US Blocks Venezuelan Purchase of Food

[magbana]

Source: The Guardian

The Guardian 19 March, 2008

US blocks Venezuelan purchase of food

"The war with the US has already begun and they are blocking our purchases of food", Venezuelan Minister Ramón Rodríguez Chacín told viewers on Venezuelan TV on March 12. His statement came at a time when the US is threatening to add Venezuela to its list of "terror-sponsoring" states and some Senators are calling for a full blockade of the country.

The Venezuelan minister, speaking on the program Counter Coup in Synthesis, accused the US of blocking purchases by the government, especially of food, from foreign sources. Venezuela´s economy is essentially oil-based. It imports around 70 percent of its food products. The blocking of food supplies is just one of the methods being used by the US in its attempts to undermine the popularity of the government and destabilise the internal situation there.

Rodríguez told viewers that for some time the US has exercised an informal blockade against Venezuela. The government has also had difficulty acquiring spares for military equipment and other items important to the national interest.

This, he added, was part of the war declared by Washington on the Bolivarian Revolution and it combines with the paramilitary offensive in Venezuela and the actions of the Opposition.





Read more: http://www.cpa.org.au/garchve08/1358venez.html

---

The beginning of a Cuba-style blockade by US of Venezuela? Hard to believe that Venezuela with its oil money would have trouble buying food from foreign sources ,but the US has close to 50 years experience in forcing both foreign governments and corporations to participate in their genocidal blockade of Cuba. With the high percentage of food that Venezuela imports, this could be very serious.

[plantwomyn]

1. This couldn't have anything to do with Exxon, could it?

Duh.

[thunder rising]

2. Broken record foreing policy, do these Goddamn assholes ever read a second book on options?

[silverweb]

3. UNconscionable!

This is an act of violence against the civilian population of a sovereign, democratically elected government, and must be sanctioned by the world community!

Those of our senators pushing for this blockade must be exposed and condemned. :grr:

[superkia]

9. Its sad when the country that talks aout freedom, runs around...

and attacks any oil rich country that wont go along with the elites agenda. Its strange to say but its good that China, Russia, Iran, Iraq(WAIT, WE DESTROYED THEM) and Venezuela are standing up to those who want this new world order, where the elite enjoy everything and the rest of the world become slaves to run the world physically. Obviously this is only my opinion but I am afraid it is their agenda?

[RethugAssKicker]

4. Shit !...... There is a slow but steady effort to fuck Chavez

and the revolution taking place in South America...

[awoke_in_2003]

71. Well, it hasn't worked in Cuba...

Chavez may end up having a job for life if we keep it up.

[Rage for Order]

5. From where? When?

I read the linked article and it doesn't mention anything about what was blocked, who they were trying to buy it from, when it supposedly occurred, or anything else even remotely specific. All there is to this "report" is one man saying the US is blocking food purchases. Some details would be nice.

[Bacchus39]

6. yep, same here. nothing at all to back up the accusation

Venezuela imports 70% of its food. thats in the article. they have had problems of chronic food shortages. so when there are problems at home, who you gonna blame?

[Dreamer Tatum]

10. Shhh...you'll wake them

The Chavez-tinians would boycott blue crayons if a Venezuelan told them the sky was red.

[Judi Lynn]

13. Might as well cough up some proof DU'ers are idealogues who don't care about the facts.

There is absolutely no doubt the serious posters at DU probably know a hell of a lot more about the situation than you do.

[Dreamer Tatum]

15. Then how come no one mentioned this "news" before? nt

[Judi Lynn]

17. Who has to mention it before it becomes "news?" It was "news" in Venezuela.

Take that up with your corporate media.

[Dreamer Tatum]

25. My corporate media?

Your claim was that there are people here who know a lot more about Venezuela than I do. Believe me, I will grant you that point.
I would just like to see more substantiation before I'm willing to condemn. "I wouldn't put it past them" doesn't pass the burden
of proof test. Nor does "How do you know they're not?" I don't think that's unreasonable.

[The Doctor.]

56. I take this quite rational approach;

I balance "I wouldn't put it past them", "We would do it and have before", "* is hostile to them", and "how do you know they're not?" against "Why would anyone lie about something that serious?" and I come up with "This is likely."

Connaître?

[Dreamer Tatum]

66. That calculus is what many have been reduced to...sadly enough. Point taken. nt

[The Doctor.]

80. Sad? No. French... yes.

[KingOfLostSouls]

19. freeper?

[Dreamer Tatum]

21. Nope.

I'm sorry...I just don't see a lot of substantiation in the article.

[bitchkitty]

82. You have to hear it on Fox before you believe it?

I suspect that we'll be hearing more of this kind of news - the kind that doesn't make it to your television.

I also suspect that you and yours, when you hear it, will stick your fingers in your ears and sing, "la la la! la la la!"

[PVnRT]

87. Spot on, there, with the ad hominem attack

Instead of falling back on the usual freeper accusation, why don't you post some facts?

The poster is correct - there is no substantiation IN THE ARTICLE about blocked food shipments; why is it wrong to want more information?

[Winterblues]

93. But that isn't what he claimed at all

He claimed people here at DU were:
"The Chavez-tinians would boycott blue crayons if a Venezuelan told them the sky was red."
Where in that statement is there anything about lacking information. what there is, is an attack on all here at DU that support what Venezuela is doing..

[Bacchus39]

16. lets hear about it then

n/t

[Hugabear]

83. Don't worry, I'm sure Condaliar Rice will come along to reassure you

You'll probably get a statement from *'s State Department categorically denying this story. That should make you feel all better, right?

[Truth2Tell]

63. Here's a report from November

suggesting that this has been part of the U.S. destabilization plan all along:

.. U.S. TO LAUNCH THE 2ND COUP D’ETAT in VENEZUELA!...

The Washington-spawned plan is also bent on blocking major routes to cut off distribution of food supplies in order to bring the population to its knees and with the hope they will demand Chavez’ resignation.

http://eldib.wordpress.com/2007/11/13/us-to-launch-the-2nd-coup-d

Pro-Chavez site. Certainly not definitive, but it's more corroboration.

[Scooter24]

67. I agree...

All I got from the article was a one-sided, no-source opinion piece that spent most of the article bashing the US.

It's not even news-worthy.

[GreenTea]

76. k & r

[pbca]

7. Dumbest Move This Week

Can't be the dumbest ever - this is the * admin but...

China would LOVE to have Venezuela's oil, the price doesn't bother them in the least and while China doesn't have alot of food to export, no one would dare block China's food imports so they can sail tankers full of food to Venezuela and then head back to China with them full of oil.

When you do the math this amounts to nothing more than an attempt by * to further reduce the US supply of Oil and Natural gas.

Chavez isn't going to take it lying down, and he's not going to roll over for * either.

[Judi Lynn]

8. This is great. Read this from the same article:

Plan Colombia is part of the US’s bogus war on drugs, where billions of dollars are given to puppet governments to fight progressive forces in their countries.

The Colombian government has since apologised for its actions on the sovereign territory of Ecuador, but diplomatic relations with Colombia are still cool after the bombing of its territory and the deaths (in fact cold-blooded assassination) of around 21 people in a FARC camp, including three Mexican students.

The FARC members killed in the March 1 attack include commander and international spokesperson Raúl Reyes, who was a member of the organisation’s secretariat. They were involved in the humanitarian exchange of prisoners in Ecuador. In the previous week FARC had unilaterally released four prisoners, demonstrating good will and a genuine desire for peace.

On the day of the bombing, three personal envoys of French President Nicolas Sarkozy were in Ecuador and due to visit the camp for negotiations for the release of Ingrid Betancourt who holds dual French and Colombian citizenship.

The Interpress Service News Agency reports that the envoys were phoned on the morning of March 1 by Colombian Peace Commissioner Luis Carlos Restrepo who warned them not to go to the meeting with Reyes as they would be in danger.

Since the attack, more information has come to light indicating that the precision bombing was a well planned, pre-meditated and high tech operation. Questions are being raised about the capability of Colombian forces to have executed such a strike without the involvement of the US.
(snip)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BOGUS! Yay! Whoopee. Tell us something we DIDN'T know!

Thanks, magbana!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I'm looking forward to see how _Bush tries to cover this up. He's been hammering Cuba behind the world's back ever since he got into office.

He's been living like this for a very long time, as illustrated clearly in this photo of the jerk from his skool daze:

[OKthatsIT]

72. Bush cocaine cartel in Columbia...Since 1965.

[The Doctor.]

11. Idiots. Keep pushing the anti-US sentiments.

They're virtually ensuring that Chavez will remain in power. Is that their goal?

[Bacchus39]

14. read the article. there is nothing there. I mean really nothing at all

no specifics whatsoever.

[The Doctor.]

28. I did read it. It's an accusation that I have little doubt is well-founded.

Are you saying it's not?

I could believe that too until we had official confirmation from the BA. That'll take a WH reporter asking the question.

We'll see.

[Rage for Order]

29. What evidence in the article leaves you with little doubt that it's well-founded?

I mean, aside from the one guy from Venezuela saying it was so. I didn't see anything even remotely substantive.

[The Doctor.]

31. Because that's our typical foreign policy tact for upstart populists.

Duh.

Sometimes it helps to know how the world works... it tells you what's likely and what's not. A blockade by the US is more than feasible.

We've been blocking other stuff, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/article?f=/c/a/2006/10/19/MNGA0LRS7I1.DTL, why not food?

[Rage for Order]

33. Your link isn't working

Regardless, the fact that something isn't unreasonable doesn't mean that it occurred. I wouldn't be surprised if this report were true, but I'm not going to take it on faith simply because our current (mis)administration has committed other unseemly acts.

[Bacchus39]

34. neither is his argument

n/t

[The Doctor.]

49. LMAO! Stop being a dumb-ass.

It was a serious accusation by the Minister of Interior and Justice. A high state official would seldom voice an unfounded charge, especially regarding Venezuela with the current state of affairs. What would they stand to gain whose certainly immediate losses would be worth it?

Now, I'm open to the possibility that the article is fraudulent, and I may have placed faith in the title 'Guardian' because of my experience with 'The Guardian UK', but the same question comes up; Why a bullshit story that would instantly tank their credibility the moment it was contradicted by Venezuela?

So, sure, I'm placing my faith in the odds which tell me that a)we DO do that shit. -and- b)it's a serious allegation.

"Broken argument"?

Hardly... for that I'd have to be arguing. I'm just telling you why I can believe it. I'm sure it'll come out in the wash.

And no... calling you a 'dumbass' isn't arguing, it's just being observant. :P


The link is working just fine for me;
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/article?f=/c/a/2006/10/19/MNGA0LRS7I1.DTL

[beastbitten]

55. It's not the Guardian UK. Not at all.

The Guardian
The weekly newspaper of the
Communist Party of Australia

http://www.cpa.org.au/guardian/guardian.html

[The Doctor.]

59. I know it's not TGUK.

So do they have a history of false reporting? Or are they one of the lone voices for otherwise blacked-out leftist regimes?

Do you think that the US media is going to show us being the bad guys to Venezuela?

Ummm... fuck no.


Again... it's possible that the Minister of the Interior is fucking around, and so long as no one else picks it up, he has as little to lose as he does to gain. What's the point?

We'll see in the next few days. If no one picks up the story, I'll consider it dead.


Meanwhile, I'll just remind you; "We do shit like that".

[dweller]

35. here's the link

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/article?f=/c/a/2006/10/19/MNGA0LRS7I1.DTL

U.S. blocks Spain's sale of military planes to Venezuela


there was a comma at the end of above posted link.
dp

[Rage for Order]

38. That says nothing about blocking food sales

I understand the point the poster is trying to make, but there is a big difference between blocking a sale of military equipment, even non-combat equipment, and blocking the sale of food.

[Bacchus39]

40. yes, and if you consider the title of the article then........n/t

n

[dweller]

44. it never purported to say anything on blocking food

poster said "We've been blocking other stuff" and provided a link w/ a typo, aka, a simple error.

if you and your tagteam member were to read the link, it will explain it to you both.
dp

[Rage for Order]

46. I'm well aware of what it said

"We've been blocking other stuff". So what? I have no problem with blocking sales of military equipment to any country for any reason, no matter how arbitrary the decision. Do you think it would be in America's best interests to promote sales of military equipment to Venezuela given the level of discourse between Chavez and Bush?

The indignation expressed in this thread concerns America's supposed "blocking of Venezuelan food purchase". I've yet to see any evidence of that. Call me old fashioned, but when one party accuses another party of a particular action I like to see proof to back up the accusation prior to believing it.

[The Doctor.]

53. LOL... considering our current HOSTILE STANCE on Venezuela, I'm sure you're quite glad

we're keeping them from becoming better armed.

After all, you want our invasion to succeed, don't you?

[Rage for Order]

57. Dude, what are you talking about?

I've said all along, I wouldn't put it past this administration to do what the OP accuses it of doing, but some details would be nice. When did this occur, who was Venezuela trying to buy food from, where did the US block the sale, etc. None of these details are addressed.

[The Doctor.]

62. I totally agree. We need more info.

And I've been looking.

I'd just be surprised if this administration didn't pursue that course.

[The Doctor.]

50. Now you're being a dumb-ass... I said the same with "other stuff".

C'mon... is English really that difficult that you interpret "other stuff" to mean "the same thing"?

Of course the link had nothing to do with blocking food sales... it deals with other stuff. :eyes:

[Rage for Order]

54. Was that really necessary?

I don't believe I was being a "dumb-ass". I confirmed that I saw the point you were trying to make re: "other stuff", but the "other stuff" in this instance happened to be military transport planes. Given Chavez's hostility (not without merit) to our current administration, would you really expect the US to approve the sale of military equipment to them? We don't sell military equipment to North Korea, but neither do we block the sale of food to them. Why would we treat Venezuela, another Bush bogeyman, any worse?

[The Doctor.]

61. You corrected it in another post I hadn't read.

Ummm... you're trying to help convince me the story you're so dubious of has merit?

Let's look at this;

"Why would we treat Venezuela, another Bush bogeyman, any worse (than N.Korea)?"

Let's think about that... uhhh... let's see... maybe it would have something to do with one having the military capacity to eat a blockade like cotton-candy?

Oh, wait... let's go with... ONE of them has nice juicy oil reserves that our corporation/government is desperate to get control of?

How about both?

Think things through man.

[Rage for Order]

64. There won't be any invasion of Venezuela

When is Bush going to begin the invasion? He has 10 months left in office, and all of our troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan. How exactly is Bush going to invade Venezuela and seize its natural resources by next January? Is he trying to keep Venezuela weak in the event that another neo-con gains power down the road and decides to invade Venezuela then?

[The Doctor.]

81. Since when do the petrol companies care how long * has...

:shrug:

[Viva_La_Revolution]

12. They should stop selling us their oil.

I bet the food shipments will get through then.

[Pavulon]

22. NO then they will starve as their single thread economy fails..

[Viva_La_Revolution]

30. China would be more than happy to take it. nt

[Pavulon]

32. fungible

ignoring the fact they cant refine it and would have to move it across a huge freakin ocean...

that would free up the oil they would buy and release it to us.

it does not work that way. almost a pure commodity

[Viva_La_Revolution]

43. Venezuela and China sign oil deal

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4123465.stm
2004

Venezuela's state-run oil firm demands payment in euros
http://www.kansascity.com/business/story/537088.html
Tue, Mar. 18, 2008

Since we don't use Euros, I'm guessing he has other customers in the pipeline too.

[tpsbmam]

18. Do these assholes have to piss off to the point of war...

every single human in the freaking world? They should already be standing trial in the Hague and yet here they are, fucking up everything that they haven't fucked up before. Unbelievable.

[jwirr]

20. The end of Food for Peace and the beginning of Starvation for Oil. nt

[Pavulon]

24. at $100 + a bbl a fair tactic for all petro states..

we increase diversion to biofuel or they reset pricing. win win for us.

[NickB79]

47. Increase diversion to biofuels?

Then WE wouldn't have any food to eat either. Wonderful.

[Zorra]

23. I am right now more ashamed of my government than ever before in my lifetime,

and that includes 8 disgusting years of Reagan and 7 plus even more disgusting years of George the Shithead.

[Bacchus39]

26. the only thing disgusting is how you can even believe this article

which doesn't contain a shred of evidence or information justifying the headline. pitiful and disgusting.

[Dhalgren]

36. When a minister from a foreign country goes on national TV and

makes a statement, very often the minister is given the benefit of the doubt. Since the US has used food and other commodities as blackmail and punishment in the past, it is an added measure of credibility to the report. Very often, because of the "Pravda-like" nature of our media, we get reports and partial accounts from foreign sources and find later that they are substantiated. If this report proves untrue, we all will acknowledge it and move on. You have little or no credibility, here, until you are known better or prove yourself. So try and follow along with the discussion and don't get excited - we will see what we will see...

[Bacchus39]

39. even the US gave phony evidence for Iraq, that is the standard we set

this guy and/or the article didn't even provide that

[ronnie624]

77. Recently, you posted an article that offered far less than this OP.

Doubtless, you were very pleased with yourself.

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3231144>

What's with all the hypocrisy?

[Judi Lynn]

79. Thanks. That one did take us all to the Twilight Zone, didn't it?

Nice and pompous condemnation from one who shouldn't be flinging stones.

The flying feet of Peru's President Alan Garcia have probably beguiled him and stolen his common sense, and he's left grasping at any shred of an article about Peru: a witless Garcia love slave. It's happened to mightier men than he.

[Igel]

92. The story you dismiss fairly well

dripped detail in comparison to the one you believe.

Critical thinking said to doubt the one about money being smuggled to support leftists in Peru. It's not an implausible story, but one that's not entirely plausible, either. Details and more evidence--verifiable evidence--is needed.

In this case, we have a story that's no implausible, but also not entirely plausible. How would we block it? Threaten another country with an embargo ... like we do with Cuba, with legislative backing? Some of that is secret, but much is very, very public: The companies so threatened tend to dislike being threatened.

We have corroboration from a plan that was never verified, released only in Spanish (and, oddly, in English back-translation), which mentions blocking "routes". This also requires clarification, if only a single example.

So, in the absence of credibility, we have appeals to authority and ad hominem attacks.

[Rage for Order]

42. Like Colin Powell at the UN circa 2002? n/t

[Dhalgren]

84. But according to you , you would have believed him because he

had "evidence". Sometimes you have to look at the bigger picture, use your experience (if you have any), take history into consideration (if you know any history) and then make your own conclusions. You really can make your own conclusions, it isn't that hard - it's scary, I'll grant you that - but one day you'll be able to decide things for yourself and won't come off so silly.

:hi:

[Wednesdays]

85. And isn't what Colin did the exception, rather than the rule?

:shrug:

That is at least part of what was outrageous about his UN speech.

[Peace Patriot]

27. I figured, when the London court ruled against Exxon Mobil, Rumsfeld & co.

would find other methods of economic warfare/destabilization. They are carrying out this...

"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


Economic warfare, then: "swift action" by the U.S. in support of "friends and allies" in South America. The Bushites don't have any "friends and allies" in South America, except the fascist thugs running Colombia, and the USAID-NED and covert budget-funded thugs planning coups in Venezuela and Bolivia, and probably also in Ecuador and Argentina. My pick for their first military move was Bolivia--where white separatists are trying to split off the gas/oil rich provinces from the central government of Evo Morales-- the first indigenous president of Bolivia (a largely indigenous country) and a Chavez ally--in order to deny the benefit of those resources to the poor majority. But Rumsfeld & co. decided to try to draw Venezuela and Ecuador into a hot war with Colombia first--by the excessive provocation of bombing Ecuador and destroying the hostage release effort and the hopes for peace in the 40+ year Colombian civil war. They failed--due to Chavez's extraordinary savvy, I believe, and his greater experience on the world scene compared to newcomer Rafael Correa, president of Ecuador. He backed Correa--who was extremely angry--by sending troops to Venezuela's border with Colombia, in concert with Correa sending troops to Ecuador's border, to let Correa know that he was not alone (to prevent rash action)--then talked him out of retaliating. That's my read on the situation. It was a Rumsfeld war trap, and they then would have been ill prepared to help Morales when the separatists declare their "independence" this May (which I think is very likely) and request "swift action" by the U.S. in support of their separatist state.

There are many reasons they hate Chavez, and one of them is that he has pulled these countries together in a strong alliance (Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina). He hasn't just insisted that oil corps operating in his country must provide a fair share of the profits for social justice and local development, he has helped build a coalition of countries committed to social justice, all sitting on oil, gas, mineral and other resources that global corporate predators want control of. And, poor babies, they are used to having U.S.-backed fascist governments just hand it over to them. They blame this new attitude in South America on Chavez, although it really is the result of a vast social movement that put Chavez in office (and managed to keep him there despite a U.S.-backed coup attempt), and that also put leftists in office in Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina, Nicaragua, Brazil, Uruguay and Chile (and almost put one in office in Mexico). The Bushites have been trying to "divide and conquer" all this for some time, but have utterly failed at it. Now they've going to try violence.

Another reason they hate Chavez is that he really was elected and then re-elected, in transparent elections, and has a 70% approval rating. Bush wasn't elected, either time, and has an 18% approval rating. Another is that he is peaceful and scrupulously lawful. They lie about him relentlessly, but anyone who knows the facts, knows what their accusations are worth.

These are evil dudes running out government, and one very, very evil dude plotting Oil War II, on their behalf--the "retired" Rumsfeld. I knew the moment he published his op-ed in the Washington Post, there would be major trouble before this year is out. And it's already started.

The Exxon Mobil case is interesting because they walked out on a deal that involved Venezuela getting a 60% share of its own oil. Norway's Statoil, France's Total, British BP and even Chevron agreed to it. It's a fair deal--a compromise. But Exxon Mobil doesn't want a fair deal. It wants all the profits--in Venezuela and the Andes region (Ecuador also has lots of oil, and is a member of OPEC like Venezuela). So they went into court--without even notifying Venezuela--and sought to freeze $12 billion in Venezuelan assets. This has little to do with the 60/40 oil deal, and much to do with destabilizing Venezuela, on the gamble that Rumsfeld's plans to destroy Venezuela's democracy--and the other allied democracies--will pay off. And they did this almost simultaneously with--just weeks before--Colombia/U.S. bombed Ecuador.

This is it, my friends. This is Oil War II--the backup plan to nuking Iran (which China is blocking, in my opinion). The Venezuelan minister is not kidding. The U.S. is intending a war. That is what all the demonization of Chavez has been building up to --to keep North Americans asleep and not caring, while they make their moves, and commit the U.S. to hostilities--which they've actually already done with the Colombia attack on Ecuador, using U.S. bombs and surveillance, and probably U.S. aircraft.

I suspect that the food the Bushites are blockading is from Colombia. But it could also be food from Argentina (which recently made an oil for beef deal with Venezuela). Argentina is a ways away from Venezuela, so the blockade could be by sea, or at the Panama Canal. There is no info about this yet at www.venezuelanalysis.com, which keeps pretty current on things like this.

[Judi Lynn]

41. Whoops, dupe. Sorry. n/t

[Judi Lynn]

37. March 18, 2008 Dogs of War Gathering in the Andes -- and in Washington

March 18, 2008

Dogs of War Gathering in the Andes -- and in Washington

Global Research, March 15, 2008


With dizzying speed--and rank hypocrisy--the United States is escalating its war of words with Venezuela.

On Friday, a group of Republican lawmakers proposed a resolution that calls on the Bush regime to declare Venezuela "a state sponsor of terrorism."

Hyped by Florida representatives Connie Mack and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a staunch apologist for Cuban neofascist thugs Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carriles, the congressional text, according to the Miami Herald cites,

...international agreements committing nations to fight terrorism that Venezuela is allegedly violating by backing the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, which has waged a guerrilla war against the government there for more than four decades. It also lists FARC abuses, including kidnappings and drug trafficking.

Were Bush to list Venezuela as a "terrorist sponsor," crippling economic sanctions could be imposed as a prelude to a military intervention to topple the Bolivarian socialist Republic.
(snip)

As Plan Colombia falters, oil prices soar and the U.S. economy "heads south," Latin America is rejecting the "Washington consensus" of IMF-World Bank-dictated neoliberal "reforms." Predicated on NED-guided "managed democracy" and vicious resource extraction schemes guaranteed by U.S.-friendly "strong states," the Bush regime is preparing the ground for full-blown political destabilization and possible military intervention across the Andes to annihilate any potential "threat" of a socialist alternative.

Dangerous times for the capitalist masters call forth desperate measures. Washington is seeking a regional adversary to blame for its own bankrupt policies and Hugo Chávez and the Bolivarian socialist government are being made to fit the frame.

More:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8347

[ConcernedCanuk]

48. USA seems to be calling anyone they don't like as "supporters of terrorism" or similar

.
.
.

heck

after 911 did not the USA accuse Canada (who refused to be a part of the invasion and occupation of Iraq) of letting the 911 bombers through OUR border to get to the USA?

USA is willing to throw dirt on anyone they can, including their closest ally.

So I'm not surprised to see the Dem candidates throwing dirt on each other.

They are, after all,

"USAmericans"

[pingzing58]

45. Starving people will remember who fed them in a time of need. To do otherwise is foolish, foolhardy

and frankly evil. Only small men with dispoportunate egos make such decisions. Instead of winning over hearts and minds, they do exactly what caused a failed policy in the middle east. When will they ever learn....

[Rosa Luxemburg]

51. US, the policeman of the world, Big Brother?

I guess Venezuela doesn't have Contras?

[mrJJ]

52. Food for Oil

Bubble Boy is just openning up the door for China to make a new energy friend.... Of all the idiotic things to stop sales on.. FOOD! That will really help America gain respect..

Food for Oil... where have I heard that before?

[HuffleClaw]

58. meep

horrifying. bush and his evil minions clearly will not be restrained by anything.

[McCamy Taylor]

60. Would Spain or Brazil or China or New Zealand honor such a blockade?

[marmar]

65. Typical US foreign policy.....Starve people because you don't like their country's leader.

Sick beyond comprehension.

[SpikeTss]

68. That's a good policy!

It finally disproves what the critics of our foreign policies often claim: That we are kinder, gentler Nazis.
Soon people in Latin America will love us for our struggle to promote freedom, fairness and democracy.

Soon the Venezuelan people will love us like Afghans and Iraqis already do!

[defendandprotect]

69. The Superpower Bully moves again . . .

what vicious pricks these people in the WH are . .. !!!

[GreenTea]

70. BushCo: Break them any way we can. Yet, Communist China's goods & labor are OK...They want that OIL!

Venezuelan OIL - And the "third world's" cheap labor for the corporates, in order to keep another way of life from socialism, you see...(Oh what a bad, dirty word they told us socialism is, that these same corporate republicans have instilled into us from birth). Keep it from spreading, they tell us....cuz it's real and happening....While the corporate media goes right on along lying with BushCo...Well, the republicans do own all five of the major news networks as well as our electronic voting machines! What's to stop them?

Fuck corporate BushCo!!

[kelligesq]

73. Write your f____ing senator to stop starving those people. AND TO IMPEACH the AHOLES

[kelligesq]

74. Kick and reccomend

[LaPera]

75. Kick!

:kick:

[Judi Lynn]

78. Too bad DU'ers who crabbed about the article didn't feel directed to read the entire thing.

They could have picked up some information they've been avoiding learning:

On the day of the bombing, three personal envoys of French President Nicolas Sarkozy were in Ecuador and due to visit the camp for negotiations for the release of Ingrid Betancourt who holds dual French and Colombian citizenship.

The Interpress Service News Agency reports that the envoys were phoned on the morning of March 1 by Colombian Peace Commissioner Luis Carlos Restrepo who warned them not to go to the meeting with Reyes as they would be in danger.
(snip)

This factual information flies in the face of the whopper Alvaro Uribe told Ecuador's President, Rafael Correa when he said originally the reason they were in Ecuador is because they were being shot at, and pursued these rebels to their hideout. His lie was revealed as soon as it was discovered by Ecuadorean forces that the people who were killed had been ASLEEP at the time Uribe had his people bomb the bejesus out of them with American clusterbombs.

Information on Uribe's fine country which sucks up the THIRD LARGEST FOREIGN AID PACKAGE IN THE WORLD annuallly:

In addition to receiving billions of dollars in military funding and other assistance, Colombia has sent more than 10,000 soldiers to train at the US’s notorious School of Americas (SOA). SOA Watch reports that its graduates have been involved in massacres, the killing of striking workers, assassinations, torture and other crimes.

The current head of the Colombian Army, Mario Motoya Uribe, is a former instructor at the SOA, and is reportedly associated with the paramilitary that do much of the dirty work for the Colombian government.

SOA Watch notes that nearly four million people have been displaced, mostly by the illegal paramilitary groups. "These vigilante groups, which often work in collaboration with Colombia’s military, are responsible for the ‘disappearances’ of more than 15,000 people. They have murdered more than 1,700 indigenous farmers and organisers, 2,500 union workers and nearly 5,000 members of the Union Patriótica movement. The violence has resulted in the displacement of thousands of Afro-Colombian and independent farmers from their lands. Victims of the paramilitaries are routinely tortured before being killed," SOA Watch reports.
(snip)

Link given to SOA Watch, a site you could use to learn more about Americans who have been very aware of American policy in Latin America for many years:

http://www.soaw.org/

[PVnRT]

86. There is no doubt of American crimes in Latin America

That is not under debate here, nor is our real and wrong support of any right-wing group in Colombia in the name of fighting commies or terrorists or drug lords or insert-enemy-here.

My question is, what are these food shipments that he's speaking of? The article just mentions that quick quote, then launches into the Ecuador-Colombia-Venezuela situation without expanding on it.

[Mika]

88. Interesting that doubters of this story also say that there is no extra territorial embargo on Cuba.

Their false claim: 'Cuba can trade with whom it wants except the US'.


-

[PVnRT]

89. They are?

I see no such claim in this thread.

[Mika]

90. Correct. Not on this thread. Usually on the Cuba threads. n/t

[L. Coyote]

91. Read this FIRST

to understand current Bush actions in Latin America:

George Bush Sr. May Face Charges: Conspiring to Kidnap and Murder Political Activists
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2459135

Plan Condor: Crimes Without Borders in Latin America
Marie Trigona - 12 Dec 2007 - http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/1042/1

Former military dictator Jorge Rafael Videla and 16 other military leaders in Argentina will be prosecuted on charges of conspiring to kidnap and kill political activists in a scheme known as Plan Condor, developed by Henry Kissinger and George Bush Sr., head of the CIA at the time. ......

............