US State Dept Spokesman Tight-Lipped on Anti-Venezuelan Actions
The following sheds some light on the dubious US position "100%" in support of Colombian President Uribe, whose bribing of Venezuelan officials to kidnap an opposition spokesman in Venezuela (who didn't appear on any official Colombian or international wanted lists until after his kidnapping had occurred) helped the international media oligopoly to label Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez Frias a supporter of terrorism. My comments are italicized. Colombia is increasingly becoming the US supported Israel for South America, and is the second largest recipient of US government dollars behind Israel.
State Dept. Daily Press Briefing for January 26 -- Transcript
Daily Press Briefing Richard Boucher, Spokesman
Washington, DC
January 26, 2005
George.
QUESTION: In light of the Panamanian delegation here, I'm going to ask a Latin America question.
MR. BOUCHER: Okay, thank you. They will be honored, I am sure.
QUESTION: What is the State Department doing to enlist the cooperation of other hemispheric countries in the conflict between Colombia and Venezuela about the fact that a FARC leader was given a safe haven in Venezuela?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, we've talked to other countries in the hemisphere about the situation specifically with regard to Venezuela and then -- or with regard to Venezuela and specifically with regard to the situation between Venezuela and Colombia. We have asked our hemispheric partners to urge Venezuela to adopt a more conciliatory and constructive position and to end any relationship it might have with the Armed Forces of Colombia, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the FARC, and Colombia's other terrorist organization. (In short, we've applied pressure to our client states to pressure Venezuela to accept this and further incursions by Colombia into sovereign Venezuelan territory, and to pressure Venezuela to stop supporting - not that we're officially accusing them of support, but I'll toss you a vague assertion to help influence public opinion - political and/or armed opposition to Uribe's US sponsored economic policies)
We have, indeed, shared our thoughts with countries like Brazil (Brazil wants a seat on the UN Security Council and needs our support, so we've twisted their arm on this for a promise of support, which may never materialize without consequence to us) and we appreciate Brazil's efforts to constructively engage both President Chavez and President Uribe in efforts to withdraw (from calling attention to our plot to label Chavez a supporter of terrorism in public opinion without the need to provide factual details)-- to resolve this dispute.
We have also highlighted our support for Peru's efforts as Andean Community president to help resolve the dispute. (Peru is very important to us because its President Toledo was elected by a wide margin on anti-corruption posturing, and under our teaching has instead instituted radical free market economics on par with Colombia's to result in a 10% approval rating. Thus, we do not want to see advances in Colombia's opposition because it may embolden Peruvian opposition) Other countries' efforts are, as I said, worthwhile and important as well. (We don't want to see people in other South or Central American nations become emboldened to slow the free flow of natural resources to North America without benefit to the nation that owns the resources) We think everybody in the hemisphere should be concerned about this, should encourage Venezuela to adopt a non-confrontational approach, (toward incursions of sovereignty by our client states) encourage them to ensure that there is no support whatsoever coming from Venezuela for terrorist groups (political and economic opposition to Uribe's radical free market economics and his refusal to negotiate with opposition) that are operating in Colombia, (at the same time giving free reign to Colombian state sponsored terrorist groups to operate toward the overthrow of democracy in Venezuela) and thereby to have a basis for working out their differences with Colombia in an amicable fashion.
QUESTION: You alluded to a list the other day that Colombia handed to Venezuela concerning terrorists --
MR. BOUCHER: I think I talked about reports of a list. I'm not sure I was able to confirm it.
QUESTION: All right. Well, can you advance the ball at all today?
MR. BOUCHER: Don't think so. (Don't press me. I know Granda wasn't on any list and don't want that to come up, and I don't want to be pressured later to admit that the "list" that Colombia provided Venezuela was only for media purposes to portray Venezuelan President Chavez as a supporter of terrorism, and that the list will eventually prove to be a farce. It's bs and I know it)
QUESTION: Okay.
QUESTION: So, as you discuss with your partners in the hemisphere, it seems that all of the emphasis is on talking to Venezuela about Venezuela adopting a different approach, (in a manner disturbingly similar to telling Palestinians that peace will only come when they quit defending themselves and their assets) or is there any sort of work that can be done with the (Israelis, ah-) Colombians, I mean, over the Venezuelan --
MR. BOUCHER: Well, as I said, (we won't talk directly to Uribe about it because we don't want to tell him on one hand to breach Venezuelan sovereignty, and other the other hand call him to account for it. It would frankly make us look like fools. Instead, out of the public eye,) the Brazilians are talking to both the Colombians and the Venezuelans. The Andean president, the Peruvians, are talking to both countries as well. So certainly anybody in the hemisphere that is trying to encourage a peaceful solution to these problems needs to talk to both sides. But I think in terms of the (economic) issues at stake here and the principles (of free liberation of natural resources) at stake here, no support for any terrorists (opposition) has got to be one of the paramount issues to resolve the dispute.
QUESTION: And while that one's paramount, one of the complaints from Venezuela is that there was some kind of abuse of its sovereignty because of the alleged bribing of its own officials. Are people talking to Colombia about that?
MR. BOUCHER: I think people are talking to Colombia and Venezuela about all aspects of the dispute. (and encouraging Chavez to accept this kind of future of foreign intervention in domestic affairs)
QUESTION: Do you have any view as to whether Colombia, perhaps, should have tried to extradite one or more of these people, or do you think they handled it properly?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have any view on specifics (that I would like to discuss publicly) because I (would like you to) think the specifics are not completely clear. We certainly don't think that (spokesmen for opposition to our man Uribe) FARC members should be allowed to roam around other places and other countries in the neighborhood (and be able to present their view of the economic equation) with seeming impunity. (We prefer for Uribe to eliminate our opposition quietly and out of public view, instead of through diplomatic channels where motives may be revealed and questioned)
QUESTION: New topic?
MR. BOUCHER: New topic. Let's go
State Dept. Daily Press Briefing for January 26 -- Transcript
Daily Press Briefing Richard Boucher, Spokesman
Washington, DC
January 26, 2005
George.
QUESTION: In light of the Panamanian delegation here, I'm going to ask a Latin America question.
MR. BOUCHER: Okay, thank you. They will be honored, I am sure.
QUESTION: What is the State Department doing to enlist the cooperation of other hemispheric countries in the conflict between Colombia and Venezuela about the fact that a FARC leader was given a safe haven in Venezuela?
MR. BOUCHER: Well, we've talked to other countries in the hemisphere about the situation specifically with regard to Venezuela and then -- or with regard to Venezuela and specifically with regard to the situation between Venezuela and Colombia. We have asked our hemispheric partners to urge Venezuela to adopt a more conciliatory and constructive position and to end any relationship it might have with the Armed Forces of Colombia, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the FARC, and Colombia's other terrorist organization. (In short, we've applied pressure to our client states to pressure Venezuela to accept this and further incursions by Colombia into sovereign Venezuelan territory, and to pressure Venezuela to stop supporting - not that we're officially accusing them of support, but I'll toss you a vague assertion to help influence public opinion - political and/or armed opposition to Uribe's US sponsored economic policies)
We have, indeed, shared our thoughts with countries like Brazil (Brazil wants a seat on the UN Security Council and needs our support, so we've twisted their arm on this for a promise of support, which may never materialize without consequence to us) and we appreciate Brazil's efforts to constructively engage both President Chavez and President Uribe in efforts to withdraw (from calling attention to our plot to label Chavez a supporter of terrorism in public opinion without the need to provide factual details)-- to resolve this dispute.
We have also highlighted our support for Peru's efforts as Andean Community president to help resolve the dispute. (Peru is very important to us because its President Toledo was elected by a wide margin on anti-corruption posturing, and under our teaching has instead instituted radical free market economics on par with Colombia's to result in a 10% approval rating. Thus, we do not want to see advances in Colombia's opposition because it may embolden Peruvian opposition) Other countries' efforts are, as I said, worthwhile and important as well. (We don't want to see people in other South or Central American nations become emboldened to slow the free flow of natural resources to North America without benefit to the nation that owns the resources) We think everybody in the hemisphere should be concerned about this, should encourage Venezuela to adopt a non-confrontational approach, (toward incursions of sovereignty by our client states) encourage them to ensure that there is no support whatsoever coming from Venezuela for terrorist groups (political and economic opposition to Uribe's radical free market economics and his refusal to negotiate with opposition) that are operating in Colombia, (at the same time giving free reign to Colombian state sponsored terrorist groups to operate toward the overthrow of democracy in Venezuela) and thereby to have a basis for working out their differences with Colombia in an amicable fashion.
QUESTION: You alluded to a list the other day that Colombia handed to Venezuela concerning terrorists --
MR. BOUCHER: I think I talked about reports of a list. I'm not sure I was able to confirm it.
QUESTION: All right. Well, can you advance the ball at all today?
MR. BOUCHER: Don't think so. (Don't press me. I know Granda wasn't on any list and don't want that to come up, and I don't want to be pressured later to admit that the "list" that Colombia provided Venezuela was only for media purposes to portray Venezuelan President Chavez as a supporter of terrorism, and that the list will eventually prove to be a farce. It's bs and I know it)
QUESTION: Okay.
QUESTION: So, as you discuss with your partners in the hemisphere, it seems that all of the emphasis is on talking to Venezuela about Venezuela adopting a different approach, (in a manner disturbingly similar to telling Palestinians that peace will only come when they quit defending themselves and their assets) or is there any sort of work that can be done with the (Israelis, ah-) Colombians, I mean, over the Venezuelan --
MR. BOUCHER: Well, as I said, (we won't talk directly to Uribe about it because we don't want to tell him on one hand to breach Venezuelan sovereignty, and other the other hand call him to account for it. It would frankly make us look like fools. Instead, out of the public eye,) the Brazilians are talking to both the Colombians and the Venezuelans. The Andean president, the Peruvians, are talking to both countries as well. So certainly anybody in the hemisphere that is trying to encourage a peaceful solution to these problems needs to talk to both sides. But I think in terms of the (economic) issues at stake here and the principles (of free liberation of natural resources) at stake here, no support for any terrorists (opposition) has got to be one of the paramount issues to resolve the dispute.
QUESTION: And while that one's paramount, one of the complaints from Venezuela is that there was some kind of abuse of its sovereignty because of the alleged bribing of its own officials. Are people talking to Colombia about that?
MR. BOUCHER: I think people are talking to Colombia and Venezuela about all aspects of the dispute. (and encouraging Chavez to accept this kind of future of foreign intervention in domestic affairs)
QUESTION: Do you have any view as to whether Colombia, perhaps, should have tried to extradite one or more of these people, or do you think they handled it properly?
MR. BOUCHER: I don't have any view on specifics (that I would like to discuss publicly) because I (would like you to) think the specifics are not completely clear. We certainly don't think that (spokesmen for opposition to our man Uribe) FARC members should be allowed to roam around other places and other countries in the neighborhood (and be able to present their view of the economic equation) with seeming impunity. (We prefer for Uribe to eliminate our opposition quietly and out of public view, instead of through diplomatic channels where motives may be revealed and questioned)
QUESTION: New topic?
MR. BOUCHER: New topic. Let's go
posted by Odysseus at 8:49 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home