Donald Rumsfeld writes an op-ed in the Washington Post, Dec 1 07, entitled, "The Smart Way to Defeat Tyrants like Chavez,"* urging "free trade" (free fire zone against union organizers) for Colombia, a country on which the Bush Junta has larded the biggest military aid package on earth, outside of Israel (about $4 billion of our tax dollars). This is how Rumsfeld wants to "defeat" Chavez--he sees "free trade" as economic warfare. Then, in addition, he urges "swift" U.S. action in support of "friends and allies" in South America. The Bushites don't have any "friends and allies" in South America, except the fascists running Colombia, and Bush/U.S.-funded fascist cells planning coups in Venezuela and Bolivia (and no doubt in Ecuador and Argentina--strong allies of the first two).

Next, we hear that Exxon Mobil has taken legal action to freeze $12 billion in Venezuela's assets, over a dispute about Venezuela's 60% share in its own oil--a deal that Norway's Statoil, France's Total, British BP and even Chevron have agreed to. Exxon Mobil's real motive--destabilization, part of Rumsfeld's war plan.

Meanwhile, the Presidents of Venezuela, Ecuador and France (also Argentina) have been working hard to bring Colombia's FORTY-plus year civil war to a peaceful end. At the INVITATION of Bush's tool, Uribe, Chavez undertakes hostage release negotiations with the FARC, the leftist guerrillas in Colombia, with URIBE bombing the hostages' locations of the first two to be freed--we just found out. Apparently, the invitation was a set up--a trap--for Chavez, and for the FARC, but Chavez took the invitation seriously. So did President Sarkovy of France (one of the hostages, Ingrid Betancourt, is a dual French-Colombian citizen). So did Argentina's new president, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, who mentioned in her inaugural speech that Argentina would do everything in its power to assist the hostage negotiations. And so did Rafael Correa of Ecuador. Chavez has gotten six hostages released this year. According to Correa, he was in negotiations with FARC for release of Betancourt and 12 others, until...

Colombia bombed the location of the CHIEF HOSTAGE NEGOTIATOR for the FARC, Raul Reyes, and more than twenty others, IN THEIR SLEEP, at a jungle camp about a mile inside Ecuador's border, slaughtering them all (Correa called it "a massacre"). Uribe furthermore LIED to him that it was hot pursuit situation. It was not. The bodies that Ecuador recovered were all wearing underwear or pajamas and no shoes.

End of the hostage releases. End of hopes for a peaceful settlement of Colombia's civil war. WHY? WHY would Uribe do this?

Looking backward for a moment, the last time peace was attempted in Colombia, thousands of FARC members put down their arms, and joined the political process, organized, ran for office, got votes--and 400 of them were elected. Late 1980s/early 1990s. Colombia's rightwing paramilitaries murdered every last one of their elected officials, plus torturing and murdering thousands of people who had voted for and supported them. Those who escaped returned to the jungle and took up arms against the Colombian government once again. And, since then, the carnage against political leftists, union organizers, small peasant farmers, human rights workers and journalists has continued, unabated--thousands tortured and killed by Colombia's security forces and closely tied rightwing paramilitary death squads--all funded by billions of our taxpayer dollars, compliments of Bill Clinton ("Plan Colombia") and now the Bush Junta.

The global corporate predators who control our government don't want peace in Colombia. They want to exterminate the political left and terrorize the poor, in Colombia AND in Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina (where most of the oil is).

Leaders who are NOT murderous, greedy fuckheads would WELCOME releases of hostages, and peaceful settlements of conflicts. The U.S. instead has done nothing but stoke up the bloodshed, arming one side to the teeth, in a civil war. Their motives are war profiteering, slave labor profiteering, and--most important of all, of course--gaining control of the biggest oil reserves in the western hemisphere.

They will lose this war--even more miserably than they have lost the Iraq War--and, what is happening to Colombia now will happen on a larger scale to us. The U.S. will become isolated in our own hemisphere, from united, allied, cooperative, social justice governments of South America.

The charge that Hugo Chavez is a "tyrant" is entirely false. You have only to consider this word in the mouth of Donald Rumsfeld to know how false it is. Chavez has been repeatedly elected by the Venezuelan people--in elections that put our own to shame for their transparency--and has run a scrupulously lawful, beneficial government for ten years. He has broken no laws. He has harmed no one. He enjoys a 70% approval rating--AND the friendship of ALL of the neighboring and nearby country leaders, except Uribe, whom he tried to make friends with and failed. He is close friends with Rafael Correa--the U.S.-educated, leftist economist who was elected president of Ecuador last year, and also enjoys high approval ratings. He is close friends with Evo Morales, the first indigenous president of Bolivia--in a largely indigenous country. He is close friends with Nestor and Cristina Fernandez-Kirchner in Argentina. He is friends with former steelworker, and President of Brazil, Lula da Silva, who has often defended Chavez, when he has come under Bushite attack. He has much common ground--if not warm friendships--with Ortega in Nicaragua, Vasquez in Uruguay and Batchelet in Chile.

Virtually the whole continent of South America has gone LEFTIST--toward democracy, openness, fairness, social justice, and maximum citizen participation in politics and government, all driven by awesome grass roots social movements.

Except Colombia--the last, dinosauric vestige of the era of U.S.-supported fascist dictators. And--natch!--that's who the Bushites give billions of our tax dollars to, to keep killing peasants.

This Colombia vs. Venezeuela/Ecuador (and the whole world) conflict has Rumsfeld's fingers all over it. His M.O. is to create "chaos and opportunity." He leaves piles of human carnage everywhere he goes. He is out to destroy these democracies and take their oil, and the Clintons not only armed the fascists in Colombia, I believe they are on board for this war. Hillary Clinton has echoed Rumsfeld's language, recently, calling Chavez a "dictator." Either she is completely ignorant of the facts, or she shares Rumsfeld's objectives, and I believe it's the latter. (Obama has been more circumspect on this matter, but I don't trust him a lot on it.)

Oil War II: South America. This U.S./Colombia aggression is actually not the first shot--just the first visible shot. The Bush Junta has been pouring millions of our tax dollars into fascist groups in this nexus of democracy--Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Argentina--through USAID-NED and other budgets--to topple these governments, beginning in 2002, with the U.S. supported violent rightwing military coup attempt against Chavez (which kidnapped him, and suspended the Venezuelan Constitution, the National Assembly, the courts and all civil rights**). There have been many attempts against the Chavez government since then--and we can only see the "tip of the iceberg," I'm sure. There are on-going Bushite covert ops against Morales in Bolivia, and Fernandez in Argentina. (One just surfaced against Fernandez, recently--the "suitcase full of money" caper out of Miami.) Correa in Ecuador was only recently elected, so they haven't had much time to try crap against him--although this invasion of his country is pretty spectacular crap! Our tax dollars at work!

We can't hold a transparent election here. The corporate rulers have taken over the voting system, with their "trade secret" voting machines. But we can sure try our best to fuck up other peoples' elections. And, as if we didn't have enough people in the world hating us, we can now add 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


**See "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised," the Irish filmmakers' documentary on how the people of Venezuela defeated the coup attempt. (--available at YouTube, and at www.axisoflogic.com).

Two informative web sites: www.venezuelanalysis.com, and www.BoRev.net (hilarious AND informative).

[bemildred]

6. You do know Rumsfeld is a dumb ass, don't you?

I'm not saying he might not think such things, but that doesn't mean shit. Look at Iraq. Look at the total lack of respect we are getting in international affairs. Rumsfeld talking about "the smart way" to do anything is a joke.

[zonmoy]

8. rumsfeld is smart in the same ways that all of the greatest tyrants and villains

of the past have been smart. He commits blatant crimes and nobody dares go after him.

[bemildred]

9. Bah. He's fucked up everything he ever touched.

The great tyrants and villains of history were not incompetent. Accountability or the lack of it is a much different issue. There have always been legions of incompetent assholes in the ruling elites that were above the ordinary reach of the law.

[EFerrari]

62. Well, aren't there several countries that he can't travel to because

he's wanted for war crimes? Is it Germany and Italy? I'm not sure if the stuff in Germany is still current.

[Bacchus39]

5. "...instead of Chavez and FARC successfully negotiating and working to get hostages released"

once again, it is the FARC who is holding the hostages in the first place. all they have to do is free them. are you saying the FARC is negotiating with themselves?

[bemildred]

7. Do you read what you write?

Did you read what I wrote? Is it really that hard for you to understand? So you really not know who FARC was negotiating with? Do you really feel that making arrangements to get the hostages freed is a bad thing? Would it bother you if FARC reformed it's ways and became a legal player in Colombian politics? Do you think ending 40 years of guerilla war is a bad thing? How would you go about that if not by talking instead of shooting?

[Bacchus39]

58. reformed their ways??? that is exactly what they have refused to do

would it bother you if the FARC ceased kidnapping and murdering people?

the FARC has rejected the peace plan you know? and the previous plan under the Pastrana administration where they were given huge portions of Colombian territory. they are seeking to overthrow the government, not a seat at the table.

[bemildred]

59. So the answer is no? nt

[Peace Patriot]

65. The last time FARC tried to go legit and political, they all got slaughtered by

Colombia's rightwing paramilitaries who are closely tied to the government and the rich pigs and their global corporate predator pals who own everything.

It is not an option for FARC, except by means of a brokered peace--which is what the Presidents of Venezuela, Ecuador, France and Argentina were trying to do...when Bushbot Uribe crashed in with bombings and troops, guided by U.S. surveillance, and slaughtered the chief FARC hostage negotiator and 20 some others in their sleep.

See my comment (#113) at
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2965329


This wearisome Freeper point--why don't they just release all the hostages (and get nuked)?-- has been repeated, nearly word for word over there by some very like-minded CIA/AP re-typist. I won't repeat all of my reply here, except to say that it's a FORTY-plus year CIVIL WAR! Get it? Both sides have done harm--but, according to all human rights groups, the bulk of the harm has been done by Colombian security forces and paramilitaries--horrendous slaughters and tortures of thousands of innocent people, not just combatants. You have to understand WHY there is a FARC in Colombia, before you can understand anything else about this long, long conflict...and before you can understand why good governments want to broker a peace, and bad governments do not.

[Peace Patriot]

4. Here's what the four hostages (that Chavez recently got released) had to say

a few days ago, about hopes for peace in this 40+ year civil war, before Uribe's bombing of Ecuador, and murder of the FARC leader who negotiated their release.....

---

Chavez, freed FARC hostages call for political solution to Colombian conflict
February 29th 2008, by Kiraz Janicke - Venezuelanalysis.com
Luis Eladio Pérez and Gloria Polanco speaking at the press conference in Caracas (Reuters)

Caracas, March 1, 2008 (venezuelanalysis.com) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has called for international mediation group to negotiate a humanitarian accord in neighboring Colombia, after a successful Venezuelan led humanitarian mission secured the release of four former legislators held by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), on Wednesday.

During a telephone call to state owned VTV Thursday, Chavez indicated that France, Ecuador, Brazil and Argentina as well as the Organization of American States support such a move. It is "essential" that Venezuela is part of any international mediation group, because "the FARC have demonstrated that they don't believe in anyone else," he added.

In a communiqué, released minutes after the hostage handover the FARC said this would be the last unilateral hostage release. The FARC reiterated their longstanding call for a military free zone as a precondition for any further negotiations for a humanitarian exchange of 40 remaining high profile hostages for 500 imprisoned guerrillas. However, the Colombian government immediately rejected this proposal.

Chavez said the desire for peace by the majority of Colombians and that the pressure of world opinion would force Uribe to change his position.

"President Uribe is going to have to change his position. Everybody is in agreement except for Uribe, " he declared.

Speaking at a press conference in Caracas on Thursday night, the former Colombian legislators, Luis Eladio Pérez, Jorge Gechem, Orlando Beltrán and Gloria Polanco, also spoke out in favor of a military free zone to facilitate a humanitarian exchange.

"I publicly challenge President Alvaro Uribe to demonstrate the success of his policy of democratic security and clear the military from the municipalities of Pradera and Florida and after 45 days the Armed Forces can recuperate this territory," Perez said after his liberation. "The solution is political, Mr. President Uribe," he repeated twice during the press conference.

"If you persist in the foolishness of insisting on a military rescue you are going to receive, Mr President Uribe, 40 or 50 corpses. It is absurd to think of a military rescue with the conditions that we had in captivity. There would be a massacre," Pérez stressed.

He revealed that the four recently liberated ex legislators have a proposal to present "to President Uribe, the President (of France Nicholas) Sarkozy and, of course, to President (of Venezuela, Hugo) Chavez." This proposal would only be made public after the three heads of state had been informed, he said.

Pérez who classified the FARC as a "political military group who use terrorist practices" also referred to former Colombian presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt, captured by the guerrillas in 2001, who he said is in a "very bad state of health."

In a message released in 2003 demonstrating Betancourt's proof of life, the former presidential candidate indicated that she was opposed any form of military rescue, as she feared a repeat of the tragedy that occurred in May that year when ex governor of Antioquia, Gilberto Echeverri, and the del ex Defense Minister, Guillermo Gaviria, died during a botched military rescue ordered by Uribe.

Betancourt maintains this position Perez said, however she is also conscious "of the high risk and lack of commitment of the President of the Republic."

In contrast Betancourt calls for a political solution to the conflict based on the Geneva Convention and believes that "fundamentally President Uribe has to recognize the political status of the FARC guerrillas," Perez said.

Pérez also affirmed that after an attempted escape, Betancourt, "remained chained up during the night," and her captors, "humiliated her, obliged her to walk barefoot, tied her to trees and rationed her food."

Ex congressman Orlando Beltrán condemned "all terrorist acts, wherever they come from. I condemn the terrorism of the FARC, of the paramilitaries and the terrorism of the State." He pointed out that Colombia "is the only country in the world that has disappeared an entire political movement, more than six thousand leaders of Unión Patriótica were disappeared, to speak only of this case."

Under a previous peace accord in the 1980's the FARC demobilized and formed Unión Patriótica, however after they laid down their arms thousands of former guerrillas were hunted down by paramilitaries, backed by the Colombian state, and massacred, forcing them back into the armed struggle.

Beltrán added that the Colombian State "has to assume responsibility and understand that they must create the conditions to achieve a humanitarian accord. I don't understand why, when make these handovers in a unilateral manner, they say they are not going to clear the military from a centimeter of the national territory."

Gloria Polanco asserted, "It is necessary to reach the heart of President Uribe, to speak to him, to explain, because he has to understand that if he does not clear the military from Pradera and Florida, which is what the FARC ask, our comrades will die in captivity."

"I am asking for a humanitarian accord, because they have to place value on life, not on a piece of land, not on a piece of territory," she said.

All four ex-legislators confirmed that they would participate in an international day of action organized by human rights organizations on March 6 in protest against paramilitary violence in Colombia. Uribe has condemned the protest scheduled to take place in some 150 cities around the world, claiming it is organized by the FARC.

(emphasis added)
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3213
(Note: Venezuela Analysis is a Fair Use web site.)


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

The first two hostages that Chavez got released have now reported on how much danger Uribe put them in, as the release was in progress. They tell their story below. The context is that Chavez knew Uribe was trying to sabotage the release, and was angry about it. As writer Weisbrot explains, our corporate media reported only one side of the story--Chavez's anger--not what Chavez was angry at--Uribe breaking his word on the ceasefire!


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



Latin America News Coverage: Half the Story Is Worse Than None

By Mark Weisbrot, AlterNet. Posted February 1, 2008

(SNIP)

President Chavez angrily accused Uribe of "dynamiting" the mission. He said that the FARC was in fact ready to release the two hostages that they held, but had to retreat from Colombian military operations. President Uribe maintained that his military, under orders from him, had held to a cease fire in order to allow the release. Who was telling the truth?

When the two hostages, Consuelo Gonzalez and Clara Rojas, were finally released on January 10, Gonzalez - a former Colombian congresswoman -- told this story to the press:

"'On December 21, we began to walk toward the location where they were going to free us and we walked almost 20 days. During that time, we were forced to run several times because the soldiers were very close,' she said. Gonzalez also lamented that on the day that Alvaro Uribe set as a deadline for the release, the Colombian armed forces launched the worst attack on the zone where they were located. 'On the 31st, we realized that there was going to be a very big mobilization and, in the moment that we were ready to be released, there was a huge bombardment and we had to relocate quickly to another place.'"

No English-language reporters questioned the truth of Gonzalez' testimony; it was simply not reported. The one exception was an Associated Press article, where it was buried and barely mentioned, and edited out of most newspapers. By eliminating this vital information, the media prevented readers from knowing that the Colombian government had reneged on its end of the bargain, putting the lives of the hostages at risk in what looked like an attempt to embarrass Chavez and abort the mission. (MORE)

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/75697/

[Meshuga]

10. Venezuela is starting to block billions of dollars in Colombian imports and investment

Source: Associated Press

CARACAS, Venezuela - Venezuela is starting to block billions of dollars in Colombian imports and investment under orders from President Hugo Chavez, threatening economic havoc in both nations in response to a Colombian military attack on rebels hiding in Ecuador.

Chavez and Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa demanded international condemnation of Colombia's U.S.-allied government on Wednesday night, while Chavez predicted a sharp fall in the $6 billion in annual Colombia-Venezuela trade: "That's coming down."

"We aren't interested in Colombian investments here," Chavez said, standing beside Correa. "Of the Colombian businesses that are here in Venezuela, we could nationalize some."

He said Venezuela will search for other countries like Ecuador, Brazil and Argentina to replace products imported from Colombia. Noting that Colombia traditional supplies food to Venezuela, he said now "we can't depend (on Colombia) not even for a grain of rice."



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080306/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/colombia_venezuela

[aquart]

11. So? They're entitled to do that.

[Meshuga]

13. Yes, they are entitled to do that

But this is a bilateral crises and Chavez keeps trying to add fuel to the fire when the goal should be on re-working Colombia-Ecuador relations to end the crises. It is easy for Chavez to say that he is going to import food from Ecuador, Argentina, or Brazil but they are having shortages as it is and stopping the Colombian imports is only going to make matters worse.

Regardless, all the noise that Chavez is making is not helping anything or anybody. If the desire is not to have conflict and end this crisis then there should be a plan in place to resolve this issue with diplomacy, not with noise and stupid rhetoric. In other words, Chavez needs to shut the fuck up. Let Brazil, Argentina, Chile, come in as mediators to support the two sides in solving this issue with diplomacy instead of useless noise.

[Winterblues]

14. Colombia has been harassing Venezuela for years with cross border incursions.

Chavez said years ago he was going to put a stop to the Colombian incursions into Venezuela and was the stated reason for beefing up his military as he has been doing. This is not something new and it is directly related to relations between Colombia and Venezuela

[Meshuga]

17. But what is this noise doing to help the situation?

Nothing. It only helps Chavez in getting the faithful fired up. Colombia fucked up and now they should work it out with Ecuador to solve the crises.

Like I said in another thread, a Colombian brigade went in to the 'Cabeça do Cachorro' region (Brazilian territory) back in 1998 but the Brazilian government decided not to make a huge public display of it. Instead they were firm with the Colombian embassador and the Colombian Foreign Minister at the time and the situation was resolved with diplomacy.

[AlphaCentauri]

20. that will justified colombian invasion of Ecuador or any other country?

just wondering then why colombia invaded Korea in 1950...

[Meshuga]

25. I don't understand your question

Can you please reword it so I can properly respond? In any case, the goal should not be to justify invasion of Ecuador but to bring a diplomatic solution to the crises. Adding fuel to the fire is not helping the situation.

[AlphaCentauri]

80. in the case of Brazil there was no hostage exchange on the way

the case is clearly explain here but never saw Colombia accusing Brazil of been a FARCs heaven.

Brazil: defending the frontier against FARC incursions. Venezuela shares with Brazil these same kinds of spillover problems. Less concerned about refugees, Brazil pays attention to drug and arms trafficking and occasional FARC incursions. Brazilians have reason to be concerned about Colombia's internal problems. Colombian insurgents and narcotraffickers have been active in Brazil's border regions for many years. Threats to Brazilian interests include smuggling contraband ranging from guns to exotic animals; direct assaults against the environment and economy from illegal loggers, gold miners, fishermen and hunters; and Colombian insurgent and drug-trafficking activities. These threats have troubled the Brazilian government for more than a decade as shown by a number of well-reported events.

In 1991 a 40-man FARC guerrilla unit attacked an army jungle operations detachment inside Brazil along the Traíra River. Three soldiers were killed and nine were wounded.30 The attack was repulsed when Brazilian special forces counterattacked into Colombia to kill seven guerrillas and recover Brazilian weapons and ammunition.31 In September 1996 the Brazilian army went on full alert because of reports that FARC elements had crossed the border into Brazil near Tabatinga, about 400 km south of the Traíra River incident. About 1,000 soldiers deployed throughout Tabatinga to guard border locations, military installations and the airport.32

On 1 November 1998, across from the Dog's Head (Cabeça do Cachorro) region of Brazil's Amazonas state, 1,400 FARC combatants attacked to seize Mitú, the provincial capital of Colombia's Vaupes Department. Mitú serves as a transshipment point for chemicals essential in making cocaine. The contraband chemicals move up the Vaupes River from Brazil to production areas in Colombia.33 To drive the FARC out of Mitú, 500 Colombian army paratroopers landed at the Querari, Brazil, airstrip (close to the border about 75 km east of Mitú) and attacked westward into their own country, regaining Mitú on 4 November. In the battle, 150 Colombian combatants, seven civilians and five FARC guerrillas were reported killed, and the FARC took 40 to 45 police prisoner.34

Again in 1999 Brazilian intelligence identified the army's airfield at Querari as a FARC target. It was thought that the FARC intended to deny Colombian armed forces' use of the strip during a guerrilla follow-on attack against Mitú. Pre-empting the FARC in late October, a 249-man Brazilian special forces unit spearheaded a major offensive to secure the Querari airfield and reinforce the Dog's Head area with 5,000 men of the Amazon Military Command. They deployed along the border from Sao Joaquim to Vila Bittencourt on a 600-km front to deter any attack.

http://leav-www.army.mil/fmso/documents/colombia_threat/colombia_threat.htm

[EFerrari]

24. Well. you have to admit the last time they tried diplomacy with Colombia

people wound up dead.

[Meshuga]

27. So what is your suggestion?

Should they go to war instead of trying for a diplomatic solution with Colombia? :shrug:

Like it is put in the OEA resolution, this is a bilateral crises. Chavez coming in to add more tension is not helping the situation at all.

[subsuelo]

30. Viva Chavez

I trust his judgment on the matter.

[Meshuga]

40. Well

Here in the US we are full of people who trust our president without the need for questioning him at all. It is evident that the equivalent for Chavez also exists.

[subsuelo]

43. Ah but you see there is a difference

George W. Bush does not represent the will of the people. Chavez does. If the U.S. ever elects someone that represents the people, then maybe you will see. Until that day, I know it may be difficult to understand my view.

[Meshuga]

45. The problem is...

... that I was not comparing Chavez and George Bush and how they represent the will of their people.

I was comparing the Bush supporters and the Chavez supporters who are not willing to question and are quick to put all their trust in their guy. That's when the similarities come in. Do you see what I mean? ;-)

Good luck with your blinders! :hi:

[Judi Lynn]

46. What great psychic powers do you have to allow you to know how much trust DU'ers have in anyone?

I've never heard anything close to that sentiment expressed at DU in all the time Chavez has ever been discussed here.

You're running out of material to throw at Democrats.

[subsuelo]

47. Thanks Judi, but it's ok with me

I really understand - it is difficult to know what it is like to have a leader that can be trusted. Particularly for Americans at this point in time.

[Judi Lynn]

50. You may have a point. Hadn't thought of that! n/t

[Meshuga]

52. Well, I agree with you there

I can't trust my leader. Wow, we agree.

But how can you trust your leader when he takes power in venezuela and eliminates his opposition, constrains the free press and undermines democratic institutions?

Like I said, good luck with your blinders!

[Meshuga]

51. Given the context of our conversation

You would know that I am not using "psychic powers". Use your brain you will see what I mean.

"You're running out of material to throw at Democrats."

What is that supposed to mean? If I don't agree with you does that means I am not a democrat?

[Judi Lynn]

55. I'd sure like to see some of your sources for your claims Chavez has "taken power," and has

"eliminated his opposition." We really need to know more about this.

It will be appropriate if you are going to lob your word bombs around that you start stepping in and backing up your charges.

We can deal with each one of your claims, one at a time. You don't throw your whole arsenal of right-wing talking points and expect people to "deal with it."

Post your links.

Bring out your resources for your claims of free press constraints, as well. You'll want to share those items with DU'ers who know differently.

Looking forward to a real education from you. Thanks.

[Meshuga]

56. Okay

You can go to the Human Rights Watch page about Venezuela for starters:

http://www.hrw.org/doc?t=americas&c=venezu


In there you will find plenty of links to what I am talking about.

But let me guess your reply: you are going to accuse HRW of being right-wing since it doesn't comply with your biased sources. Or you are going to say the HRW are uninformed like you accuse many people here who disagree you as being uninformed merely because they don't share the same opinion. :eyes:

[Judi Lynn]

63. You want me to read 2 pages of detailed reports, as opposed to a 78 page section on the U.S.

Do you think you're going to get any response when you imply someone's got the time to sit and read all the reports on HRW's TWO pages of articles on Venezuela?

I invite you to read the SEVENTY TWO pages they've got on the U.S. for the same time period.

As for Human Rights Watch, it most surely is supported financially by totally pro-US donors. Who doesn't know that? If an organization supported by elitist interests still lowers itself to do 78 pages on the U.S., it means there's a goddawful bunch of rot they're not dealing with.

As I said, don't throw a collection of crap out as your evidence. Deal with each one at a time.

As your response, you threw out a larger collection of garbage to wade through. Not going to spend that much of my time mucking around with it.

Human Rights Watch has been discussed here at length. DU'ers are very aware of them, their sponsors, their origin. Here's one quick source:

Indeed, HRW was created in 1978 as the Helsinki Watch (which later became HRW’s Europe and Central Asia Advisory Committee) “at the instigation of Arthur Goldberg” with the start-up costs covered by a $400,000 from the Ford Foundation.<12> Furthermore, as Bruce Montgomery (2002) observes their establishment credentials were fortified by Robert L. Bernstein (the founder of HRW) who “began by recruiting the establishment elite to give the cause clout and visibility.”<13> Kirsten Sellars (2002) also points out that:

“The Ford Foundation played a crucial part in the development of the human rights movement in the seventies and eighties. A graph based on The Foundation Grants Index shows that Ford provided the lion's share of US foundation grants for international human rights work in the years 1977 to 1991, especially in the first five years. (Kathryn Sikkink, ‘Human Rights, Principled Issue-Networks, and Sovereignty in Latin America’, International Organization, 47(3), Summer 1993, 421.) In particular, Ford was responsible for financially kick-starting many new human rights NGOs in the late seventies, including Helsinki Watch and the other Watch committees, the Lawyers Committee for International Human Rights, and the International Human Rights Law Group

For activists and researchers familiar with the Ford Foundation’s elitist and anti-democratic history, this in itself should start alarm bells ringing as to the political motivations guiding the financial support which helped bring about HRW’s existence.<15> This is because the Ford Foundation’s backing of HRW is consistent with ‘democratic’ changes occurring within the US foreign policy elites thinking in the 1970s, which was beginning to recognise the importance of soft-power in promoting American hegemony. These changes were no doubt informed by the political experiences gained by the political elites running liberal philanthropic foundations (like the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations’), which in 1984 eventually led to the creation of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the United States Institute for Peace (USIP). Ironically, these groups carry out the same disruptive work that the CIA and USAID are well known for, yet under the protective rhetoric of democracy and peace.<16> However, the type of democracy promoted by these organisations is best referred to as low-intensity democracy, or polyarchy.
(snip)

Agent of Imperialism: Human Rights Watch as ‘Democracy Promoter’

As this article has demonstrated, the activities of HRW’s Americas advisors are closely entwined with those being pursued by various ‘democracy promoting’ elites. In fact, the numerous overlaps that exist between HRW’s Americas advisory board and the ‘democracy promoting’ establishment are so extensive that in many cases you would be hard pressed to tell the difference between the two groups. This raises a number of serious issues, as if HRW were really genuinely concerned with the promotion of democracy and human rights, then knowledge of their links to anti-democratic organizations – which they must certainly be aware of by now – should surely give them cause to rethink their choice of advisors at the very least. However, given HRW’s elitist origins (fully outlined in the introduction) it seems more likely that such ‘democratic’ ties are actually an integral part of their modus operandi. Indeed, HRW’s intimate relations with ‘democracy promoters’ like the NED and USIP may be merely seen as a reflection of the high degree of influence liberal elites and liberal foundations have over the running and funding of HRW.

More:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=13436

[Meshuga]

99. I missed this post last night

And this is an example of what I am talking about. It is all about the blinders. You pick a side therefore sources that show anything negative about Chavez must be attacked as "right-wing" with ulterior motives and yet your sources are okay since they come from sources you perceive as "the good guys" therefore they should be trusted. :eyes:

Obviously, I don't expect you to read the two pages of articles in one sitting but since you claim others are uninformed, you should take your time to take a look at individual issues/articles and google for reports about the specific incidents and get informed yourself. But instead, you choose to look for ways to poison the well and that is easy for you to do since everything seems to be so simple as to put a label on everything calling it either "good", "bad", "left wing", "right wing", etc. However, like I said, HRW is a place just for starters since you can go beyond and research each topic to get to the bottom of it. But I am sure you would look to debunk each and every item otherwise your simplistic world would collapse.

It is one thing if I were making a case for Colombia and/or the United States and rooting for one of the "sides" but I am merely amazed at how anyone can pick a side in all this and not wanting to see a diplomatic resolution to the problem. I think there should be a way to bring a diplomatic resolution to this crises and you don't seem to agree since you subscribe to Chavez saber rattling and his threats. So I can definitely see how a Bush and a Chavez thrive because there are people out there who are willing to question and disqualify all critics in order to anoint them as flawless. :scared:

[ronnie624]

100. I'm in the process of reading all of MrWiggles' material,

even though I have read it all before.

José Miguel Vivanco is definitely full of shit. I see all of the same right-wing memes that pervade US media in "news" about Chavez and Venezuela.

Then, there's the usual citation of random violent crimes in an attempt to smear the Venezuelan government, by association.

And of course, the 'eye-witness accounts' by presumed victims of government violence, as if the accusations themselves are proof of anything.

I wonder if HRW ever withdrew their false claims against the Venezuelan government, after this item appeared back in early 2006:

Venezuelan Opposition Case Thrown Out of International Criminal Court

<http://69.50.194.86/news/1624>


As I recall, several numb-skulls continued to cite HRW and these very same 'human rights violations' for a full year after they were shown to be utter nonsense. In my opinion, anyone who cites HRW as a reputable source, is not really interested in accurate information.

Thanks for the informative article.

[Judi Lynn]

104. Just saw your link. I remember that the opposition went wild attempting to drag any lame story they

could contrive to newspapers, human rights groups, and, in this case, the ICC, which made short work of it. It has been their goal to throw so much crap around maybe someone would miss some of it, and it would be able to do damage in the public's perception until it could be exposed. There is obviously no penalty for creating bogus stories which are used to misinform.

Only people with no reputation to lose would engage this kind of behavior.

We even had a pro-oligarchy visitor who posted an article about some Venezuelan classical musician with an orchestra who claimed he was brutalized (tear gas into his jeep) by cops in Caracas. This was apparently expected to be laid at the feet of Hugo Chavez, and the poster chewed the scenery here before he finally got either bored or released enough to go back home. As you know, there's been a steady stream of these vacationing posters.

Jose Miguel Vivanco has ALWAYS been rabidly anti-left leaders, from the very first. It's the first thing you learn about him. Here's a good look at his bizarre, and unrighteous view of the acceptability of giving money to Venezuelan political groups:

Vivanco Wants Foreign Money in Venezuela Campaign
By Al Giordano,
Posted on Thu Jul 15th, 2004 at 11:52:12 PM EST

Human Rights Watch "Americas Division" chief José Miguel Vivanco falls deeper down the slippery slope of anti-democracy lobbying now with his claim that foreign government funding of partisan electoral groups in Venezuela is okey-dokey by him.

First, a reality check and public service announcement for those who might not be familiar with United States campaign finance laws:

If you want to make a donation to the campaign of George W. Bush in the United States (we're not recommending it, for the record) and you go to Bush's website and click "donations" and you will find that, before you can give him money, you have to affirm:

"By clicking on this box I acknowledge that contributions from corporations and foreign nationals are prohibited."

Likewise, if you want to make a donation to the campaign of John Kerry in the United States (neither are we recommending this) go to Kerry's campaign website and click "contributions," and there you will have to affirm:

"I confirm that the following statements are true and accurate:
1. I am a United States citizen or a permanent resident alien...

Those who have violated these laws against foreign contributions have been prosecuted in the United States…

As this 2000 interview with Federal Elections Commissioner Danny McDonald on the U.S. State Department website states:

Q: There is a ban on contributions to candidates from foreign nationals. Why is that?
A: I think it is very strongly felt that it simply is not right for foreign nationals to be involved in the U.S. political process. Clearly it is a very sensitive area and one that, over time, people have felt very strongly about.

It is a complete ban. It even goes to state and local elections, which is unusual, because we normally do not regulate state and local elections. But the theory is very straightforward, which is that foreign nationals simply should not be determining American politics.

But what is good for the goose (or eagle) is apparently not good for the troupial (the national bird of Venezuela) and apparently not good for a turkey named Jose Miguel Vivanco of Human Rights Watch.

He told Oligarch's Daily, er, Miami Herald columnist and anti-Chavez cheerleader Andres Oppenheimer
yesterday (subscription required) that it's just fine with him that the U.S.-taxpayer funded National Endowment for Democracy pumps money into the Venezuelan opposition group SUMATE (the sponsor of the drive to recall Venezuela President Hugo Chávez, on the ballot on August 15th).

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2004/7/15/235212/720

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You don't need to know another thing about Vivanco beyond this! What a dirtball.

[EFerrari]

33. Actually, his support of Ecuador is probably very helpful

to Ecuador. And Chavez was already "in" the hostage negotiations which is what this is about at bottom.

There are a lot of layers to this situation. This isn't only about crossing a border.

[Meshuga]

38. Helpful how?

Please explain. What has Ecuador gained from Chavez attitude toward all this?

Helpful to Ecuador is the participation of other neighboring countries in trying to help the two parties find a solution via diplomacy. The OEA resolution goes so far as to ignoring Chavez in all this describing this crises as a bilateral crises because that's what it is.

Who is more helpful? The Brazilian government who condemns Colombia's action while advocating for a diplomatic solution? Or Venezuela making threats and chanting for war?

Stop trying to find justifications for Chavez's attitude in this situation, he is acting like a schmuck and making matters worse.

[EFerrari]

44. It is the habit of certain posters who, when they run out of fact

knowledge or logic, resort to insulting Chavez and issuing orders to others. I have no patience with that.

[Meshuga]

49. If there is someone who ran out of facts that person is you...

...because I haven't insulted you and I am only asking you questions to know what you mean. I am not giving you orders. If you don't want to (or can't) answer them, that's fine. I hold no ill feelings. I have given you my opinion, and all I wanted is for you to explain the points that you made to know your opinion. I still don't know them but that's okay. No pressure!

I have no nice words for what Chavez is doing in this situation but why should that offend you? I am confused. But whatever!

[EFerrari]

60. You posted:

"Stop trying to find justifications for Chavez's attitude in this situation, he is acting like a schmuck and making matters worse." Orders and insults.

In any case, far from ignoring Chavez, the OAS moved this quickly and on Ecuador's behalf because Chavez is using both carrots and sticks, and has organized the leftist governments into a block that works together. It certainly hasn't always been that way and that's one reason why Bush hates him so much.

Also remember that in spite of being smeared in the American media, Chavez enjoys a great deal of support in the international community. The way he is portrayed here is not the way the world sees him. cf, OPEC is supporting him over Exxon and so on.

/typo

[Meshuga]

67. Well, according to Brazilian media Chavez is being more of a burden

than good influence in this crises. And there is praise for the way Lula's government has been handling this situation (with logic and without the theatrics). If Chavez had any say in all of this, the reaction of other countries would probably be much worse and the tone of the OAS resolution would be much harsher. but I think you have a perception that Chavez is this great powerful leader that other South American countries follow suit. Just because Ecuador and Bolivia are aligned with Caracas, it doesn't mean the other are aligned as well.

[Judi Lynn]

68. Media throughout Latin America has ALWAYS been right-wing controlled.

Who doesn't know that?

Here's a perfect example of how Nixon used El Mercurio in Chile to overthrow Allende, and did it using U.S. taxpayers' hard-earned money. This is an interview. It can be heard, rather than read, at the link:

September 12, 2003

BROOKE GLADSTONE: And I'm Brooke Gladstone. This week marked not only the second anniversary of the terrorist attacks on our shores but also 30th anniversary of the coup that brought a military dictator to power in Chile. The Nixon administration, already embroiled in proxy battles with the Soviet Union around the world, decided it couldn't countenance the newly-elected socialist government of Salvador Allende in Chile, so the CIA helped engineer his ouster in favor of a military junta led by General Augusto Pinochet. Peter Kornbluh is a senior analyst at the National Security Archive. In this month's Columbia Journalism Review he documents how Nixon and Kissinger empowered Chile's leading media mogul, Augustin Edwards, to lead the charge against Allende. Now a group of editors, human rights lawyers and journalism students are accusing Edwards of violating the Code of Ethics of the Academy of Chilean Journalists and are fighting at the very least to have him expelled from the Press Guild. Peter, welcome to the show.

PETER KORNBLUH: It's a pleasure to be here.

BROOKE GLADSTONE: First of all, who is Augustin Edwards?

PETER KORNBLUH: Augustin Edwards is really the Rupert Murdoch of Chile. He controlled in 1970 the vast majority of Chilean media. His main newspaper, El Mercurio, was the largest newspaper in Chile at the time, routinely compared to the New York Times here. He was also at that point considered Chile's richest man and a key player in government circles and in international circles as well.

BROOKE GLADSTONE: So Allende's just been elected, despite the opposition of El Mercurio, and Edwards contacts the Nixon administration. So what happens then?

PETER KORNBLUH: The first thing Edwards did is he went to Ambassador Edward Korry to say to him are you going to move militarily against Allende? What are you going to do? And Korry basically told him that the United States wasn't going to move militarily to block Allende from taking office, and since that answer wasn't satisfactory, Edwards flew to Washington, met with his close friend, Don Kendall, the CEO of the Pepsi Company, and said you have to tell the president that, you know, Chile is going to hell and the Communists are taking over, and this is bad for the United States. And Kendal actually went to the White House, told Nixon that Edwards was in town and what he was saying, and Nixon immediately ordered Henry Kissinger and the CIA director, Richard Helms, to meet with Edwards and find out what he was saying.

BROOKE GLADSTONE: So ultimately the U.S. government passed to Edwards nearly 2 million bucks, which is worth considerably more on the black market, and how was that money used?

PETER KORNBLUH: What this money purchased was really El Mercurio being able to become a bullhorn --not only for a free press -- beyond that - it went into the arena of violating Chile's Constitution, calling for the military to take power and supporting that military once it did take power, I might add.

BROOKE GLADSTONE: And this obviously goes beyond anti-Allende articles and editorials. But when you say "bullhorn" -- did the paper identify places that ought to be attacked? Did the paper call for the assassination of people? Where is the line crossed between exercising a vigorous opposition and becoming seditious?

PETER KORNBLUH: Well that is a very important question, but, but here-- you had the owner of the newspaper already having told U.S. officials that he favored military action to stop Allende, and you had editorials declaring that Allende's government was illegitimate and essentially inciting people to rise up against it.

BROOKE GLADSTONE: You quote from a CIA paper that credits El Mercurio with making the military takeover possible. Is that what you think?

PETER KORNBLUH: El Mercurio was the centerpiece of the CIA's largest covert action in Chile between 1970 and 1973 -- what was called "The Propaganda Project." And the CIA's own internal memoranda state that this project set the stage for the coup of September 11th, 1973.

More:
http://satie.onthemedia.org/yore/transcripts/transcripts_091203_chile.html

[Meshuga]

70. They had no choice during the dictatorship

And there is no way to compare US backed propaganda back in those days with the reality today. I lived in Brazil during that period and those were not good times. But things changed and your claim is not a reality today. In fact, it is a pretty ignorant assertion. But coming from you anybody that goes outside your model of the world is right-wing.

But the Brazilian media, in general, is not right-wing and there is nothing in mainstream Brazilian politics that one could consider to be "right-wing". In my experience, the media down there has been pro-government no matter the ideology in power. With exceptions from some popular magazines like Veja (a magazine as popular as Time Magazine here in the US), for example, which is very anti-Lula and some newspapers.

But the media is not critical of the leftist governments involved in resolving this issue. What is right-wing about condemning Colombia's operation and wanting to find a solution using diplomacy? There is no call or demand to support Colombia or anything like that coming from the media. And there is no criticism for the role of the Brazilian government in this situation that I have seen. They do criticize Chavez for adding problems when we should be looking for solutions.

I don't think one can say that Chavez represents the left in South America and that he is someone that other left governments follow. Unless one comes to the conclusion that there are different types of left but the only countries that seem to follow Chavez are Bolivia and Ecuador.

[EFerrari]

72. Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru, Nicaragua, Argentina and progressive parties

in El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras.

Yes, Chavez does represent the left right now. He is leading the left. And the criticism of his actions can mostly be traced back to BushCo. What a surprise.

[Meshuga]

97. I don't know about the

Central American countries you included, I know that Bolivia and Ecuador follow Chavez example. But Argentina following Chavez lead and emulating him as the leader? :rofl:

And why criticism of Chavez's actions have to always be linked to BushCo.? Why should you use the same methods as the conservative right wing kicking and screaming pretty much saying that any criticism of Bush's action is traced back to terrorist groups and anti-americanism? It is childish and pathetic.

[EFerrari]

102. Fernandez is most certainly building an alliance with Venezuela.

She's not a socialist but she is on the left.

You said criticism is always traced back to Bush. I expressed no surprise this this incident was.

Your habit of putting words in other people's mouths to criticize is a right wing tactic, though.

[Judi Lynn]

107. Absolutely right! She was in Venezuela on Monday, too.

Hugo Chavez has been very, very close to Argentina throughout the Presidency of the former President Kirchner, and it appears Christina Fernandez has a lot of projects underway this very moment with Venezuela, not letting a minute go to waste.

You remember it was because Venezuela and President Kirchner worked together they were able to get Argentina out from under that hideous debt to the World Bank or IMF a couple of years ago which was ammassed through neo-liberal machinations of earlier Argentinian Presidents, like the _Bush family friend, the impeached and absurd Carlos Menem.

[EFerrari]

73. And, btw, I love these statements.

"But coming from you anybody that goes outside your model of the world is right-wing."

Right. The most knowledgeable poster to DU on Latin American issues is right wing.

That's hilarious.

lol

[Meshuga]

77. I didn't say she is right wing

She accuses everybody who disagrees with her to be right wing. Who is the most knowledgeable poster to DU on Latin American issues? I am confused.

[EFerrari]

79. I stand corrected. You said this:

"I lived in Brazil during that period and those were not good times. But things changed and your claim is not a reality today. In fact, it is a pretty ignorant assertion. But coming from you anybody that goes outside your model of the world is right-wing."

[Meshuga]

98. The sarcasm and all is cute, but

Even knowing that I am no South America expert I can see that claiming Latin American media (as a whole) to always be "right wing" citing dictatorship era as an example is not a valid argument. Sorry. It's pathetic. Things changed and it is a different reality. There is media in the mainstream very critical of the progressive governments, yes, no one can deny that. But the situation down there is not that simplistic and it is not a all or nothing like you guys seem to present.

[EFerrari]

110. There was no sarcasm in that post.

And I have no idea who you mean by "you guys".

[Meshuga]

111. Reading back...

now I see what you meant.

:blush:

[EFerrari]

112. Oh, never mind that. We all get pretty excited 'round here. n/t

[EFerrari]

71. Brazil is not an objective player.

The leftist block is playing good / bad cop and very skillfully.

Please don't attempt to tell me what I think because you will get it wrong.

[Meshuga]

75. I make assumptions

because you seem to be trying to attribute Chavez with doing something positive for Ecuador and the region in this crises. He is not. From the Brazilian perspective, they seem to prefer if Chavez would just shut up. This is not a game, this is serious. They can't risk a war in the region. A war is not in the interest of any of the neighboring countries. Your "good cop/bad cop" theory is nothing but wishful thinking.

[EFerrari]

76. Bookmark your post so you can read it back to you

after Chavez and the leftist coalition have achieved exactly what they worked for.

[Meshuga]

78. Okay... I will do.

If you're right I'll paypal you money for a beer.

[Peace Patriot]

105. Some comments on this Mr.Wiggles and SFexpat2000 exchange, re alliances in

South America.

Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina and Nicaragua form a quite solid block of strong allies, evidenced on many issues, and many social justice and other cooperative projects, as well as by strong, personal friendships among these leftist leaders. Not sure about Ortega, but Chavez (Venezuela), Morales (Bolivia), Correa (Ecuador) and the Kirchners (Argentina) are close friends. In fact, when the Bushites sent down word that Latin American leaders must "isolate" Chavez, Nestor Kirchner replied, "But he is my brother!" Venezuela helped bail Argentina out of World Bank debt--the seed of the Bank of the South (a major new institution aimed at regional self-determination). Argentina is now well on its way to recovery, and is a healthy trading partner for Venezuela, Brazil and other countries. Argentina just last week signed a food for oil trade deal with Venezuela. And, a few weeks before that, President Cristina Fernandez da Kirchner, strongly criticized the Bush Junta for its absurd "suitcase full of money" caper out of Miami--the goal of which was to "divide and conquer" Venezuela-Argentina. The Bank of the South has now been launched, and has many partners, including even a center-right government like Paraguay, which can see its advantages. It has basically driven the World Bank loan sharks out of the region. Hugo Chavez, and the Chavez government, have been pioneers in establishing regional independence, and are greatly admired for doing so. The Chavistas are very legitimate and acknowledged leaders of the South American social justice movement--the left, the majority!

The total of leftist governments--which covers nearly the whole continent--includes Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina and Nicaragua, AND Brazil, Uruguay and Chile. Paraguay may well go leftist this year (the beloved "bishop of the poor," Fernando Lugo, is running for president, and is ahead in the polls). Peru is currently run by corrupt "free traders" with a sort of leftist tinge, but a real leftist Bolivarian came out of nowhere last year, and, with no money and no experience, knocked the rightwing candidate out of the race, in the primary, with 30% of the vote, then increased his vote to 45% in the general election. I think, when the "free traders" are done with ruining Peru's economy, the Bolivarian left will be back and win the next election. One more change that has occurred--Guatemala just elected its first progressive government, ever. The new government's leftist leanings are not fully clear, but two of their policies point that way: a PEACEFUL, rather than a "police state," approach to the "war on drugs," and investigation of the genocidal crimes of previous governments. And, finally, Calderon (rightwing) in Mexico won his election (if he did) by a hairsbreadth--0.05%--with a solid, Bolivarian-type leftist, Lopez-Obrador, as his opponent. At least half of Mexico is way over to the left (and that's just counting voters--many poor folks can't or don't vote).

Of the OTHER leftist governments in South America--Brazil, Uruguay and Chile--Brazil's president, Lula da Silva, has been very friendly to Chavez. After Chavez's "devil" remark about Bush at the UN, and just weeks before the Venezuelan 2006 election (an election that had been targeted by an assassination plot against Chavez, hatched in Colombia), Lulu went out of his way to endorse Chavez, by visiting Venezuela for a big ceremonial opening of the new Orinoco Bridge (a joint Venezuela-Brazil project). And Lulu has frequently defended Chavez against Bushite attacks. But Lulu has been more compromising on "free trade" agreements, on bending to BushCo on biofuel production (bad environmental policy), and also has a contingent of rather rabid anti-Chavistas in the legislature. Brazil, of course, is in some ways a rival to Venezuela--both are powerful players in South America, with big economies. But it is a friendly rivalry--at least as far as Lulu is concerned.

Uruguay's Tamare Vasquez (a leftist) specifically turned Bush down, on "free trade," when Bush visited in March 06--bringing his bribes, bullyings and kneecappings to "divide and conquer" the South American Left--but Vasquez made a lot of Uruguayans very unhappy by inviting Bush at all. As for Chile, Michelle Batchelet (leftist who was tortured by the fascist junta) was at first inclined to compromise on Bush vs. Chavez issues. Chile abstained on Venezuela's effort to have its turn in a UN Security Council seat--thus, the seat went to compromise candidate Panama. But Batchelet was severely criticized for this--even by her own ambassador to Venezuela--another indication of majority sentiment in South America, on Chavez. Batchelet has since settled a long term dispute with (strong Chavez ally) Bolivia, by signing an agreement giving Bolivia port access. This was a big sore point in Bolivia--even though the war about it was over a hundred years ago. And it indicates increasing unity, and cooperation on peaceful solutions, among all of these leftist countries.

The huge effort of Chavez, Correa, the Kirchners, and also the President of France, Nicholas Sarkovy, and others, to END the Colombian civil war--starting with these hostage release negotiations at which Chavez was so successful--is part of this trend of peaceful negotiation, and a positive, new, cooperative approach--i.e., not letting the U.S. "divide and conquer." The Bushites (using their tool, Uribe) bombing inside Ecuador, and invasion with troops, and slaughtering of the FARC hostage negotiator, was aimed, first of all, at punishing Ecuador for electing Rafael Correa (friend, ally of Chavez). But its larger aim was to implement the Rumsfeld "chaos and opportunity" war strategy--Rumsfeld's M.O. (--and he is behind this, believe me!). Kill people, get everybody up in arms, stir up every conflict, flood the place with armed soldiers and paramilitaries, stoke up hatred, destroy all hopes for peace and diplomacy--and then use the "scattered ant colony" result to topple local power structures and grab resources--and to make a lot of war profits in the process.

Ecuador and Venezuela had exactly the right reaction to this Rumsfeld warmonger strategy: Condemn it, call it out, and demonstrate your ability to mobilize quickly, to counter aggression. To call this "bluster" or to blame CHAVEZ--or Correa--for wanting war, or in any way inviting it, is to greatly misunderstand what Uribe did, and what a threat the Bushites are. It is to not "walk in Chavez's shoes"--Chavez who has had a Bushite bull's eye target on his back since 2002. And it is to underestimate how much these two leaders--of countries that border Colombia--are worried about Colombia's military and paramilitaries, Blackwater (active in Colombia), and Bush/U.S. invasion. They have EVERY REASON to be extremely worried. As I mentioned above, last year, a plot to assassinate Chavez was hatched within Colombia's military, among people with close ties to Uribe. Uribe had to apologize to Chavez for it (and every Latin American leader knew about it--from Calderon to Lulu, and MENTIONED it to Bush when he visited, in public, in their references to respecting Venezuela's sovereignty!) And NOW what is Chavez to think of that Uribe apology? Now that Uribe has once again bent over for the Bushites, and invaded Ecuador?

You may call Chavez a 'hot head' or whatever. But WHO inspired the Bank of the South--which they are all now joining? WHO put Argentina back on its feet--and also helped Ecuador and Bolivia to get out of the clutches of "first world" loan sharks? WHO has given South America its first ideas and hopes of self-determination in over a hundred years? WHO has taken on Bush, whom most of them hate and despise (--and if the leaders don't, their people do)? WHO has set the agenda of social justice? WHO has shown how it can be done?

If you are going to run down the middle, and do a little bit of social justice here, and a little bit U.S. dominated "free trade" there--like Chile and Brazil--you need a strong leftist wind at your back, to get that little bit of social justice done. I think Lulu and Batchelet are genuine in their social justice goals, but have big, complex, economies, with multiple ties to the U.S (not just oil), that they have to do it in. It is no bad deal for them to have Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina pulling strongly to the left. And it is no bad deal for them either, to have these other countries in confrontation with the Bushites, so they can walk between them and get better deals out of the Bushites for their own countries--which is exactly what Lulu did on biofuels. This is neither good nor bad, in my opinion (--although corporate biofuel production is going to kill the planet - can't go that way). In general, it is merely REALITY. It is how things work, in politics, and among political leaders. When the Bushites were strong-arming Batchelet, on the Venezuelan UN Security Council seat, I was rooting for Batchelet to get what she could for her people. If she can't do the right thing, do the next best thing--USE the situation to the peoples' advantage. (I never found out what she got--but I hope she got something good out of these dirtbag torturers.)

In the bigger picture, the Chavez government, and the Bolivarian block, have been enormously beneficial to Latin America. Even the rightwing Calderon used their pressure from the left, to demand more Mexican autonomy over U.S. "war on drugs" funds. That may not turn out to be so good, but it does exemplify the INFLUENCE of the Bolivarian Left on events. And, for the most part, it has been extremely positive. And I don't think that Bush/Uribe's provocation--and Chavez's and Correa's strong defensive response--is going to change that at all. It is, instead, going to strengthen South American alliances, and show this new leftist leadership of the continent at its best--as independent actors and peacemakers, and as the new leadership, and the future, of the western hemisphere.

[Judi Lynn]

109. Thanks for taking the time to inform those who haven't understood these things already,

or to refresh the memories of DU'ers who knew but had lost track of them.

You provide a major service every time you remind people of the facts.

[subsuelo]

28. Colombia is a client state of the U.S.

What else can be expected

[EFerrari]

36. I didn't think Uribe would stoop to this and I was wrong.

:(

[Peace Patriot]

69. And why do you think that Chavez and Correa and their allies are NOT

treating this BOMBING of Ecuador, invasion of troops onto Ecuadoran soil--guided by U.S. surveillance--and slaughter of the FARC hostage negotiator like that?

Because they know who's behind it, that's why--and what the intentions of those puppetmasters are.

This is not a mere border incident, that can be sloughed off between friendly countries. This is the opening shot of Oil War II. All the signs are there. Wake up, for chrissakes! But you have to have been following this situation over the last several years--though all the border incidents, through U.S. "war on drugs" pesticide spraying of border peasants' farms, through the rightwing paramilitary killings, through all the many attempts of the Bush Junta to topple the Chavez government, because of its leadership on social justice and regional self-determination--including the recent one, hatched within the Colombian military, among Uribe connections, to assassinate Chavez (--and that Uribe had to apologize for). All the covert ops. All the lies and disinformation about Chavez AND about other social justice leaders like Cristina Fernandez of Argentina; the Bush-supported rightwing separatists in Bolivia, who want to destabilize Evo Morales' government, by splitting off the gas/oil rich provinces.

Do you have any idea what the Bush Junta has been DOING with USAID-NED money, and other money--OUR money--in South America? Funding rightwing minority political groups--people who have tried coups and every illegal and underhanded means to regain power; funding their rightwing militias and paramilitary who beat up on leftists; funding plots against these DEMOCRACIES, funding fascists and 'brownshirt' rioters and killers--in a relentless campaign, with one object--to destroy democracy and social justice in South America, and regain global corporate predator control of its resources, and access to cheap, poor slave labor.

The Bolivarian countries in the Andes region have cost the World Bank loan sharks billions and billions of unearned dollars, that they were stealing from the poor! They have rejected U.S.-dominated "free trade." They have rejected the corrupt, murderous U.S. "war on drugs"--resulting in billions more dollars not going into the pockets of the rich! And the capper, of course, is that these very same countries sit on the biggest oil reserves in the western hemisphere--also gas, water, forests and other resources. And, by God, the people of these countries have established REAL democracies, with government leaders who serve the interests of the people, and the country in general, and the prosperity, welfare and AUTONOMY of the region.

The Bush Cartel's client state invading Ecuador, and killing off hopes for peace that these other leaders so fervently desired, and took great personal risks to achieve, is not a mere border incident. They all know it--if you don't. They know what they have been up against--with billions of U.S. tax dollars being used to arm this fascist dinosaur, Colombia, where thousands of union leaders and other innocent people have been murdered--and being used to plot against THEM, against democratic leaders.

This is a very grave situation--not because Colombia violated Ecuador's border, but because of WHO Colombia IS, WHO is funding them and arming them to the teeth, and WHO is pulling the Colombian government's strings.

Wake up! Get informed! Cuz YOU'RE paying for Oil War II, and it is coming right into the middle of the U.S. presidential election, like a live hand grenade tossed into the lap of the Democrats.

On Dec 1, 2007, Donald Rumsfeld, writing his "Project for a New North American Century in South America" in the Washington Post, among other things, urges "swift" U.S. action in support of "friends and allies" in South America. The Bush Junta doesn't have any "friends and allies" in South America, except the fascist thugs running Colombia, and the fascist thugs within Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Argentina, planning coups in cahoots with the Bushite embassies and the Bush/CIA. Whatever does he mean? "Swift action"--in support of WHAT?

It's coming. I'm telling you. We are going to be in the middle of an oil war in South America, on the wrong side--on the losing side--before the end of the year. These countries are NOT going to tolerate further U.S. aggression. And I'm talking of the following leftist (majorityist) governments, covering nearly the entire continent: Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina and Nicaragua. Peru may waffle (led by a corrupt "free tradist"--but even he condemned Colombia's incursion).

Rafael Correa has pledged to throw the U.S. military base out of Manta, Ecuador, when its lease runs out in 2008. And you know what he said to the press in Miami, when they asked him about this? He said that he would agree to U.S. boots on the ground in Ecuador when the U.S. permits Ecuador to put a military base in Miami."

He's a funny guy, Correa. But he was quite serious. The South Americans have HAD IT with U.S. interference. (And that same U.S. spy base in Manta was probably the one used to guide Colombia onto Ecuadoran territory, to kill hostage negotiator Reyes and his group.) THAT is the attitude throughout South America.

Rumsfeld won't win--can't win--this war. But when has that ever stopped him or his Bushite pals from creating hell on earth for other people, and taking what greedy advantage of it that they can--in war profiteering or seized resources?

That is what they intend. They've been planning for it, and working towards it, for a long time. Their plan is now in motion. And it is up to the leaders of South America to find a way to disable this plan. Uribe and Colombia are very isolated--for all their armaments and U.S. backup (including Blackwater, by the way--active in Colombia). There are millions of Colombian refugees in Venezuela, fled over the border over the last half decade, to escape the civil war, and mostly the Colombian security forces and paramilitary death squads. Most are poor peasants. It will be tough to achieve a political solution, in the circumstances that Rumsfeld & co. have created. But those refugees will have to be part of it. They are poor and landless. I think Uribe will be pressured to resign, and some mild caretaker kind of government put in his place. But the biggest problem is the well-funded and truly bloodthirsty and vengeful Colombian military and associated paramilitaries and fascist political elite. They are very corrupt. They are involved in the drug trade. And they have been used to rule by the sword. It's going to take some awesome leadership to pull off a negotiated peace without more bloodshed. I think these new leftist leaders are up to the task. I've been studying each of them, as they arose and were elected. I think they have great strength, both individually and collectively.

When you think what some of them have endured--what horror and oppression they have in living memory--some of them tortured, beaten, kidnapped, jailed, threatened--including personal experience in the cases of the leaders of Chile, Bolivia, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and others--and how they have triumphed over it, and are now the heads of this social justice revolution--I think they can achieve peace. I think it is their strongest collective desire and value. Peaceful, lawful, orderly, democratic change. No more death squads. No more fascist coups. No more bloody U.S. interference.

[Bacchus39]

18. bingo, Venezuela lies on the eastern border of Colombia if I am not mistaken

whereas Ecuador, where the incident occurred is to the west.

[AlphaCentauri]

21. what about the incursion of paramilitaries in Venezuela

could Venezuela lunch preventive attack on colombian soil to destroy paramilitary bases?

[The Croquist]

34. They are only entitled to Nationalize if they pay fair market value

They are already in court with Exxon over that issue. They have also threatened Nestle and Parmalat. A week or so ago Chevron stated that it is in Venezuela for the "long term".

The more Venezuela threatens businesses the more nervous foreign investors will get. Chavez is doing a hell of a job destroying an economy that should be booming.

[EFerrari]

35. The economy has been growing steadily since 2003.

And, OPEC has thrown its support behind Chavez in the Exxon flap. He's not destroying anything.

/typo

[Judi Lynn]

39. Chevron happy in Venezuela, says it's there for the 'long term'

Chevron happy in Venezuela, says it's there for the 'long term'

By Isabel Ordonez
Last update: 6:49 a.m. EST Feb. 29, 2008Print E-mail RSS Disable Live Quotes

HOUSTON (MarketWatch) -- Chevron Corp. (CVX:CVX CVX, , ) sees its oil business with Venezuela as a "long-term" relationship, a top executive of the oil giant said Thursday, adding that Chevron plans to comply with new contractual terms for its projects in the Orinoco Belt.

"We will continue to follow our contract to the government of Venezuela and PdVSA," Ali Moshiri, president for Chevron Africa and Latin America Exploration and Production, told Dow Jones Newswires. "We are in Venezuela for the long term."

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/chevron-happy-venezuela-says-its/story.aspx?guid=%7B8660EC7A-0996-4225-ABD3-C8F305A4164C%7D

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nestle:

Murder in Colombia Prompts Group to Sue Nestle Units in Miami
Miami Herald

October 28, 2006

» View nestlesuit_miamiherald_102806.pdf

The widow of a brutally murdered Nestlé worker joins others in a lawsuit against the firm over her
husband's death.
BY JANE BUSSEY
[e-mail]

Colombian trade unionist Luciano Enrique Romero died a slow death. The fired Nestlé factory worker, whose body was found in a paramilitary-controlled area of Colombia a year ago, was tied up, tortured and then stabbed 40 times.

Now Romero's widow, Colombian labor union SINALTRAINAL and the Washington-based International Labor Rights Fund have filed a lawsuit in Miami charging Nestlé USA and Nestlé of Colombia with complicity in his death.

Nestlé USA, headquartered in Glendale, Calif., said in response to questions Friday: ''We have not been served with a copy of the lawsuit, and therefore we have no comment at this time.'' The company is a wholly owned subsidiary of Switzerland-based Nestlé SA, the largest food and beverage company in the world.

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday in federal court, charges that Romero was killed by members of Colombia's paramilitary United Self-Defense Forces because the union leader helped expose Nestlé's use of expired milk in its Milo brand drink. The Colombian government later confirmed the 2001 allegations, the lawsuit said.

Nestlé operated in complicity with the paramilitary; plant managers met openly with them inside the factory in Valledupar, in northern Colombia, the lawsuit said.

In October 2002, Nestlé fired Romero, a 20-year veteran. Romero also received numerous death threats, and two years ago he fled to Spain, where the Organization of American States International Committee on Human Rights placed him under a protection program.

More:
http://www.laborrights.org/end-violence-against-trade-unions/colombia/969

~~~~

Nestlé SA

• Corporate Crimes
  
• Unethical Marketing of Artificial Baby Milk
  
• Exploiting Farmers
  
• Union Busting
  
• Promotion of GM Food
  
• The Ethiopia scandal
  
• Illegal extraction of groundwater
  
• Pollution
  
• Pyres of Burning Animals
  
• Fraudulent Labeling
  
• Perpetuating Sexism
  
• Promoting unhealthy food
  
• Promoting untested nano-technology
  
• Backlashing against Fairtrade

http://www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=240

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Parmalat? Don't make people laugh:

Inside the Parmalat Scandal: What You Need to Know?
Our Paesani
by Francesca Di Meglio

DECEMBER 28, 2003 - For Christmas this year, Italians certainly got a surprise: The country's eighth-largest industrial group, Parmalat, filed for bankruptcy in light of an Enron-like accounting scandal.

Parmalat, a food group famous all over the world for its long-lasting milk products, employs 35,000 people in 30 different countries. The news of cooked books or creative accounting has erupted into a full-fledge investigation into the company's practices - and will have long-lasting ramifications on Italian business and politics.

The story began a little more than a week ago when Parmalat announced that Bank of America had declared false a document, which showed a deposit of nearly 4 billion euros in Parmalat's Bonlat Financing Corp. in the Cayman Islands. The disclosure sent shockwaves throughout Italy, worrying investors and knocking market confidence. Prosecutors began to investigate other questionable financial transactions, as the government rushed to develop a bankruptcy protection plan for the firm. Already, media reports are suggesting that the hole in Parmalat's accounts could prove to be as big as 10 billion euros or $12 billion, according to Reuters. A scanning machine may even have been used to falsify Bank of America documents

Calisto Tanzi, who had run the company since founding it in 1961, is at the center of the probe into fraud. Although investigators have searched Tanzi's home, they were unable to take him in for questioning last week reportedly because he fled to another country. Tanzi sent word that he had taken a holiday but would be available later, according to various media outlets.

More:
http://www.italiansrus.com/articles/ourpaesani/parmalat.htm

~~~~

The Latin America Factor in the Scandal at Parmalat

By TONY SMITH
Published: January 13, 2004
Was South America the problem with Parmalat?

The company's founder, Calisto Tanzi, who is in police custody in Italy, has hinted to investigators that the accounting fraud uncovered at Parmalat was driven partly by a need to hide huge losses at the company's South American operations. A lawsuit by an American pension fund accuses Citigroup of helping Parmalat cover a gap in its balance sheet created by a Brazilian subsidiary. And an important figure in the widening investigation, Giovanni Bonici, returned to Italy and surrendered to the authorities last week after briefly hiding in Venezuela, where he once ran Parmalat's local unit.

But many analysts doubt that Parmalat's operations in South America, unprofitable though they are, could possibly have brought down a giant dairy and food company with operations in 31 countries.

Senior executives of the main South American unit, Parmalat Brasil, said they were ''flabbergasted'' and ''overwhelmed'' by assertions that it had helped propel Parmalat's sudden dive into insolvency. As they fight a daily battle to keep Parmalat Brasil running, they expressed fury at the bad news from the home office in Italy. ''What we are reading in the papers should not even be on the business pages, but in the crime section,'' fumed one executive, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Parmalat went on a buying spree here in the 1990's that some in the Brazilian business community called aggressive and others said bordered on reckless, highlighted by a 1998 deal to acquire Batavia, a major dairy cooperative, for $160 million. With little thought given to synergy or economies of scale, the company's empire grew to 17 plants across the country. By splashing out heavily on advertising and marketing, including some prominent sports sponsorships, Parmalat built a strong brand name and rose to second place in the Brazilian dairy industry.

What it did not build was profitability. Parmalat Brasil has lost money every year since 1998, when it first began publishing results. But the company's managers insist that they have been making good progress under Ricardo Gonçalves, who took over as chief executive in late 2001 -- streamlining operations to seven plants, putting more emphasis on higher-margin products like yogurts, cheeses and fruit juices, and narrowing the net loss to $28 million in the first three quarters of 2003, down from $76 million for 2002.

Those losses come nowhere close to explaining the parent company's woes, analysts and executives said. And the units in Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela are all considerably smaller operations than the one in Brazil.

''Yes, part of the problems could stem from Latin America, but we're talking about billions of dollars that have disappeared,'' said Rafael Guedes, director in Brazil of the Fitch credit-rating agency. ''It would seem hardly probable that a Latin American unit could produce such a big hole.

More:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9803E2DB1230F930A25752C0A9629C8B63

[Peace Patriot]

66. "Entitled" to Nationalize? A sovereign people are entitled to do whatever they

want with their land, their resources, their economy. And, gee, they just keep electing Chavez, by ever increasing margins--in elections that put our own to shame by their transparency--to do just that: RE-assert their sovereign RIGHTS as a people, after decades and centuries of the rich elites SELLING their sovereignty to global corporate predators.

Fuck Exxon Mobil. It has NO rights, as far as I'm concerned (me and Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, who said PEOPLE have rights, NOT corporations). No right to exist. They are chartered entities. PEOPLE give them PERMISSION to operate, IF the People feel like it. No right to profits. PEOPLE determine the rules of business, the laws they will follow, the taxes and tariffs they will pay, and the level of corporate responsibility they must show TO THE PEOPLE. No right to accumulate vast wealth and power in perpetuity, so that tiny billionaire elites take over governments and hijack PEOPLES' militaries, and rob their treasuries, for corporate resource wars. No rights! None!

Really, it's time WE nationalized Exxon Mobil--without compensation, for all the shit they've done to us, and money they've stolen from us--and for destroying our economy and our democracy. I would not give them one fucking penny. The Venezuelan people are giving them 40%--which is coming out of the hides of the poor, as it is! They have no RIGHT to it. None! They OWE the people of Venezuela, as they owe us! Not the other way around. Them and their goddamned secret energy meetings with Dick Cheney, carving up the Iraq oil fields, like the fascist pigs they are carving up babies for dinner. 1.2 million dead people in Iraq--babies, children, innocents of every kind. 1.2 million!

"Fair Market Value," huh? What's the "fair market value" of 1.2 million peoples' lives? What's the "fair market value" of the millions of dirt poor people--near starving, no food, no shoes, living in hovels--that Venezuela's previous (prior to Chavez) 10% share in their own oil created? And WHERE did all that money go?

[Robbien]

12. Hit 'em in the pocketbook

Not a bad idea. The elites of Columbia will soon put some pressure on Uribe.

[Doctor Cynic]

15. and make the poor masses of Venezuela starve!

Until now people have been able to skirt the rations by buying Colombian food. Now they can't. Chavez = Chimpy, Latino style.

[AlphaCentauri]

22. to my knowledge Venezuela foods were taking into the black market by speculators.

[Judi Lynn]

26. Truly! It was hard to miss in the newspaper reports. That's why they raided those trucks

to get back the food the speculators were hauling into Colombia to get lucky and make a killing.

A lot of people see that as cheating, stealing from, and selling out their fellow men/women, by taking their food out of circulation at home, where it is surely needed, and selling it elsewhere at a large profit.

[Doctor Cynic]

41. and why does a black market exist?

Why is there food rationing when the country is sitting on so much cash? Perhaps instead of putting money into pet projects and making speeches denouncing imperialism, Chavez should, you know, spend some money on helping farmers grow more food perhaps? Nah, too practical and doesn't bash the rich enough.

[Judi Lynn]

42. Please provide some information for DU'ers who don't know about food rationing in Venezuela.

It's wrong to make claims if you're not going to provide your sources.

You'd be helping to educate those of us who don't know that Venezuela has had control of the food and is rationing it out. It would be news to everyone, you can be sure.

Will be waiting to see some of your references. Thank you.

[Doctor Cynic]

48. Try this link:

http://news.google.com/news?oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-GB%3Aofficial&client=firefox-a&um=1&tab=wn&hl=en&q=food+rationing+venezuela&btnG=Search+News

You'll notice most of them are ideologically right-wing, but unless there's evidence that Venezuelans have milk and honey aplenty, you can't really deny what's being presented.

Still doesn't change the fact that Chavez has a severe case of misplaced priorities.

[Judi Lynn]

54. Looks like the best bet is the Miami Herald which is sadly, wildly right-wing, pandering, as it does

to Cuban right-wing reactionary "exiles" whom, as you must know, are completely off the wall!

Here's what the Herald says:

Food shortage sparks Cuba-style rationing

Earlier this year, the government created a distribution network known as Pdval -- financed by the state-run oil company Petróleos de Venezuela, or PDVSA -- to solve shortages of groceries like beef, eggs and milk that have sparked long lines in recent months.

According to Asdrubal Chávez, President Hugo Chávez's cousin and the coordinator for Pdval, the distribution centers will now keep a registry of families shopping at each center to ensure that no home receives a ''surplus'' of staple products.

Under the new rationing system, government distribution centers will open at 8 a.m. and each customer will be given a control number that will allow him to shop for food that day. The customer will also fill out a registry card with his name, ID number and the products and quantities to be purchased.
(snip)

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/story/430874.html

If you don't know about the Miami Herald, please look into the campaign the Cuban "exile" community, under the thumb of Jorge Mas Canosa implemented to intimidate the Herald into bowing to their interests, when they went wild, seeing articles coming out which didn't follow their ideology, and started making death threats to the publisher, David Lawrence, and Herald staff, and taking out huge signs on buses, saying "I don't believe the Herald," and smearing newspaper vending machines throughout the city with feces, then jamming them up with gum.

David Lawrence and his wife started having people check their cars every day for bombs before they would drive them. finally, Lawrence gave up, left, and the Herald, and the Nuevo Herald have ALWAYS done what the right-wingers want, even firing moderate Cubans on staff, like the highly esteemed columnist, Max Castro.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Were you aware that these government subsidies and offerings at government markets are to HELP the poor in Venezuela? This is not their only way to get food.

The government makes food available to poor Venezuelans at deeply discounted prices, so they can afford more food on their meager incomes. If the government did NOT have these programs available, they would be in the condition they enjoyed all the time up until Hugo Chavez was inaugurated, February 2, 1999. This, even in the worst of times, is an IMPROVEMENT.

There is a war going on between the food retailers and their acceptance of sensible food prices. If you've been watching any of the news on Venezuela, you have to have read that at various times retail merchants arbitrarily have held back on various vital resources to drive up the prices. This has been in practise since LONG BEFORE CHAVEZ was elected. We had an article posted here recently in which the author said it's predictable, they do it every year before Christmas, and he provided background on it.

The government in Venezuela has been putting in new safeguards to help the poor, in a state of transition away from helplessness, hopelessness, to a state of adequate nutrition for everyone. It can only be done in stages. So far they've got programs, or "missions" like this:

VENEZUELA: Nutritious food a 'basic human right'

24 August 2005
Owen Richards

We’re crammed into a small kitchen, maybe three by four metres, with blue concrete walls. Lining the walls are shelves stocked with kitchen basics — string bags of potatoes, garlic cloves, carrots, pumpkins and melons. There’s a bucket of chopped onions. A giant stainless steel pot waits empty on the gas stove. Four women and a man, in matching red aprons, hand-roll fish cakes and banana balls. A tiny wall fan hums in the background.

It could be a kitchen anywhere, but it’s quite different. The members of the Caracas section of the Australia-Venezuela Solidarity Brigade are here in Guaicaipuro Casa de Alimentaciones on July 29, witnessing firsthand one of the social achievements of the Bolivarian revolution. It is here in this modest house that 150 people come daily to receive two free meals.

There are some 4000 of these kitchens now across Venezuela. They are only possible because of the revolutionary will of the Venezuelan people and the assistance provided by the government of President Hugo Chavez.

Established to guarantee access to nutritious food — particularly for pregnant women, children, the over-60s and the extreme poor — the casas are nonetheless open to all.

They will not accept any money for the food, not even a donation. In fact, they have been instructed by the government to feed everyone who visits, even if they be from rich First World countries. And that is how we came to be eating delicious fishcakes, banana balls and rice complimented by endless arepas and fruit juices. The point of feeding tourists and fact-finders, they tell us, is to show the world that their food is both tasty and nutritious.

While the casas are a grassroots phenomenon driven by the compassion and solidarity of their volunteer work force, they are assisted in every possible way by the Venezuelan government. According to one of the cooks, the government provided all of the kitchen equipment, including the fridge and the oven. The government also assists on an ongoing basis by donating 60,000 bolivars a month to help pay the bills. Recently Chavez granted the workers a small bonus in income support.

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2005/639/33934

Mission Mercal, the government plan for discounted food for the poor:

"Mission Mercal (officially launched on April 24, 2003) is a Bolivarian Mission established in Venezuela under the government of Hugo Chávez. The government has set up subsidized grocery stores in a state-run company called Mercal. At present some 11.36 million Venezuelans benefit from Mercal food programs on a regular basis. At least 14,208 Mission Mercal food distribution sites are spread throughout Venezuela, and 4,543 metric tons of food are distributed each day. Mission Mercal stores and cooperatives are mostly located in impoverished areas and sell generic-branded foods at discounts as great as 50%. While the company is heavily funded by the government, the goal is to become self-sufficient by replacing food imports with products from local farmers, small businesses, and cooperatives (many of whom have received microcredits from Mercal). This endogenous development is central to Chávez's stated goal of non-capitalistic development from the bottom up." (From Wikipedia.org, the Free Encyclopedia).

http://www.lfsc.org/wsf/educ_package.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you take some time reading about this, and then THINKING it over, you will see the reality is far different from whatever it is some slower Americans automatically assume without benefit of actual information.

[EFerrari]

64. Because the production and distribution chains have been

largely in the hands of the oligarchy and although he probably could have seized those assets, he operates within the law? Ya think?

It's all right. Those vampires are toast, their day is over whether they manage to kill him or not. The people aren't going back.

[AlphaCentauri]

74. hope you remember ENRON

in latin america food prices rise by speculating, private vendors hide their stock to create a fake food shortage pushing the market to increase prices, in one year what is call the canasta basica could rise up to 40%. That is, they buy their food stock to be retail at 70-100% in profits but hiding it for a while they could make up 150-200 in profits in only a couple months.
Just take a look at this http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=canasta+basica+especulacion+&btnG=Google+Search and see for your self that all latin american countries have the same problem.

[Andrushka]

82. Wow

What an impressive grasp of the situation you have. :sarcasm:

[Peace Patriot]

84. What was done to Venezuela's food self-sufficiency, by the rich ruling elite,

over decades and centuries, and more recently, prior to Chavez, with the utter mismanagement of the oil economy, added to U.S.-imposed neoliberal policies, cannot be undone in a day--or a decade.

The Chavez government is pouring big chunks of the oil profits into land reform and food self-sufficiency projects, to correct this problem as soon as humanly possible. The basic problem--which is typical of Latin American countries--is that the rich big rural landowners have driven the small peasant farmers off the land, and into urban shantytowns, by the millions. In some places, they have tortured, killed and terrorized the poor indigenous farmers. And, over time, these poor peasant farmers, crammed into urban squalor, LOSE THEIR SKILLS. They don't pass them along to their children. It is not easy, then, to entice them back to the land.

Writer Seith DeLong describes the situation this way:

Spectacular Iniquities

In Venezuela roughly 75 to 80% of the country's private land is owned by 5% of all landowners. Regarding agricultural holdings, that figure drops to a mere 2% of the population owning 60% of the country's farmland, much of which is fallow. Because these stark statistics do not help one understand the extraordinary levels of both rural and urban inequality in Venezuela, perhaps the following analogy will. Imagine if in the U.S. a handful of families owned the entire state of California. There is no California Coastal Commission, no limits on the amount of land that may be purchased, no zoning laws, no government oversight of any kind, nothing of the sort. But none of this really matters to the average citizen because California, as a conglomeration of large, privately owned estates, will never be seen by most U.S. residents (excepting itinerant laborers). In other words, try to think of one of the most beautiful states in the U.S. as a giant gated community. Meanwhile, the country's landed oligarchy owns the vast majority of the land, most of which lies fallow because they prefer to sit on it for the purpose of land speculation rather than use it for agricultural production. With most of its arable land unused, the U.S. is the only net importer of food on the continent and is forced to purchase more than two-thirds of its foodstuffs abroad. Though this analogy may help one to empathize with the land situation in Venezuela, it is still woefully inadequate for conveying an adequate grasp on the levels of inequality in that country, as California only makes up 4% of the U.S. land mass.

----------

Me again:

Small peasant farmers, working 5 to 10 acre plots, are the backbone of the food chain in Latin America. They are the best farmers and produce the best food (organic food, using ancient methods). They feed their families, their extended families, and the local community, at the least, and market the rest--small quantities, but, collectively, a lot of food. That "food chain" was nearly broken, in Venezuela, by the greed of the rich for big ranches and holdings, which lie fallow, and by big absentee landowners as well, with large tracts of land not used by anyone for anything. Further, as DeLong describes, previous governments did absolutely nothing about this, for many decades, as Venezuela lost all food self-sufficiency. High-living on petrodollars--thinking nothing of the welfare of the country and the future--while an increasing population of poverty-stricken urban dwellers had no schools, no medical care, no decent housing, no education/skills to get good jobs, no services, not even flood control. (The poor shantytowns of Caracas regularly slide off the hills they built on, in heavy rains.) This is the selfish, greedy, pampered rich oil elite that has been trying, since 2002, to overthrow the elected government, and put themselves back in power, with the help of the Bush Junta. (God, they're just like Bush--spoiled oil brats who think the world owes them a billionaire living!)

The Chavez government has put enormous energy into distributing government farm land to peasant farmers, and researching legal title to lands, and trying to put peasant farmers BACK on the land, producing food, without violating the Venezuelan Constitution, which has strong protections of private property. To do this lawfully and fairly, and to RESTORE an atrophied agricultural sector takes time.

Here's further description of what all the Chavez government has been doing on land reform...

---------


More Like Lincoln Than Lenin
Land Reform in Venezuela
February 26 / 27, 2005

By SETH DELONG

President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela is pushing full speed ahead with land reform, an issue that has been one of the most divisive and perennially debated topics in Latin America.

(SNIP)

The Facts Regarding Chavez's Land Reform The Venezuelan leader first articulated his land reform plan, what he calls "Vuelta al Campo," (Return to the Countryside) under the Law on Land and Agricultural Development in November 2001. The goals of this legislation were as follows: to set limits on the size of landholdings, tax unused property as an incentive to spur agricultural growth, redistribute unused, primarily government-owned land to peasant families and cooperatives and, lastly, expropriate uncultivated and fallow land from large, private estates for the purpose of redistribution. On the last and most controversial goal, the landowners would be compensated for their land at market value. The National Land Institute (INTI) was set up to facilitate achieving these goals by establishing criteria to determine what land could be redistributed and the eligibility of those applying for new land deeds. Under Plan Zamora of 2003, both the INTI and its sister organizations, the National Rural Development Institute and the Venezuelan Agricultural Organization, have been tasked to administer agricultural expertise to the new peasant landowners and to provide markets for their goods. After a slow start, the Chavez government has redistributed about 2.2 million hectares of state owned land to more than 130,000 peasant families and cooperatives (1 hectare = 2.47 acres). So far, although not one acre of private property has been expropriated by the government, tensions are beginning to mount as Chavez extends his reform program from government-owned land to the latifundios (large, privately owned estates of more than 5,000 hectares, roughly 12,350 acres).

Chavez Emulates Lincoln
In the history of land reform, the most accurate analogy to illustrate what is transpiring in Venezuela is not Zimbabwe or Cuba - Chavez officials have repeatedly emphasized that they are not emulating the Cuban model of land reform - but the U.S.' own Homestead Act. Signed by President Abraham Lincoln in 1862, the measure declared that any U.S. or intended citizen of at least 21 years of age could claim up to 160 acres of government land. Like Chavez's Vuelta al Campo, there were many restrictions in the Act which benefited the recipients by ensuring that the new reform could not be manipulated by entrenched, moneyed interests. Under Lincoln's legislation, the land could not be sold to speculators or used as debt collateral, and only after five years of "actual settlement and cultivation," according to Section 2, could the homesteader submit an application for a land patent. Similarly, in Chavez's plan, only after three years may the peasants obtain legal ownership of the land, and only then after they have rendered it productive. The Homestead Act was one of the most progressive and far-reaching government initiatives in U.S. history insofar as it helped to develop and secure an agrarian-based middle class, which had an epic impact on the future democratization of the nation. That Chavez is trying to emulate it in his own country, as part of his plan to extirpate Venezuela's entrenched inequality, is an effort that all right-minded people should applaud. (MORE)

http://www.counterpunch.org/delong02262005.html

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

DeLong goes on to describes the hysteria of the highly acquisitive, wealthy landowners, with fallow lands, as the Chavez government begins to implement the policy of full restoration of Venezuela's food self-sufficiency on private lands, and the ludicrous lies and disinformation about this in our corporate monopoly press. DeLong then brilliantly evaluates the ways that the Chavez government has learned from past land reform mistakes--for instance, failing to require anything of the beneficiaries of land reform, as to production, and failing to encourage competitiveness and other market principles. The Chavez government is determined not to make these mistakes, and has put lot of thought and resources into preventing them. DeLong concludes...

Nice Job so far - but be Careful
Chavez is right to enact sweeping land reform, both as a means of reducing Venezuela's feudal levels of inequality and as a way of boosting agricultural output, which now accounts for a pathetic 6% of the country's GDP. And the right is certainly wrong to offer up only its usual, knee-jerk reaction to anything Chavez promotes. That noted, Chavez would be well advised to consolidate the gains already made by the newly landed peasants on public lands. By making certain that those who have been deeded public land live up to their end of the bargain - as was the main obligation of Lincoln's Homesteaders - Chavez can establish his program as a rare success story in a region littered with failed attempts at agrarian reform.

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

Me: DeLong wrote this piece before the ill-willed food hoarding by supermarket chains, and other fascist/corporate efforts to derail the economy, such as Exxon Mobil's recent attempt to freeze $12 billion of Venezuela's assets--all coordinated, in my opinion, with Donald Rumsfeld plan for Oil War II: South America. The conflict with Colombia may do some good, actually (if it doesn't turn more violent that Colombia has already made it), by staunching the flow of Venezuelan food out of the country to the Colombian black market. In any case, it will be decades before Chavez's agricultural policy will achieve its goal--food self-sufficiency--as new farmers go through trial and error, learning skills, and new markets are created, internally and in cooperation with other good governments. As the first government of Venezuela ever to pay serious attention to agriculture and the common welfare, there is hope now--and positive planning--yet another reason, as with our own FDR, that Chavez should be permitted to run again and be elected again. The poor needs time to right the wrongs of the rich!

[Bacchus39]

87. and nothing has changed in the regard to food self-sufficiency has it?

what has Hugo been doing the last 10 years?

[AlphaCentauri]

93. nothing has change in regard to who controls the food supply n/t

[Bacchus39]

94. and in food exporting countries like Colombia or the US??

your argument doesn't hold water. nothing has been done to increase food production and distribution. they STILL are overreliant on oil revenues. not so bad when prices are high but it doesn't address the food shortage issue.

[Peace Patriot]

101. Can't you READ? Did you read the above--DeLong's analysis of Venezuelan ag policy?

You can't reverse decades--a half century--of utter mismanagement by the oiligarchy overnight!

You can't just start producing food,as if by magic, after so much irresponsibility. You can't just plow a field, and expect it to be highly productive the next year, or even in the next five years, or ten years. Do you KNOW anything about agriculture? Do you know anything about recovering long-fallow lands for food production? Do you know anything about farmers' skill levels in Venezuela?

The difference between the Chavez government and all previous governments is that the Chavez government is DOING SOMETHING ABOUT IT. They have an aggressive, and very smart and well-thought-out, land reform policy, which is enticing thousands of people BACK TO THE LAND, and is converting millions of acres BACK INTO food production. But, as every country that has this problem knows, it takes about as much time to UNDO bad, stupid land and agricultural policy, as it did to totally fuck up the country's food supply. A half a century, minimum, in this case. And if you count the bad policy PRIOR to the 1960s, it could take a century of reform to reverse the damage, and reach full food self-sufficiency. UNLESS you want to go the way of the Soviet Union and FORCE people back to the land. And the Chavez government has repeatedly, and strongly, rejected any such policy. They won't even force private land into production, without compensating the rich, irresponsible, land-speculating owners!

And all this while--all the while the Chavistas have been devising the FIRST decent land reform policy EVER TO BE implemented in Venezuela--the Bushites and their pals, the Venezuelan oil elite--have been plotting and executing a violent rightwing military coup, a crippling oil professionals' strike, a U.S.-funded recall election, and, together with the fascist fuckheads in Colombia, an assassination of Hugo Chavez! The Chavistas have had a lot to deal with. And it's not over yet. Donald Rumsfeld is determined to start a war there, to regain global corporate predator control of the oil that is PAYING for these reforms!

Your criticism is a lot like their torture policy. You smash a helpless prisoner in the face, and when he cries out, you ridicule him for his weakness--for crying for his mommy. And then you hit him again. And if he pees in his pants, you laugh. And then you stick his head underwater until he drowns, and pull him out short of death, and when he pukes all over the floor, you stick his face in the puke, then put a "confession" before him, to sign. And if he won't, you tell him to stand up, and to remain standing until you return, and you leave him there for hours, and if he falls to his knees, you come back and beat him up again--for not standing up, like he was told. And if he can't stand up now, you tie him up with ropes and force him to stand, as his ankles and knees collapse beneath him. And all the while, you ridicule and berate him for crying, for peeing, for shitting his pants, for puking, for being a weakling who can't stand up.

You try a coup, you try a strike, you try a recall, you try to assassination plots, you try freezing $12 billion in the country's assets, you try CIA dirty tricks out of Miami, you try 24/7 lies and disinformation and slander and ridicule, you try 'brownshirt' riots and boycotts, you try food hoarding, you try arming their hostile neighbor to the teeth, you try border incursions to get them into a shooting war, you try every conceivable means of destroying a government, and then you abuse them for not implementing the first decent agricultural policy the country has ever seen fast enough to suit you.

Bushite tactics. Bushite logic. Bushite goals. Your goal is NOT good agricultural policy in Venezuela. You goal is to ADD TO Bushite lies and disinformation, the goal of which is to topple this democratic, and very beneficial government.

[Demeter]

96. Excellent Post! Deserves Its Own Thread

Wish I could recommend this. Consider reposting?

[Judi Lynn]

16. At some point, even the Colombian oligarchy is going to start seeing Uribe is far more trouble than

he is worth. What were they thinking so long ago when the U.S. Department of Defense had Uribe in its sights for his deep connections to Pablo Escobar?

Now available for public information, and of course far later than appropriate:

U.S. INTELLIGENCE LISTED COLOMBIAN PRESIDENT URIBE AMONG
"IMPORTANT COLOMBIAN NARCO-TRAFFICKERS" IN 1991

Then-Senator "Dedicated to Collaboration with the Medellín Cartel at High Government Levels"

Confidential DIA Report Had Uribe Alongside Pablo Escobar, Narco-Assassins

Uribe "Worked for the Medellín Cartel" and was a "Close Personal Friend of Pablo Escobar"



Washington, D.C., 1 August 2004 - Then-Senator and now President Álvaro Uribe Vélez of Colombia was a "close personal friend of Pablo Escobar" who was "dedicated to collaboration with the Medellín cartel at high government levels," according to a 1991 intelligence report from U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) officials in Colombia. The document was posted today on the website of the National Security Archive, a non-governmental research group based at George Washington University.

Uribe's inclusion on the list raises new questions about allegations that surfaced during Colombia's 2002 presidential campaign. Candidate Uribe bristled and abruptly terminated an interview in March 2002 when asked by Newsweek reporter Joseph Contreras about his alleged ties to Escobar and his associations with others involved in the drug trade. Uribe accused Contreras of trying to smear his reputation, saying that, "as a politician, I have been honorable and accountable."

The newly-declassified report, dated 23 September 1991, is a numbered list of "the more important Colombian narco-traffickers contracted by the Colombian narcotic cartels for security, transportation, distribution, collection and enforcement of narcotics operations." The document was released by DIA in May 2004 in response to a Freedom of Information Act request submitted by the Archive in August 2000.

The source of the report was removed by DIA censors, but the detailed, investigative nature of the report -- the list corresponds with a numbered set of photographs that were apparently provided with the original -- suggests it was probably obtained from Colombian or U.S. counternarcotics personnel. The document notes that some of the information in the report was verified "via interfaces with other agencies."

President Uribe -- now a key U.S. partner in the drug war -- "was linked to a business involved in narcotics activities in the United States" and "has worked for the Medellín cartel," the narcotics trafficking organization led by Escobar until he was killed by Colombian government forces in 1993. The report adds that Uribe participated in Escobar's parliamentary campaign and that as senator he had "attacked all forms of the extradition treaty" with the U.S.

More:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB131/index.htm

[Hugabear]

19. FUCK Colombia

Fascist Bush-licking bastards. Chavez is doing the right thing, flexing his own muscle to counter Colombia's actions, which are no doubt being encouraged by BushCo.

[EFerrari]

23. Duplicate.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3212444

[Meshuga]

57. A kick since the topic has been merged

The topic has finally been merged by the mods. :-)

[bemildred]

29. Uribe is a thug and a criminal dictator. He needs to resign now for the good of all Colombians. nt

[fascisthunter]

31. Uribe the Fascist Puppet

needs help.... awwwwwwwww

[bemildred]

32. Colombia Pipeline Bombed by FARC After Ecuador Attack (Update4)

March 6 (Bloomberg) -- Colombian rebels bombed an oil pipeline and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said he may seize local assets of the neighboring country's companies after a Colombian raid into Ecuador killed a rebel leader.

The bombing and Chavez's nationalization threats may be the start of reprisals for the March 1 air raid on Ecuadorean soil that killed the second-in-command of Colombia's biggest guerrilla group. Escalation of the conflict could cut the more than $5 billion in annual trade between Venezuela and Colombia.

---

Ecuador's President Rafael Correa, who joined Chavez at the press conference, called on the international community to condemn Colombia for its cross-border strike. He said he'll only accept the findings of a panel set up by the Organization of American States to investigate the attack if it denounces Colombia's actions.

``If the international community doesn't condemn this aggressor without question, then Ecuador will know how to respond,'' Correa said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ahXn5_r5Yjl0&refer=home

[subsuelo]

37. This whole incident may be part of a test

I think Chavez may want to gauge the level of support he has at this time. He needs an issue to show off his growing muscles and the solidarity of the people he has come to represent. The people are no longer in the shadows in Latin America. Chavez is their voice. Maybe now is the time to tear apart the U.S. influence in Colombia. At least to show a serious challenge to it. This cannot continue any longer.

[bemildred]

53. I dunno.

Latin America has been trying to get El Norte to butt out of their affairs for quite a long time now, this is really just a continuation of that. Chavez is not the first Chavez, he is just the most successful so far. What is different now, mainly, is the way Bush has hamstrung the US. It's true Bush has had the cooperation and complicity of the US ruling elites, but still only Bush could have fucked it up this badly.

[EFerrari]

61. Nicaragua has broken diplomatic relations with Colombia.

Colombia does seem to be under a lot of pressure right now.

I wonder if there is something going on there. :shrug:

[AlphaCentauri]

81. Colombian anti-paramilitary march

BOGOTA, March 6 (Reuters) - Thousands of Colombians marched on Thursday against right-wing militias that carried out massacres as part of a dirty war against Marxist rebels, highlighting sharp divisions in the country as it faces a regional diplomatic crisis.

A far larger march was held a month earlier against the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, a rebel group widely despised for using kidnapping and assassination as tactics in its four-decade-old insurrection.

Thursday's rally came amid a diplomatic crisis in which the left-wing governments of Ecuador, Venezuela and Nicaragua cut diplomatic ties with Colombia over a weekend raid in which Colombian forces entered Ecuador to kill a FARC commander.

President Alvaro Uribe is under pressure to say he will never again allow troops to enter foreign soil in pursuit of the guerrillas. But the conservative Colombian leader demands that neighboring countries crack down on rebels using their border areas as safe havens.

The left-right rift could be felt on the streets on Thursday as victims of paramilitary violence marched with photographs of murdered and missing loved ones.

The contrasting marches showed that Colombia is still not ready to condemn all violence with one voice, said Mauricio Romero, analyst for the International Center for Transitional Justice.

"We had to have one against the guerrillas last month and then another today against the far right," he said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/americasCrisis/idUSN06484783

[Bacchus39]

83. Colombians certainly want peace

one of the main reasons why the anti-FARC march was so much larger was the indignation at the sympathetic tones that one Hugo Chavez expressed. saying such things as the FARC is a people's army and the Uribe was not fit to be president of Colombia. he did not express that so gently either. it was Hugo along with others but the others seemed to follow his lead. add this to the fact that the FARC, once again, showed they cannot be trusted when they claimed they had the hostage child when they in fact did not. they actually tried to retake him.

this pent up frustration is what produced that march. one political party tried to change the theme by saying it should be "an anti-violence" march. Colombians rejected that notion NOT because they have any love for the paras, but because they rejected the idea that the FARC is a legitimate force fighting for them.

[Peace Patriot]

85. I don't think we can trust gages of sentiment in a country where

political leftists still get chainsawed and their body parts thrown into mass graves, and where thousands of union leaders, community organizers, small peasant farmers, human rights workers and journalists are punished with death for their beliefs. Also, the Bush Junta has been pouring USAID-NED money--OUR money--into rightwing groups in South America, and I can't imagine that Colombia is any exception. Easy to have big marches paid for by Uncle George. Harder for dead people to have any kind of marches.

---------



Human Rights Atrocities Still go Unpunished in Colombia
http://www.alternet.org/rights/75239

"The Chainsaw Massacre" Is Not a Movie in Colombia: Witness
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0419-04.htm

[Bacchus39]

86. ahh, so Colombians don't know what is good for them

but you do along with the other experts here. oh, and p.s. yes the FARC should let the hostages go unconditionally. don't you agree??

[Peace Patriot]

103. I'm saying the deaths of thousands of union leaders, community organizers,

political leftists, small peasant farmers, human rights workers and journalists, at the hands of the Colombian security forces and closely tied rightwing paramilitaries, creates an atmosphere of fear and intimidation in which it is not possible to determine what the majority of Colombians want. Those who want a socialist, peace-minded government, for instance, are either dead or threatened with death if they raise their voices.

My point was not that *I* know what's good for them. My point is that they face persecution, threats, torture and death, if they freely express their views. In fact, that is why there is FARC in Colombia. The last time they tried to demobilize and join in the political process, and freely express their views, and elect people to office, the Colombian security forces and associated paramilitaries murdered all of their elected political leaders--some 400 of them--and murdered thousands of their supporters and voters. That is not at atmosphere in which the real desires of the people of Colombia can be known. Big demos, organized by the fascist government, and paid for by the Bush Junta, are not persuasive.

As for FARC and "unconditionally" releasing hostages: They just released six hostages UNCONDITIONALLY--and got bombed and slaughtered in the sleep for doing so.

I imagine that Chavez, Correa and Sarkovy are very regretful that they advised FARC to release hostages without conditions. And they were working on more such releases--including that of Ingrid Betancourt--when Uribe smashed that hope all to pieces. Bush puppet Uribe has made clear that he will kill every last one of them, the moment he has an advantage. He will not show good faith EVEN IF THEY RELEASE HOSTAGES UNCONDITIONALLY. According to the first two hostages who were released, they had to flee Colombia UNDER FIRE from Colombian security forces to get out. Uribe doesn't give a fuck for the hostages' lives. In fact, he will risk war with Ecuador and Venezuela just to up his kill "score."

And now I'm going to ask you something. What if Ingrid Betancourt had been sleeping in that FARC camp inside Ecuador's border--a distinct possibility, since President Correa was negotiating with Raul Reyes for her release and that of 12 others--what he described as a "very advanced" negotiation? Would you say it was justified to BOMB that camp, in violation of Ecuadoran sovereignty, and slaughter everybody in their sleep, in order to enact revenge and peremptory execution, not just of FARC members, but of ANYBODY who happened to be there?

It's hard to imagine anything MORE unjustified. But tell me, now do YOU justify it?

-----------

One more thing: Do I agree that the hostages should be released "unconditionally"? Yes, I do. But what *I* want is not the issue. What's POSSIBLE is the issue. Chavez pulled off what seemed impossible--UNCONDITIONAL release of six hostages. Chavez, Correa, Sarkovy and others were trying to get more hostage releases. Chavez had told the world what FARC wanted--a ceasefire zone, and recognition as a legitimate fighting force in a civil war. But he did not require that those conditions be met for FURTHER hostage releases. He was PROCEEDING with further hostage release efforts--even though Uribe had SHOT AT the first two hostages who were being released! And now, what Uribe and the Bushites have done is to stop the release of hostages, with or without conditions! It will now be impossible to get more hostages released without meeting the condition of a ceasefire zone.

I want world peace. I want my country to cut its military budget by 90%, down to a true defensive posture (no more wars of choice!). But what I am faced with, in the presidential election, is three remaining candidates all of whom support big military budgets. Do I refuse to vote? Do I join a third party and undermine the chances of the least bad candidate, on military budgets, getting elected? Or do I support what's POSSIBLE?

Theoretical questions--do I want the hostages released immediately and without conditions?--can be good for establishing principles, but they are useless for getting things done in the real world, in REAL circumstances. I want A LOT OF THINGS that are not possible or realistic. FARC, after getting bombed and massacred, is NOT going to be releasing any more hostages, any time soon. And that is a BAD outcome, and deliberate sabotage of peace efforts, by our warmongering government.

[Bacchus39]

108. you can take the February march as a good indication of Colombian sentiment

the march was a grass roots outpouring of anti-FARC frustration. now did the government support it? yes. they would have been stupid not to.

I'm sure the Colombian government is very cognizant of not trying to kill hostages so your Betancourt hypothetical isn't worth an answer. here is one for you: if she dies in captivity, will you blame the FARC or the government?

Colombia allowed the hostage releases to occur. it was particularly easy since the first scheduled release was a complete blunder and embarrassed both the FARC and Chavez. any time the FARC has indicated they would release hostages, the government has obliged.

[Judi Lynn]

118. It's starting to be too easy to realize your purpose now. It has been published

and publicized that the first two hostages said that the first time they had attempted to make it to the spot where they would be released, as they traveled on foot through the jungle, with assurances from Uribe that he would keep his troops at a distance so they would be safe, Uribe instead had his forces launching so many explosions directly in their area that after struggling against their fear for a very long time, they eventually became too frightened and had to return.

As for the embarrassment part, only in your dreams.

[AlphaCentauri]

92. there was a campaign against this march

portraying it as organized by the FARC, there were circulating e-mail saying it.

[EFerrari]

113. And Uribe denounced it. What a guy.

Our man in Colombia. :puke:

[Judi Lynn]

114. I heard about that. You recall that when the pro-government march was held in February, businesses

were encouraged to let their employees off so they could attend the march, and schools were likewise encouraged to let the students have the day off. T-shirts were printed in massive numbers so everyone would be able to carry out the theme.

In the case of the March 6 demonstration, threats were made, implying participants would be seen as supporters of the terrorists, instead! Read about that several days ago.

Went to the Colombian newspaper, El Tiempo, and found this article which I ran through the google translation tool, for a rough approximation of the text:

March 6, 2008



Photo: Mauritius Moreno / WEATHER
The arrival in the Plaza de Bolivar in Bogota began shortly
before 12 days. At 4 pm were still hundreds of people.

Thousands of Colombians marched through the victims of violence in several cities

At times the march seemed more a political protest, but for others it was a great cultural encounters with the theme of violence. Women were involved.

On the seventh race of Bogota, a forced many to enter the Plaza de Bolivar, which held the largest concentration of protesters, a long strip of photos and newspaper clippings that reflected the long history of massacres by paramilitaries, symbolized the message mobilization.

As in the march last February 4 against FARC, were thousands of white shirts. However, as announced by the Movement of Victims of State Crimes, which organized the day, joined other colors associated with the history of violence in Colombia.

They were yellow of the Patriotic Union, the black of photos with the faces of the missing and kidnapped, the purple of mourning for widows and displaced some red and some unions and groups of university students. The latter, more bent on attacking with their slogans on the Government to pay tribute to the victims.

One of the women who paraded took a wooden frame on which rested a few bones which, he said, accounted for the way in which the missing were in the graves dug by the paramilitaries.

They, by thousands

The number of women who marched yesterday, not only in Bogota but in several cities, revealed one of the most harsh realities of armed conflict. They are, as the Commission has found for Reparation and Reconciliation (CNRR), which they loaded with the weight of violence. "In the name of peace made war. FARC, AUC, what shame!" Said a banner carrying the members of the National Network of Women Displaced.

The organizers of the march were not the first to arrive at the Plaza de Bolivar. When the race progressed on Seventh them 'slipped' on the Avenue 19 and Avenue 13 other marches teachers, officials from entities such as the Seine, university students and displaced. In Ivan Cepeda, the spokesman for the Movement of Victims, what touched both said that this was "a real blow opinion to the Government." Then the march again seems more political.

But among the crowd, two women carrying a cardboard sad face with the photo of Jorge Enrique Vargas, a driver for 33 years since the April 29, 2003 was retained by the paramilitaries in St. Maarten (Target).

Many of those who came to the Plaza de Bolivar unwittingly stepped silhouettes of hundreds of men and women made with white ribbon. Each represented a missing person or a victim of violence. Like reminding Angela Maria Murillo, disappeared in the capture of the Palace of Justice in November 1985.

Matches were felt

Around noon, the mayor of Bogotá, Samuel Moreno, marched from the downtown park Santander accompanied by several of his secretaries office. "This is a new call for tolerance, peace, coexistence and a message to sympathize with the families of the missing, killed, those who are abducted, with whom today unfortunately are not with their families," he said.

Besides, Senator Pole Gustavo Petro marched with a banner on which was the Liberal leader Jorge Eliecer Gaitan, which he described as "one of the major victims of the violence of state." Nearby was the former governor of Valle Angelino Garzon, who described the mobilization as a sign that society rejects violence regardless of their origin.

In the midst of the siege of the media, the liberal Senator Juan Fernando Cristo said that the participation of people served to put the victims' place of their rightful privilege. "

Neither rain, nor the group of youths after 3 o'clock tried to disrupt the tranquillity on the street with 17 career Seventh attacked members of the security forces, managed to tarnish the peaceful march for the victims.

While not as multitudinous as was done against the FARC, was moving in every city where sympathized with those who have suffered the conflict.

Four testimonies of the march

Flower Galician, a farmer of Antioquia:

"La Esperanza-in Carmen de Viboral, Antioquia, was a quiet lane, but the June 21, 1996 reached Ramon Isaza supported by the military and began to take people. Took my husband, two brothers, one .... premium to 15 families. Did we recovered from the entire world and we get Isaza we received, but said they did not buried people, but that threw into the river. "

Maria Elena Barrera, the mother of a militant of the UP

"My only son, Jose Barrera Carrero Sunday, has been kidnapped, tortured and murdered on April 7, 1992, when he was 26 years. Studied systems engineering and was the UP, that was his crime. For four days its disappearance found his body was covered with the face, hands tied behind his back and feet tied. had two shots to the head. " (Bucaramanga)

Deisy wants to see his daughter

"A group of men with weapons arrived at the house of my daughter in a car, asking for her and her husband. He escaped, but she embarked on the carrier. This happened on April 4, 2002 in Puente pump ( Riohacha), where my daughter lived Zenith del Carmen. "Since then, I do not know anything about it and anguished that has kept me all these years. whom I ask to have his life respected."

Nancy Jimenez lost his daughter in Buenaventura:

"My daughter Katherine Soto still alive, and had to sepultarla in August. I do not need money, only justice. Ella, aged 21, student of Bachelor of Social Sciences, came out on the first morning of August for the reservation of San Cipriano, in Buenaventura. after I received a call from the Army. They told me that he died in a confrontation, "Nancy Jimenez.

[Judi Lynn]

115. More from 'El Tiempo' on the march, March 6th:

March 6, 2008

So was the way in the country's main cities

In some of them, the call had an effect much smaller than the past February 4. In others there was symbolic acts in tribute to the victims.



Pereira

Participants in the march lucieron shirts of all colors. Some were dressed in black representation in mourning, sadness and distress for the thousands of crimes committed by paramilitaries and state agents, and who are still unpunished.

The pereiranos also protested against the deaths of the 11 deputies in the Valley, the social cleansing that was generated in Pereira at the end of last decade and the killings of union leaders, among others.

University students were able to pass their slogans chanted many of the walkers: "Rescue military, no. Humanitarian agreement, yes," exclamaban. Also arengaron against violations of rights.

From the windows and balconies, people pulled out handkerchiefs and flags to show solidarity with the demonstration citizen.

Manizales

About 3 thousand people participated in the march. The demonstration came from Cable and ended at the Plaza de Bolivar. When booted, the weather helped more people to join, but a persistent and heavy rain prompted many to leave the demonstration to take refuge.

In his point of arrival, a group of about 150 people continued with harangues against the crimes committed by paramilitary groups, the impunity of the Justice and Peace Law, the extermination of the Patriotic Union and the Democratic Security policy.

The demonstration was led by a family of displaced Samana (Caldas), where guerrillas operate from the front 47 of the FARC and the AUC demobilized Magdalena Medio. "One of my sons was used by the Army to military intelligence and the" paras "killed a cousin" was Luis Alonso Garcia, who lives with her six children in Manizales.

Barranquilla

The Plaza of peace was again filled with voices condemning the thousands of victims who had left the violence in the region.

The large tour, which started at 10:15 in the morning from the park cemetery Universal, it took 45 minutes. Except for a few skirmishes with some demonstrators who protest painted graffiti on the walls of commercial premises, there were no facts to regret.

The names and pictures of Alfredo Correa De Andreis, Manuel Espinosa, Lisandro Zapata Vargas, his brother Miguel Angel, Pedro Perez Orozco, Jose Antequera, Victor Mieles, among others, to be seen and heard again, recordándolos as genuine martyrs of the conflict.

One of the images that stood in the mobilization was to Iveth War Jimenez, a 16-year-old who disappeared on December 17, 2001. Marbel Jimenez, a mother of the girl, displayed a banner with his picture and the legend, 'Where is
Iveth? '. Just know that the paramilitaries took her and five companions.

The concentration in the Plaza de la Paz drew attention a trio who represented the late Jaime Garzón, as embodied his character's embolador 'Humberto De la Calle.

"This is a tribute to this big comedy, humorismo and journalism in Colombia," said one of the actors.

After many speeches on a stage with a poor amplification, the march disbanded toward 1:15 in the afternoon.

Medellin

Members of the entities of victims of displacements, disappearances and massacres led dressed in black, and in complete silence with banners calling for the truth, justice and reparation. They carried addition altarpieces with photos of those who lost loved ones.

Then followed them chirimías, youth groups, unions and students who shouted to the whole lung against impunity and against the alliance between military and political "paras".

In the tumult was a large group of officials from the Department with the Governor Luis Alfredo Ramos at the helm, accompanied by the political Cesar Perez. The reaction of the youth group that marched in front of him was taken away. Later, appeared graffiti which read: "Ramos paramilitary outside."

The analyst Claudia Lopez recently questioned the choice of Ramos with a lot of votes and influence of this AUC announced that the demand for libel and slander.

Amid the ongoing TIME knew testimonies of people who were intimidated not to attend. Specifically, the District March 8.

Cucuta

Contrary to what happened last February 4, just congregated around 3 thousand people, mostly representatives of trade unions, universities and organizations defending human rights.

The rain was accompanied by much of the journey, which began at 10 am at the Bolivar Park and ended in Santander Park, where the concentration lasted until 12:30 pm

The mayor of Cucuta, Maria Eugenia Riascos, who led the march in the capital nortesantandereana took as spokesman and asked to remind all that violence robbed them.

"We must also remind our abducted from the police, the army, parliamentarians, Ingrid Betancourt, all women ...", he said.

For its part, Sandra Guevara, general coordinator of the National Movement of War Victims and organizer of the march in Cúcuta called dignity to the victims and make a tribute.

"Today, the paramilitaries, head Mancuso, cry and justifies any crime committed against the civilian population. We want to tell you that this is not the truth, the truth that we are the victims, we ask and we demand the right to be heard , "said Guevara.

Bucaramanga

The sky plomizo covering all morning yesterday to the capital santandereana to 2:00 pm Dropped in a strong gust downpour that threatened the progress of the victims from violence.

But St. Peter, in the long run, not aguó mobilization. About 2:30 p.m. Rain stopped and what appeared raquíticas two concentrations in the park, a St. Pius, in the west, and the other at the entrance of the UIS, north-as if by magic will be strengthened and began to fill the streets.

About 3:30, the two marches converged in the city centre and it is estimated that no fewer than 15 thousand people joined their voices in protest against the crimes of the paramilitaries and the complicity of certain sectors of the state. About 4:00 pm on, in the Luis Carlos Galan began a mitín in which stood slogans against the government of Alvaro Uribe.

Arauca

A large segment of society araucana went to the streets to protest against the various manifestations of violence. From 10 am, some sectors led by the Catholic Church marched through the main streets of the city with white handkerchiefs and flags of Colombia.

At noon, arrived delegations from various municipalities and also took to the streets. The latter was much more extensive because many people who joined had already gone in the morning. Emphasis was placed on the active participation of teachers, female heads of household and displaced population.

In El Amparo, Venezuelan population bordering Arauca, a large number of Colombians and Venezuelans decided to march to protest the wave of violence and the Government's actions in that country. They were joined chavistas so-called 'light', a political and cultural movement, which defends President Hugo Chavez of the alleged assault of Colombia.

http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/2008-03-07/ARTICULO-WEB-NOTA_INTERIOR-3990085.html

[Judi Lynn]

116. Photos of the march, from 'El Tiempo," Colombia:

Bogota
Ivan Camilo Gonzalez
The seventh became one of the main ways of collection for demonstrators. (translation problem)

[Judi Lynn]

117. More photos from yesterday's demonstration in Colombia:

[Judi Lynn]

119. More on that REAL peace march yesterday:

Colombia: Thousands Come Out for Anti-Paramilitary March
Written by Helda Martínez*
Friday, 07 March 2008

Bogota, Colombia (IPS) - "I will march against the members of the security forces who have betrayed the honour of the military and the police, and have betrayed their fatherland, by selling themselves out to paramilitaries and drug traffickers to serve their interests," said Colombian Senator Juan Manuel Galán in a speech given at the spot where his father was assassinated in 1989.

He was addressing hundreds of protesters on their way to take part in Thursday’s demonstration that paid "homage to the victims of paramilitarism, parapolitics and crimes of the state" in more than 20 Colombian cities and another 100 around the world.

The peaceful nationwide demonstration took place without incident. But it basically went unreported by the mainstream media, by contrast with the heavy international coverage of the global Feb. 4 march against the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) guerrillas.
(snip)

Between 1982 and 2005, nearly four million people were forcibly displaced and lost their land, and at least 15,000 people fell victim to forced disappearance, according to a local human rights group, Justice and Peace.
(snip)

The far-right paramilitary militias, which in the 1980s joined the security forces in their fight against the leftist rebel groups that emerged in 1964, have been blamed by the United Nations for the lion’s share of the human rights crimes committed in the armed conflict.
(snip)

Of the 15,000 victims of forced disappearance reported between 1982 and 2005, at least 3,000 were buried in common graves, some of which have begun to be exhumed. It is impossible to know how many were thrown into rivers, a common paramilitary practice.

"Disappearance is a monstrous crime," former Bogotá mayor Antanas Mockus told IPS. "That is why…we started this march at the Magdalena river," he said, after accompanying hundreds of mainly indigenous and black people displaced by the war on the three-day march from Flandes.

"We were inspired by an audiovisual testimony by the artist Clemencia Echeverri, who recently showed, in a sophisticated Bogotá art gallery, a night-time recording taken from the two shores of the Cauca river" in the northwestern province of Antioquia, said Mockus. (Antioquia is a paramilitary stronghold.)

"On the recording, you hear the sound of the water flowing, and above that you hear the screams of peasant farmers and chainsaws running, and you can see people with sticks, fishing pieces of clothing out of the river," he added.

According to testimony from numerous survivors and members of paramilitary groups, the latter frequently used chainsaws to cut their victims up alive.
(snip)

"The paramilitaries have perpetrated more than 3,500 massacres and stolen more than six million hectares of land, and since their demobilisation they have killed 600 people a year. They also achieved control over 35 percent of the seats in Congress," said the Movement of Victims of Crimes of the State (MOVICE), which organised Thursday’s nationwide march.

Guillermo Cano, director of the El Espectador newspaper, was murdered in 1986 after denouncing, in his column, the activities of "paramilitarism and drug trafficking carried out under the complicit silence of the government."

More:
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/1170/1/

[Pavulon]

88. What makes this so wrong..

is how easy it would be to have done right. After killing communists for 50 years you think someone would get it right. IN THE OPERATIONAL SENSE.

After raiding, and GRABBING the valuable people everyone else is shot. Remember covert operation here, not legal anyway.

The valuable guys are flown or carried out and used for intelligence. Then they are shot and dumped 3 miles out. Remember these guys are hostage taking scum. They are playing in the arena.

An overt cross border raid is stupid and mickey mouse. Don't fool yourself into believing that all these players black bag and assassinate others members on a right regular basis.

They do manage to keep it out of the press.

AGAIN THIS IS NOT ADVOCACY BUT POINTING OUT HOW BAD THIS WAS HANDLED.

[bemildred]

89. Seemed very Bushlike to me, very Afghanistan.

High on bluster and sending a message and low on thought about consequences.

[Pavulon]

90. So screwed up could be a CIA op..

they had a run of bad luck for a while, while being public messes across decades.. None the less the fact this is in the news means someone really screwed up.

[bemildred]

91. LOL. Yep.

Reeks of dumbshit spook. I sort of thought they wanted it public, but that might not be so. That's sort of hard to wrap my mind around though, how could they expect something like this not to be a public spectacle? I think it was Correa that surprised them. He's pretty much kicked ass.

[Judi Lynn]

95. New guy on the block, and all. He has acquitted himself well.

[EFerrari]

106. Could you say more about that? Because I have a context problem.

lol