ECUADOR: Manta Air Base Tied to Colombian Raid on FARC Camp (U.S. use base)

[Judi Lynn]

Source: IPS

ECUADOR: Manta Air Base Tied to Colombian Raid on FARC Camp
By Kintto Lucas

MANTA, Ecuador, Mar 21 (IPS) - Military and diplomatic sources see a link between the Manta air base, operated by the United States in Ecuadorean territory, and this month’s bombing raid by Colombia on a FARC guerrilla camp in Ecuador.

The U.S. air force was granted a 10-year concession in 1999 to use the base, located in the port city of Manta on Ecuador’s northern Pacific coast, in its counter-drug trafficking activities in the region.

A high-level Ecuadorean military officer, who preferred to remain anonymous, told IPS that "a large proportion of senior officers" in Ecuador share "the conviction that the United States was an accomplice in the attack" launched Mar. 1 by the Colombian military on a FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) camp in Ecuador, near the Colombian border.
(snip)

"Since Plan Colombia was launched in 2000, a strategic alliance between the United States and Colombia has taken shape, first to combat the insurgents and later to involve neighbouring countries in that war," said the officer. "What is happening today is a consequence of that."
(snip)

The information gathered by IPS from military and diplomatic sources indicates that the Manta air base played a role in locating, and carrying out reconnaissance of, the FARC camp in Ecuador.



Read more: http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41687

---

Manta air base, on the Pacific side of Ecuador

[Javaman]

1. Sooprise! Sooprise! Sooprise! nt

[sce56]

2. I hope that means the Empire will lose one base next year!

Ecuador's President Rafael Correa, is not a friend of the Bush Junta!

Oops too late he already said no more to that base!


Ecuador wants military base in Miami
Mon Oct 22, 2007 3:38pm BST Email | Print | Share| Single Page| Recommend (1) <-> Text <+>
By Phil Stewart

NAPLES (Reuters) - Ecuador's leftist President Rafael Correa said Washington must let him open a military base in Miami if the United States wants to keep using an air base on Ecuador's Pacific coast.

Correa has refused to renew Washington's lease on the Manta air base, set to expire in 2009. U.S. officials say it is vital for counter-narcotics surveillance operations on Pacific drug-running routes.

"We'll renew the base on one condition: that they let us put a base in Miami -- an Ecuadorean base," Correa said in an interview during a trip to Italy.

"If there's no problem having foreign soldiers on a country's soil, surely they'll let us have an Ecuadorean base in the United States."

The U.S. embassy to Ecuador says on its Web site that anti-narcotics flights from Manta gathered information behind more than 60 percent of illegal drug seizures on the high seas of the Eastern Pacific last year.

[Peace Patriot]

3. I think it's likely that U.S. aircraft were also used, and possibly U.S. special forces

or Blackwater mercenaries (in the follow-up raid across the border, in which they shot any survivors--some of the them in the back, as they ran around in their pajamas or underwear, trying to avoid death; they had all been asleep when the bombs hit).

Thanks, Bush! You have fucked up U.S./South American relations for at least a decade, if not the remainder of the century, by this despicable act--like you've fucked us over everywhere else in the world.

And I fear there is more to come--major Bushite-funded and instigated trouble in Bolivia, possibly Paraguay (election this year--leftist ahead in the polls), and again on the Venezuelan and Ecuador borders with Colombia, aimed at recovering global corporate predator control of the Andes oil fields (Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina--the Bolivarian alliance--Venezuela and Ecuador are members of OPEC and have lots of oil; Bolivia has oil and gas; Argentina--big oil find there recently, and strong ally of the other three; all committed to social justice and regional self-determination).

Ecuador's president, Rafael Correa, made it a campaign pledge to deny renewal of the U.S. military lease at Manta, when it comes up for renewal in 2009. This makes him a Bushite target, and we will no doubt soon hear that he, too, is a "dictator" (they've already started with their "terrorist-lover crap"). He is a U.S.-educated, leftist economist, elected last year. He was running neck and neck with a rightwing banana magnate for much of the campaign. Then somebody asked him, what did he think of Hugo Chavez's remark to the UN that Bush is "the devil"? His reply: "It's an insult to the devil." He is quite a witty guy (and one of the handsomest politicians on the face of the earth!). He told news media that he would agree to U.S. boots on the ground in Ecuador when the U.S. agreed to give Ecuador a U.S. base in Miami.

After his "insult to the devil" reply, his numbers soared, and he won the presidency of Ecuador with 60% of the vote! I don't know if that made the difference, but it certainly didn't hurt him.

This is what the Bush junta is up against in South America. They are hated--and all of their bribes and kneecappings and psyops and coup plots and dirty tricks and funding of rightwing groups, and use of massive amounts of our money for these purposes (through USAID-NED and covert budgets), and their $5.5 billion in military aid to Colombia, have failed. There are now leftist governments covering the continent--in Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay and Nicaragua (and, say your prayers, soon Paraguay). Colombia (the Bushites' pet torturer and murder of union leaders, peasant farmers, political leftists, human rights workers and journalists) is very isolated, and, like the Bush junta, has only dishonest elections and violent force on its side.

Paraguay is important to the Bushite oil war plans in South America for several reasons. It has a U.S. air base (near the rumored Bush Cartel purchase of 200,000 acres on a major aquifer). It borders Bolivia, where white separatists intend to split off the gas/oil rich provinces from the central government of Evo Morales--the first indigenous president of Bolivia (a mostly indigenous country)--to deny benefit of those resources to the poor majority. Paraguay might therefore be the pathway for U.S. troops to support these rightwing, racist separatists in Bolivia, if they declare their "independence" this May (which they will likely do). As such--and with the Manta, Ecuador military base under threat of non-renewal--Paraguay has great strategic value the likes of Donald Rumsfeld.

Paraguay currently has a corrupt, entrenched center/right government, which has played both sides. They joined the Bank of the South (a Chavez-inspired project to evict the World Bank loan sharks from the region, and keep loan decisions local--a highly successful endeavor), and I think Paraguay rescinded its law that gave immunity to U.S. soldiers (under Bolivarian pressure--but I'm not 100% sure of this). But they have played footsie with the Bushites (one of the Bush daughters visited their president, around the time of the rumored land purchase), and they are not a social justice government, but their power is threatened by a strong leftist candidate for president. Should this candidate--Fernando Lugo (the legendary "bishop of the poor")--win Paraguay's presidency, it would be a major blow to Rumsfeld (and Exxon Mobil) war plans.

If you read between the lines a bit, you can see the outline of 'Oil War II: South America' in Rumsfeld's recent op-ed in the Washington Post (12/1/07). He urges economic warfare against Venezuela, via a "free trade" deal with Colombia (and also, as we learned recently--not mentioned by Rumsfeld--via Exxon Mobil trying to freeze $12 billion in Venezuela's assets--over a deal about Venezuela's 60% share in its own oil--a deal that Norway's Statoil, France's Total, British BP and even Chevron agreed to; Exxon Mobil just lost round one of the legal battle in a London court). Rumsfeld further urges "swift action" by the U.S. in support of "friends and allies" in South America (the white separatists in Bolivia?). Here's PNAC II:

"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

This article was published on the very weekend of the first scheduled hostages release by the FARC (leftist guerrillas in Colombia's 40+ year civil war), engineered by Chavez, at the invitation of Alvaro Uribe in Colombia. Rumsfeld mentions it in the first paragaph--but fails to state that Chavez was doing the hostage negotiation at Uribe's request. Clearly what happened that weekend is that Rumsfeld & co. pulled Uribe's strings, got him to rescind this request (using a lame excuse), and instead bomb the location of the hostages, who were driven back into the jungle on a 20-mile return to captivity. Chavez somehow managed to get them released a few weeks later. And they recently reported that they were under heavy Colombian security forces fire as they were headed to their freedom, the weekend of Rumsfeld's op-ed.

Chavez has gotten a total of six hostages released. Ecuador's president, Correa, and also the presidents of France and Argentina, were working on getting 12 more released, when the U.S./Colombia bombed the position of the chief FARC hostage negotiator, Raul Reyes, killing him and 22 others (including some visiting Mexican students, apparently there to participate in the humanitarian mission), in their sleep, at a camp just inside the Ecuador border--using U.S. ordinance and surveillance, and probably U.S. aircraft (and soldiers?).

The bombing of Ecuador's territory, the use of the U.S. base in Ecuador--as well as Uribe's betrayal (he lied to Rafael Correa that it was "hot pursuit"), and the destruction of this peace effort--combined to make Correa extremely angry. I'm pretty sure it was Chavez who cooled him down--by, first of all, sending Venezuelan battalions to Venezuela's border with Colombia, in concert with Correa's re-enforcement of Ecuador's border, so that Correa knew that he was not alone; and then talking him out of retaliation, and into being satisfied with a Uribe apology (however insincere) and an OAS resolution (unanimous, except for the U.S.) accusing Colombia of violating Ecuador's territory (and numerous treaties). The U.S./Colombia bombing/incursion against Ecuador was likely a Rumsfeld war trap--a way of drawing Ecuador and its allies into the Colombian civil war, and destabilizing the region. All sane leaders in the region want peace in Colombia, and many were working for peace. Everyone understood that the hostage release negotiations were a preliminary to a political settlement of Colombia's long civil war. But, of course, the Bushites don't want peace. That's why they have larded military aid on Colombia--to stoke up their civil war, and create a well-armed fascist ally on a continent that despises them. And it's why they bombed and killed the FARC hostage negotiator.

I also think now that Uribe's initial invitation to Chavez, to negotiate hostage releases, was a trap set by the Bushites from the beginning, with Uribe's complicity--a trap to draw FARC leaders like Reyes out in the open, to kill them, and a trap for Chavez (they intended a disastrous negotiation, with dead hostages), and, when Chavez took it seriously and started getting hostages released, they quickly tried to salvage their dirty plot by bombing the hostages' location, and, also, rigging those emails that they claim they found in Raul Reyes' computer (in the raid into Ecuador), giving them fodder to call Correa and Chavez "terrorist-lovers." Uribe's erratic behavior points this way--to a botched Rumsfeld plot--as do the Bushite "talking points" for the corporate news monopolies (including Rumsfeld's first paragraph--which shows signs of being quickly re-written, as events unfolded that weekend). (This latter--that Rumsfeld was timing his op-ed to the hostage situation, and writing "talking points" as it unfolded--is more evidence that he is intimately involved in war planning for South America, and not just a "retired" mass murderer, offering his advice.)

To repeat, I think we are in for major Bushite-caused trouble in South America before the year is out.

[Zorro]

4. Good

I'm glad we're getting some value out of that base.

The US presence at Manta Air Base has served as a catalyst for improving the economic situation of the local area.

I think the local residents would become very concerned about their local economy if the US left.

[fascisthunter]

5. You Think the US using the Base to Carry Out Acts of Aggression are Good?

That was an act of war... did you think invading Iraq was good too?

[Zorro]

8. So do you approve and support FARC's presence within Ecuador?

I don't. They are ruthless murderers and criminals.

Your characterization that the US used the base to "carry out acts of aggression" is such a stretch it's laughable. There's no evidence that the US supported the attack from the base, only the reported suspicions.

Nevertheless, whether the US provided support or not to the Columbians, IMHO killing FARC terrorists is a commendable action.

[fascisthunter]

10. That's Too Bad for You, Because It Doesn't Matter What You Like or Dislike

America should mind it's own business and not start shit in another part of the globe. It's NOT JUSTIFIED!


PS - I don't buy your right wing characterization of FARC either.

[Zorro]

15. So you are a FARC supporter

They aren't revolutionary heroes. Get a clue.

[fascisthunter]

17. NOPE... Nice Try. I'm Against Breaking International Laws as You Support

go push your war somewhere else.

[Zorro]

23. Who's pushing war?

Are you saying that FARC's presence in Ecuador did not violate any international laws or treaties? So you're OK with them being there to plot murders and kidnappings?

Guess I need to read up on International Law.

[gbscar]

27. Apparently FARC were angels setting up a camp for peace and the appreciation of culture

...by visiting Mexican students, so they had a de facto free hand to violate international law and set up shop in Ecuador without being condemned by quite a few people here who (rightfully, at least by itself) condemn Colombia's own violation and U.S. involvement but either ignore FARC's own responsibilities or wish to excuse their activities in Ecuador while demonizing everyone opposing them.

[Bacchus39]

29. the FARC are a humanitarian organization

they were allegedly going to release a group of hostages that they themselves took captive. as you are well aware, only an international media spectacle is the appropriate forum for such a charitable offering. the Colombian government screwed up this humanitarian gesture by killing the #2 leader of this benevolent murderous terrorist organization. adding fuel to the fire, is that the FARC had their base of operations in a country who has denied providing support to them.

[Andrushka]

40. More BS, Zorro?

"there to plot murders and kidnappings"?

Nothing to do with negotiations to release hostages. Nooo.

[Zorro]

43. So FARC is noted for it's humanitarian policies, eh?

News to me.

Hostage negotiations with FARC have been hightly controversial in Colombia, where the majority of the people reject the FARC and support Uribe's policy to not make any concessions.

I wonder why THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE IN COLOMBIA REJECT FARC, if they serve the popular cause.

Kidnapping and holding prisoners for ransom FOR YEARS is hardly a sign of a progressive agenda from my perspective.

[Judi Lynn]

46. As a Colombian said in the March march, when the death squads get victims, they don't

take them as prisoners, they cut them into pieces.

Kidnapping and holding prisoners for ransom is somewhat different from taking towns hostage and killing them with chainsaws like the death squads, then dumping them into mass graves.

You're not going to sell any Democrats your ideas.

[Zorro]

50. So you presume you're speaking for all Democrats on this issue?

Then you're presuming way too much.

[AlphaCentauri]

58. I'm a little confused here, what is a democrat? n/t

[Zorro]

60. I would think

it's someone who's registered affiliation is with the Democratic Party.

[Judi Lynn]

62. It's Democrats in Congress who are blocking the Colombia FTA, due to hideouus excesses by the right-

wing little emperor of the country. They have the ability to understand the facts and make a moral conclusion based on the facts, whereas idiots only react with unacceptable compulsion to sustain and encourage the death-squad, narco-trafficker indulging and protecting President.

It's the DEMOCRATS _Bush has been attempting to flail into line so he can get them to bow to his will on the FTA. He believes they shouldn't have the right to refuse to service his imperialist aspirations in Colombia. Republicans have never believed working people deserve any protection whatsoever. It's historic.

Democrats are wildly different. Their position is historic, and moral in this issue. They say "no" to death squads.

[Judi Lynn]

63. Adding, at no cost to the reader, a notice of a Colombia FTA-related meeting.

Say NO! to corporate financed assassinations of trade unionists in Colombia!

Join us for an in-depth discussion on conditions for workers and union organizing in Colombia and how the Colombia Free Trade Agreement would hurt workers, families and human rights both in Colombia and the US.

Edgar Paez, International representative of SINALTRAINAL (Food Industry Workers Union) of Colombia will visit Boston on Tuesday March 25, 2008, as part of a national tour of the U.S. - http://www.sinaltrainal.org/

Edgar Paez has dedicated his entire life to organizing workers and has worked actively connecting social struggles in Colombia and the world over. More than 4000 trade unionists have been killed in Colombia in the last 20 years — more than in the rest of the world combined. Nine have been killed so far this year.

SINALTRAINAL represents Colombian workers of several well-know multi-national corporations in the food and beverage industries. Many SINALTRAINAL activists have been killed. SINALTRAINAL is conducting mass campaigns and legal battles to defend trade unionists against these attacks.

Sponsored by:

USW District 4; USW Local 8751 Boston School Bus Union; Greater Boston Labor Council AFL-CIO; Central Mass AFL-CIO; Boston City Councilors Chuck Turner and Sam Yoon; Felix Arroyo; Bishop Filipe Teixeira OFSJC; MLK Bolivarian Circle; International Action Center Boston; Women’s Fightback Network; Committee for Justice for Hector Rivas; New England Human Rights Organization for Haiti; Dorothea Manuela, Co-Chair Boston Rosa Parks Human Rights Day Committee

http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_26343.shtml

See leaflet:
http://www.bostonschoolbusunion.org/pdf/Boston-Paez-tour-leaflet-engspan.pdf

Add U.S. Steelworkers.

[Judi Lynn]

12. Not in someone else's country. That VIOLATES international law. n/t

[High Plains]

31. Why don't you scoot on down there and try to kill some of them then?

I hear Dyncorp is hiring.

[Zorro]

33. Don't need to, Gomer

Looks like the Colombian armed forces are figuring out how to do that already. Bully for them.

[Peace Patriot]

32. Oh, for pete's sake, Zorro! WHO are the "ruthless murderers and criminals" in Colombia?

Amnesty International report on Colombian security forces/paramilitaries' murders and atrocities against union leaders
AI Index: AMR 23/001/2007
http://www.amnesty.org/en/alfresco_asset/26e626d7-a2c0-11dc-8d74-6f45f39984e5/amr230012007en.html

"...cases in which clear evidence of responsibility is available indicates that in 2005 around 49 per cent of human rights abuses against trade unionists were committed by (Colombian) paramilitaries and some 43 per cent directly by the (Colombian) security forces. Just over 2 per cent were attributable to guerrilla forces (primarily the FARC and ELN) and just over 4 per cent to criminally-motivated actions." --p.5

Uribe tied to the Medellin Cartel
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=405x1991

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

Blueprints for Wider Columbian War
http://www.freepress.org/columns.php?strFunc=display&strID=547&strYear=2001&strAuthor=2

The “Sixth Division”: Military-paramilitary Ties and U.S. Policy in Colombia (Human Rights Watch)
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/colombia/2.1.htm

Chavez, freed FARC hostages call for political solution to Colombian conflict
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3213

For those interested in an alternative view, two recommended sites:
www.venezuelanalysis.com
www.BoRev.net (hilarious AND informative)

Also, expose of the fascist thugs in Venezuela (kindred to the fascists in Colombia), on DVD:
"The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" (available on YouTube, and at www.axisoflogic.come)

[Zorro]

34. There are a lot of dirty hands in Latin America

I just find it disingenuous to read FARC apologists condemning retaliatory actions against FARC while conveniently ignoring that organization's own criminality.

[Peace Patriot]

66. 1. I am not a FARC "apologist." 2. This was NOT a retaliatory action against

FARC! It was a calculated action against the hostages releases that Chavez had accomplished (at Uribe's invitation!) and against those that were being negotiated--12 more hostage releases--by the presidents of Ecuador and France.

You want more bloodletting in Colombia? Ten more years? Twenty? Another 40+ years? It's been going on for 40+ years, for godssakes! How do you end it?

The first two hostages who were released reported that the Colombian military drenched their location with bombing, as they were being released--driving them back into the jungle on a 20 mile hike. What kind of shit is that? What kind of dirty game was Uribe playing--inviting Chavez to get them released, and then bombing them?

Peace requires PEACE, not more killing. Uribe is addicted to war--and to the $5.5 billion in U.S. taxpayer booty that rains on him from the Bush regime. That is the problem. The Bushites are stoking this war, and using Uribe and the Colombian military as tools in their goal of toppling the democratic governments of Venezuela and Ecuador, to get their oil. That is what this is about. It has nothing to do with FARC. Just like their slaughter of 1.2 million Iraqis to get their oil had nothing to do with Al Qaeda.

And, I'm sorry, but, after reading the Amnesty International report on the Colombian military and paramilitary slaughter of union leaders in Colombia, I have no confidence in the Colombian government. I consider them to be terrorists. They have no right to be killing anybody. Same for Bush. These are war criminals--Uribe and Bush!--no better than FARC, and, as a matter of fact, far worse. The Colombian government has been perpetrating a reign of terror against thousands of innocent people. Bush has been doing the same in Iraq. FARC was releasing hostages without conditions, and peace talks were imminent. And Bush and Uribe shot that hope all to hell.

Peace, Zorro! Peace! That must be the goal. No more killing.

[Judi Lynn]

9. The President of Ecuador was elected running on his promise to remove the U.S. from the air base.

Doesn't that get through to you?

Do you think the people of Ecuador appreciate the fact _Bush had his people fly surveillance over Ecuador, determine where some FARC had hidden, then assisted the bombing of THE SAME COUNTRY?

Why do you think Ecuador's President has been hopping mad?

The people VOTED the man into office who pledged to get the U.S. out of Manta.

Timeline of Ecuador:

~snip~
1987 - President Leon Febres Cordero kidnapped and beaten up by the army in protest at policies of privatisation and public expenditure cuts.

1992 - Indigenous peoples granted title to 2.5 million acres in Amazonia; Ecuador leaves the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries to increase its oil output.

1995 - Vice-President Alberto Dahik Garzoni flees, seeks political asylum in Costa Rica to escape corruption charges.

1996 - Abdala Bucaram Ortiz elected president.

1997 - Fabian Alarcon becomes president after Bucaram is deposed by parliament on grounds of mental incapacity.


Ecuador was predominantly agrarian until the discovery of oil
1998 - Jamil Mahuad Witt elected president.

2000 - Vice-President Gustavo Noboa becomes president after Mahuad is forced to leave office by the army and indigenous protesters; Ecuador adopts the US dollar as its national currency in an effort to beat inflation and stabilise the economy.

2001 January - Ecuador declares state of emergency in Galapagos Islands after an oil spill from a stricken tanker threatens the islands' fragile ecological balance. The potential danger is, in the end, largely averted.

2001 September - Indigenous community leader Luis Maldonado sworn in as minister for social welfare, the first Indian to hold a cabinet post which does not deal exclusively with indigenous affairs.

2002 February - Protests by indigenous peoples bring oil production to a near standstill. The protesters demand that more of the oil revenues should be invested in their communities.

Gutierrez elected

2002 November - Leftist and former coup leader Lucio Gutierrez wins presidential elections. He takes office in January 2003.

2003 August - Former president Gustavo Noboa, who faces corruption charges, goes into exile in the Dominican Republic.

2004 April - Jail crisis: Hundreds of people are held hostage by prisoners demanding better conditions and shorter sentences. Police regain control after 10 days.

2004 December - Congress dismisses most of the Supreme Court's members and appoints a new court. President Gutierrez accuses the former court of pro-opposition bias.

Gutierrez ousted

2005 April - Anti-government protests mushroom after the Supreme Court drops corruption charges against two former presidents. Congress votes to oust President Gutierrez. Alfredo Palacio replaces him.

2005 August - Protesters, demanding that oil revenues should be spent on infrastructure, bring oil production to a halt. A state of emergency is declared in two oil-producing provinces. The protest ends after oil companies agree to help mend roads and pay local taxes.

2005 October - Former President Lucio Gutierrez is arrested and detained on charges of endangering national security. He is released in March 2006 after a judge dismisses the charges.

2006 March - Nationwide protests flare over a proposed free trade agreement with the US.

2006 June - Ecuador prompts US ire by cancelling the operating contract of the US oil firm Occidental Petroleum after it allegedly sold part of an oil block without government permission.

2006 November - Rafael Correa wins presidential election.

2007 January - Ecuador turns to the Organisation of American States (OAS) for help with its challenge to Colombia's coca crop-spraying programme along their common border.

2007 April - Voters in a referendum support President Correa's plan to form a citizens' assembly to rewrite the constitution.

Several opposition MPs flee to Colombia after they are accused of sedition. They are among 57 fired in March for allegedly obstructing the referendum.

2007 October - President Correa's Alianza Pais party wins 80 of the 130 seats in elections for a new constituent assembly.

2007 November - On its first day of work, the constituent assembly votes to dissolve Congress - which promises to defy the vote.

2007 December - Mr Correa's key ally, Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez, suffers a defeat in a referendum on constitutional proposals similar to those of Ecuador.

2008 March - Diplomatic crisis after a Colombia cross-border strike into Ecuador kills senior Farc rebel Raul Reyes. Venezuela and Ecuador cut ties with Colombia and order troops to their borders.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1212826.stm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They've been struggling for ages with the run-over of peasants fleeing Colombia, and the government destroying Ecuadorean land along the border with chemicals.

Oil companies have made sweet deals with corrupt politicians who threw them wildly beneficial arrangements for oil, at the horrendous expenses of a depleated infrastructure, etc., etc., etc.

The last politician _Bush supported in the run against Correa had to flee the country earlier during corruption charges.

Please take some time to understand what you're discussing.

[fascisthunter]

11. I'd Say from the Info You Provided, No Amount of Economy

generated from a base is worth the death toll it creates. Thank you, Judi... you are a gift to DU.

[Judi Lynn]

14. So glad to witness your close attention to the FACTS of US policy in Latin America.

As you've noticed the actual REALITY of the situation seems to take so much effort a lot of posters will just go ahead and offer their opinions WITHOUT bothering to study small details like INFORMATION.

It doesn't take long until it's possible to see it's the same pattern going on all over Latin America. THEY ARE NOT AT FAULT when they protest and want to get rid of the brutal, dirty people who've been running their "governments." They LIVE there and they have lost enough of their loved ones to have a clearer grasp of their predicament than propaganda swallowing idiots in the States.

Thank you for taking the time continually to really know the situation. When you take time to post here I NEVER doubt you know what you're discussing.

It's easy to see the difference a mile away.

Right-wingers never bring the links because the truth never supports their views.

[fascisthunter]

18. I Am Trying to Educate Myself with Your Help

I want our country, the US to be a beacon of what's right in the world, and not act like some fascist empire that wants to take over the World. It really bothers me to see those who are traitors to that principle pretending to be patriotic when they are anything but aggressors who are willing to twist America's true meaning for economic and political gain. They have done enough damage to our country, it's constitution and have abused it's fruits for evil purposes. It needs to stop and we must work to rebuild relations for a better World, a better future for all.

[Judi Lynn]

20. You're so right. We need to turn a corner. NOW, and SHARE this hemisphere with the people

who live here, not live at their expense.

We've been doing that for so very long. It's time we let go, and stop pretending they're all simply crazy people who don't know what they're talking about!

Why didn't we get the message when Nixon visited Caracas in the late 1950's?





Caracas resident pour into the streets to get a glimpse of the U.S. Vice-President.

THAT would have been the proper time to start rethinking U.S. policy toward Latin America.

[Zorro]

13. Do you think Correa won only because of his opposition to the Manta base?

If you had any true knowledge of Ecuador, you would know there were other more significant reasons that made him the more attractive candidate.

I see no proof anywhere of your assertion that the US provided support to the Columbians to pinpoint the FARC location. Are you supporting FARC's presence in Ecuador?

Please spare me the lecture on recent Ecuadorian history. I'm quite familiar with the country and its people, and recognize how corrupted that society has become over the past 15 years with the influx of FARC-originated narcodollars into the country.

[Judi Lynn]

16. Nice try, Joe McCarthy. Label people who can't agree as FARC supporters.

We've all heard that one before.

Go read some human rights reports about who's responsible for the VAST majority of the bloodshed in Colombia. It has been there for your leisurely perusal for years and years, had you taken the time to do something wild and crazy like RESEARCHING the subject, like the rest of us peons.

Take advantage of your free time and do your homework.

Oh, this is choice: I'm quite familiar with the country and its people, and recognize how corrupted that society has become over the past 15 years with the influx of FARC-originated narcodollars into the country.

Maybe you'll be good enough to provide some links to the amazing influx of FARC-derived "NARCODOLLARS" in Ecuador. Should be fascinating. I should have known THAT'S where the corruption is coming from.

Please post some links to inform us on your charge of FARC corruption of Ecuador. You should find it easy to substantiate.

[Zorro]

19. So do you approve and support FARC?

It's a simple question. While you're at it, please tell me about your life and adventures in Ecuador.

I think I'm qualified to speak on the topic of Ecuador, since I've owned property there for many years. If you've had any real experience in the country, you'd recognize how serious crime has become since dollarization and understand one of the great sources of this money is from Columbian drug traffickers.

[Judi Lynn]

21. The subject is the illegal invasion of a sovereign country. PERIOD.

There is no built-in excuse for that, or it would have have been prohibited by INTERNATIONAL LAW.

[Zorro]

22. Why won't you answer the question?

You have also made allegations that the US supported the strike against FARC from Manta base. You tar the US with supporting an "illegal invasion of a sovereign country", yet offer no evidence of the sort -- just some histrionics and a list of recent Ecuadorian events.

Instead of lecturing me to do my homework, why don't you actually spend some time in Ecuador instead of trying to diagnose the problems from several thousand miles away by reading press reports. It makes you sound like Bill Frist diagnosing Terri Schiavo.

[ButterflyBlood]

28. Let's say there was an insurgent group in the US

That carried out a bunch of ruthless bombings, kidnappings and murders. The US because of this ended up with one of the highest kidnapping rates in the world, and judges and police had to wear masks when appearing in the media due to the threat of assassination. The US's tourism economy is also hit hard because of the fear of tourists being taken as hostages.

This group sets up a base in Canada, just over the border. Canada does absolutely nothing about it. Partially because they are unable to do so, but the base is set still. So the US carries out a raid on the base in question. In addition, much of the group's top leadership is present in this base, probably because they are aware of the unlikeliness of being caught.

So the US carries out a raid on this base, killing one of the top leaders and several other guerillas. No Canadians are killed or even injured in the raid. Who exactly is committing the worse things here?

And before anyone brings out the strawman, I don't consider the right wing paramilitaries in Colombia any better (and I doubt anyone else on DU does either.) Bringing up AUC every time anyone criticizes FARC is a classic logical fallacy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

[Peace Patriot]

35. There's that word again--"ruthless"! So let's talk about who is the MOST

"ruthless" force in Colombia's FORTY-PLUS YEAR civil war...

Amnesty International report on Colombian security forces/paramilitaries murders and atrocities against union leaders
AI Index: AMR 23/001/2007
http://www.amnesty.org/en/alfresco_asset/26e626d7-a2c0-11dc-8d74-6f45f39984e5/amr230012007en.html

"...cases in which clear evidence of responsibility is available indicates that in 2005 around 49 per cent of human rights abuses against trade unionists were committed by (Colombian) paramilitaries and some 43 per cent directly by the (Colombian) security forces. Just over 2 per cent were attributable to guerrilla forces (primarily the FARC and ELN) and just over 4 per cent to criminally-motivated actions." --p.5

(49% + 43% =) 92% Colombian security forces and closely tied rightwing death squads.
2% FARC.

On the "ruthless" meter, who would you rather have just over the border in Canada--FARC, or the Colombian military and its death squads?

It's a civil war! Crimes committed by both sides--with one side heavily armed ($5.5 billion!) by the Bush/U.S., killing union leaders, and also peasant farmers, political leftists, human rights workers and journalists, by the thousands. How do you end it? By more killing? By violating Ecuador's sovereignty and killing the chief hostage negotiator and probably the main hopes for peace?

This question--"Do you approve of FARC?"--is stupid. You can't gainsay reasonable reply that the Colombian military and closely tied paramilitaries are more criminal than FARC--by calling it a "strawman" (Amnesty's International's "strawman"!)--because, ButterflyBlood, that is why there is a FARC. This has been going on for 40+ years--fascist slaughter of the innocent. The last time FARC tried to demobilize, fascist death squads killed 4,0000 of their political candidates and voters! Violence is endemic in the fascist ruling elite of Colombia. That is why there are guerrilla fighters in the jungles, in armed rebellion against this murderous elite.

You don't end it by more killing--and utter lawlessness, threatening to destabilize the region. You end it by hostage negotiations, by creating a non-militarized zone, and starting peace talks for a political settlement. That is what the presidents of Ecuador, France, Argentina, Venezuela and others were trying to do. And that is what Bush/Uribe destroyed by bombing and invading Ecuador, and gratuitously killing the hostage negotiator. That was "ruthless"--Bushite, war profiteer ruthlessness--of the sort we see in Iraq, and all to do with toppling the democratic governments of Ecuador and Venezuela, and grabbing their oil. Ruthless bastards out to dominate the world--and using greedy little, drug-trafficking fascist worms like Alvaro Uribe as their puppets.

[ButterflyBlood]

36. The right wing paramilitaries formed because of FARC

Hell FARC has been around since the 60s, the paramilitaries only got big in the 90s.

I oppose both FARC and the right wing paramilitaries. It's a logical position and I don't see what's so hard to grasp about it.

[Judi Lynn]

39. Actual accounts of history appear to contradict your "take" on Colombia:

~snip~
History of Violence

Colombia’s long history of violence – the origins of which Scott lays at the doorstep of a feudalistic oligarchy that dispossessed peasants and subjugated laborers with impunity – predates the first U.S. intervention in the early 1960s. (The 15-year-long “La Violencia” period began with the 1948 assassination of a popular presidential candidate.)

Furthermore, the crystallization of what had previously been a fragmented left-wing underground into an armed revolutionary guerilla movement, occurred in response, not prior, to U.S. intervention.

Washington intervened in Colombia after the Indochinese and Cuban revolutions of the 1950s. Throughout the Cold War, but particularly then and in the Reagan era, the U.S. government viewed political developments through red-tinted glasses, seeing evidence of Soviet expansionism in every revolutionary movement.

Determined to block another revolution in Latin America, Washington applied new CIA counterinsurgency techniques in Colombia.

“In February 1962,” Scott writes, “a U.S. Special Warfare team, headed by General William Yarborough, visited for two weeks.” Following that visit, “the Special Warfare experts at Fort Bragg rushed to instruct the Colombian army in …counterinsurgency techniques…

“ recommended development of a ‘civil and military structure… to perform counter-agent and counter-propaganda functions and as necessary execution, sabotage, and/or terrorist activities against known communist proponents. … In the wake of Yarborough’s visit, a series of training teams arrived, contributing to the Colombian Army’s Plan Lazo, a comprehensive counterinsurgency plan implemented between 1962 and 1965.”

As result, according to counterinsurgency historian Michael McClintock, “The banditry of the early 1960s…was transformed into organized revolutionary guerilla warfare after 1965, which has continued to date.”

Worse yet, Plan Lazo also spawned the paramilitary death squads that today control much of the narcotics traffic and about 30 percent of the Colombian legislature.
(snip)

More Fires

In the 1970s, Washington continued to pour fuel onto Colombia’s fires.

The CIA, Scott writes, “offered further training to Colombian and other Latin American police officers at its so-called bomb school in Los Fresnos, Texas. There AID , under the CIA’s so-called Public Safety Program, taught a curriculum including ‘Terrorist Concepts; Terrorist Devices; Fabrication and Functioning of Devices’ Improvised Triggering Devices; Incendiaries,’ and ‘Assassination Weapons: A discussion of various weapons which may be used by the assassin.’ During congressional hearings, AID officials admitted that the so-called bomb school offered lessons not in bomb disposal but in bomb making.

“Trained terrorist counterrevolutionaries thus became assets of the Colombian security apparatus. They were also employed by U.S. corporations anxious to protect their workforces from unionization as well as in anti-union campaigns by Colombian suppliers to large U.S. corporations. Oil companies in particular have been part of the state-coordinated campaign against left-wing guerillas.”

According to more mainstream versions of how the “death squads” were born, rich landowners living in fear of kidnapping by leftist guerillas paid protection money to right-wing militias. By 1981, the right-wing militias had morphed into civilian-murdering squads operating alongside the Colombian army.

Scott notes that the leftist guerillas also kidnapped drug kingpins, who joined with the army and established a training school for a nationwide counterterrorist network, Muerte a Sequestradores (MAS, Death to Kidnappers).

The traffickers put up the money and the generals contracted for Israeli and British mercenaries to come to Colombia to run the school. A leading graduate was Carlos Castano, who later became head of the AUC, which carried out the murders of hundreds of civilian opposition leaders and peace activists.

The Colombian legislature outlawed the autodefensas in 1989. But, according to a 1996 report by Human Rights Watch, the CIA and Colombian authorities cloned new ones.

More:
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/053106a.html

[gbscar]

37. It's so great to be selective and ignore FARC abuses...

"(49% + 43% =) 92% Colombian security forces and closely tied rightwing death squads.
2% FARC."

That's only "human rights abuses against trade unionists".

If you're going to restrict your analysis to that subject (or its equivalents) alone, ignoring the areas where FARC at the very least has a significantly higher responsibility than "2%"...no wonder you find such a simple picture. What about political killings or general murders? What about kidnappings? What about child recruitment? What about landmines? What about extortion? What about blowing up infrastructure, paralyzing roads, declaring "armed strikes" and harming hundreds of thousands if not millions of people as a result? And that's just a short overview.

"On the "ruthless" meter, who would you rather have just over the border in Canada--FARC, or the Colombian military and its death squads?"

Again, in order to answer that question, one would expect you to present a list of all FARC abuses and criminal activities as well, not just a selective list of specific abuse categories where FARC has little to no participation. How convenient, is it not?

"It's a civil war! Crimes committed by both sides--with one side heavily armed ($5.5 billion!) by the Bush/U.S., killing union leaders, and also peasant farmers, political leftists, human rights workers and journalists, by the thousands."

Yeah, because all those sectors are only targeted by one side and the guerrillas do absolutely nothing against those who oppose them, including those same farmers, journalists and others who don't have lobbyists in Washington right now.

"How do you end it? By more killing? By violating Ecuador's sovereignty and killing the chief hostage negotiator and probably the main hopes for peace?"

Do you really think that there ever was a "main hope" for peace at this moment just because FARC was freeing a very small and selective number of hostages, while refusing to accept changes to its main demands or renouncing to kidnappings as a whole?

"This question--"Do you approve of FARC?"--is stupid."

Not at all.

"This has been going on for 40+ years--fascist slaughter of the innocent."

If you ignore all that the guerrillas have done over those decades and how history has developed over time, including the fact that certain acts of violence only increased to current levels after 20 or so years...much of that slaughter wouldn't have happened if FARC had not provoked people by increasing their attacks during the late 70s and 80s. But apparently that doesn't matter, they are mere "victims" who harm nobody and can't possibly create a backslash, even if it may be worse over time.

"The last time FARC tried to demobilize, fascist death squads killed 4,0000 of their political candidates and voters! "

Yeah right..."tried to demobilize". Sounds so great when you ignore that they did not demobilize at all, but rather did everything possible to create and increase their guerrilla activities through greater extortion, kidnapping and recruitment in the 80's.

If that's what you call "trying to demobilize", then I guess you expected the victims of those guerrilla activities to just shut up and die "in the name of peace". Unfortunately, they did not, and took vengeance against leftists and others they identified, wrongly and barbarically for the most part, with FARC and the other guerrillas.

"Violence is endemic in the fascist ruling elite of Colombia. That is why there are guerrilla fighters in the jungles, in armed rebellion against this murderous elite."

Yet if they were as popular and blameless as your argument rather simplistically implies, it would be a piece of cake for them to seize power after 40 years through a mass uprising.

Castro didn't take quite as much time, didn't he?

"You end it by hostage negotiations, by creating a non-militarized zone, and starting peace talks for a political settlement."

Hostage negotiations under reasonable terms, not FARC's, which only focus on freeing a select few while the vast majority of hostages are not part of any potential agreement and kidnapping continues to be an instrument of war.

And a "non-militarized" zone that allows FARC to do what it did during the Caguán peace talks with no restrictions only creates this: a haven for violence and kidnappings with absolute impunity, all in the name of a "peace" that never comes.

But apparently that's not really a problem from your point of view. So what are the following abuses which FARC continued to engage in during the previous peace talks, I ask?

"Human Rights Watch calls upon the FARC-EP's General Secretariat to ensure that the conduct of the FARC-EP complies with international humanitarian law. In particular, we urge the members of the General Secretariat to issue orders and take effective steps to ensure that FARC-EP forces:

_ cease all extrajudicial killings of civilians;

_ release immediately and unconditionally all hostages within their power, while guaranteeing the hostages' safe return to their families;

_ cease using child soldiers, establish mechanisms for the immediate demobilization of child soldiers, and instruct all FARC-EP forces that child soldiers should not be recruited or deployed as combatants in the future;

_ cease holding so-called popular trials, which lack minimal due process guarantees;

_ extend humane treatment -- including appropriate medical care -- to all captured combatants -- including police, soldiers, and members of paramilitary groups --and permit them regular access to and visits from the ICRC;

_ cease all use of indiscriminate weapons, such as gas cylinder bombs;

_ cease all attacks or threats against medical workers and facilities, including ambulances, hospitals, and clinics.

Human Rights Watch also calls upon the FARC-EP's General Secretariat to permit immediately a system of independent national and international monitoring within the Zone."

http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/farc/Formatted%20FARC-Eng%208-241.htm#P95_12854

Oh, sorry...this can be explained because FARC wants peace and the "fascists" do not. Silly me.

"That is what the presidents of Ecuador, France, Argentina, Venezuela and others were trying to do. And that is what Bush/Uribe destroyed by bombing and invading Ecuador, and gratuitously killing the hostage negotiator."

Was there a cease-fire in place? Did he have permission to be in Ecuador? Was this mere "hostage negotiator" someone who earned his high rank through "peace talks" and nothing else? Did he command no guerrilla fronts or had no criminal record? Just wonderful.

It would have been better for his death to occur in Colombia, but he was as much of a valid target as any of the military targets FARC attacks with little or no remorse. They haven't exactly stopped their activities or given any indication that they will.

[Peace Patriot]

49. I did not say they were innocent. I said there are "crimes on both sides."

It's a civil war. How do you end it? You won't answer my question. Just keep killing people? Kill every last FARC member and sympathizer? Where does that end?

Why did Uribe ask Chavez to negotiate hostage releases? --then suddenly rescind it, when it was going to be successful? and then bomb the hostages' location (as reported by the first two released hostages)?

It seems to me that the presidents of Venezuela, Ecuador, France, Argentina and others were genuinely working toward peace talks, and Uribe/Bush deliberately sabotaged that--with more deaths--instead of cooperating with it, in these new circumstances, with leftist governments elected all over South America, who want peace?

Cuz Uribe and Bush don't want peace. They prosper from war.

[fascisthunter]

6. Great... the US involved in More Illegal Military Aggression

We have some very sick people in our country. It's time to take them out of power and for good!

[superkia]

7. I feel bad for any place that is oil rich and doesnt go along with...

the elites agenda, their country and their people will be destroyed by the U.S. to continue on with the agenda. the U.S. isnt the freedom police, our gov. is just the leader for the elites agenda with the E.U. right behind them.

I started laughing when I saw this line:

"The U.S. air force was granted a 10-year concession in 1999 to use the base, located in the port city of Manta on Ecuador’s northern Pacific coast, in its counter-drug trafficking activities in the region."

Didn't they mean drug trafficking activities in the region?


I hope at some point the elite are stopped, it just doesnt seem right for 90% of the world to suffer so 5% can live like hogs!


They say "pigs get fatter and hogs get slaughtered", lets hope that saying has some truth to it.

[pegleg]

24. If FARC is involved in the smuggling and proliferation of drugs to the US

it is indeed our affair.

[Andrushka]

41. If it's the Uribe gang, though

WELLLL,that's another story: turn a blind eye, still blame the FARC! :eyes:

[Judi Lynn]

44. DU'ers who have bothered to research have a very clear idea of who's doing what there.

Land grabs by narco-traffickers and paramilitaries: Colombia's death squads get respectable
November 10, 2005

The United Nations and other organisations have condemned a new Colombian law that will grant former members of death squads near-immunity and allow their leaders to retain their loot and drug profits. Is this demobilisation or legitimisation?

By Carlos M Gutiérrez

THE justice and peace law passed by Colombia's parliament on 21 June allowed the president, Alvaro Uribe, to claim he had made peace with, and demobilised, the extreme-right paramilitaries. There was widespread and varied reaction from multilateral bodies, politicians, human rights campaigners and the press. An editorial "Colombia's capitulation", on July 4 in the New York Times suggested: "It should be called the impunity for mass murderers, terrorists and major cocaine traffickers law."

The Colombian congress knows how the paramilitaries came into existence, what they have done and who has been, and continues to be, behind them. It has given them political status without the approval of the international community or the prior national consensus that the law's promoters had sought. As the director of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights office in Colombia, Michael Frühling, remarked a week before the law was passed, "it is not a good idea to treat paramilitarism as a mere political misdemeanour" (1).

The government may deny parentage, but the extreme-right groups are happy to admit that they are the children of the state. "We were born paramilitaries," says one of their most prominent leaders, Ernesto Báez. "The weapons sent to us in June 1983 at Juan Bosco Laverde, San Vicente de Chucurí and Puerto Boyaca and in the Magdalena Medio region, had government stamps on them."

Shortly before the law came into force, several Democratic members of the United States Senate wrote to Uribe to express their anxiety about "the very negative impact that this law could have on peace, justice and the rule of law in Colombia" (2). Earlier, a group of their Republican opposite numbers had declared their support for efforts to achieve peace in Colombia, provided that "such a process is conducted pursuant to an effective legal framework that will bring about the dismantling of the underlying structure, illegal sources of financing and economic power" of terrorist organisations. "It is also critical," they added, "that the provision of benefits to leaders be conditioned on the groups' compliance with the ceasefire and cessation of criminal activity" (3). Uribe promised to take their demands into account and then ignored them.

This is all about cocaine, and such narco-traffickers as Pablo Escobar, Gonzalo Rodrí-guez Gacha, Carlos Lehder and the Rodríguez Orejuela brothers. These were the idols and role models of many Colombians in the 1980s, accepted in political circles and secretly visited by national leaders. In towns such as Medellín and Cali, where their word was law, local authorities kept out of their way, teamed up with them or turned a blind eye.

The drug barons could be useful allies. Their supplies enabled the CIA to finance the Contras' vicious war against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. They acquired enormous power and enough wealth to pay off Colombia's foreign debts, an offer they actually made in 1983 in an attempt to legalise their business and escape extradition to the US.

More:
http://www.landaction.org/display.php?article=365

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Did you see this earlier?

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

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
More to read when you've got some free time on your hands:

Last Updated: Sunday, 7 October 2007, 08:06 GMT 09:06 UK
Reporter flees Colombia threats

A foreign correspondent in Colombia has fled the country after being criticised by President Alvaro Uribe over a book and receiving death threats.
(snip)

Mr Guillen said Mr Uribe was angry about a book that he published earlier this year called The Confidants of Pablo Escobar.

It claimed that the Uribe family had ties to organised crime, allegations which first surfaced in 1991 in a US intelligence document.

"Ever since Uribe came out defaming me and accusing me, I have been sought after by the hit men of Colombia, and there are a lot of them in Colombia," Mr Guillen said.

"In three days, I have received 24 death threats."

The government has not commented on Mr Guillen's departure, but the BBC's Jeremy McDermott in Bogota says the threats are being taken seriously.

More than 40 journalists have been killed in Colombia over the last 15 years.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7032203.stm

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

BLACKLIST TO THE A LIST
ONCE DEEMED A BAD GUY, URIBE IS NOW A TOP ALLY
By BY JOSEPH CONTRERAS AND STEVEN AMBRUS | NEWSWEEK
Aug 9, 2004 Issue

The declassified defense Department intelligence report, dated September 1991, reads like a Who's Who of Colombia's cocaine trade. The list includes the Medellin cartel's kingpin, Pablo Escobar, and more than 100 other thugs, assassins, traffickers and shady lawyers in his alleged employ. Then there's entry 82: "Alvaro Uribe Velez--a Colombian politician and senator dedicated to collaboration with the Medellin cartel at high government levels. Uribe was linked to a business involved in narcotics activities in the U.S.... Uribe has worked for the Medellin cartel and is a close personal friend of Pablo Escobar Gaviria." Escobar died in a 1993 police raid. Two years ago this week, Uribe became president of Colombia.

Washington loves him. In a two-page written statement, the Colombian president's office denied that Uribe had links of any kind to a U.S. business, as described in the 1991 report. (The list was obtained by the National Security Archive, an independent U.S. research group.) But the statement did not address the allegations that Uribe had worked for the Medellin cartel and was Escobar's close friend. It may be that Uribe thinks his recent actions speak louder than denials: in the last two years, Colombia has extradited 140 accused traffickers to the United States--a figure unmatched by any previous president. "This is probably one of the most pro-American presidents in Latin America's entire history," says Adam Isacson, at the Center for International Policy in Washington.

Still, questions persist. Uribe has been talking peace with outlawed right-wing paramilitaries. These groups began in self-defense against an out-of-control Marxist guerrilla movement, yet they supported themselves via the drug trade. After winning office on a pledge to stop leftist guerrillas, Uribe is now offering leniency to paramilitaries who renounce trafficking and disarm. "Some of these people don't even have anti-guerrilla credentials," says Isacson. "They're just drug traffickers who've bought their way into the paramilitary movement as a way to claim political status, legitimize their fortunes and walk free." Most Colombians seem unconcerned. With the president's approval ratings hovering above 70 percent, he's likely to get a constitutional amendment later this year to let him run again in 2006--and win.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/54793

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

Narco-Candidate in Colombia
Uribe Velez, Favourite for President, and his narco-links

by Al Giordano
Narco News
March 20, 2002

A Narco News Investigative Report

In 1997 and 1998, alert U.S. Customs agents in California seized three suspicious Colombia-bound ships that, the agents discovered, were laden with 50,000 kilos of potassium permanganate, a key "precursor chemical" necessary for the manufacture of cocaine.

According to a document signed by then-DEA chief Donnie R. Marshall on August 3, 2001, the ships were each destined for Medellin, Colombia, to a company called GMP Productos Quimicos, S. A. (GMP Chemical Products).

The 50,000 kilos of the precursor chemical destined for GMP were enough to make half-a-million kilos of cocaine hydrochloride, with a street value of $15 billion U.S. dollars.

The owner of GMP Chemical Products, according to the 2001 DEA chief's report, is Pedro Juan Moreno Villa, the campaign manager, former chief of staff, and longtime right-hand-man for front-running Colombian presidential candidate Alvaro Uribe Velez.

Mr. Moreno was Uribe's political alter-ego before, during and after those nervous 1997 and 1998 months when he awaited those contraband shipments.

When Uribe was governor of the state of Antioquia from 1995 to 1997 - from its capitol of Medellin - Moreno was chief of staff in Governor Uribe's office. During those years, according to then-DEA chief Marshall, ""Between 1994 and 1998, GMP was the largest importer of potassium permanganate into Colombia."

More:
http://www.zmag.org/content/Colombia/giordano_uribe.cfm

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

‘That Blessed Lad’: Why Drug Lord Pablo Escobar Idolised the Colombian President
by Francesc Relea
October 17, 2007

The figure of the drug trafficker, Pablo Escobar, struck down 14 years ago, still buffets the Colombian political class. Virginia Vallejo of 57 years, lover and fiancée for five years of the head of the Medellín Cartel, the most powerful criminal organisation that has existed in Colombia, has broken a long silence to speak of the past and the present of her country. In the book, ‘Loving Pablo, Hating Escobar’ (Amando a Pablo, Odiando a Escobar), Vallejo attacks prominent political leaders, attributing to them intimate links with the drug lord. A refugee in the United States expecting to obtain political asylum, Virginia Vallejo gave El Pais a long interview, the first since leaving Colombia more than a year ago. Having disappeared from the scene for more than a decade, in which gossip and rumour of the worst kind proliferated, the television presenter, reporter, model and actress, returns to the arena as an inconvenient witness for the Colombian politicians. The President, Álvaro Uribe Vélez, has swiftly rejected the accusations in Vallejo’s book.

“The narco-State dreamt of by Pablo Escobar is today more relevant than ever in Colombia,” says the diva of the Eighties. “The narco-traffickers prospered in Colombia not because they were geniuses but because the presidents were very cheap,” says Vallejo, and mentions three names as narco-Presidents: Alfonso López Michelsen, Ernesto Samper and Álvaro Uribe. Of the current Colombian President, Álvaro Uribe, Vallejo says that the chief of the Medellin Cartel idolised him. She states that the (Colombian) leader, as director of civil aeronautics (1980-1982), “granted dozens of licences for landing strips and hundreds for aircraft and helicopters on which the drug trafficking infrastructure was built”. “Pablo used to say: ‘if it were not for that blessed lad, we’d have to be swimming till Miami to reach the drugs to the gringos. Now, with our own strips, nobody can stop us. Own strips, own aircraft, own helicopters…’ They reached the merchandise till Cayo Norman, in the Bahamas, operational headquarters of Carlos Lehder (co-founder of the Medellín Cartel), and from there to Miami without problems”. Vallejo is ready to defend publicly and through a lie detector everything written and stated.

“When I met Pablo I did not know he has so much money. I found out through Forbes and Fortune magazines that they put him as the seventh richest person in the world,” says Vallejo. Another episode that illustrates the supposed links between Uribe and Escobar is the death of Alberto Uribe Sierra, the President’s father, in 1983 at the hands of a FARC guerrilla squad. “Pablo loved dear Alvaro very much,” explains Escobar’s former fiancée. “When FARC killed Uribe’s father in a kidnap attempt, Pablo send them a helicopter to collect the remains. His brother Santiago was bleeding. He was in a farm far from Medellín, where there wasn’t any helicopter or aviation infrastructure of any sort. Pablo gave the order to send the helicopter. He told me this a few days later. He felt that death very much. He felt very sad. He told me: ‘Anyone who thinks that this is an easy business is very wrong. This is a trail of deaths. Every day we have to bury friends, partners and relatives.’ He told me that he too would be one of the dead and asked me if I was prepared to write his story”.

According to the National Security Archive, a group of non-governmental researchers based at the George Washington University, Álvaro Uribe was a close friend of Pablo Escobar who collaborated with the Medellín Cartel. The same group of researchers put out a list of the most important Colombian drug traffickers in 1991 produced by the U.S. intelligence services in which Escobar occupied the 79th place and Uribe 82nd.

More:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=14063

[Judi Lynn]

25. More on Bush involvement in the illegal invasion of a sovereign country, forget the "me" principle.

Yankees Head Home
John Lindsay-Poland | March 11, 2008

~snip~
Declining U.S. Influence
Latin Americans are increasingly saying "No" to the U.S. military bases that are spread through the region. The Pentagon uses vassal states in Central America—Honduras and El Salvador—as bases for drug-war surveillance, police training, helicopter sorties, and military-run charity programs. And Colombia, a key ally in the region, receives more military equipment and training than the rest of the hemisphere combined.

But U.S. influence in the region is declining, and the U.S. military presence is perceived as protecting a failed economic model. Instead of militarizing relations and building fortresses, the United States should address the reasons why majorities throughout the region are turning against U.S.-led models.

The widespread U.S. military presence in Latin America and the Caribbean has a long history. Bases resulted from and facilitated the hundreds of U.S. interventions to protect corporate property, coups, occupations, threats by gunboats, and other uses of force since the mid-1800s. Panama was carved out of Colombia in order to build the canal, with a series of bases and forts. In addition to protecting the canal, U.S. bases there served for training Latin American armies, preparing U.S. troops for jungle warfare in World War II and the Vietnam War, testing military equipment, including chemical weapons, and preventing leftist forces from either winning or consolidating power in Central America.

~snip~
Cutting Off Manta
President Rafael Correa, who was inaugurated last year, pledged that his government would not maintain the lease for the Manta base, which expires in 2009, unless the United States allows Ecuador to have a military base in Florida. In a public letter to Correa, more than 40 peace, religious, and solidarity organizations publicly declared their support in October for Ecuador's decision to close the U.S. military base in Manta. "Every dollar spent on military approaches to drugs represents a theft from programs for at-risk youth and treatment of addiction in the United States, for investment in reducing U.S. carbon emissions, and for payment of other debts our country owes to the world," the groups said.

Keeping the air base in Manta is still on the table, say spokesmen at the Southern Command and U.S. Embassy in Quito. One arrangement that SouthCom is exploring would allow U.S. military or surveillance aircraft to land in Ecuador, but not at a fixed U.S. base.

The conflict that erupted between Colombia and Ecuador after Colombian forces bombed a FARC guerrilla camp in Ecuadorean territory on March 1 was born of rising bilateral tensions. Previous Colombian military operations along the border spurred diplomatic protest notes last year. When Ecuador last May withdrew from annual naval exercises led by the United States that were scheduled to be held off its coastline, the U.S. Southern Command said that the exercises would be held instead in Malaga Bay on Colombia's Pacific coast. The Manta base houses AWACS aircraft with a capability for detecting satellite phone calls. The location of the FARC guerrilla camp was reportedly determined by a satellite call regarding humanitarian exchange of prisoners made by guerrilla leader Raul Reyes to Senator Piedad Cordoba, leading Ecuadorean groups to call for an investigation into the role that U.S. and Colombian soldiers based in Manta played in the operation.

More:
http://americas.irc-online.org/am/5058

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Already posted by DU'er bemildred Friday March 7th, 2008

bemildred

Source: Xinhua

Colombia used U.S.-facilitated electronic weapons and technology in its attack on a Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) camp in Ecuadoran territory, Ecuadoran Defense Minister Wellington Sandoval said on TV Thursday.

Five U.S. "intelligent bombs" were used by Colombia in Saturday's attack, he said. The raid resulted in the deaths of 21 FARC rebels, including second-in-command Raul Reyes.

Sandoval said only the U.S. army possessed the kind of bombs used by Colombia in the attack, reiterating that no other military force in Latin America had comparable electronic equipment.

The highly precise intelligent bombs fell in a radius not bigger than 50 meters from the FARC base, located 1.5 km inside Ecuador an territory, the minister said, citing military experts who had inspected the attack site.

More:
http://english.people.com.cn/90001/90777/90852/6368418.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3213872

[Zorro]

26. So....

If it's reported in a Chinese news source then it must be true.

Got it.

[Judi Lynn]

30. The quotes they published were taken from a public speech made on Ecuadorean tv. Use your head.

It would be futile to lie about something which is common knowledge.

[Judi Lynn]

38. The Story Behind Colombia’s Attack

Column: Dispatches From the Edge: The Story Behind Colombia’s Attack
By Conn Hallinan 2008-03-14


Colombia’s March 1 attack on an insurgent camp in Ecuador appears to have been an effort by the right-wing government of Alvaro Uribe to derail efforts by Venezuela and France to free hostages held by the group, intimidate a growing movement against Bogotá’s close ties to rightwing death squads, and put the squeeze on the U.S. Congress to pass a joint trade agreement.

According to Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa, the attack—which killed 24 people, including Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) leader and diplomat Raul Reyes—spiked efforts to release French-Colombian politician Ingrid Betancourt and 11 other FARC hostages.

French diplomats say they were negotiating with Reyes with the full knowledge of the Colombian government. “In the framework of the efforts that we—Spain, Switzerland, France—were making, we had contacts with Raul Reyes,” French foreign ministry spokeswoman Pascale Andreani told Reuters, “and I can tell you the Colombians were aware of it.”

The nighttime attack on the FARC camp was also aimed at undermining ongoing efforts by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to free these and other hostages. Uribe sabotaged a Chavez initiative last December by refusing to demilitarize the area where hostages were to be released. The hostages were finally turned over to Venezuelan officials Jan. 10, much to the embarrassment of the Colombian government.

Three days after FARC released another four members of the Colombian congress, the Uribe government struck the Ecuador camp.

“What was Colombia’s objective?” asks Ana Maria Sanjuan, director of the Center for Peace and Human Rights at the Central University of Venezuela. “Clearly the whole operation was planned and executed. I think it had a lot to do with the humanitarian exchange.”

But scotching hostage releases was only one thing on Bogotá’s agenda.

According to James Brittain and Jim Sacouman, two Canadian researchers and experts on the Colombian civil war, another target was a March 6 demonstration called by the National Movement of Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism, the International Trade Union Confederation, and social justice organizations.

The groups are protesting close ties between the Uribe government and paramilitary organizations like the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (USDF) and the Black Eagles. Uribe, Colombian Vice-President Francisco Santos, Uribe’s brother, Santiago, Uribe’s cousin, Senator Mario Uribe, plus almost 100 governors, mayors and politicians have direct and indirect ties to the death squads. According to human rights organizations, some 90 percent of the people who have died in the Colombian civil war have done so at the hands of the Colombian Army and USDF.
(snip)

The Colombians claimed that the attack was a case of “hot pursuit.” Uribe said Colombian helicopters were fired on in Colombian territory and that the Army returned fire. But the FARC camp was 10 kilometers inside Ecuador. “President Uribe was either misinformed or he lied bare-facedly to the President of Ecuador,” said Correra.

The bombing took place in the middle of the night, and most of the dead were in their pajamas, not garb soldiers normally wear into combat. Nighttime bombing attacks are extremely complex and notoriously inaccurate unless the weapons are laser or satellite guided. The weapons appear to have been cluster bombs, and the suspicion is that the U.S. was directly involved, both in pinpointing the camp and in aiding the air strike.

“It seems that they used state-of-the-art technology to track the FARC group at night,” said Correa, “undoubtedly foreign powers assisted.”

http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2008-03-14/article/29469

[Zorro]

42. Ah yes...

An article from berkeleydailyplanet. No agenda there.

I see where it doesn't mention the reports that recovered computer messages indicate that Hugo Chavez committed $300 million to FARC or that the majority of Colombians are anti-FARC. Hmmm. Guess that means those reports aren't true, since they aren't mentioned in the article.

And of course it wraps up the story about the poor FARCies getting killed while still in their jammies. Just after having a warm glass of milk and getting tucked in to bed, no doubt.

[Judi Lynn]

45. Why don't you go get that information which indicates they said Hugo Chavez gave them

300,000,000? Go right ahead and get it.

As the rest of us know, it never said that whatsoever. It referred to the THREE HUNDRED FARC HOSTAGES. The computer is said to have referenced an "ANGEL" which the Uribe people claim meant HUGO CHAVEZ.

Why isn't Colombia letting anyone examine the computer information they are telling the world about?

Don't infest a progressive message board and spew right wing crap. It's a stupid idea.

[Zorro]

51. I challenge your assertion that I am "infesting" this message board

On the contrary, I am challenging your ignorance of ground truth on the complex situation that exists.

Too bad if you don't like it. Truth hurts when it doesn't comply with a simplistic perspective.

[Judi Lynn]

52. Looking forward to seeing your proof on the "FARC laptop" documents.

In the meantime, be sure to read journalist Greg Palast's article on the amazing laptop info. in post #47.

Chances are this man may just know as much as you do about Latin America, since he's been covering it every single day for years.

You're not challenging anyone with your comments.

DU'ers who are concerned with Latin America policy are very aware of the truth, and that's why WE are the ones who provide the links, the articles, and right-wingers show up with hot air and slurs against Democratic posters.

You're going nowhere with your verbal assault.

Throw some facts on us, instead.

[Zorro]

53. Sorry

I'm afraid that throwing facts at you would only bounce off your head, since it's obvious that you prefer to ignore the problems that FARC represents.

FARC is a menace not only to Colombia, but also to Ecuador. Your passionate defense of FARC shows you aren't really concerned about FARC's impact on Ecuadorian society.

[Judi Lynn]

55. Lead me to my passionate defense of FARCs statement(s).

Concern about FARC's impact on Ecuadorean society? What sense does that make? Point out any sentence I've written anywhere which would lead a sane person to that conclusion.

To get back on topic, you've neglected to provide your proof that FARCs said, in a computer document in the hands of Uribe's administration, that Hugo Chavez gave them $300,000,000.00.

We need to see the proof which convinced you, so that we, too, may be convinced.

Will be looking forward to reading that proof.

[Zorro]

56. You seem to miss the point

Let me explain it to you. One needs some clarity of vision to see that complex issues are not always so black-and-white.

You reference a source (berkeleydailyplanet) that by inference indicates you believe to be reliable.

I imply that it may be tainted with an agenda, because it neither mentions reports that Chavez provided $300M to FARC, or that the majority of Colombians are anti-FARC. An unbiased report should at least mention a couple of topical issues, which your reference did not.

The point is that anyone can link to a "report" from a wide variety of sources on the internet to assert as corroborating evidence supporting their agenda. However, there is a difference between truth and rhetoric that requires one to have a fine ability to discriminate between what's real and what's propaganda.

The reality is that FARC is a notorious criminal organization. I have personally witnessed the increase in criminality in Ecuadorean society, which really accelerated when Ecuador dollarized their economy to halt rampant inflation but had the unfortunate effect of making it easier to exchange Colombian narcodollars, including those from FARC sources.

You were asked previously whether you supported FARC and its agenda, and have dodged making a response. Unless you can acknowledge FARC's criminality, it seems to me that you lose credibility on issues related to FARC's presence in Ecuador and the attack by Colombian forces.

But I will say that I actually applaud your interest in Latin American issue, because it's an area that has been tremendously neglected by the majority of US citizens. However, the hands on all sides are dirty, and hopefully you'll come to understand that as you learn more about Latin American politics and society.

[Judi Lynn]

57. Your claim that "Chavez provided $300M to FARC" is bogus, and you have been asked to

substantiate your claim. Instead, you repeat it as if it is accepted as real.

Actually it is not.

Any reference to that charge comes from Uribe's administration, which refuses to allow anyone to verify its "evidence." I am posting comments by former New York Times/Observer/BBC News reporter, Greg Palast:

$300 Million From Chavez To Farc A Fake

Here’s the written evidence
By Greg Palast

07/03/08 "ICH" -- -- Do you believe this?

This past weekend, Colombia invaded Ecuador, killed a guerrilla chief in the jungle, opened his laptop – and what did the Colombians find? A message to Hugo Chavez that he sent the FARC guerrillas $300 million – which they’re using to obtain uranium to make a dirty bomb!

That’s what George Bush tells us. And he got that from his buddy, the strange right-wing President of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe.

So: After the fact, Colombia justifies its attempt to provoke a border war as a way to stop the threat of WMDs! Uh, where have we heard that before?

The US press snorted up this line about Chavez’ $300 million to “terrorists” quicker than the young Bush inhaling Colombia’s powdered export.

What the US press did not do is look at the evidence, the email in the magic laptop. (Presumably, the FARC leader’s last words were, “Listen, my password is ….”)

I read them. (You can read them here) While you can read it all in español, here is, in translation, the one and only mention of the alleged $300 million from Chavez:

“… With relation to the 300, which from now on we will call “dossier,” efforts are now going forward at the instructions of the boss to the cojo , which I will explain in a separate note. Let’s call the boss Ángel, and the cripple Ernesto.”

Got that? Where is Hugo? Where’s 300 million? And 300 what? Indeed, in context, the note is all about the hostage exchange with the FARC that Chavez was working on at the time (December 23, 2007) at the request of the Colombian government.

Indeed, the entire remainder of the email is all about the mechanism of the hostage exchange. Here’s the next line:
“To receive the three freed ones, Chavez proposes three options: Plan A. Do it to via of a ‘humanitarian caravan’; one that will involve Venezuela, France, the Vatican, Switzerland, European Union, democrats , Argentina, Red Cross, etc.”

As to the 300, I must note that the FARC’s previous prisoner exchange involved 300 prisoners. Is that what the ‘300’ refers to? ¿Quien sabe? Unlike Uribe, Bush and the US press, I won’t guess or make up a phastasmogoric story about Chavez mailing checks to the jungle.

To bolster their case, the Colombians claim, with no evidence whatsoever, that the mysterious “Angel” is the code name for Chavez. But in the memo, Chavez goes by the code name … Chavez.

More:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19477.htm

[Zorro]

59. You just don't or won't get it, will you?

Go back and read what I wrote.

You still miss the point, whether from overzealousness or willful ignorance.

[Judi Lynn]

61. Simply provide your proof of your (and Uribe's) claim Chavez gave FARC 300,000,000. Should be easy.

Once that's established, it will be easier to respect your comments.

In the meantime, we DO have the words of the document itself which do NOT lead a serious person to make that absurd assumption.

STILL WAITING FOR YOUR PROOF SUPPORTING YOUR CLAIMS.

[bemildred]

64. There is no proof, it's butt-covering horseshit. nt

[Zorro]

65. Well

My claim was that berkeleydailyplanet did not mention the report that Chavez provided $300M, which was in the news for several days prior to the publication of the report you cited.

If you can't understand plain English, I suggest you take some remedial reading courses. And while you're at it, take a logic course too.

[Judi Lynn]

67. You're confused. People have SEEN what Uribe is saying is proof Chavez gave FARCs $300,000,000.00.

It's a LIE.

Money is not mentioned, nor is millions.

What is known is that they were discussing the return of 300 HOSTAGES.

Uribe claims when they used the word "Angel" they were referring to Chavez. Yet, the document actually refers to Chavez as CHAVEZ. There is absolutely no reason whatsover to make that absurd jump unless you think you are fooling someone.

You are simply out of proof, or you would GO FIND THE PROOF THAT CHAVEZ GAVE $300,000,000.00 TO THE FARCs AND POST YOUR REFERENCE. Simple idea, you can solve the problem easily.

Why would the publication I used as a reference allude to something which was not in evidence? The appearance of that whopper in corporate news media is not proof until Uribe allows people in to examine what he's got.

If all he has is the document he has discussed he has NOTHING, and he will continue to have NOTHING and it's sheer deceitfulness if any corporate media continues to carry his lies concerning the contents of the laptop.

STILL WAITING FOR YOUR EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIMS.

[Zorro]

68. I confess

You apparently don't understand English.

Lo siento mucho.

Since it's apparent that you intend to continue your hysterical ravings, here's something for you to ruminate over from the Miami Herald today.

<snip>

Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, Ecuador President Rafael Correa and Colombia's FARC guerrillas issued frantic statements last week rejecting the authenticity of explosive computer files seized by Colombia in its March 1 raid of a rebel camp in Ecuador. They may have good reasons to be worried.

If proven authentic by a team of Interpol forensic computer experts invited by the Colombian government to examine three Toshiba laptops seized from slain FARC rebel leader Raúl Reyes during the raid, the documents would indicate among other things that Chávez and Correa's political careers were partly funded by one of the world's most violent terrorist groups.

In addition, the documents talk about a $300 million fund that Chávez was allegedly setting up for the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), and of Correa's active support for FARC rebel camps inside Ecuador. While Chávez is asking the world to give the FARC ''belligerent status,'' which amounts to diplomatic legitimacy, the United States, Canada and the 27-member European Union define the FARC as a ''terrorist'' group.

The team of Interpol forensic computer investigators, which has been looking into the computers for nearly two weeks, is scheduled to issue its verdict on the authenticity of the computer files by mid-April.

<snip>

More at: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/columnists/andres_oppenheimer/story/466590.html

It's curious to read that Greg Palast has had access to these emails. Hmmmm.

I'd suggest it's wiser to hear what the Interpol investigators say; their report should indicate where the truth may be in the matter.

Until then, you can continue your unhinged rants and continue to prove the point I was making that you can't believe whatever you read on the internet.

[Andrushka]

69. ouch

"Until then, you can continue your unhinged rants and continue to prove the point I was making that you can't believe whatever you read on the internet."

Says the poster who quotes from the Miami Herald.

Move along folks...

[Zorro]

70. Duelling internet references is what Judi was demanding

So I accommodated those demands. You are free to judge the veracity or accuracy of the referenced report as you wish.

I would prefer to see what unfolds on this issue if and when the reported Interpol investigators release a report.

[AlphaCentauri]

73. That is funny, 6 weeks to proof if a chunk of electronic data is authentic

the easies document to falsify is an electronic document but there are some evidence they can't falsify is the picture with leader of the argentinian communist party and the body of the ecuadorian citizen.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

71. You have this right-wing POS dead-to-rights

I confess not knowing too much about the region, except that we've been playing destabilization and murder games in Central & South America for years, and that the Bush admin has been trying like hell to oust Chavez any way they can). So I'm not familiar with the laptop story, but it does sound a lot like the laptops we've "found" several times in Afghanistan and Iraq, complete with doomsday plans and names and addresses, all neatly contained in one magic laptop. Anyway, it looks like young Zorro here has nothing but hatred and accusations he cannot back up. Thanks for speaking eloquently on the subject, even if you're having to address it to an obvious supporter of the Bush axis.

[Zorro]

72. Hmmm

You declare your ignorance on the subjects, but nevertheless have the chutzpah to label me a "supporter of the Bush axis". Shows how clueless you are.

Don't know what more I can say, since you've already described yourself as a dumbass.

[jzodda]

54. Your belief that being progessive means pro Chavez is wrong

I am as progressive as they come. My friend, born in Columbia and whose brother was kidnapped by FARC many years ago (released many years ago-back in the 80s) is as progressive as they come. Being Anti Farc, and anti Chavez does not make us right wing. I can't speak to this specific issue being discussed because I don't have the facts, though I read this whole thread with interest. I don't believe everything I read on one side or the other in any event. Everybody has an agenda to spin something one way or the other. I am sure though that you can understand that progressives don't always agree. I am as anti Hugo Chavez as they come. I don't like his policies nor his personality but that certainly does not make me right wing. In principal I am sure I may agree with some things Chavez wants, but in ways of implementation we are far far apart.

[Judi Lynn]

47. Here's more information from NY Times/Observer/BBC reporter, Greg Palast

$300 Million From Chavez To Farc A Fake

Here’s the written evidence
By Greg Palast

07/03/08 "ICH" -- -- Do you believe this?

This past weekend, Colombia invaded Ecuador, killed a guerrilla chief in the jungle, opened his laptop – and what did the Colombians find? A message to Hugo Chavez that he sent the FARC guerrillas $300 million – which they’re using to obtain uranium to make a dirty bomb!

That’s what George Bush tells us. And he got that from his buddy, the strange right-wing President of Colombia, Alvaro Uribe.

So: After the fact, Colombia justifies its attempt to provoke a border war as a way to stop the threat of WMDs! Uh, where have we heard that before?

The US press snorted up this line about Chavez’ $300 million to “terrorists” quicker than the young Bush inhaling Colombia’s powdered export.

What the US press did not do is look at the evidence, the email in the magic laptop. (Presumably, the FARC leader’s last words were, “Listen, my password is ….”)

I read them. (You can read them here) While you can read it all in español, here is, in translation, the one and only mention of the alleged $300 million from Chavez:

“… With relation to the 300, which from now on we will call “dossier,” efforts are now going forward at the instructions of the boss to the cojo , which I will explain in a separate note. Let’s call the boss Ángel, and the cripple Ernesto.”

Got that? Where is Hugo? Where’s 300 million? And 300 what? Indeed, in context, the note is all about the hostage exchange with the FARC that Chavez was working on at the time (December 23, 2007) at the request of the Colombian government.

As to the 300, I must note that the FARC’s previous prisoner exchange involved 300 prisoners. Is that what the ‘300’ refers to? ¿Quien sabe? Unlike Uribe, Bush and the US press, I won’t guess or make up a phastasmogoric story about Chavez mailing checks to the jungle.

To bolster their case, the Colombians claim, with no evidence whatsoever, that the mysterious “Angel” is the code name for Chavez. But in the memo, Chavez goes by the code name … Chavez.

More:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19477.htm

[HuffleClaw]

48. not really surprising

considering its bushco. that is behind this crap