Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Uribe to Chavez, "Be a man." Chavez to Uribe, "Go to hell."

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Places » Latin America Donate to DU
 
rabs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 03:14 AM
Original message
Uribe to Chavez, "Be a man." Chavez to Uribe, "Go to hell."


Harsh, and very loud, verbal clash today in Cancn between Chavez and Uribe. It got so heated that Raul Castro had to step up and calm them down.

It happened at a lunch break of the Group of Rio leaders.

Uribe complained to Chavez that Venezuela was not respecting commercial agreements the two nations had signed previously. Uribe said Venezuela's "blockade" against Colombian businesses was the equivalent of the U.S. economic embargo of Cuba. :shrug:

Chavez replied that since he was first elected in 1999, commerce between the two countries had risen from 1.6 billion dollars to 7.9 billion in 2008.

Chavez then brought up the 300 Colombian paramilitaries that he said had been sent into Venezuela to assassinate him, which Uribe denied. Then Chavez threatened to leave the lunch.

"Be a man and stay and discuss this face to face. Sometimes you insult from a distance, but when you are face to face we don't talk," Uribe said.

Uribe then demanded that Chavez apologize for "insults" against Uribe following the signing of the U.S./Colombian military bases accords.

"Go to hell," Chavez replied. (Vete al carajo)

The Spanish news agency EFE reported that at that point, Raul Castro stepped into the fray, calling for them to calm down.


Among the witnesses were Lula, Fernndez of the DR, Correa, Castro, and others. Some of the leaders later met separately with both Chavez and Uribe to smooth over things.

(Info above from El Tiempo and El Espectador of Bogota.)






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 03:24 AM
Response to Original message
1. These two represent the polar opposites of the continent.
I like that the others present stepped in.

What would Latin America be like without US involvement?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Judi Lynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 04:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. Interesting this little sleazeball's trying to push Chavez enough to lose his temper,
then have a picnic with his words uttered hastily, making an international case of it, as the corporate media does with everything he says, anyway.

What a dirty little mess he is.

Maybe he could SHOW Hugo Chavez how to be a man.



His little Majesty, Alvaro Uribe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
protocol rv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 06:29 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. But now we're not getting electricity from Colombia?
We need the Colombian's electricity, I guess we won't be getting it now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 06:51 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. she doesn't care about you, she worships Chavez "from a distance"
she doesn't know anything
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 07:20 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. You're saying Judi Lynn "doesn't know anything"?!!! Now that is a laugh.
Judi Lynn is the best informed blogger at DU! And she is the most informative--constantly posting current and historical information and relevant photographs, from her extensive archives, linking those currently in the news to their past actions, and linking current events to past events. She is an invaluable resource.

You may be content to wallow in ignorance, and promote stupid, uninformed, rightwing/corporate views, with your brief and thoughtless posts. But others--and I think most people--want to understand the world better, want to know the history behind current events, and want progressive reform of U.S. policy, and peace and justice for our own people and for others. Judi Lynn makes a huge contribution to those who wish to be informed and who support progressive policy. It is you and "protocol rv" who "don't know anything" or pretend not to know anything.

Your comment is absurd, and gets this...

:rofl: :thumbsdown: :puke: :thumbsdown: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. yep, never been to latin america no Spanish, just like you
all you did was offer an opinion and I gave you mine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. I've never been to Vietnam and don't speak Vietnamese. And I've never been to Iraq
and don't speak Arabic. Yet my government slaughtered 2 million people in Vietnam and Southeast Asia, and sent over 55,000 U.S. soldiers to their deaths. Estimates of the U.S. slaughter in Iraq are one million people, and thousands of deaths and injuries to U.S. soldiers. Does this disqualify me from studying these countries and learning as much as I can about places and peoples who are of so much interest to the Pentagon and the CIA and the State Department? That is just silly. I am a typical American. Language education didn't "take" very well with me. Does that mean I can't be interested? Does that mean I can't read everything possible in translation, and can't pour over Google's strange transliterations for current, and even try out my poor Spanish skills to get the gist of headlines and ledes, to determine if I want to get them translated for deeper reading, and can't talk to friends who have visited the countries I would love to visit but can't afford to travel to, and can't acquire a very good working knowledge of leaders, countries, peoples and issues in a region that the U.S. and its corporations have impoverished and looted for a hundred years and more, and are implanting with military assets?

That is just a stupid, stupid position. But I gather you would prefer not to have knowledgeable people--whether they can speak Spanish or not--providing information about Latin America at DU. You would prefer to have your disinformational, rightwing comments, and those of "protocol rv," be the only information available.

Sorry! Ain't gonna happen. We're just going to keep at it, despite your sneer. A person can speak Spanish and be an ignoramus, you know. A person can speak Spanish and join a death squad and chainsaw leftists and union leaders and community organizers, while alive, and dump their body parts into mass graves. Speaking Spanish has nothing to do with accurate information, progressive policy and ethics. Neither does speaking Vietnamese. Nor speaking Arabic or Farsi. How can we possibly keep up with all the countries that the U.S. or its "allies" are killing and torturing people in, and learn all their languages, and be able to read original sources? That is a ridiculous requirement for thoughtful, informed discussion.

Yeah, it would be great if we all spoke Spanish, and Vietnamese, and Arabic, and Farsi, and Persian, and Chinese (God knows) and a dozen other languages of U.S. targets. But we don't. So what?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. "Protocol rv," I'm waiting for you to take back your uninformed, ignorant statement
that "there is no 'rainforest Chernobyl in Ecuador,' here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I have provided you with documentation of the "rainforest Chernobyl " in Ecuador--the huge Chevron-Texaco toxic spill that reaches from Ecuador to Peru, with toxic black mud still oozing out of the ground, dead fisheries, toxic rivers and streams, high cancer rates among the 30,000 Indigenous people who live in the region and who depend on its waters and fisheries, and destruction of a wide swath of the Amazon rainforest. There is a nearly $30 billion lawsuit in the courts in Ecuador, which Chevron-Texaco is likely going to lose.

For instance, here is one description that I've provided for you...

--

If you think that the only Chernobyl is in Russia, think again. The Amazon region of Ecuador is being called the Rainforest Chernobyl, as 30,000 indigenous in Ecuador struggle to gain $27 billion in recompense for extensive damages to their health and environment.
http://chevrontoxico.com/about/rainforest-chernobyl /

The accused culprit in this environmental case is Chevron, the current owner of Texaco. From 1964 to 1990 Texaco allegedly dumped billions of gallons of toxic waste in the Amazon region of Ecuador.

The contaminated area is three times the size of Manhattan and involves over 1000 open toxic waste pits that the company abandoned after drilling 350 oil wells.


(MORE)

http://blog.pro-ecuador.com/?p=1169

--

So, are you still promoting Chevron-Texaco's P.R. that "there is no 'rainforest Chernobyl ' in Ecuador"?

And having made that absurd assertion, and not having taken it back, how can we take you seriously on any other issue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
protocol rv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Those references aren't valid
Sorry, but those sites you quote aren't valid. Can you produce something by a reliable site, say the BBC, World Wildlife Fund, or similar?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. Maybe you're a visual kind of person and a movie would do it for you...
See "Crude: The Real Price of Oil" (about Ecuador's "rainforest Chernobyl")

A Herculean work of investigative journalism.
-Ed Gonzales, Village Voice

"A sprawling legal thriller with rare depth and power.
-Stephen Holden, The New York Times

"A forceful, often infuriating story about Big Oil and little people.
-Manohla Dargis, The New York Times

Grippingcinematic. The most urgent film Ive seen at Sundance this year.
-Scott Foundas, LA Weekly

http://www.crudethemovie.com /

------------------------

You want the corpo-fascist press to make Chevron's dirty underside real for you? Ha-ha! Well, let's see what we can find, hm? You said 'there is no 'rainforest Chernobyl' in Ecuador." Are you denying that there is a massive Chevron-Texaco oil spill in Ecuador? It wouldn't surprise me if you were. I don't think I've ever run across a more uninformed, clueless blogger at DU. So I have to ask: Do you also deny the evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution? How about global warming? You deny that?

As for the World Wildlife Fund, they are closely allied with the World Bank, so I wouldn't expect them to expose Chevron's disaster in Ecuador.

http://www.worldwildlife.org/what/globalmarkets/forests...

How about Amnesty International USA? Would you accept them as "valid"? Here's what they report about Chevron...

--

Chevron (CVX) in the Amazon Oil Rights or Human Rights? Texaco's legacy, Chevron's responsibility

"'Our health has been damaged seriously by the contamination caused by Texaco. Many people in our community now have red stains on their skin and others have been vomiting and fainting. Some little children have died because their parents did not know they should not drink the river water.'"
Excerpt: Affidavit of the Secoya tribe given by Elias Piaguaie -Aguinda, et al v. Texaco Inc. - Case # 93-CV-7527.

The human rights situation of Indigenous peoples and environmentalists in Ecuador continues to be a serious concern for Amnesty International. For over four decades, Indigenous communities have witnessed multinational oil companies cut through the Ecuadorian Amazon and their ancestral lands in search of the country's vast petroleum resources. Testimonies by members of these communities, verified by independent health studies and reports (including "Amazon Crude" by Judith Kimerling) have described how oil companies have left dead rivers, road-scarred forests, polluted air, and daily discharges of millions of gallons of toxic waste in their wake that are affecting the daily lives of the communities in the area.

Operating in a region of the rain forest known as the Oriente' both transnational and domestic oil companies threaten the survival of Indigenous populations as well as those who seek to protect their communities and the environment. Over the past four decades, a succession of U.S. petroleum companies including Texaco (now owned by Chevron Corporation), Occidental Petroleum, ARCO, and Maxus Energy Corporation, among others, have come to Ecuador in search of oil. Environmental and human rights defenders claim that these companies have left behind a trail of destruction, posing a serious danger to people's survival.

Northern Amazon:

The Chevron Pollution and Three Decades of Neglect

Texaco, currently owned by Chevron Corporation (CVX), began prospecting for oil in Ecuador in 1964, becoming the first company to discover commercial quantities. Subsequently, Texaco's joint venture with Petroecuador, in which the U.S. company was an operating partner, set the standards for operations in the region. According to the 1993 report "Crudo Amaznico" (Amazon Crude) by the environmental lawyer Judith Kimerling, from 1972 until it left Ecuador in 1992, Texaco intentionally dumped more than 19 billion gallons of toxic wastewaters into the region and was responsible for 16.8 million gallons of crude oil spilling from the main pipeline into the forest. By comparison, the infamous Exxon Valdez tanker disaster in 1989 spilled 10.8 million gallons off the coast of Alaska. The report alleges that these actions contaminated both the soil and the groundwater of the communities in the area and will continue to threaten the economic and cultural bases of Indigenous peoples' survival.

According to the authors of the 1999 "Yana Curi" Report, which details the impact of oil development on the health of the people of the Ecuadorian Amazon, living in proximity to oil fields seems to have increased the risk of residents developing health problems. For instance, based on the characteristics of the population, cancer rates are statistically higher in the oil producing village of San Carlos than should be expected. Another study published in the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health points out the relationship between higher spontaneous abortion rates and living in the proximity of contaminated water streams. In some streams, the levels of oil chemicals like hydrocarbon concentrations was as high as 280 times the permitted levels in the European Community. Meanwhile, Chevron (CVX) has not only refused to acknowledge any link between the public health hazards and the environmental problems caused by its drilling policies in the Ecuadorian Amazon, but has also refused to clean up the pollution, claiming that a clean up' agreement with the Ecuadorian Government has released it of any further liability. The company has further denied direct compensation to the affected communities for threatening their health and their economic and cultural survival by polluting their environment.


(MORE)

http://www.amnestyusa.org/business-and-human-rights/che...

-------------------------------

But you are obviously in Chevron-Texaco oil spill denial. So there is no pleasing you. How come you are such an apologist for oil giant Chevron-Texaco, hm? I would believe the Indigenous people of the Ecuadoran rainforest and the EVIDENCE OF MY OWN EYES in the numerous documentaries and on-line photos of the devastation that Chevron-Texaco has inflicted on them, before I would believe the New York Times on any subject, let alone an oil giant's horrors--given their active support and publication of damned lies in promotion of Bush-Cheney's oil war! But you apparently need the New York Times to make things real for you. So here it is:

--

Texaco Goes on Trial in Ecuador Pollution Case

By JUAN FORERO
Published: October 23, 2003


LAGO AGRIO, Ecuador, Oct. 22 When Ren Arvalo draws water from his well, it is brown and gummy, requiring him to run it through a makeshift filtering system outside his wood-plank home in the jungle outside this town.

Like thousands of other people here, he suspects the water was fouled by the waste an American oil company dumped across miles of Amazonia in its 20 years of operations. After all, he and his five children live across from a separation plant once operated by a Texaco affiliate, their house built on a mound of dirt that covered a pit where wastewater was dumped.

''If you dig here just a meter deep, you hit oil,'' Mr. Arvalo said, moments after probing into the dirt outside his house to show visitors the gooey slime. ''The water is contaminated, very contaminated. But we drink it. What else can we do?''

Now, about 30,000 people affected by the waste are hoping that a lawsuit, accusing ChevronTexaco of dumping 18.5 billion gallons of waste into open, unlined pits, will lead to a full-scale cleanup. This week, the California-based company, an energy giant created in 2001 when Chevron merged with Texaco, went on trial here in a case that, if successful for the plaintiffs, could establish a new way for American companies to be held accountable for environmental degradation in foreign countries.


(MORE)

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/23/business/texaco-goes-...

--

Or will the Washington Post do ya?

--

In Ecuador, High Stakes in Case Against Chevron

LAGO AGRIO, Ecuador -- Deep in the northern Ecuadoran rain forest, next to pits filled with noxious sludge, a lawyer on his very first case argued that a U.S. oil company had deliberately fouled a swath of jungle nearly the size of Delaware during two decades of production.


(SNIP)

If the judge rules against Chevron, the company could face the largest damages award ever handed down in an environmental case, dwarfing the $3.9 billion awarded against ExxonMobil for the 1989 spill in Alaska.

A report by a court-appointed team last year concluded that pollution caused mainly by Texaco's Ecuadoran affiliate, Texaco Petroleum, had led to 1,401 cancer deaths in this stretch of Amazonian jungle. The team's leader, Ecuadoran geologist Richard Cabrera, reported finding high levels of toxins in soil and water samples near Texaco's production sites and assessed damages at up to $27.3 billion.

"This is a simple case," said Fajardo, 37, a former oil worker. "We ask, is there damage or not? If there is damage, who pays? And if there is payment, how much and to whom?"

For Fajardo and his team, two 20-something lawyers financed by a Philadelphia law firm, the blame rests squarely with Texaco and, now, Chevron. They say that for 18 years, from the time Texaco started full-scale production in Ecuador in 1972, the company unloaded drilling mud and wastewater into hundreds of unlined pits or directly into waterways. They accuse Texaco of choosing savings over safety, and say the company botched a highly publicized cleanup of its production sites in the 1990s.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...

-----

And how about "Politico"? Here's one you really ought to pay attention to, cuz it's about oil corp propaganda...

--

Chevron's Lobby Campaign Backfires
By Kenneth P. Vogel , Politico
16 November 2009

Facing the possibility of a $27 billion pollution judgment against it in an Ecuadorean court, Chevron launched an aggressive lobbying and public relations campaign to try to prevent the judgment as well as reverse a deeply damaging story line. 



Chevron's tactics ranging from quietly trying to wield U.S. trade policy to compel Ecuador's government to squelch the case, to producing a pseudo-news report casting the company as the victim of a corrupt Ecuadorean political system were designed to win powerful allies in Congress and the Obama administration as well as to shape public opinion and calm shareholders. 



But many of the company's moves have backfired, drawing fire from environmentalists, media ethicists, state pension funds, New York's attorney general, members of Congress and even Barack Obama when he was a senator.



"Their lobbying and PR efforts are really clumsy and very heavy handed, and I think that that's why they're experiencing a degree of backlash," said Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), who is circulating the first of what she promises will be three letters to colleagues blasting what she calls the company's "misguided approach" to dealing with the case.


The case stems from a class action suit brought by well-connected U.S. trial lawyers on behalf of 30,000 Ecuadoreans alleging that from 1964 to 1990, Texaco which was purchased by Chevron in 2001 dumped billions of gallons of toxic waste into Ecuador's Amazon rain forest, leaving behind an unprecedented environmental and public health disaster including a wave of cancers, birth defects and miscarriages. 



Chevron has been pushing the U.S. government to revise Ecuador's trade preferences since soon after the lawsuit was filed in Ecuador in 2003 (it originally had been in U.S. federal court in 1993). But with a years-long trial in a tiny courtroom in the Ecuadorean rain forest expected to culminate in a ruling early next year, Chevron has turned up the heat, arguing that it can't get a fair trial in Ecuador, an assertion that Sanchez and other Chevron critics point out seems to conflict with the company's previous efforts to move the trial from U.S. courts to Ecuador.


(MORE)

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29560.html

--

Is it real for you now?

But, frankly, I'd trust this site more than I'd trust the New York Slimes and the Washington Psst:
http://chevrontoxico.com /
(great logo!)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #8
14. Aren't valid? And the story is that unfamiliar.
How about Amnesty? Will that be ok with you? :eyes:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/business-and-human-rights/che...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #8
26. How about the San Francisco Bay Guardian, which I quoted in my initial challenge to you?
"The rainforest Chernobyl"

San Francisco Bay Guardian
- April 27, 2005

By Camille T. Taiara

CHEVRONTEXACO INVESTORS ARE in for an unsettling interlude when they gather for the annual shareholders' meeting at company headquarters in San Ramon April 27. Two indigenous Amazonian leaders, as well as numerous concerned local citizens, are set to interrupt the drab, predictable corporate discourse with testimonials about Texaco's toxic legacy in Ecuador.

Humberto Piaguaje, who's lost two family members to different strains of cancer, will be among them. Another relative -- a nephew -- recently contracted the disease, and the family lacks the money to pay for the chemotherapy he needs, Piaguaje told the Bay Guardian.

"Crude Reflections: ChevronTexaco's Rainforest Legacy," an exhibit of 50 photographs taken by Bay Area photographers Lou Dematteis and Kayana Szymczak and documenting what some experts say is the worst environmental devastation caused by an oil company in the history of the planet, opened at a nearby restaurant April 25 and will help reinforce the Ecuadorans' case.

"We've taken delegations of investors to the region" to show them firsthand the devastation caused by Texaco's oil development projects over the two decades ending in 1992, Amazon Watch associate director Shannon Wright told us. Now, with the photo exhibit, which will tour several cities, they're bringing the story to the American public.

The activity surrounding ChevronTexaco's shareholders' meeting indicates an important maturation of the global struggle against the human and environmental devastation caused by fossil fuel development abroad.

That's the good news.

But increasingly, oil industry analysts are pointing to an impending crisis that's likely to result in a surge of these kinds of offenses around the globe, as oil companies vie for a dwindling supply of the black gold that fuels our economy.


(MORE)

(the site the article is from--the San Francisco Bay Guardian)
http://www.sfbg.com/39/30/news_chevrontexaco.html

(the site you spat upon where I found the above)
http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/americas/ecuado...

---------------------------------------

You didn't even read it, did you? You just scanned down and noted that your precious corpo-fascist press "and the World Wildlife Fund" (the World Bank) were not cited. You saw "Global Exchange" and went "Eeeek! Yuck! Humanitarians! Not valid!"

So, what do you have to say now, that I've cited the New York Times, the Washington Post and the venerable old San Francisco Bay Guardian? But you probably think the New York Times and the Washington Post are "too liberal," and the SF Bay Guardian, ye gods, they're communist!

Got anything to say that isn't more Chevron-Texaco-type lies, such as "there is no rainforest Chernoybl in Ecuador"?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 04:41 PM
Response to Reply #8
29. And here's your BBC ...and a few others...
Amazon natives sue oil giant
By Greg Palast
Reporting for Newsnight

BBC Newsnight has been able to get rare footage of a new Cofan Indian ritual deep in the heart of the Amazonian rainforest.

Known as "The Filing of the Law Suit," these natives of Ecuador's jungle, decked in feathers and war paint and heavily armed with lawyers, are seen presenting their official complaint seeking $12bn from Chevron Inc - the international oil giant.

I stepped, somewhat inelegantly, into a dug-out log canoe to seek out the Cofan in their rainforest village to investigate their allegations. There I discovered stinking, leaking pits of old oil residue leaking into drinking water - and farmers whose skin is covered in pustules.

(MORE)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/7113903...


--

And here's some more, these from "unauthorized" web sites--unauthorized and deemed "not valid" by "protocol rv" (a source you can really trust on oil corp crimes) (not)

"Ecuador: Chevron Hires 12 PR Firms to discredit indigenous Indians in Ecuador"
http://www.naturalnews.com/028108_Chevron_Ecuador.html

--

"The Campaign for Justice in Ecuador" and "The Hollywood Premiere of CRUDE a Huge Hit"
http://www.chevroninecuador.com/2009/09/hollywood-premi...

--------------------------------------

"12 PR Firms"! Thanks quite a lot of work and money to keep people stupid. But I guess it works in some cases.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
protocol rv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #29
36. Indian presenting complaint?
So...we got a video of an Indian presenting a complaint. What I'd like to see is real data, such as chemical analysis of soil samples taken over a wide area, samples of the water in rivers, and proof the state oil company doesn't pollute any more. As far as I know, this is a baseless claim, most of the pollution was caused by the state oil company, not Chevron.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. What is your objection to an "Indian" presenting a complaint?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Judi Lynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. How dare you wave your racist flag here.
You'd better wake up, grow up at some point during your "lifetime". That racial superiority excrement is the dirtiest, most devious myth in human history, spun in hatred, and ignorance by fools.

You are CLEARLY posting at the wrong forum. Whatever possessed you to dream DU'ers would respect racism?


Step to the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. +20,000,000,000,000
Edited on Wed Feb-24-10 05:19 PM by Mika
Thank you Judi, for calling out that repugnant post. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
No need for the poster to step to the right .. already there.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zorro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #39
44. "Indian" is a naughty word?
Apparently it is.

Among the hissified kiddies in the LatAm forums.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #36
41. Protocol rv, the racism and stupidity of your posts on this subject are beyond belief.
But do keep posting. Every time you do, you discredit Chevron-Texaco and their "12 P.R. firms"* and the corpo/fascist policies that you are advocating for.

And, seriously, if you want to see "real data," I suggest you go take a nice long drink of water from the streams that "60 Minutes" films--see below.

-------------------

*"Ecuador: Chevron Hires 12 PR Firms to discredit indigenous Indians in Ecuador"
http://www.naturalnews.com/028108_Chevron_Ecuador.html

---------------------------------------------

Here's some visuals for you, cuz I don't really think you are interested in written data of any kind. If you were, you would have read the briefs for the lawsuit, and maybe called Mr. Beltman, quoted below--the EPA Superfund expert who testified for the 30,000 Indigenous who have been grossly affected by this Chevron-Texaco oil filth--and asked him for some "real data":

-----------------------------------------------------

From the "60 Minutes" film: Amazon Crude
Scott Pelley Reports On A Multi-Billion Dollar Lawsuit Over Oil Drilling Pollution


(SNIP)

Generally two or three pits were carved out near the well site. Trouble is, when Texaco finished its drilling, the waste pits were abandoned by the hundreds and for decades.

Manuel Salinas' house is next to one of those pits. He's one of 30,000 people suing Texaco's owner, Chevron. "We couldn't drink the water," Salinas told 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley.

Salinas says the pollution leaked into his water well.

"It's a disgrace. They treated Ecuador like a trash heap," says Doug Beltman, who worked for the EPA on Superfund sites in the U.S.

He's now the scientific expert for the people suing Chevron.

"Are you saying that Texaco never could have gotten away with this in the United States?" Pelley asked.

"Oh, absolutely not," Beltman replied. "It wouldn't have happened in the United States. And if it had happened, they wouldn't have gotten away with leaving it here for 30 years."

In Texas, for example, pits like this are supposed to be temporary, isolated from fresh water, and soon after emptied and backfilled. But in Ecuador one pit 60 Minutes saw has been there for 25 years and we found it's actually designed to overflow into streams.

"They put these pipes in the side. So that as it rains, it fills up with water, contaminated water, it just dumps out into the jungle," Beltman explained.

"Well, it rains here in the rainforest all the time, so there's water pouring out of it now. And if you smell the water, you can clearly smell the oil pollution in it. Runs right down the ravine, where you are, and right down into the stream, not 50 yards down that way," Pelley observed.

When they stirred the bottom of the nearby stream, oil floated to the top.


(MORE)

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/05/01/60minutes/mai...

-----

CBS good enough for ya, huh? A "valid source," in your weighty judgement?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChangoLoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 12:47 PM
Response to Reply #7
20. You mean like yourself should do with
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 06:50 AM
Response to Original message
4. hahaha n/t
s
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 09:30 AM
Response to Original message
10. It's interesting that Raul Castro would be the peacemaker.
Some peacemakers in past conflicts--Lula da Silva (often), Michele Batchelet (critically important on the U.S.-funded/organized white separatist coup attempt in Bolivia in 2008), Cristina Fernandez (Argentina--assisted efforts of many countries--France, Switzerland, Spain, Venezuela, Ecuador--to bring Colombia's 40-year civil war to a peaceful conclusion--2007-2008) and Chavez himself (whom Lulu called "the great peacemaker" after the U.S./Colombia bombing/raid on Ecuador in early 2008). Fidel Castro, through Chavez's daughter, advised Chavez not to resign as president during the 2002 U.S.-supported coup attempt in Venezuela, but I have not heard of an active role of Raul Castro in conflict situations. Wouldn't it be interesting if Cuba, whose government, unique among them all, began with violent conflict--and has been so reviled by the U.S., though that conflict (U.S. support for the heinous dictator Batista) has long been over (except in Miami), and whom the U.S. has for so long been trying to bully and strongarm other Latin American countries to shun--turns out to be the "common ground" on which all of Latin America stands, and the peacemaker among them, and perhaps the one who helps them solve the U.S. 'South Vietnamization' of Colombia.

Chavez's "go to Hell" to Uribe was for Uribe's signing of that military agreement (among other treacheries)--an agreement which permits the U.S. military to use SEVEN military bases in Colombia, U.S. military use of all civilian airports and other infrastructure, the presence of U.S. spy and war planes, U.S. navy ships and U.S. soldiers and 'contractors' at the seven bases, and total diplomatic immunity for anything that U.S. soldiers and U.S. 'contractors' do in Colombia. Although I have a new take on this agreement (I think the immunity clause is a quite important part of it--as cover for U.S. participation in death squad 'turkey shoots," for instance, the one in La Macarena, where 2,000 bodies have been found in a mass grave, of 2005-2009 vintage, in a region of particular interest to the U.S. military, possibly as a "pacification" rehearsal for Afghanistan), the agreement also presents a "clear and present danger" to Venezuela and its northern oil provinces and oil coast, adjacent to Colombia.

I think Chavez has had it with Uribe's treachery. I suspect that Uribe felt compelled to sign this agreement (possibly pushed on him by the Bushwhack in the U.S. embassy in Bogota, whom Obama hasn't--and maybe can't--remove), to save his own skin (so he doesn't suffer Diem's fate at the hands of the CIA). But, whatever Uribe's motives--and whatever the agreement is really all about--it has to look very ominous to Venezuela and to the Chavez government, as well as being an aggressive affront to all the other leaders of Latin America who are newly asserting their countries' sovereignty and independence from the U.S. Just as they were beginning to make progress with this--with assertion of their sovereignty individually, and through new institutions, such as the UNASUR and ALBA trade groups--Uribe invites the Pentagon to occupy Colombia.

And, of course, that is not the end of U.S. aggressive moves in the region. There is also the reconstitution of the U.S. 4th Fleet in the Caribbean, which even Lula da Silva said is "a threat" (to Brazil's oil), the U.S. supported coup in Honduras and the Pentagon securing of its military base and port facilities in Honduras, new or beefed up U.S. military presence in Panama, U.S. military use of the Dutch islands off Venezuela's oil coast for illegal spy flights (against Venezuela), U.S. militarization of the aid to Haiti, and on-going U.S. funding of rightwing groups throughout Latin America (not to mention the things we can't see--psyops, disinformation, destabilization efforts, dirty tricks, black ops).

Uribe has stood as the focal point of all of this--symbolically and materially the U.S.'s "best friend" in the region--and, by means of this military agreement, has perhaps tried to cement himself into that position. You could almost see his puppet strings being pulled, back in late 2007/early 2008, when he asked Chavez to help negotiate FARC hostage releases, then (call from Washington?) pulled the rug out from under Chavez (or tried to), days before the first Chavez-negotiated releases, by rescinding that request. That may have been his initial treachery. (It's still not clear whether he set Chavez up for a diplomatic disaster with dead hostages--the Colombian military shot rockets at the hostages' location as they were in route to their freedom--or whether his initial request of Chavez was sincere, then got overridden by Washington). He has clearly been carrying water for the Bush Cartel (following an early career of carrying water for the Medellin Cartel). Now we see this little "big man" buddying up to the Pentagon and giving them all of their heart's desires (for, as an AF doc described it, "full spectrum" military ops throughout the "southern cone"). It's no wonder that Chavez grew impatient with him. Uribe is a cypher--an emptiness--who holds power by means of death squads, terror and corruption. A genuine popular leader like Chavez--genuinely elected, genuine friends with other leaders--must feel repulsed by Uribe's corruption and his toadying to the U.S. This corrupt little shit saying, "Be a man!", would certainly bring "go to Hell" to my lips, if I'd been Chavez. And Chavez says what he thinks. Uribe does not. Uribe, like so many fascist leaders, projects. When he says "be a man" what he is really saying is that "I am not." It's kind of like that coward Bush saying, "Bring 'em back dead or alive!" He ain't going to risk his skin for it--never did, never will. But he gets off on wearing a flight suit and a codpiece and sending others to die for his heinous and illegal oil wars. "Be a man." Yeah, right.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. and remember you said the US would invade Ven within 2 years
ordered by Obama of course
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
protocol rv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Yuck yuck
The invasion talk, the "they're trying to kill me" talk, coupled to the megalomania "I'm the people" and comparing himself to Jesus sure make Venezuelans look crazy. We did elect the guy, but he sure makes us look like we're missing neurons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #12
16. Venezuelans seem rather sane to me.
Most of them, any how.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
protocol rv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #16
35. Oh no, we're crazy
Sorry, but we're crazy. We did elect the government. It's a national disease, to always elect bad candidates. We've been doing it for a long time. This is why our streets are full of garbage and potholes, we have a crime epidemic, there's a national health crisis, a national electricity crisis, water rationing, high inflation, shortages, salaries don't buy what they used to, and a government with irrational policies...did you know here in Venezuela gasoline is sold by PDVSA so cheap, it's cheaper than water?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. That's what it looks like to me--war preparations--but I did NOT predict that it would happen,
nor that it would happen "within 2 years," nor that Obama would order it.

I have said the following--which you have repeatedly misstated, despite my asking you to stop doing it:

1. The Pentagon is surrounding Venezuela's northern oil provinces and oil coast with war assets--in Colombia, in the Caribbean, on the Dutch islands off Venezuela's coast and in other places--and SOUTHCOM has documented plans for "full spectrum" U.S. military activity in South America.

2. Depending on how advanced those preparations are, and other factors involved in the war planners' decisions--including the political scene here in the U.S.--within two years is a good guess.

3. I don't know if Obama is on board for such a war--and I have said this repeatedly. But it is possible that he could be cornered into it, even if he doesn't agree. The same kind of war profiteers tried to do that to JFK, who probably paid with his life by refusing to invade Cuba and then refusing to nuke Russia and Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis.* And I've also said they may wait until they have ES&S-ed more of a warmonger into the White House, which, if such a war is going to be instigated by the Pentagon/CIA, will be more than two years from now. Such a war could also be used as part of the narrative of Obama's "failure"--a narrative that is already being worked up by the corpo-fascist press.

I don't have a "crystal ball." I can't know what the Pentagon or the CIA is going to do. I should know. I'm a U.S. citizen. I'm paying for it. But none of us knows what they will spring on us next. All we can do is watch their deployment of war assets and follow their psyops/disinformation campaigns, and GUESS.

So STOP SAYING THAT I PREDICTED A U.S. WAR ON VENEZUELA! And that I "predicted" it "within two years"! And that I "predicted" that Obama would order it! I SAID NONE OF THESE THINGS! I have merely warned people about what the facts that I have gathered seem to add up to, based on the accumulated force of those facts, and on past events--the Iraq War, the Vietnam War--on the control that oil corps and war profiteers have over this country's policy, and on the ability of the far rightwing to overrule the will of the American people. It is rather an overwhelming picture, in my view, but I cannot, and I did not, "predict" such a war.

You have done this once too often. I have asked you to stop, and you have ignored my requests. So I will say to you what Chavez said to Uribe: Go to Hell!

------------------

*(JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters," by James Douglass, pub. Orbis Books.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. here you go
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Nope, there is not one prediction in that post. I talk about my "guesses" and the "evidence"
for a war plan, and include all if's and unknowns that I said I did. You have LIED ABOUT what I said. And until you apologize and retract it, you can go to Hell--to quote Hugo Chavez.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. no, you said instigate a war within two years, not plan for a war
and it is your prediction isn't it?? you wrote it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. p.s. this quote is quite hilarious
"This is going to be very bad news for US soldiers--jungle fighting in unfamiliar terrain, against people who utterly detest them and who have memories that go back to the Conquistadores."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. It's apparently already happening...
Report of U.S. mercenaries on the Panama/Colombia border...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/notebook/okke-ornstein...
http://www.thepanamanews.com/pn/v_16/issue_02/news_03.h...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

And it may have happened in La Macarena, Colombia, where a mass grave with 2,000 bodies was recently found...

La Macarena, the site of the grave, has been a very important site of U.S.-aided military operations since the mid-2000s. In this area, the U.S. government supported and advised the Colombian Armys 2004-2006 Plan Patriota military offensive, and since 2007 has supported the Plan for the Integral Consolidation of La Macarena or PCIM, part of the new Integrated Action framework (link) that is now guiding much U.S. assistance.

http://www.cipcol.org/?p=1303

Apparently, the UK military was involved...

Silence on British Army link to Colombian mass grave
http://www.tribunemagazine.co.uk/2010/02/04/silence-on-... /

------------------------

It's interesting what you consider "hilarious." The possibility that U.S. soldiers or U.S. mercenaries are already killing Colombians is not funny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
protocol rv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #25
43. It is said, apparently....
that flying saucers landed in New Mexico, USA, died there, and their bodies were taken to Area 51.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. How clever you apparently are, Protocol rv! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rabs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
19. Watered down CNN version of the incident



Cancun, Mexico (CNN) -- A shouting match involving the presidents of Venezuela and Colombia is the latest rumble in months of tension between the two South American nations.


http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/02/22/colomb... /


(Includes this paragraph, pure unsourced speculation by the CNN guy and flat-out wrong.)

The shouting match between Chavez and Uribe raises questions about the possibility of creating a regional organization that would speak with a unified voice for Latin American and Caribbean nations, one of the stated goals of the summit.

-----------------

The Rio Group Summit members couple of hours ago approved the creation of an Organization of Latin American and Caribbean States. It is scheduled to go into effect after the next Rio Group meeting in Caracas in 2011. The United States and Canada will NOT be invited to join the group.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #19
24. Three cheers for creation of the Organization of Latin American and Caribbean States!
That is very good news! Thanks for posting it!

:applause: :bounce: :applause:

--------------------------

Re:

(Includes this paragraph, pure unsourced speculation by the CNN guy and flat-out wrong.)

"The shouting match between Chavez and Uribe raises questions about the possibility of creating a regional organization that would speak with a unified voice for Latin American and Caribbean nations, one of the stated goals of the summit." --CNN


--

Paragraphs like this are useful because they tell us what the CIA's and our corpo-fascist rulers' agenda is. The corpo-fascist press pretty much just copies and pastes the communiques from Langley. So this was the CIA's and our corpo-fascist rulers' wish. This is what they were/are trying to do--stop the creation of a regional organization that can do what UNASUR (the all South America group) did when the Bushwhacks were funding/organizing the white separatist rioters in Bolivia, and Evo Morales threw the U.S. ambassador out of the country (Sept '08): They backed up Morales 100% and helped him to end the riots and re-establish peace.

The coup in Honduras was in part aimed at preventing ALBA from becoming strong enough to act as a Latin American-only regional group, both to provide collective clout and mutual aid for the smaller countries in the Central America/Caribbean region, and to fend off bullying and aggression by the U.S. The coup leaders' last minute withdrawal of Honduras from ALBA, just before the supposedly "legit" government took over, tells us that it was important. They couldn't leave it to chance (to the new president and legislature). Getting that done--Honduras' withdrawal from ALBA--was part of the price of U.S. protection of the coupsters, and very important to the U.S. and its "free trade for the rich" agenda. The U.S. doesn't want those countries to have any collective clout, or to help each other.

So I am just thrilled that the Rio Group has acted swiftly and decisively to counter that U.S. move. Far better that they have a larger group anyway--with more powerful countries like Brazil involved. It is sickening how the Obama administration has been implementing Bushwhack policy in Latin America. They had an opportunity to do better--to really open a new era. And they have blown it. I think it's very hard to see why. It's not hard to see what. But it's hard to see why--why is Obama blowing it so totally? It could be among deals he may have made not to be Diebolded in 2008. That's what it feels like--that he intended to do one thing and found his hands tied by what he had had to do to get into a position of power. Chavez said, of him, that he is "the prisoner of the Pentagon," and I think that's close to the truth. I think he is also the prisoner of the far rightwing corps that control the voting machines (which in turn control who sits in Congress as well as who gets to be president) and of the DLC, of course. In any case, it looks like "divide and conquer" isn't working so well for H. Clinton, John Negroponte, Jim DeMint and the other architects of this U.S. policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Yep. That's their wish, to divide.
And it's no use pretending Obama is not complicit in the Washington consensus. It's such a shame, too, because they have already lost Latin America; it's just not obvious yet. There was for about a year an amazing opportunity to do differently in that region but the mile high corruption of our government/political system precluded anyone using that opportunity. It's hard to even blame Obama in any way. He doesn't run this place by himself. There's hundreds of years of layers of exploitative policy in the halls of D.C. Apart from sandblasting the whole joint, that's not going to change any time soon, imo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
protocol rv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #27
32. Latin America wasn't the US's to lose
There you go again. We weren't for the US to lose. In the end, what happens here is our problem. Blaming the US is an adolescent's posture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 10:23 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. yeah, I don't know what was meant by that either
as if there is some kind of formula to follow for the US to "keep" Latin America
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #32
37. Ronald Reagan, is that you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-24-10 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #37
42. wow, someone believing that Latin American countries don't belong to the US
is accused of being Reagan. does the nonsense and irony ever cease??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bacchus39 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 07:22 PM
Response to Reply #24
31. the doubts expressed by the CNN report are not wrong at all
but first I preface this by saying that the creation of the region wide organization is fine idea. that said, it still remains to be seen if the group will in fact speak with one voice. I find it difficult to believe that will be the case consistently even though they sided with Argentina in the Maldivas issue. Just like the UN, there will be differences and that is to be expected. there are too many divergent interests in the region but the groups formation is likely a positive.

ALBA is nothing. Furthermore, other countries are free to join to replace Honduras or more countries can be added in. If its such a great idea than other countries will surely want to be part of that group too.

I don't believe the Rio group has any authority to veto sovereign actions of member nations. If individual nations want to pursue trade agreements or any other type of bilateral or multilateral agreements with any other nation or nations they are free to do so. the Rio group has no standing to block another nation's international policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mika Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 04:17 PM
Response to Original message
28. Raul steps in.
Raul knows Uribe's charge (of Venezuela's import restrictions) are ludicrous.

















Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #28
30. Pinochhio the puppet wants to be a real boy someday.
He set out to pick a fight, and he almost got it. I'm a bit disappointed in Hugo in that he appears to have become angry, pissing off Uribe instead would have been better. I mean I understand why he got angry, but it's still the wrong thing. Raul I would expect is an old hand at this sort of thing by now. Perhaps he will have a chat with Hugo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bemildred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-23-10 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. Ah, here we go:
Chvez is willing to normalize relations with Colombia

Venezuelan President Hugo Chvez on Tuesday said he is willing to bring trade relations with Colombia back to normal, following a verbal clash with his counterpart lvaro Uribe during the summit of presidents of the Rio Group.

"Respect and trust should be fully reinstated. And if Uribe needs to sell Venezuela more goods produced in Colombia, we are ready to assess this possibility, on the grounds of respect," Chvez told a news conference from the Mexican resort of Playa del Carmen, where the summit was held.

"I confirm our best intentions to return to calm and normal trade, political, social relations between two republics that are inhabited by the same people, for the same reason," added the ruler.

However, the Venezuelan president demanded respect for his government from his Colombian counterpart. "We need a government in Colombia that respects the Venezuelan government and recognizes that in Venezuela there is a legitimate democratic revolution. We do respect Colombia and we want to work again with the government of Colombia as we have worked for many years, with an occasional problem, especially in recent years, when war has increased in Colombia. From Colombia, with US support, pressure is exerted and the conflict is crossing the borders of Colombia."

http://english.eluniversal.com/2010/02/23/en_pol_esp_ch...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Aug 14th 2018, 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Places » Latin America Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC