|
to Obama on Latin America--over some supposed corruption thing in New Mexico--may be more significant than we realized.
Here's my theory: First of all, remember that Richardson visited Hugo Chavez, back during the period when the Bushwhacks/Colombia had just committed such treachery around the release of FARC hostages that Chavez was negotiating, and had sabotaged and stopped Chavez's initiatives (which they had asked him to undertake), after six were successfully freed. That was Dec 07/Feb 08, during the presidential primaries here. The political situation here, as I recall, is that Richardson had just switched from H. Clinton to Obama. At that point, Richardson visited first with Colombia's Uribe, then Chavez, reportedly on behalf of three U.S. hostages. He got nowhere with Uribe (no promise of help, apparently--a seemingly cold reception), but then spent 1 1/2 hours with Chavez, followed by a friendly press conference, in which Chavez said he would do everything he could. 1 1/2 hours. That meeting was not just about the hostages. It was my guess at the time that Richardson was an emissary from Obama. (It is normal for serious presidential candidates to feel out foreign leaders as their campaign progresses--to develop policy, and so as not to be surprised by developments, if they win the election and find themselves in the White House). And, if Richardson spent 1 1/2 hours with Chavez, we can be sure that he was thoroughly filled in on Bushwhack plots against him and other democratic leaders, on Colombia's treachery and so forth. It appeared that Richardson was being primed for Sec of State, or Asst Sec of State for Latin America. As it turned out, he was chosen for Commerce, then withdrew because of this business in NM (which I know nothing about, except that it smells of the false prosecution of Seigelman in Alabama).
The Bushwhacks are spying on everybody; our political scene, both Repub and Dem, is very corrupt, across the board, at all levels, so, basically, almost anybody can be "gotten." I have no doubt whatsoever that there are dirty little deals all over the map, possibly deliberately permitted by the Bushwhacks so they can blackmail almost anyone. Dirty or questionable deals--petty stuff compared to Bushwhack mindboggling theft--and also personal dirt. And, lacking that, they make shit up (as they did re Calif's sec of state Kevin Shelley, who had sued Diebold six months before the 2004 election). And if our leaders don't toe a certain corpo-fascist line--like say Spitzer in NY, who was going after Wall Street--they are, a) blackmailed, and, if they disobey anyway, b) are taken out. Our government has been run like the Mafia for eight years now. The Bushwhacks and their corpo/fascist pals can trigger 'scandals' on cue.
The Colombian 'free trade' deal, the $6 BILLION "war on drugs" (in Colombia alone), THE OIL in Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia (all with democratic, leftist governments) are BIG DEALS. Bush spent some of his time, in his last week in office, giving a Medal of Freedom, for godssakes, to that narco-trafficking, murderous little SOB, Uribe. Also, keep in mind that Hillary Clinton had Mark Penn, a paid agent of the Colombian government, as her chief campaign adviser. She is now Sec of State. And Chiquita execs' death squad attorney--for their paid murder of some 4,000 union leaders and members in Colombia--Eric Holder, is now Attorney General of the U.S.
SOMETHING has happened--probably a deal with Obama, which he may have agreed to so as not to be Diebolded--to radically change the direction of his Latin American foreign policy. And Richardson getting aced out may be the key to it. He gets no appointment. He even lost Commerce--a position in which he might have done some good for pro-democracy policy in L/A. I'm speculating a lot here, on what Richardson may have been doing, visiting Chavez, on what Richardson's beliefs about L/A policy might be, and on what has happened with Obama, for his administration to be so dominated by DINOs/DLCers (who might as well be Bushwhacks on most issues), and on how Richardson was taken out. I'm just now putting my thoughts together on this. But I think I may be on to something--and it is not good as to peaceful relations with democratic countries rich in oil in South America. We may even be seeing a second oil war in development, which could be Obama's "Bay of Pigs."
And all this may be why Lula da Silva issued this warning to Obama--warning him to stop these destructive Bushwhack/DLC policies, and--for Obama's own good, I think, as well as for the sake of South American countries--to understand "the strength of democracy that exists in this region" now, that has never been there before. Also the unity. The South American countries--in their new institution UNASUR, the South American 'common market'--acted swiftly and unanimously to help Evo Morales turn back a Bushwhack-organized coup attempt just this September. If Obama proceeds against Venezuela, he will find a wall of opposition, and will set back U.S./Latin American relations another century. The evidence is not good that Obama has the power, or desire, to create a new L/A policy that respects L/A democracy and sovereignty. Was Richardson being elbowed out by the DLCers (perhaps with help from the Bushwhack spies) a pivotal moment in this bad turn?
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
