Aligned with Chavez (Morales, Bolivia) not aligned with Chavez (Lula, Brazil)

[ChangoLoa]

Evo Morales backs Chávez's military call

Bolivian President Evo Morales supported on Monday his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chávez, who called upon militaries to get ready for a war in reference to the increasing tension with neighboring Colombia.

Morales also disclosed that he would call an emergency meeting of member states of the Bolivarian Alternative for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA).

"Any president has the duty to defend dignity and sovereignty of his territory; that is constitutional;" Morales said in a press conference held on Monday in the central city of Cochabamba, Bolivia, AP reported.

"I have come to the conclusion that it is annexation of Colombia to the United States. Colombia is a US military base," Morales reasoned. "It is open provocation to the countries which are starting to dignify their people, and to revolutionary governments," he added.

http://english.eluniversal.com/2009/11/09/en_pol_esp_evo-morales-backs-ch_09A3027291.shtml


Brazil reiterates willingness to mediate between Bogotá and Caracas

The Brazilian government is ready to act as a middleman in the diplomatic downturn between Colombia and Venezuela, Marco Aurelio García, the advisor on foreign policy to the Brazilian Presidency, said on Thursday.

García proposed a monitoring system on the border. "If it were up to us, we would make the two of them talk, at the request of the two of them," the diplomat said in reference to Presidents Álvaro Uribe, of Colombia, and Hugo Chávez, of Venezuela, AFP quoted.

Colombia-Venezuela ties, at a standstill since July, have lately worsened after an agreement that enables the United States to use Colombian military bases.

On Sunday, Chávez urged Venezuelans to "prepare for war." Last Tuesday, however, he denied his message was meant to trigger an armed conflict with Colombia.

"The border area is today the core of tension between Venezuela and Colombia (…) If they need monitoring in the region, we are ready to do it, commented the advisor to Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

http://english.eluniversal.com/2009/11/12/en_pol_esp_brazil-reiterates-wi_12A3046251.shtml

[Peace Patriot]

1. The rightwingers here at DU seem to have a big stake in pushing this corpo-fascist line that

Chavez and Lulu are not in accord, are not strongly allied, and are not good friends (who meet every month to discuss various matters). The evidence to the contrary--that they ARE quite good friends and allies is very strong, yet they ignore all of the evidence and just keep insisting that the opposite is true. I can only guess that this is some kind of corpo-fascist/CIA/Bushwhack wishful thinking, or perhaps step one in a plot to try to "divide and conquer" them. Plotters like these have the power to plant their preliminaries in the Wall Street Urinal, the Washington Psst, the New York Grimes, or wherever they want to, throughout the world in the network of corpo-fascist 'news' monopolies (including El Universal), and that is where rightwingers may be picking up this "talking point."

Lula da Silva is one of the biggest objectors to the U.S. military buildup in the region. In fact, he said that the US 4th Fleet--that the Bushwhacks reconstituted in the Caribbean last summer--is "a threat to Brazil's oil," and it was Brazil that proposed a "common defense" for South America in the context of their new "common market," UNASUR. That he is offering to mediate between Colombia and Venezuela--with Venezuela under the most threat at the moment from the $6 BILLION-U.S. taxpayer funded Colombian military and the seven new U.S. military bases in Colombia--does not mean that Lulu and Chavez are not closely allied on all major issues, including rejecting a Junta-run election in Honduras and fully backing President Zelaya (Lulu is giving Zelaya refuge in the Brazilian embassy in Honduras!), keeping national control of resources like oil and using the profits to benefit the poor (Lulu just secured the majority share in Brazil's new major oil find for this purpose--in close alignment with Chavez and other leaders, like Morales and Correa), rejecting U.S.-imposed "neo-liberalism" (Lulu has been scathing in his criticism of U.S. and other 'first world' economic advisors), on regional Latin American cooperation and control of their own destiny, on regional development, on a "raise all boats" philosophy toward smaller, weaker countries (Lulu has been particularly helpful to Paraguay and Bolivia), and on and on. Lulu just last week, in a public appearance with Chavez, announcing Venezuela/Brazil economic accords, stressed that Latin American countries must "choose each other" rather than "looking north" (to the U.S.) for trade and development.

Lulu credits Chavez with stopping the war that the Bushwhacks tried to instigate between Colombia and Ecuador in early 2008. Lulu called him "the great peacemaker." He is well aware of the threats to Venezuela with Colombia's 40+ year civil war just over its border--a civil war that the U.S. is using to justify U.S. militarism. He knows what happened at that time--that the U.S./Colombia bombing/raid on Ecuador's territory all but killed the then-current hopes for peace in Colombia's civil war. It has been his purpose, and Chavez's purpose, and the purpose of good leaders, to draw Colombia more into UNASUR's obit, away from the U.S. and its bad, bad, bad motives of destabilization, toppling democracies, fomenting division and civil war, grabbing resources and looting and exploiting other countries. That he wants to help mediate between Venezuela and Colombia in no way cancels out these facts about Lulu and his friendly accord with Chavez. It is absurd and wrong, and flies in the face of the facts, to assert that Bolivia is aligned with Venezuela and Brazil is not aligned with Venezuela, on the basis of this situation. Lulu wants peace. Chavez wants peace. Morales wants peace. That has been a major thrust of their dealings with each other over the last 3 to 4 four years!

[EFerrari]

4. I know. What a pantload.

[Judi Lynn]

12. Love those photos! It seems harder to NOT know about their friendship than to have been aware

of it all this time. It's not as if it had been a secret, after all!

I like the group hands photo.

Thanks for the reminders. :woohoo:

[ChangoLoa]

15. Friends, almost allies... yes, but not "aligned"

It's maybe a question of subjective language, but for me these concepts are quite different...

If they were aligned, for example, Brazil wouldn't have proposed the joint monitoring system Chavez just refused.

You can see the difference between Bolivia's and Brazil's positions on this issue. In my language, Bolivia is "aligned" with Chavez, not Brazil.

[ChangoLoa]

7. El Universal??!

You've been failing to explain why you say El Universal is part of a "network of corpo-fascist 'news' monopolies" for the last 2 months. I personally think it's not correct.

What do you know about this newspaper that leads you to that judgement?

[Judi Lynn]

9. Just one tiny scratch on the surface of available information on the fact El Universal is spin:

Media In Venezuela: Facts and Fiction
Written by Caitlin McNulty and Liz Migliorelli
Monday, 17 August 2009

~snip~
Print media in Venezuela is diverse, but it depicts a greater opposition presence than seen in television networks. Many publications are corporate-owned and extremely critical of the Chávez administration. In comparison to the United States, where New York, the largest city, has only four daily papers (New York Times, Wall Street Journal, New York Post, Daily News), two of which are markedly sympathetic to the Bush administration, Caracas, the capital of Venezuela, has twenty-one daily papers. Whereas the New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, USA Today and Washington Post are the only nationally distributed daily papers in the United States, Venezuela circulates eight daily papers nationally. A Washington D.C. based think-tank Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) has described the print media situation in simple terms: “nine out of ten newspapers, including {the most prestigious daily} El Nacional and {the business oriented} El Universal, are staunchly anti-Chávez.” 7

Venezuela - Opposition News Sites

El Universal - Newspaper (Spanish)

Union Radio Web Site - Up to the minute news (Spanish)

Analitica.com - Short opposition opinion pieces - good archives (Spanish)

Noticiero Digital - Extremist Opposition opinion site (Spanish)

Petroleum World - Focus on Ven Oil

Bonus graph for the enjoyment of the worthwhile posters at D.U.

http://i6.photobucket.com.nyud.net:8090/albums/y218/oilwars/image001-6.gif
http://oilwars.blogspot.com/2007/06/venezuelan-military-spending-busting.html

[ChangoLoa]

14. El Universal is anti-Chavez, I agree, but

After reading it for the last decades (among other Venezuelan newspapers), I can tell you that describing it as part of a "network of corpo-fascist 'news' monopolies" is not correct.

By the way, El Nacional was quite pro-Chavez at the beginning.

[Judi Lynn]

19. We've all known about Andres Mata, who runs El Universal, for years.

He was one of the media co-conspirators in the coup. Did you imagine we'd be ignorant about it? He met extensively with other coup-enabling media owners/publishers/editors prior to the coup.

Found a quick reference mentioned in a thread posted all the way back in 2004, from Indiana Green:

IndianaGreen (1000+ posts) Tue Nov-30-04 12:17 AM
Response to Reply #71

El Universal is a rightwing newspaper
which played a key role in the US-sponsored coup:

Led by Cisneros, the media group, which also included Andrews Mata, owner of El Universal, Venezuela's other major daily, met with self-proclaimed interim President and big business mouthpiece Pedro Carmona on Saturday April 14, as demonstrators were pouring out on the streets of Caracas demanding Chávez' return. Flanked by one of the generals who had installed him in the presidential palace only a day earlier, Carmona asked the media bosses for help.

They obliged: shortly thereafter, the news blackout, which had started the night before, became total. Neither El Universal nor El Nacional published their Sunday editions. Globovisión's Ravell reportedly even called CNN's Atlanta headquarters to ask, in vain, that the U.S. network join the news blackout.

Venezuelans with access to cable and satellite — mostly the rabidly anti-Chávez middle and upper classes, the 20 percent not living in abject poverty — were thus able to find out that the coup was failing without leaving their homes. The poor had to go out on the streets to find out, which made them angrier — some attacked TV stations and newspapers — and probably accelerated Chávez' restoration, which happened early last Sunday.

http://www.thegully.com/essays/venezuela/020421_venezuel_media_coup.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1030870#1031062

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

~snip~
It seems that many had hoped, as had always been Venezuelan tradition, that key big business supporters of the president would be named to important ministerial posts. The editor of El Nacional, Andrés Mata, for example, had clearly hoped to become the minister of culture. Others were hoping to control the ministry of production and commerce and other related economic ministries. Chávez, however, made a clean break from Venezuelan political tradition in this case and did not name any of these types of supporters to ministerial posts.

It was thus only a matter of time for these former supporters from the business sector to turn against Chávez. But of course it was not just the slight of their traditional rights that bothered Venezuelan big business; they also had to contend with a number of programs that directly touched upon their privileges. Three policy areas enraged the Venezuelan business class.

First, right after Chávez became president, he rescinded a law that stated that Venezuelan business would no longer have to pay generous severance payment to laid-off workers. (Venezuela for the longest time required business to pay generous severance packages. This policy had been reversed, though, shortly before Chávez came into office.) Second, Chávez moved forward in enforcing Venezuela’s tax code. For decades, the Venezuelan business sector avoided paying taxes and the government, in the belief that looking the other way in the face of tax evasion would be good for the economy, tolerated this.

During Venezuela’s oil boom years, the country could easily afford such tax evasion. However, as the oil revenues steadily declined from the 1980s onward, it could no longer afford tax evasion, but most governments were too timid to do anything about it. When Chávez came into office he immediately set about collecting taxes, closing businesses temporarily or, more recently, refusing hard currency to them if they refused to pay.

Third, and perhaps most importantly, Chávez introduced the so-called “enabling laws” mentioned earlier (land reform, banking reform, and oil industry reform), which touched on a wide variety of business sector interests.

The main representative of Venezuelan big business is its largest chamber of commerce, Fedecamaras. As such, it took up the fight against Chávez and announced its first challenge on December 10, 2001, when it, together with the union federation CTV, called for a general strike.

Fedecamaras opposition tactics, under the leadership of its president, Pedro Carmona, eventually led to the April 2002 coup attempt and Carmona’s two-day self-proclaimed presidency. It would seem that the chamber’s resistance to Chávez is slowly coming to an end with Chávez’s recent victory in the recall referendum.

More:
http://www.voltairenet.org/article125894.html?var_recherche=The%20bolivarian%20revolution%20of%20Hugo%20Chavez

[Braulio]

13. Brazil isn't really aligned with Venezuela

Brazil is aligned with Brazil.

For the record:

Population, Brazil 191 million, Venezuela 28 million.
GDP Brazil $1313 billion, Venezuela $228 billion;
Area Brazil 8.5 million Km2, Venezuela 0.9 million Km2.

Lula (not Lulu) is a moderate leftist interested in improving his country's economy, and to do so has worked very hard to obtain contracts and sales for Brazilian companies. This policy has had great success. Today Brazilian companies do a lot of business in Venezuela via no-bid country to country agreements which generate tremendous profits for Brazilian PRIVATE business, all of this thanks to Lula's diplomacy. In other words, the guy is a genius.

Brazilian democracy is alive and well, something we can't say about Venezuela's, this means the leftists will have a very difficult time gaining the presidency next time (not because Lula did a bad job, but because the leftist candidate is somewhat colourless). However, the Brazilian elites are 100 % in agreement they need to continue to appease Chavez as much as possible - AS LONG AS THEY CAN PROFIT FROM DOING BUSINESS IN VENEZUELA.

Regarding Brazil's opposition to US military presence in Colombia, the Brazilians have, as a long term strategy, the goal to set themselves up as continental leaders. This means they don't want the Americans to interfere with THEIR plans. They see Chavez as a bothersome pimple who will eventually pop, and want to move on to roll the whole continent under a Brazilian umbrella. Which isn't a bad idea as long as they continue electing good leaders like Lula.

[ChangoLoa]

16. Actually, Latin American hard right wing would always try to show that Lula and other leftist

candidates were aligned with Chavez. They have tried it with Lugo, Tabaré Vasquez, Mujica, etc... before every election. In fact, Brazilian hard right used and overused the argument Lula = Chavez (I know you're not saying that) before it became ridiculous.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

2. This is just another attempt by Chavez

to make himself a bigger player in the world stage that he actually is or deserves to be. There is a bit of irony in him allowing the FARC to operate in Venezuela and wage war on Colombia while raising a stink about the right of his nation to defend its sovereignty - however it's an irony he and many of his supporters obviously miss.

[EFerrari]

3. You have yet to show any evidence whatsoever of Chavez

"allowing FARC to operate in Venezuela".

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

5. The best argument you can make, EFerrari

is that Chavez is turning a blind eye to it.

[EFerrari]

6. "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." -- Donald Rumsfeld.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

8. Hold on a minute

You're denying that the FARC are present on Venezuelan soil?

[EFerrari]

10. LOL. No, I've been asking you to produce evidence

that FARC is being supported on Venezuelan soil by the Venezuelan government and all you do is dance, stranger.

Well, don't dance for me any more because I'm not watching.

lol

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

11. If you're going to continue to stonewall me, fine, we'll play it your way.

As another poster was so kind to provide in a similar thread (one you apparently avoiding):

Here's an article on how Venezuelan purchased, shoulder-launched anti-tank missiles have made their way into the FARC's hands: http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/07/27/colombia.venezuela.arms/index.html

Here's an article on how evidence of a working relationship between Chavez's government and the FARC has been found on a laptop recovered in a strike that killed a FARC commander: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/03/world/americas/03venez.html?_r=2

Other aspects of this I assume don't need a source, since anyone remotely familiar with the topic understands them to be true - i.e. the Venezuelan government's complete unwillingness to do anything about the FARC's fighters using Venezuelan territory to rearm, to extort money, etc. and Chavez's efforts to convince nation's around the globe to remove the FARC from their lists of terrorist organizations. However, if you're going to nitpick or deny these basics, I'd be more than happy to provide sources for them as well.

Also, I don't blame you for not wanting to pursue this further. It's clear you've put Chavez on some kind of pedestal and are unwilling to acknowledge that he has his hands dirty in this war and that he's being pretty damned disingenuous in insisting that Venezuela's territorial integrity must be respected at all costs while he's clearly violating Colombia's.

[Peace Patriot]

18. LOL! You can't pull that crap here, Skyway. We have closely followed the complete

discrediting of both stories--the missiles and the laptop(S).

As for "Chavez's efforts to convince nation's around the globe to remove the FARC from their lists of terrorist organizations", that was in the context of a concerted effort by many parties--including President Sarkozy of France, the governments of Spain and Switzerland, the presidents of Ecuador and Argentina, the families of FARC hostages, human rights groups and others, to broker a peace in Colombia's 40+ year civil war in 2008. The FARC needed to be taken off the Bushwhacky 'list" and acknowledged for what they are--an indigenous rebellion, unique to Colombia (not part of some Al Qaeda-like, international "terrorist" network), with justifiable reasons for revolting against their own government; i.e., a legitimate fighting force--in order to de-Bushify the whole situation, and make a peaceful settlement of the civil war possible.

This is one of the reasons that Lulu da Silva called Chavez "the great peacemaker" during that period. He not only de-fused the war that the US/Colombia were trying to instigate by their bombing/raid on Ecuador (in which they killed the FARC's chief hostage release and peace negotiator, Raul Reyes, and 24 other sleeping people), he was trying to use Alvaro Uribe's request of him to negotiate FARC hostage releases as a means of brokering a peace in Colombia's long civil war. Unknown to Chavez, at first, was that this treacherous request by Uribe was not genuine; it was a trap; and it was then used to try to frame Chavez as a "terrorist-lover."

You are parading elements of intense psyops and disinformation as facts. They are not facts. They are bullshit, and your coup de grace--"It's clear you've put Chavez on some kind of pedestal..."--denying reason itself to someone who bothers to find out the facts about your pathetic little parade of rightwing "talking points"--says more about you than anything else. We've seen this tactic before: If someone defends Chavez because THE FACTS WARRANT IT, they are called a "Chavez lover," or accused of thinking that "Chavez is God." The person who bases their opinion ON FACTS is accused of the opposite--of basing their opinion only on emotion. My conclusion from this ad hominem part of your argument is that you yourself have made an a priori decision that Chavez is a "terrorist-lover" and so you don't feel the need to investigate the items that you cite in defense of that view. I won't accuse you of doing so for emotional reasons, because I don't know what your emotional attachments are. But I do know this: You have made up your mind and facts don't matter to you.

[Zorro]

21. You mean this "discrediting" of the laptop(s) stories?

Direct from INTERPOL's site:

INTERPOL reaffirms key findings of its examination of seized FARC computers in response to efforts to distort conclusions

Following the publication of ‘INTERPOL’s Forensic report on FARC computers and hardware seized by Colombia’ on Thursday, 15 May 2008, there have been many inaccurate and misleading statements made in relation to INTERPOL’s findings.

The most recent misinterpretation of the report’s conclusions was contained in a press release issued by Ecuador’s Ministry of Foreign Relations on Tuesday, 10 June following a meeting with INTERPOL officials from its New York office at the United Nations. Ecuador's press release gives the false impression that some ‘new’ information was brought to light during its meeting with INTERPOL representatives. INTERPOL believes that Ecuador has misinterpreted the key findings of INTERPOL's report and the content of discussions with INTERPOL staff.

For example, Ecuador’s press release inaccurately suggests that INTERPOL had not established whether the eight seized exhibits forensically examined by INTERPOL’s computer forensic experts had been recovered by Colombian authorities on 1 March 2008 from a FARC camp or belonged to Raul Reyes.

In fact, during the preparation of its report INTERPOL requested and was provided with documents and information relating to the chain of custody of the exhibits seized by Colombian authorities on 1 March 2008. Based on a review of all the information and material provided by Colombia, including a classified oral briefing, INTERPOL was able to satisfy itself, and clearly stated in its report, that the seized computer exhibits it was requested to forensically examine were taken from the FARC terrorist camp on 1 March 2008 and belonged to Raul Reyes. This finding was inextricably linked to INTERPOL's determination as to whether there was any manipulation or alteration of data contained in those seized computer exhibits.

The INTERPOL report clearly states that the overall conclusion of its experts was that ‘no user files have been created, modified or deleted on any of the eight FARC computer exhibits following their seizure on 1 March 2008’ (paragraph 99). The report also makes clear that after detailed and careful computer forensic analysis – comprehensively documented within the text - the experts excluded the possibility that the user files were tampered with after 1 March 2008, including the period between 1 and 3 March 2008.

Therefore, the assertion in the press release issued by Ecuador that there was no evidence ‘that user files had not been created, modified or deleted’ is groundless. Clearly, if no user file has been created or modified or deleted on a computer then there will not be any evidence of this, as it does not exist. INTERPOL cannot understand why Ecuador would persist in trying to suggest that Colombian law enforcement authorities altered the content of the user files of the seized FARC computer exhibits when INTERPOL's independent investigation determined that they did not.

If Ecuador has objections with the content of the user files, then Ecuador should criticise the FARC because the seized computers belonged to the FARC. Yet, to date, INTERPOL has not read any account of Ecuador denouncing or criticising the FARC in relation to any user files content in the seized computer exhibits allegedly implicating Ecuador or any of its government officials.

INTERPOL also has made clear that validating the contents of the computer exhibits were not manipulated after their seizure by Colombian authorities is not in any way, shape or form the same as saying that the contents of the user files are true and accurate. INTERPOL therefore objects to those who suggest that INTERPOL's report validates the source and accuracy of any particular document or user file contained therein. INTERPOL's report states exactly the contrary.

Countries and individuals who have been the subject of attack based on INTERPOL's report could thus have used INTERPOL's report to support their arguments of innocence, rather than invoking false, weak and offensive arguments that the user files had been manipulated or altered by Colombian authorities after their seizure. The fact that a computer contains a document accusing or implicating a person of wrongdoing does not make such claims true. Only a court of law or a specially appointed commission with appropriate jurisdiction can make such a determination after having heard all of the evidence.

In response to Ecuador’s ‘reaffirmation’ that ‘it attached no evidential value to the information obtained in the computers,’ it must again be made clear that at no time has INTERPOL suggested or recommended its factual determination that none of the user files were altered be legally binding in any of its 186 member countries. It must also be underlined that INTERPOL’s report was not prepared in order that it be submitted to any court of law; INTERPOL's report was prepared in response to Colombia's request, with the full support of the Organization of American States and without any objection from any INTERPOL member country (including Ecuador).

Ecuador, or any of INTERPOL’s member countries, has the sovereign right to accept or reject INTERPOL’s report in whole or in part, but no governmental authority should mislead or misinform the public about INTERPOL’s findings, either to deflect the focus of the public's attention, to attack an individual or a country, or through a lack of understanding.

As stated not only in the report, but on many occasions, INTERPOL’s Secretary General has repeatedly offered to meet with Ecuador or any other INTERPOL member country that has concerns or questions about the nature of INTERPOL’s computer forensic assistance to Colombia, an offer which has never been taken up.

In the interests of international police co-operation, INTERPOL hopes that Ecuador will control its repeated tendency to attack INTERPOL for simply having reported the truth in an impartial manner. If there is indeed content in the seized FARC computer user files with which Ecuador disagrees, then it should complain to and criticise the FARC, not INTERPOL.

INTERPOL equally hopes that in the future, any country or individual commenting on ‘INTERPOL’s Forensic report on FARC computers and hardware seized by Colombia’ will study the actual contents of the report before making erroneous or misleading remarks about its alleged content.

http://www.interpol.int/Public/ICPO/PressReleases/PR2008/PR200826.asp

[Judi Lynn]

22. Letter to the Media: Laptop Does Not Prove Venezuela Ties to Rebels

Letter to the Media: Laptop Does Not Prove Venezuela Ties to Rebels
by Various Authors
Apr 28 2008

Later this month, the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol) will publicly determine the “authenticity” of laptops recovered from a rebel encampment in Ecuador after a March 1 raid on the camp by the Colombian military. Based on previous press coverage of the incursion and the documents, we are concerned that the media take extreme care in interpreting the Interpol findings.

In the first round of media coverage of the event, significant problems of inconsistency surfaced precisely as a result of the gap between Colombia’s exaggerations and what the documents actually say.1

Even if the laptops are found to have belonged to members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), there is no evidence that the publicly available documents support any of the extreme claims by the Colombian government that Venezuela and Ecuador had any sort of financial relationship with the rebels. In fact, independent analyses of the documents indicate that the Colombian government has substantially exaggerated their contents, perhaps for political purposes. Any media coverage of the Interpol findings must make clear that many of the Colombian allegations have already been largely discredited.

The Colombian interpretation has already proven so weak that Organization of American States (OAS) Secretary General Jose Miguel Insulza, testifying before the House Subcommittee on Western Hemispheric Affairs on April 10, stated unequivocally that there is “no evidence”2 linking Venezuela to the Colombian rebels, yet Insulza’s statement has gone virtually unreported in the English language press.

THE FLAWS
Analysts cite three primary flaws in the Colombian government’s charges linking Venezuela and the FARC:

The “Dossier”: The notion that the Venezuelan government provided—or intended to provide—$300 million to the FARC is based exclusively on this passage from a letter sent to the FARC secretariat from Raúl Reyes:

“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 cripple which I will explain in a separate note.”3

There is no clear description of what the “300” represents. While the Colombian government claims it is a reference to three hundred million dollars, it could just as easily refer to three hundred hostages. Note that this letter was dated December 23, 2007—two weeks before the first wave of FARC hostage releases.

The Contact: To believe that Hugo Chávez was providing material support to the FARC—beyond his role as a hostage negotiator—one must accept the premise that the person referred in the FARC documents under the code name “Angel” is indeed Hugo Chávez. Yet the documents reference both “Angel” and “Chávez”—sometimes in the same paragraph. It appears that the documents are referring to two different people.

The Timing: The most extensive evaluation of the available documents has been done by Adam Isacson of the Center for International Policy.4 In addition to the concerns above, Isacson concluded that the uptick in communication between the Venezuelan government and the FARC coincided almost exclusively with the timeframe in which Chavez had been invited to mediate hostage negotiations.

As Isacson put it, “When considered in chronological order, the guerrilla communications regarding Hugo Chávez and Venezuela appear to reveal a relationship that was cordial but distant until the fall of 2007,” exactly the time that negotiations began.5

Note too that other laptop-related Colombian allegations have already been proven false or dubious. Notably, claims that the FARC were conspiring to build a “dirty bomb” were publicly dismissed by the U.S. government as well as terrorism experts throughout the region.6 Also Colombia’s allegations that a photo found in the laptops showed a meeting between FARC leaders and an Ecuadorian cabinet official were also proved to be false.7

The discussion here is about state support of terrorism, and in the current political climate the stakes could not be higher. Given the sensitivity and potential implications for peace within hemisphere, it is crucial that the media exercise a more critical eye in reporting than has been demonstrated to date. Any fair-minded coverage of the upcoming Interpol announcement would make clear that the authentication of the laptops does not mean the validation of the Colombian government's interpretation of their contents, and should make note both of the independent analyses of the documents and the statement from the OAS Secretary General.

Sincerely,

Charles Bergquist, University of Washington, Seattle

Larry Birns, Council on Hemispheric Affairs

Amy Chazkel, Queens College, City University of New York

Avi Chomsky, Salem State College

Luis Duno Gottberg , Florida Atlantic University

James Early, TransAfrica Forum Board of Directors and Institute for Policy Studies Board of Directors

Samuel Farber, Brooklyn College, City University of New York

Sujatha Fernandes, Queens College, City University of New York

Lesley Gill, American University

Greg Grandin, New York University

Daniel Hellinger, Webster University

Forrest Hylton, New York University

Diane Nelson, Duke University

Jocelyn Olcott, Duke University

Diana Paton, University of Newcastle, UK

Fred Rosen, North American Congress on Latin America

T.M Scruggs, University of Iowa

Sinclair Thomson, New York University

Miguel Tinker Salas, Pomona College

Mark Weisbrot, Center for Economic and Policy Research

John Womack, Harvard University

http://www.mediaaccuracy.org/node/56

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

24. Thank you, this was informative, however...

I appreciate your providing this article and it does raise some important questions about how we should interpret what was found on the laptop, however, it is not the end of the story. The laptop does appear to be genuine and the materials on it were deemed by Interpol to be perfectly intact (aka not tampered with). Whether "Angel" is Chavez or not, every analysis of these materials has deemed it quite clear that the FARC and the Venezuelan goverment do indeed have a working relationship. I realize that's politically inconvenient to a lot of people on this board, but it is the reality on the ground. http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=42391

[Judi Lynn]

28. Interesting seeing some of these obervations again.

I should take time to highlight remarks made by an Interpol spokesman some time ago, repeated in your IPS article:

~snip~
The public report, which is available over the Internet and was distributed to the press, states that "no data were created, added, modified or deleted on any of these exhibits between 3 March 2008 at 11:45 a.m. and 10 March 2008, when the exhibits were handed over to Interpol’s experts to make their image disks."

During those few days, the files were examined by forensic computer experts in the Colombian National Police force, the report says.

"Colombian law enforcement authorities have openly stated to Interpol’s computer forensic experts that an officer in their anti-terrorist unit directly accessed the eight seized FARC computer exhibits under exigent and time-sensitive circumstances between 1 March 2008, when they were seized by Colombian authorities, and 3 March 2008," the report adds.

"Using their forensic tools, they (the Interpol experts) found a total of 48,055 files for which the timestamps indicated that they had either been created, accessed, modified or deleted as a result of the direct access to the eight seized exhibits by Colombian authorities between the time of their seizure on 1 March 2008 and 3 March 2008 at 11:45 a.m.

"The actual seizure of the eight computer exhibits occurred between 5:50 a.m. and 7:50 a.m. (local time at the place of seizure, GMT -5:00) on Saturday, 1 March. However, it was not until more than 48 hours later that the eight seized exhibits were given to the computer forensic specialists of the Colombian Judicial Police," the report goes on to say.

"Access to the data contained in the eight FARC computer exhibits between 1 March 2008, when they were seized by Colombian authorities, and 3 March 2008 at 11:45 a.m., when they were turned over to…the Colombian Judicial Police, did not conform to internationally recognised principles for handling electronic evidence by law enforcement.

"When law enforcement directly accesses seized electronic evidence without first making physical images of the data, such access leaves traces of the relevant law enforcement officer’s accessing and viewing of the evidence.

"Direct access may complicate validating this evidence for purposes of its introduction in a judicial proceeding, because law enforcement is then required to demonstrate or prove that the direct access did not have a material impact on the purpose for which the evidence is intended," the report adds.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
*The information leaked to the press by Colombian authorities includes internal FARC correspondence that shows that the guerrillas obtained weapons on the black market, apparently through corrupt Venezuelan military personnel or officials - something that has been occurring at least since the mid-1990s.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
When Organisation of American States (OAS) Secretary General José Miguel Insulza testified before the U.S. House Subcommittee on Western Hemispheric Affairs in mid-April, he clearly stated that there is "no evidence" linking Venezuela to the Colombian guerrillas.

In an open letter issued to the press on Apr. 26, 21 U.S. and British academics who criticised media coverage of the laptop documents, said that "there is no evidence that the publicly available documents support any of the extreme claims by the Colombian government that Venezuela and Ecuador had any sort of financial relationship with the rebels."

"The authentication of the laptops does not mean the validation of the Colombian interpretation of their contents," they stated, adding that there is a "gap between Colombia's exaggerations and what the documents actually say."

*As has been revealed many times the assertion Hugo Chavez is responsible for FARC arms from Venezuela is crude, clumsy, as these weapons are old, and in use long BEFORE Chavez was sworn into office in February 1999.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

31. What's interesting is that...

you're completely ignoring the overall conclusions of Interpol and focusing exclusively on the parts you like and that feed into your already-made-up opinion on the subject. Again, back the the article, which clearly states Interpol's conclusion. I'll copy and paste it for you, since you seem to have missed it the first time through.

BOGOTÁ, May 15 (IPS) - "Interpol reported Thursday that the files found on computers that Colombia seized from a FARC guerrilla camp in March were not tampered with and did belong to the rebel group."

I guess it's like the say, you can bring a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

[Zorro]

27. How many of these "experts" had unrestricted access to the laptop files?

I think it's safe to say that the answer is none -- they don't even know what they don't know, and it's highly likely that they won't ever have direct access to the source materials.

Can't see how that makes them authorities on the subject.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

30. That's exactly true

Many of the critics have the material have had extremely limited access, whereas those who have had full access have all reached the conclusion that the information has not been tampered with and that it shows a working relationship between the Venezuelan govt. and the FARC.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

23. It's a shame you couldn't bother to elaborate

...because it's awfully difficult to simply take you at your word when you claim both stories have been discredited. :eyes:

Secondly, which other parties were pushing for the removal of the FARC from nation's lists of terrorist organizations again?? Also, you seem to have this misguided idea that "an indigenous rebellion, unique to Colombia" cannot qualify as "terrorist". Where did you get that idea from, if I may ask?

Third, I don't necessarily agree with the timing of Reyes' assassination, however, I also don't buy the argument that the FARC has been sincere in their efforts to negotiate peace. Every bit of leeway they've been given by the Colombian government has simply been used by the FARC to fill their coffers with money raised through extortion or drugs and resupply their arms.

Fourth, which facts am I ignoring? I'd appreciate it if you'd be specific here, since you're so adament in your accusations.

[EFerrari]

29. Why are you asking posters to this forum to do your grunt work?

You have already been directed to the archives. Do you not have The Google?

Btw, Peace Patriot is one of the best informed best analysts at DU on any topic.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

32. How dare I ask you to cite evidence to support your opinion

If you're going sit there and post about how wrong I supposedly am, I expect you to take a few minutes to back up your opinion. This is a forum for political dialogue. If you're not willing to engage in it, why do you even bother showing up?

"You're wrong! Go to Google!" Pretty weak.

[Judi Lynn]

34. She's without a doubt one of the most respected people here.

Trying to attack EFerrari will only gain you the expected support from the cluster of trolls who insist on trying to disprupt this site which clearly states was formed for a Democratic, liberal, progressive readership.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

35. Asking someone to back up their opinion with evidence

is "attacking" them, in your opinion? Because that's all I'm asking for here.

[EFerrari]

39. No, what you've been doing for weeks now is asking other posters

to disprove your ungrounded assumptions. You, again, have it backward.

Do your own homework.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

40. I've provided links for all my arguments

so where you get off claiming *anything* I've said is an "ungrounded assumption" is beyond me.

Also, the irony of you asking me to do my homework isn't lost. Get back to me when you have an answer that's more substantial than "Google".

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

42. Here's another link

"Colombians arrested four men, including two Venezuelans, one of whom identified himself as a sergeant in Venezuela's national guard, transporting 40,000 rounds of AK-47 ammunition to the FARC"

http://www.heritage.org/research/latinamerica/wm1956.cfm

[EFerrari]

20. Go to the archives. Those stories are crap

and have been discussed here at length already. In fact, after Colombia pulled this shit, INTERPOL refused to work with them any more.

So, no, nothing is clear to you and your gratuitous mind reading is about as wrong as it can possibly be.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

25. Two of us have provided links to Interpol's findings.

If you'd like to respond, that would be wonderful, however, simply declaring these stories "crap" is a far cry from proving it.

[EFerrari]

26. Interpol now under civilian police control

Interpol now under civilian police control

Colombian Police Wednesday officially took over leadership of Interpol as part of a restructuring of scandal-ridden Colombian Department of Administrative Security (DAS).

The decision, hammered out during a meeting between Defense Minister Gabriel Silva Lujan, National Police commissioner Oscar Naranjo, and the director of the DAS, Felipe Muñoz, established the framework under which Interpol will work under direction by regular police, which is generally how the organization operates in many of its 186 member countries.

Interpol, or International Criminal Police Organization, is a law enforcement association that promotes international police cooperation involving crimes that overlap member countries. The international body had requested the transfer after the wiretap scandal became known.

The restructuring comes on the heals of a scandal within the organization involving illegal wiretapping, alleged paramilitary links and other illegal actions involving the Colombian intelligence department, which prompted President Alvaro Uribe to order the dismantling of the agency and the forming of a new one.

http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/6297-interpol-now-under-civilian-police-control.html

And that's the last freebie you get. :)

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

33. And the relevance of this to the discussion is...?

[EFerrari]

36. That the agency who gave INTERPOL the crap about the laptops

has gone down in the flames of its own corruption. Otherwise, none at all.

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

37. Are you disputing Interpol's findings?

Or is this unrelated to the topic?

[EFerrari]

38. False dilemma much? Oh, wait, I know the answer to that question.

LOL

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

41. I'm simply questioning the RELEVANCE of the article you posted to our immediate discussion

[Braulio]

43. Sounds like baloney

Interpol is an international police agency. The Colombians don't run it.

[Braulio]

17. the Perija hills are FARC and ELN territory

This was true before Chavez, and is true now. The Venezuelans have historically shied away from tangling with the FARC, to them it's not worth the effort.