|
and/or Bush Junta complicity in Uribe's crimes, which include ties to rightwing death squads, ties to drug trafficking, many, many murders by the $7 BILLION U.S.-funded Colombian military and massive illegal domestic spying (apparently linked to the creation of "lists" for death squad or Colombian military murders and death threats, even against Colombia's prosecutors and judges).
There is considerable circumstantial evidence that the Bush Junta was complicit in Uribe's excessively criminal regime, that the Obama administration is in some way obliged to cover this up and that protecting and even coddling Uribe is part of the cover up (likely because of what he knows about U.S./Bush Junta complicity).
The article states that, "Critics of international law see Garzón's appointment as an infringement of national sovereignty, while defenders of human rights are concerned about the president's hidden intentions, suspecting him of seeking endorsement for his policies."
I think there is far more at issue than national vs international legal jurisdiction or Santos' policies. And I find the opinion of Colombia's state prosecutor alarming in this regard.
"The most virulent critic has been the state prosecutor, Alejandro Ordóñez, who noted that Garzón has been the subject of three disciplinary inquiries in Spain, and is temporarily suspended from the national court." --from the OP
Colombian prosecutors have been the victims of at least two gross U.S. interferences with their justice system in collusion with Uribe--the midnight removal of death squad witnesses to the U.S. on mere drug charges and their "burial" in the U.S. federal prison system, out of the reach of Colombian prosecutors and other their objections (circa 2009-2010), and the presumed (my presumption) U.S. involvement in the flight of the chief spying witness against Uribe to the U.S. client state of Panama with Panama giving her instant asylum upon her arrival (early this year)--also over the objections of Colombian prosecutors. (I don't think this could have happened without CIA approval, and even complicity.)
There is quite a bit more, as to indicators of a U.S. government cover-up of Bush Junta crimes in Colombia. I won't go into it all. But what is going on, generally, is an attempt to "launder" Colombia's image in prep for U.S. "free trade for the rich." Colombia is so notorious for its murders of trade unionists, teachers, community activists, political leftists, journalists, peasant farmers and others that there is a P.R. problem. The U.S. government and its corporate masters don't really care if these people are dead--in fact, it was Bush Junta policy to make them dead. But U.S. "free trade for the rich" is a hard sell, in all respects. Add to this Colombia's bloody ground work, and the hypocrisy is egregious, and, above all, highly visible. I believe that this is the reason for Leon Panetta yanking Uribe off the stage (and preparing a silk cushion for him to fall upon) and vetting and approving Santos as the "new face" for U.S. "free trade for the rich."
For "laundering" to be successful, it has to put forward positive associations. For instance, Uribe was given academic sinecures at Georgetown and Harvard. Their good names were sullied to "purify" Uribe. Bringing in Judge Garzón could be a similar move--and it is especially worrisome that the Colombian prosecutor objects to it. He is in a position to know what is going on.
Garzón's function could be to put an international gloss on the U.S. cover up--possibly to also protect Uribe, although I suspect that Uribe is a lesser rung "made man" than Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld,--i.e., may not be fully covered by Obama's "we need to look forward not backward" immunity for the crimes of the richest and the most powerful. Garzón's purpose may be to protect the richest and most powerful, i.e., to insure that Uribe never tells what he knows--whatever that may mean as to Uribe's fate. He could also be functioning as a spy--to keep the U.S. government informed as to how close the prosecutors are getting to Uribe and what they know, and to warn the U.S. government if and when it needs to jettison Uribe.
I also think that brutal consolidation and control of the trillion+ dollar cocaine revenue stream is a major factor in this situation--and may even have been the chief goal of the Bush/Uribe collaboration--with "free trade for the rich," war profiteering, warmongering, expansion of the Pentagon's footprint, prep for Oil War IV: South America, and promotion of fascism as secondary goals. I have generally thought of the Bush Junta as thieves, as opposed to serious nazis--or more thieves than nazis--and that gold mine--Colombia's cocaine industry--would surely make their eyes glitter, possibly as much as Iraq's, Iran's and Venezuela's oil. In any case, if U.S. banksters, the CIA, the Bush Cartel and/or other such parties are beneficiaries of Uribe's criminal network--that is, of his consolidation of the cocaine trade (use of U.S. militarism to smash up the smaller cocaine operations and secure and direct the huge profits)--it is all the more reason for the U.S. to be covering up U.S/Bush Junta activity in Colombia.
With so much money involved--trillions and trillions of dollars, altogether, in war profiteering, corporate resource exploitation, corporate labor exploitation, massive land theft and the drug trade--it would be a mere trifle to corrupt a judge and have him be the operative for interfering with Colombia's prosecutors, rather than the direct U.S. interference that absconding with death squad and spying witnesses represented. It would also "send a message" to Colombia's prosecutors that they are all alone--or perhaps send a final message. The U.S. did have Uribe--Uribe!--teaching "international law" at Harvard!
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
