|
"Yet there has always been a darker side to Mr Uribe. Several of his officials and allies have been accused of complicity with the paramilitaries and his army murdered many civilians. The president has seemed to want to subvert the independence of the judiciary. In foreign affairs he was sometimes naive and erratic. Colombia has been unjustly isolated abroad." --The Econobust
----------
So now we're getting down to it--the script they are writing from (...originating where? Langley, maybe. U.S. State Dept? Exxon Mobil? BP? Not sure yet.)
The "darker side" of Mr. Uribe is a Hillary problem. She's trying to ram the U.S./Colombia "free trade for the rich" agreement through Congress, where labor Democrats who object to the short life spans of union leaders in Colombia have been holding it up.
Democracy cosmetics are needed. "Several" of Uribe's "officials and allies" (about 70 of them, The Economist doesn't say) are not just "accused" of complicity with the death squads (also drug trafficking), some--including Uribe relatives--have been convicted and are in jail. So, right off the bat, The Economist is downplaying the vast, murderous corruption of this Bush Cartel puppet, even while they assist the CIA in ousting him.
"The president has seemed to want to subvert the independence of the judiciary." --The Economyst
Oh, give me a break.
But here's the nut of The Econocrack: "In foreign affairs he was sometimes naive and erratic. Colombia has been unjustly isolated abroad."
Colombia is about as "unjustly" isolated as Israel is. And guess what? They hold the No. 2 and the No. 1 positions, respectively, as the worst human rights violators on earth. "Unjustly isolated" for slaughtering thousands of civilians, and displacing some 5 million poor farmers? Colombia would be even more of a pariah--it would be completely boycotted and isolated-- if it were not being propped up by the U.S., including billions of U.S. tax dollars to its wretched, corrupt, murderous military.
"Naive and erratic." Uribe was sometimes moved by loyalty to South American sovereignty and by the opinion of his peers. For instance, back in 2007, Uribe engaged in a 4 hour meeting with Chavez in which Uribe apologized for the Colombian military plot to assassinate Chavez. Uribe's publicly announced request to Chavez to negotiate with the FARC for hostage releases probably came out of that meeting. Chavez proceeded with the hostage release effort quite successfully, but just as it began (Dec 07), Washington pulled Uribe's chain and he abruptly (days before the first Chavez negotiated hostages were to be released) rescinded his request, for no good reason, and the Colombian military sent rocket fire upon the first two hostages, as they were in route to their freedom. And when the U.S./Colombia bombed the FARC hostage release camp just inside Ecuador's border--almost starting a war between Ecuador/Venezuela and the U.S./Colombia, then and there, and ending all talk of peace in Colombia's 40+ year civil war--Uribe apologized for the attack and promised never to do it again, and furthermore joined Chavez in announcing economic projects between Venezuela and Colombia.
Another for instance, when Uribe signed the secretly negotiated U.S./Colombia military agreement, he knew it was bad, very bad, so he went round to all the leaders in South America and held private meetings trying to explain his action.
"Erratic" in that he didn't always follow the Pentagon script. I think that's what they are subterraneously saying. But "naive"? Uribe naive? That is just more white-washing.
You can bet that Santos won't be "erratic" and "naive." He'll be Reagan, or, more precisely, Rumsfeld. He doesn't give a fuck what the other leaders of Latin America think. He is the Pentagon's boy. Callous, arrogant, cold-eyed killer.
"Colombia has been unjustly isolated abroad." The Economist will help sell Santos as a democrat.
:rofl:
And here is how:
"Mr Santos’s task is to consolidate Mr Uribe’s achievement. (:puke:) That requires not blind copying but correcting mistakes, using different methods and taking some neglected steps. In democratic politics, means matter as well as ends. That was a point that Mr Uribe sometimes forgot. It was powerfully made by Antanas Mockus, a new broom who briefly threatened Mr Santos in the election by stressing 'democratic legality' and warning against 'shortcuts' in pacifying the country." --The Econocad (puke added by me)
("...a new broom" ???!)
Democracy cosmetics. Mr. Uribe's "achievement" was to kill thousands of leftist leaders, with Santos as Defense Minister. Half the murders of union leaders in Colombia were committed by the military and the other half by their closely tied rightwing paramilitary death squads (according to Amnesty International). This, and the displacement through state terror of some 5 million peasants, created conditions in many regions of Colombia that make an utter mockery of so-called elections and opinion polls. The Econodust mentions Uribe's "70%" approval rating and Santos' supposed election. You raise your head in a just cause in Colombia, you risk getting it shot off. That is what elections and polls are worth in Colombia. This was Uribe's job--to KILL and TERRORIZE the political opposition. This is what the $7 BILLION in U.S. taxpayer dollars was paying for--to pave the way for U.S. military enforced "free trade for the rich," and possibly worse: spreading Colombia's murder and mayhem throughout the region, to topple Venezuela's and Ecuador's truly representative governments, and take over their vast oil reserves, the profits of which are now being "wasted" on the poor.
Democracy is THE LAST THING IN THE WORLD that U.S. multinationals and their war apparatus want in Colombia! The Economess is one of their propaganda organs, so they don't want it either. It is a "Big Lie."
The end of The Econowreck article is ridiculous. After more lies about Venezuela, they propose that Santos send Uribe as ambassador to Beijing, to stop his "meddling." They never mention the $7 BILLION in U.S. "meddling" nor the seven new U.S. military bases in Colombia, nor anything else of real relevance to this U.S. psyops at the OAS.
And in their black holes (where information should be), ye shall know them.
The banksters (those whom FDR termed "organized money") want the Caribbean/Central America region and the northern rim of South America (Colombia, Venezuela's oil region) as their "free trade for the rich" playground. The Econorich speaks for the banksters. That goes without saying. But what I was looking for was some clues about the Clinton "free trade for the rich" agenda vs the Pentagon war/oil agenda. I'm trying to figure out if Clinton wants the war or doesn't want it. Is she trying to stave off the war by creating the "free trade for the rich" playground without firing a shot at Venezuela (or Ecuador), or is she allowing the war plans to be put in place as Plan B (perhaps to be followed up by whoever ES&S/Diebold installs in the White House in 2012, as B. Clinton's "no fly zones" and other crushings of Iraq paved the way for the Bush Junta invasion).
And I'm afraid that the "black hole" in this Econowar article is very telling. They DON'T MENTION the $7 BILLION in U.S. military aid, nor the secretive U.S./Colombia military agreement (recently signed by Uribe and the Bushwhack ambassador to Colombia, Wm Brownfield, who is still in place). Santos' job is to build upon Uribe's "achievement" of thousands of dead union leaders and other leftists, to enrich the rich, including the rich here and the allies of the rich here (British, EU banksters). It is not to create "jobs"; it is to create SLAVE LABOR jobs for U.S. and other multinationals, and to KEEP THE COUNTRY IN A STATE OF TERROR, enforced by the Colombian and U.S. militaries, with the war profiteers, here and there, cleaning our clocks. And by not mentioning the U.S. military buildup and the U.S. control of the Colombian government, they have raised my worry level about Oil War II: South America. Is that Santos' most important job? Is this Econowad 'meme' of a rift between Uribe and Santos wholly concocted, and are we in truth looking at an INVENTED narrative, with Santos and Washington calling the shots, with Uribe--under threat of removal of CIA protection--playing it out because he has to, to save his skin?
Bear in mind that it was URIBE who apologized for the bombing/raid into Ecuador. SANTOS promised to do it AGAIN (--to pursue the FARC into Venezuela and Ecuador). Santos is NOT "erratic." Santos is the Pentagon's sure bet.
Sometimes you have to read Economuck backwards, to get at the truth. And you have to peer deeply into the black holes where information should be.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
