Ecuador Illegalizes Foreign Bases

[seafan]

Source: Prensa Latina

Quito, Apr 2 (Prensa Latina) The Constituent Assembly's decision to constitutionally prohibit foreign military bases in Ecuador indicates Wednesday a firm rejection of US forces.
Assembly members agreed Tuesday night in a majority vote that the future legislation invalidate all possibility of having foreign military facilities in the country.

"The position has been understood and we ratify the lack of interest to renew in 2009 the 1999 controversial accord to use the southeastern Manta military base by US military forces," states the text.

"Ecuador is a peaceful territory. It does not allow the establishment of foreign military bases or foreign facilities with military purposes. We cannot give national military bases to foreign forces, and we close any actions destined to extend beyond next year the presence of Pentagon troops in this nation."

The constituent majority also rejected an opposition minority proposal, to request deployment of foreign peacekeeping forces in Ecuador.

Read more: http://www.plenglish.com/article.asp?ID={4AA69B94-57EF-4E1E-AA76-74675D90171C})&language=EN

---

Another repudiation of the Reagan-Bush ideology of aggressive interference in Latin America.


(very short article)

Link to story also found on main page: http://www.plenglish.com/

[FightTheRight89]

1. This is disappointing.

Don't these people understand that we're not there to occupy them? And when Ecuador gets attacked, who are they going to cry to for assistance?

[mac2]

2. Yes...Congress gave Bush a blank check and their powers.

[David__77]

3. You've GOT to be kidding...

I think that the sovereign state of Ecuador is capable of managing its own affairs without foreign bases. I'm pleased that nations are asserting their inherent rights to develop as they see fit.

[FightTheRight89]

22. I'm not kidding.

When Ecuador's navy starts fighting the pirates and drug lords on the Pacific Coast, then I'll say they're capable of managing their own affairs. And I'm pretty sure that having a small military base in their country does not impede their rights to develop however they want.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

30. Then they should call Johnny Depp. he's good at fighting pirates. n/t

[populistdriven]

79. Equador can thank Clinton for the controversial 1999 Manta military base accord

[Judi Lynn]

81. He bumbled around quite a bit, didn't he? Here's an article to refresh rusty memories:

U.S. MILITARY BASE MOVE IN ECUADOR SPARKS CONTROVERSY

Indigenous groups, the Catholic Church and human rights organisations in Ecuador are protesting against the proposed installation of a US military base in their port city of Manta, which they see as an affront to their freedom, autonomy and sovereignty, and a possible threat to the environment.

By Kintto Lucas

August 1999

Quito: The proposed installation of a US military base in the port city of Manta, Ecuador has won the support of the government of Jamil Mahuad, but is staunchly opposed by indigenous groups, the Catholic Church and human rights organisations.

The government of this Andean country argues that a US military base in the Pacific port city would serve as a back-up for the local armed forces, and authorised the first air operations in the area in May.

The need to find a new site for its troops stationed for the past century in the Panama canal zone has led the US government to speed up its efforts to transfer its bases to Ecuador, in South America, and Aruba and Curacao in the Caribbean.

The United States will hand the canal over to Panama on 31 December, in accordance with the 1977 canal treaties signed by then-presidents Jimmy Carter and Omar Torrijos.

Indigenous leaders and spokespersons for other social movements in Ecuador told IPS they would object to the installation of the military base when they sit down at a round- table with the government in early August.

The government agreed to that forum for dialogue in an accord signed with the Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities (Conaie), that put an end to a two-week nationwide rash of protests, roadblocks and occupations of TV and radio stations by native communities in July.

More:
http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:26qsfkmxO1IJ:www.twnside.org.sg/title/1931-cn.htm+Manta+air+base+Ecuador+protest&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us

[David__77]

31. Latin America will improve its defense capacity, you will see.

Venezuela is leading the way. At the end of the 80's, the Washington consensus was to disarm and render impotent the armed forces of Latin America. Clearly, this was to pave the way for "globalization" and neo-liberal economic policy. Now, Latin America is rebuilding its capacity to defend itself. That's a good thing. No single country should manage international affairs.

[FightTheRight89]

35. Yeah, I'd rather we lead the way than Venezuela.

Considering we stand for freedom and Hugo Chavez stands for communist oppression.

[Judi Lynn]

41. Take some time out of your right-wing delusion and start becoming acquainted with the FACTS.

There's no excuse for your not taking the initiative to learning SOMETHING about the history of US policy in Latin America.

Why don't you share some of your sources concerning Hugo Chavez's "stand for communist oppression?" You'd be throwing a lifeline to those of us who believe that's childish, ignorant, deliberately misleading, and unbelievably stupid.

[FightTheRight89]

48. For starters...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1925236.stm
http://www.dictatorofthemonth.com/Chavez/Jun2005ChavezEN.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6277379.stm

[Judi Lynn]

56. Unbelievable! Why does your second source list "Hillary Clinton Dictator?"

Why does it conceal the name of the people who publish it? You can't find out who they are anywhere at the site. You have to wonder why they are concealing their names.

I repeat, "Why don't you share some of your sources concerning Hugo Chavez's "stand for communist oppression?" " You haven't done that, yet.

[FightTheRight89]

66. Listen, Hugo Chavez took power in a military coup.

Democracy was supposed to have prevented its decline into a failed state. Yet once President Chávez gained control over the government, his rule became exclusionary and profoundly undemocratic.

Under Mr. Chávez, Venezuela is a powerful reminder that elections are necessary but not sufficient for democracy, and that even longstanding democracies can unravel overnight. A government's legitimacy flows not only from the ballot box but also from the way it conducts itself. Accountability and institutional restraints and balances are needed.

All they ask is that they be given a chance to vote.

---- http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1241

He shuts down television stations that oppose him.

---- http://www.davidbruceallen.com/strategyoped/2007/05/hugo_chavezs_fi.html

Are you seriously going to sit here and tell me that a man who fought to give himself Dictator-For-Life powers is someone espousing Democratic Socialism?

---- http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/1/18/211119.shtml?s=lh

[Judi Lynn]

76. You are wildly wrong! He did not take power in a military coup, now, did he?

He lead one of two coups against the vicious asshole Carlos Andres Perez, who had shocked the massive poor of Venezuela by suddenly without warning making sharp increases in vital resources they need for daily life, among them, the cost of simple transportation to their jobs and to the grocery stores. They could no longer afford to ride public buses to get to work.

When they poured into the streets to protest Carlos Andres Perez instructed his military to fire DIRECTLY INTO THE CROWDS OF UNARMED PEOPLE, killing over 3,000 of them in the massacre in 1989 known as "El Caracazo."

After this bloodbath, Carlos Andres Perez was later IMPEACHED for massive corruption, and in prison for a time.

Hugo Chavez served time in prison, after which he was pardoned by Venzuelan President Rafael Caldera.

Here are a few photos of the massacre, El Caracazo, which, in itself, triggered a peoples' movement when they vowed this would NEVER happen to them again. NEVER. Damn forever the assholes who even dream of putting them back into that position.





Hugo Chavez "shuts downs television stations that oppose him?" Is that right? Maybe you could explain which ones they are, and provide full substatiation.

You are attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of a whole lot of people who know better. RCTV has been discussed at great length for days on end, time after time. If you want to open that subject, you should pack a lunch, as DU'ers will have a lot to discuss with you.

Here's a quick reference, with comments from a man who quit RCTV for moral reasons after they participated in the coup against Hugo Chavez and LIED to the Venezuelan people:

VENEZUELA, RCTV, AND MEDIA FREEDOM: JUST THE FACTS, PLEASE, by James Jordan

~snip~
Corporate media seems to regularly forget that along with freedom of press is the responsibility of presenting facts to back up their news reporting. Well, dear reader, you are in for a rare treat-a discussion of some actual facts.

The general situation is this: In April of 2002, there was a two-day, illegal coup carried out against Venezuela's electoral government, which involved the kidnapping and jailing of President Hugo Chavez. There were four major media outlets, along with others, who actively aided and abetted this coup (more later). In the intervening five years, none of them were closed, nor were any of their journalists incarcerated. Rather, the Chavez administration met with them, not to change their editorial slant, but to reach agreements preventing a repeat of such anti-democratic measure and the hyperbolic misrepresentation of facts, and also to discourage such continued infractions as the airing of pornography and cigarette commercials.

Another important fact is that the heads of the media-monopoly in Venezuela, including Marcel Granier -owner of RCTV, also participated in the economic sabotage that occurred between 2002-2003. Yet, no one went to prison for endangering the country's social and economic stability.

What is truly amazing is that it has taken five years for the Chavez administration to take action in any way against media that helped carry out this coup. Certainly, if the same thing happened in the United States, it wouldn't be tolerated. Just ask Aaron Burr or Timothy McVeigh what happens when folks plot against the existing, elected government. The fact is. you don't get away with it, you get punished, and pretty severely. Getting their broadcasting licenses renewed would be the least of their problems.

When RCTV's broadcasting license came up for review, Pres. Chavez decided, after exhaustive research and study, not to renew the license. Chavez is legally responsible for renewing such licenses under laws which were enacted before he became president. The reasons given for not renewing the license cite RCTV's participation in the coup, plus the fact that RCTV leads Venezuelan media in infractions of communications laws. RCTV's problems pre-date the Chavez administration, having been censured and closed repeatedly in previous presidential administrations. RCTV leads Venezuela in its violation of communications codes, with 652 infractions.

Another interesting fact is that our corporate media and distinguished Members of Congress have neglected to mention that on April of 2007 the government of Peru did not renew the broadcasting licenses of two TV stations and three radio stations for breaking their Radio and Television laws. It is obvious that Venezuela continues to be a target.

What, then, are the facts behind the charges made by the Chavez administration?

More:
http://www.unobserver.com/layout5.php?id=3554&blz=1

"Dictator for Life?" Are you referring to standing for re-election in elections monitored heavily by international observers, on machines which are open AT ALL TIMES to review? Or are you referring to _Bush puppet, right-wing death-squad loving Álvaro Uribe, in Colombia, who got his CONGRESS to fix it so he could run again for an unprecidented 2nd term, and is working on getting his CONGRESS, NOT THE PEOPLE, to give him an unprecidented THIRD TERM to run, on top of the fact paramilitary leaders (death squad leaders) have testified publicly that paramilitaries have COERCED voters in Colombia to vote for Uribe, under threat.

If you raise these subjects you are going to need to bring your information with you. You can be sure we are all prepared to discuss it with you.

[FightTheRight89]

86. So why don't you give me some facts to back up your case?

You don't like mine. How about you try and convince me that Hugo Chavez is a happy-pappy wonderful, freedom loving, democratic reformer who's made everything in Venezuela just swell? You seem to imply it.

[Judi Lynn]

90. I don't care about convincing you. It's up to you to inform yourself. n/t

[FightTheRight89]

102. And that's where I call this a draw.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

104. Haahaahahaaaaa. Stop it you're killing me.......

I would call this more of an ass whipping.

[ronnie624]

122. The information provided by the other poster

does not support his/her accusations against Hugo Chavez.

Oddly enough, some of the opinion articles this individual has posted, mention the National Assembly as well as Chavez's elections by an overwhelming majority of Venezuelans.

Elections under the Bolivarian government are doubtless the most closely monitored in the history of human civilization, which clearly express the will of the majority of the Venezuelan people.

I cannot understand how those who blindly lash out at Chavez, consistently misconstrue elections for "communist oppression". It's really quite bizarre.

[Texano78704]

93. Not even close to the truth...

Chávez did take part in a coup back in 1992. He served two years in prison and was pardoned.

He was democratically elected three times, 1998, 2000 and 2006.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_chavez#Presidency_.281999.E2.80.93present.29

Up until Chávez was elected, Venezuela was run by an oligarchy, an oligarchy that still controls the media.

As for being a "dictator for life," I cannot believe anyone would believe Newsmax. The Venezuelan congress granted him power to rule by degree, he didn't just take them or make himself dictator.

[Judi Lynn]

95. It's a fact they either don't know, or try to conceal, that it's the other guys who've been running

Venezuela into the ground all these long, long years, and who are fighting like men possessed to keep the power from shifting to the people of Venezuela.

It's such an important thing to recognize as the foundation for what is happening there. That has to be understood in order to understand any part of the rest of it.

Welcome to D.U., Texano78704. :hi: :hi: :hi:

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

101. No

you moron he won an election in 1998. Then he was reelected in 2000 and 2006. I won't even tell you what you can do with that newsmax article. No wonder you're embarrassing yourself all over this thread.

[FightTheRight89]

74. I also would appreciate it if you DIDN'T accuse me of being in right-wing delusion.

Doesn't conform to the parameters of respectful, mature debate.

[Judi Lynn]

77. Everyone else takes the time to have a grasp of the subject. n/t

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

103. I'm sure she doesn't appreciate you bringing filth from Newsmax in here.

We would also appreciate a little knowledge on your part about the topics being discussed. "I have faith in America no matter what the facts or history tell me" yeah that's mature.

[Judi Lynn]

130. Newsmax set new standards in journalism during the kidnapping of Elián Gonzalez by the drunken

great uncle's family in Little Havana in Miami.

After the U.S. government finally retrieved the child to complete the court order, he was taken with his family and his Cuban classmates, first cousin, doctor, school teacher to live in the Aspen Institute Wye River Conference Center in Maryland, offered by a concerned woman involved in the arbitration.



The protective little boy is Elián's first cousin (to his right)
all here as companions as they shared quarters in Maryland.

Near the end of their stay, the family's attorney, Greg Craig, gave a dinner for them all, a great outdoor event. Newsmax got a neighbor to take photos out her back window, looking over the fence. They wrote a story claiming the father, Juan Miguel was wildly drunk, Elián was mistreated, and there was a figure of a Santería voodoo god in the backyard, near the air conditioner, living proof the owner of the house is a voodoo practitioner.

People later revealed, after the story came out with photos, that the "Santería" deity was actually a LAWN GNOME. LAWN GNOME.




Hi ho, hi ho!
Lawn gnome.
Newsmax.

Blazing new trails in Journalism, Newsmax.

[PetraPooh]

44. Communist oppression? He has honored every vote, even when

they were not in favor of his policies. Try reading something a bit less propagandized about him.

[FightTheRight89]

50. Robert Mugabe is likely to step down as President of Zimbabwe...

In the process honoring the mandate of the people. That doesn't mean he's not a horrible dictator.

[PetraPooh]

91. Mugabe is so totally different. His reign has had a nearly opposite

effect on his people than Chavez'. If you are serious about the two being comparable, I again suggest you read attain some information that isn't so propagandized.

[David__77]

49. How about we lead the US, and Venezuela leads Venezuela.

I did not mean that Venezuela should set up bases to replace those of the US - I meant they're setting an EXAMPLE for Latin America in terms of asserting national sovereignty. Every country should be allowed to have its own social system.

[Ghost Dog]

51. Democratic socialism has nothing to do with communist oppression n/t.

[FightTheRight89]

63. Nor does it have anything to do with Hugo Chavez.

[bitchkitty]

59. Toto, you're not in Oz.

This is Kansas. Or are your assertions a belated April Fool's joke?

[High Plains]

64. Did you get lost on your way to that other web site?

Please pack up your ancient anti-communist bs and take it with you.

[FightTheRight89]

67. What other website?

I trust America more than I trust Hugo Chavez. I trust democracy more than I trust dictatorship. I'm a Democrat, but not an isolationist. I think we should have an active role in that region. We're the protector of the Americas.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

107. "We're the protector of the Americas."

You've got some brass ones my friend. I take it you've never heard of: Dwight D Eisenhower, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, George HW Bush. That's just to name a few of our "protectors" of the region.....Forget it I don't even know why I bother.

[alarimer]

96. WE do not have the right to do this

We are not the world's police.

Chavez is not a fucking communist you idiot.

[Andrushka]

111. psst

You forgot the 'sarcasm' smilie.

(please...tell...us... you were being sarcastic... if you weren't you are seriously ill-informed)

[raccoon]

133. We stand for Freedom? Tell that to the Iraqis, and people in many

other countries where the US has supported a-hole leaders for ages.

You sure you belong here? Your posts are most suspicious.

[LanternWaste]

135. We've pretty much lead the way in Latin America for the past 150 years...

We've pretty much lead the way in Latin America for the past 150 years, the results of which have been pretty dismal, raging from economic rape to social unrest.

Let's try something new, shall we? Maybe self-governing sovereignty for once...?

[Winterblues]

136. Are you sure you are on the right board?

I am not sure war mongering is something DU is in favor of. It personally offends me..and you seem much in favor of it..

[arcos]

142. And waste resources that could go to better education and healthcare?

No thanks. Most Latin American countries have no use whatsoever for a strong military. We're all better off spending the money on things that actually benefit most of the population, instead of it being used to kill... the military has been abused by totalitarian (especially right wing) governments throughout Latin American history.

[Judi Lynn]

38. And you're claiming the U.S. is there to protect Ecuador. Oh, please! You're killing us. n/t

[FightTheRight89]

39. Oh yeah, that's right.

Because I forgot it was our policy to create colonies out of other nations.

My bad.

[noamnety]

132. Newsflash: The US isn't capable of handling it's own affairs.

Perhaps you could focus more energy on that, instead of whatever whitedude supremacy kick you're on.

Not "capable of managing their own affairs." pfffft.

[mac2]

113. The President does not have that Constitutional power

especially since they didn't attack us. Impeach him.

[LaPera]

4. Bullshit!! The only reason US forces are there is to control the region for American corporations

and oppression!

The US has always ONLY supported right-wing dictators in the region. The usual republican corporate fascism, steal everything they can get their hands on, oppress the people into slave labor for the rich and death squads to those who don't go along with the corporate program....

Yes, the US has such noble reasons for the bases = IMPERIALISM!!

They keep it that way to steal resources, agriculture, cheap labor and to control the drug market where American "suits", businessman, make fortunes on the drug trade behind the scenes, while speaking out of their asses that they are against drugs in public.

Just like the flourishing opium trade in Afghanistan since BushCo has been in power, and as it was when pappy Bush was in power.

The US (BushCo & the corporations) are dying to invade Venezuela, to steal and control those huge oil reserves, just as they want to do in Iran and have done in Iraq!

[Acadia Blue]

17. Our foreign policy has caused us problems, but the rePIGs don't

want to have a debate about it.

[FightTheRight89]

25. Yeah, I'm gonna say no on that one.

Right wing dictators are better than communist pro-Soviet dictators or total anarchy as we see in Iraq. I really do not think that anybody wants to invade Venezuela or Iran outside of Cheney's inner circle, and it's not gonna happen.

An air force base also is in no way tantamount to imperialism. I don't think you can seriously compare a military base used to fight drug traffickers to the enslavement of the entire continent of Africa.

But no, we're totally a corporate fascist government.

[Lance_Boyle]

33. What is the US military doing fighting drug traffickers?

Isn't that a police responsibility, not a military one?

[FightTheRight89]

34. Yeah, their police aren't fighting the traffickers.

Thus, we must.

[Lance_Boyle]

42. why "must" we?

It's outside of US territory and outside of US jurisdiction. Should we also be sending troops to Amsterdam to shut down the coffeeshops?

[lunatica]

45. The traffickers of drugs sold mosly here in the US

We are the biggest illegal drug consuming nation on the planet. Do you see the irony in that? We send our military to fight the drug trafficking that brings the drugs to us.

edited for clarity

[FightTheRight89]

46. No irony in that.

The same people fighting the drugs are not the same people consuming the drugs. Perhaps the reason we're fighting drug traffickers is because we want to get our nation off of it's drug addiction?

[lunatica]

52. Your logic is non-existent

You're saying that the way to get American people off drug addiction is to send the military to other countries? And how well has that worked out?

[FightTheRight89]

68. Yes.

It's not working out too well now, but I assure you it would be much worse should we stop.

[Judi Lynn]

53. Ah, HA HA HA HA HA. You will not find any takers here for that line of "thought."

Please, just take a stroll to Wikipedia, for a broad outline of places to look when you start your education program on the U.S. and drugs:

Vietnam Era
Western Vietnam and Eastern Cambodia had some opium fields. It was widely alleged among various veterans that the Central Intelligence Agency was involved in smuggling this opium to heroin producers in the United States at considerable profit. In the book The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia, Alfred W. McCoy, a professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, provides evidence of the use of opium by agents of the U.S. Government to fund covert operations in Vietnam. McCoy discusses the use of opium to fund covert operations done by the CIA in Vietnam and provides prolific testimony from interviews with many of the principles involved.<2> According to Dr. McCoy, the agency intimidated his sources and tried to keep the book from being published.<3>

There is also an article in Peace Magazine containing similar allegations.<4>

Speculation on this matter played a role in the Steven Seagal film Above the Law, as well as in the Mel Gibson film, Air America. Air America was based on the Christopher Robbins book Air America, which chronicled the history of CIA proprietary airlines in Southeast Asia.


Soviet Afghanistan
Further information: Inter-Services Intelligence#Afghanistan Undated
It was alleged by the Soviets on multiple occasions that American CIA agents were helping smuggle opium out of Afghanistan, either into the West, in order to raise money for the Afghan resistance or into the Soviet Union in order to weaken it through drug addiction. According to Alfred McCoy, the CIA supported various Afghan drug lords, for instance Gulbuddin Hekmatyar <5>.


Iran Contra Affair
Main article: CIA and Contras cocaine trafficking in the US
Released on April 13, 1989, the Kerry Committee report concluded that members of the U.S. State Department "who provided support for the Contras were involved in drug trafficking...and elements of the Contras themselves knowingly received financial and material assistance from drug traffickers."

In 1996 Gary Webb wrote a series of articles published in the San Jose Mercury News, which investigated Nicaraguans linked to the CIA-backed Contras who had allegedly smuggled cocaine into the U.S. which was then distributed as crack cocaine into Los Angeles and funneled profits to the Contras. According to Webb, the CIA was aware of the cocaine transactions and the large shipments of drugs into the U.S. by the Contra personnel and directly aided drug dealers to raise money for the Contras.

In 1996 CIA Director John Deutsch went to Los Angeles to refute the allegations raised by the Gary Webb, and was famously confronted by former LAPD officer Michael Rupert, who said he had witnessed it occurring. <6>


Venezuelan National Guard Affair
In November 1993, Judge Robert Bonner, the former head of the DEA, appeared on 60 Minutes and alleged that the CIA had permitted a ton of cocaine to enter the United States.<7>

The New York Times reported:

“ The CIA - over the objections of the Drug Enforcement Administration, a branch of the Justice Department - approved the shipment of at least one ton of nearly pure cocaine to Miami International Airport as a way of gathering information about the Colombian drug cartels. But the cocaine ended up on the street because of "poor judgment and management on the part of several CIA officers," the intelligence agency said.<8>
”

In November 1996 a Miami jury indicted former Venezuelan anti-narcotics chief and CIA asset, General Ramon Guillen Davila, who "led a CIA counter-narcotics program that put a ton of cocaine on U.S. streets in 1990."
(snip)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_drug_trafficking

Of course this is only the most fantastically superficial view you could get, but it's a starting place. All that's missing is your growing up and starting to clear out the cobwebs by investing in your own research and education. You can do it, we have faith in you.

[FightTheRight89]

69. Thanks for treating me like I'm an idiot and don't have fucking clue what I'm talking about.

There's a couple bad eggs. Doesn't mean drug lords run our gov't.

[NBachers]

87. This is What Our Overseas Airbases are Used For:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Hasenfus
Hasenfus' capture and detention helped uncover and publicize the Iran-Contra Affair. A black book of phone numbers in the wreckage tied the plane to an operation run out of Ilopango airbase in El Salvador, supported by anti-Castro exile Felix Rodriguez. Press speculation focused on former general Jack Singlaub as the sponsor; this was encouraged by Oliver North to divert attention from the true head: Richard Secord.


Also check out a book called "Powderburns" by retired DEA Agent Celerino "Cele" Castillo. It's a fascinating first-person account of the DEA career of an agent who investigated drug smuggling by Nicaraguan Contras operating from the Ilopango Air Force Base. He got too close to Poppy Bush and was pushed out of the DEA. This guy was right down and dirty in the trenches. He knows what he's talking about.

It's a fascinating book- buy a copy: http://powderburns.org/

[Judi Lynn]

92. Thanks for the information. It will be worth studying. Here are 2 photos of Felix Rodriquez with

his influential friend:



In the documentary, 634 ways to kill Castro, Rodriguez shows the filmmaker his photos of himself with _{George H. W. Bush,} really proud of his relationship with him.

In the photo below, Felix Rodriguez is portraying the drunk lying on the stage, next to Porter Goss, with the Operation 40 team of assassins in a nightclub in Mexico City.



"This photograph was taken in a nightclub in Mexico City on 22nd January, 1963. It is
believed that the men in the photograph are all members of Operation 40. Closest to the
camera on the left is Felix Rodriguez. Next to him is Porter Goss and Barry Seal.
Tosh Plumlee is attempting to hide his face with his coat. Others in the picture
are Alberto 'Loco' Blanco (3rd right) and Jorgo Robreno (4th right).

[NBachers]

121. Barry Seal- Where Have We Heard That Name Before . . .

Let's shine a little light on that subject -
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKseal.htm

[Judi Lynn]

124. Now THAT'S a link! Thank you for the info. Wow. I've heard some of these points, but it looks

like something from another planet all together,doesn't it?

Very glad to get the chance to see this now. Thank you so much.

He had terrible taste in associates, super low standards.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

105. But you don't know what you're talking about. if you don't know about the last 3

presidential elections in Venezuela, which had international monitors by the way. Then you don't know what you're talking about.

[bobthedrummer]

141. You sure stick to your decider's mind control programming, amigo/amiga.

Here's an antidote from The National Security Archive about the "drug war" and black budget military bases.

"Colombian Paramilitaries and the United States: 'Unraveling the Pepes Tangled Web'" (National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book 243, February 17, 2008)
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB243/index.htm

[formercia]

5. Nobody will attack them

we're already there.

[FightTheRight89]

23. And so when we're not there, and they get attacked, who are they going to cry to?

Oh it won't be us, of course. Because we're a bunch of freedom-hating fascists. Oh wait, that's the other guys.

[lunatica]

26. Who is going to attack them?

We're the only occupying military in all these countries. It's our army boots stomping squarely on their throats. Oh wait! That's right! Our military is benign and only spreads freedoms. What was I thinking!

And if you say Chavez is going to attack them, then they're evenly matched military-wise.

[FightTheRight89]

29. Political systems can change.

Our military is a powerful force that can be used for good or evil, but the vast majority of the time for good. The bases are not cancers of the Bush Administration but footholds that the United States can use to assist the Ecuadorian people should something terrible happen. I would also argue that since Chavez has a military twice as large as Ecuador, they probably are in some danger just because of his aggressive nature.

[lunatica]

36. Who will attack and what is 'something terrible' that's going to happen?

You keep setting up these straw man arguments. Something terrible could happen right here, to us, or to the North Pole or to anyplace on the planet. Your justification for having an American base in other countries is deluded. What terrible things are we averting by being there?

You know the other people on this planet are as intelligent and as good at things as the Americans are. Believe it or not. They don't need Big Brother In Army Boots walking all over them in the name of protection, which is the kind of extortion that the mafia practices.

edited to change a word

[FightTheRight89]

40. I don't know.

I have faith in America as a good force in the world.

[lunatica]

55. claiming faith is the last refuge of dummies

Anyone who thinks that having faith is an argument that will convince others is very naive.

[FightTheRight89]

70. Yeah.

Only morons have faith in America.

[lunatica]

73. Lately, yeah

Especially your kind of faith that's obviously in denial about facts, history and believes we're the good guys who do no harm. Like you say, only morons...

[FightTheRight89]

75. Did I ever say any of that?

Geez, sometimes people on this site can be just as McCarthyist as the Repukes...

What's wrong with saying that America is more a force of good than a force of evil?

I never said America can do no harm. You, my friend, made that up.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

106. Funny, 'cause that's exactly what you did in post # 86.

"Hugo Chavez is a happy-pappy wonderful, freedom loving, democratic reformer who's made everything in Venezuela just swell?"

[raccoon]

134. After "Shock and Awe?!!!!" nt

[Occulus]

117. Our military should be used for nothing but to defend our nation against attack.

Our military should never- never, ever EVER- be used to "protect American interests abroad".

If you don't get that, none of us can help you.

[FightTheRight89]

118. Help me?

Isolationism is a dangerous policy.

[northzax]

62. since they're doing such a wonderful job of keeping FARC out

of the country, I don't imagine who might.

still, this will save the US taxpayer some money in the short term, at least.

[mopinko]

6. sounds like you took a wrong turn.

viva ecuador.

[FightTheRight89]

24. Viva Ecuador.

Best way to promote Ecuador's stability and economy is to have the U.S. base there.

[mopinko]

61. yeah, sure

the pentagon- bastion of good will and stability the world over. sure, sure that's the ticket.

[High Plains]

Funny, Ecuador doesn't seem to agree with you.

But what do they know, right?

[FightTheRight89]

72. Well if they don't want us there,

We should respect it and leave. But I don't like their decision.

[President Kerry]

110. Their decision is not for you to like. It's a matter of sovereignty.

Them kicking us out is pretty understandable knowing the recent history of the US in LatAm (Nicaragua, Panama, Chile). As for America being a force for good - it all depends on who's in charge. A bus is not a bad thing, unless driven by a drunk.

[High Plains]

65. Funny, Ecuador doesn't seem to agree with you.

But what do they know, right?

[katsy]

9. Tell that to Iraq.

As if our corporate controlled government has any credibility.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

21. BWAAAHAAAHAAAHAAAA!!!!!!!

Dude, you owe me a new keyboard.

[laylah]

100. Tell that to the Iraqis...nm

[struggle4progress]

114. Ecuador WAS attacked recently by Uribe: the US applauded

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

144. Take your "world police" and shove it.

Everybody is sick of empires.

[Freddie Stubbs]

7. Keep in mind that this news source is a propaganda organ of the Cuban Government

[LaPera]

8. Right, our corporate propaganda is so much more honorable, reliable, truthful & honest?

Get fucking real!

[Freddie Stubbs]

11. Even Fox News has articles on its website critical of Bush Admin policies:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,323968,00.html?sPage=fnc/specialsections/waronterror

Does La Prensa ever have anything critical of the Casrto regime?

[LaPera]

12. What's your point? American bases should be in the region why? What purpose do they serve

except for exploitation for American corporations and exploiting cheap labor and corporations OWNING the countries resources, such as Dole, what do you think Americans corporations want with Venezuelan oil?

[Acadia Blue]

14. Exactly. Its coming home to roost.

[Freddie Stubbs]

15. My point is that some DUers may not be aware that La Prensa was a state-owned propaganda tool

Are you disputing this fact?

[LaPera]

20. Then report to DUers that Fox News is also a republican owned propaganda coporate tool!

Yet you want to side with the what "fairness" of Fox news as an example to make your point....Hardly creditable!

Just because La Prensa reports on US imperialism doesn't make it a lie or propaganda, if it's a true an accurate story can you contest the story?

[Judi Lynn]

57. You've caught us dead to rights. The story must be a lie. Oh, wait! Here it is, from another source!

Ecuador plans foreign bases ban
Ecuadorian lawmakers have approved a constitutional change that would outlaw foreign military bases on its soil.

The approval throws into doubt the future of a key US base in the South American country.

The US has its only South American base in the town of Manta but its 10-year lease is up for renewal next year.

The lawmakers' decision, if given final approval in a public vote, could signal the end of joint Ecuadorean and US efforts to fight drug cartels.

"Ecuador is a land of peace; foreign military bases or foreign installations with military purpose will not be allowed," read the amendment approved by the assembly, which is controlled by President Rafael Correa's Alianza Pais party.

Strained relations

The air base at Manta has great strategic value for the US military.

American officials say surveillance flights from Manta have led to more than half the illegal drug seizures in the region.

The coastal town also doubles up as a strategic look-out post for US forces monitoring warships heading north from the Middle East and Asia.

More:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7326797.stm

[LaPera]

13. Are you saying La Prensa is always wrong because Fox news has a story

about BushCo on waterboarding....Fox news isn't owned by the republicans corporate fascist structure?

[LaPera]

16. Again!! The only reason US forces are there is to control the region for American corporations

and oppression!

The US has always ONLY supported right-wing dictators in the region. The usual republican corporate fascism, steal everything they can get their hands on, oppress the people into slave labor for the rich and death squads to those who don't go along with the corporate program....

Yes, the US has such noble reasons for the bases = IMPERIALISM!!

They keep it that way to steal resources, agriculture, cheap labor and to control the drug market where American "suits", businessman, make fortunes on the drug trade behind the scenes, while speaking out of their asses that they are against drugs in public.

Just like the flourishing opium trade in Afghanistan since BushCo has been in power, and as it was when pappy Bush was in power.

The US (BushCo & the corporations) are dying to invade Venezuela, to steal and control those huge oil reserves, just as they want to do in Iran and have done in Iraq!

Just because La Prensa reports on US imperialism doesn't make it a lie or propaganda, if it's a true an accurate story can you contest the story?

[Judi Lynn]

28. Bush policy doesn't favor anyone in the world outside his narrow base, and it's deadly for everyone

else.

It's up to you to provide some proof that what has been written about Ecuador is a lie. If you can do that, you've got a point that we can't trust anything outside the corporate media which has been constantly at the service of the _Bush predators.

[Acadia Blue]

19. Clinton-Gore hurt the Middle class as much as a republican could

and more because they were trusted to be Dems not repigs.

[Ghost Dog]

47. So what if it is? The reporting here is strictly factual,

describing a democratic decision approved by majority vote.

[Judi Lynn]

58. You're just too fast for us, Freddie Stubbs. Drats. Would you accept this article as a substitute

source?

Ecuador assembly OKs ban on foreign military bases
Wed Apr 2, 2008 12:26am EDT

QUITO (Reuters) - Ecuador's popular assembly on Tuesday approved a law to ban foreign military bases, a move that could dash hopes in Washington of renewing a lease that lets U.S. troops use a key anti-drug air base.

The 130-member assembly passed the reform in the first package of rewrites to the constitution that once finished must be ratified by Ecuadoreans in a vote during the second half of this year.

"Ecuador is a land of peace; foreign military bases or foreign installations with military purposes will not be allowed," read the amendment approved by the assembly controlled by President Rafael Correa's Alianza Pais party.

Correa, a leftist former economy minister, opposes U.S. military presence in his Andean nation and once vowed to cut off his arm before renewing the lease on the Manta base that runs out in 2009. Air surveillance missions from the Pacific coast base are responsible for more than half of all drug seizures in the world's top cocaine-producing region, U.S. officials have said.

http://www.reuters.com/articlePrint?articleId=USN0132110520080402

[Hulk]

10. Good for Ecuador. Get the American military back where it belongs.

What business have WE got planting our military on bases in Latin America? Who the f*ck do we think we are? Considering how our media and this government holds Chavez as a "threat", I think it's only fitting that Latin America should kick our asses OUT of Latin America. We are NOT entitled to have a hand in their affairs. We've already got a history of meddling in Chile and Argentina..as well as nearly all the rest of the Latin American nations.

Shame on us. We are #1...imperialists.

[Judi Lynn]

32. Absolutely right. Anyone who is independent enough to look for the truth KNOWS the history of the US

in Latin America, or will be searching to know more about it, and it's a long, sordid, FILTHY, brutal history which has benefited NO ONE but the very wealthiest, and it has left entire countries broken and suffering and hopeless.

Anyone who has traveled through the region knows this, and anyone who has known people who have emigrated found out about this a long time ago.

I have no respect for these clowns who come here to try to put one over on people who CLEARLY know better. Anyone with a functioning brain knows better.

You bet we have a history of meddling in those two savage bloodbaths. It's no secret now, by God, although the idiots among us don't have the ambition to pick up a book or do any research long enough to learn a damned fact or two about it.

[flashl]

18. K&R

[Peace Patriot]

27. The U.S. Manta air base was likely used in the recent U.S./Colombia bombing

and incursion on Ecuadoran soil that very nearly caused a war between Ecuador and Colombia. U.S. surveillance and U.S. "smart bombs" were used, and probably U.S. aircraft and personnel (or DynCorp aircraft/personnel--same thing, in our privatized military).

But the U.S. base was controversial long before that. Rafael Correa, Ecuador's president, made it a campaign pledge not to renew the lease for that base in 2009, when it comes up for renewal. He won the presidency with 60% of the vote, so that sentiment is widespread in Ecuador. When Correa was asked about this by the news media in Miama, he said that he would agree to U.S. boots on the ground in Ecuador, when the U.S. agrees to permit an Ecuadoran military base in Miami!

Correa is quite a card. When the press asked him about Hugo Chavez's remark to the UN that Bush is "the devil," Correa replied that it is "an insult to the devil." (Correa had been running a 50/50 neck and neck race with Ecuador's biggest banana magnate at the time. After this remark, his numbers soared and he won the election with 60% of the vote. I don't know if this remark did it, but it certainly didn't hurt.)

The U.S. has MAJOR PROBLEMS with its image in South America--problems that the Bush Junta is trying to solve in their typical way--massive lies, and military preparations. Their purpose is to destabilize and destroy the Andean democracies--Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina--"divide and conquer" their strong alliance, bust up their alliances and friendships with other leftist governments (Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Nicaragua), prevent any more governments going left (Peru and Paraguay are on the verge), and regain global corporate predator control of the massive oil deposits in Venezuela and Ecuador (both members of OPEC), and the oil and gas reserves in Bolivia, and, as to Argentina (where there was a big oil find recently), they have been primarily interested in destroying Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, the new leftist president who is a strong ally of Venezuela in particular, as is her husband, Nestor Kirchner, the previous president. (When the Bush Junta issued orders to Latin American leaders that they must "isolate" Chavez, Nestor Kirchner replied, "But he's my brother!").

The murderous, corrupt, failed Bush-U.S. "war on drugs" has been used to create a war plan against these countries. That war plan is now in motion. The first shots in this war have already been fired--with the ten 500-lb "smart bombs" that the U.S. dropped on Ecuador, followed by a Colombian military incursion into Ecuador, which killed Raul Reyes and 24 others (including an Ecuadoran citizen, and several visiting Mexican students) who were asleep in a FARC guerrilla camp just inside Ecuador's border. The camp was a temporary refugee for the transfer of 12 FARC hostages (including the most famous one, Ingrid Betancourt) to President Correa. Correa, and also the presidents of France, Argentina and Venezuela, and possibly others, were involved in this hostage negotiation. The hostage release was imminent. This third hostage release (Chavez of Venezuela engineered the first two--a total of six hostages released) was clearly paving the way for peace talks in Colombia's 40+ year civil war. Bang, bang, shoot, shoot.

The Bushites don't want peace in South America, any more than they want to stop drug traffic. They are funding the biggest cocaine producers and traffickers on the planet--the Uribe government of Colombia--with $5.5 BILLION (our money) in military aid, to, first of all, eliminate the "labor problem" and the left in Colombia (murders of thousands of union leaders, political leftists, peaceful demonstrators, small peasant farmers, human rights workers and journalists); secondly, to use toxic pesticides against small peasant farmers, to drive them off the land, in favor of the big drug cartels and corporate interests (Chiquita, Drummond Coal, Occidental Petroleum--and now corps like Monsanto, for ruinous corporate monoculture in biofuels); and, thirdly, to draw Venezuela, Ecuador and others into a war with Colombia.

Donald Rumsfeld (yup) laid out the speakable portions of this strategy in an op-ed in the Washington Post four months ago.* He urges passage of the Colombia "free trade" deal as a means of economic warfare against Venezuela and others. (I believe that Exxon Mobil's recent effort to freeze $12 billion in Venezuela's assets was part of this strategy.) He also urges "swift action" by the U.S. "in support of friends and allies in South America." The Bushites have almost no "friends and allies" in South America, except the fascist thugs running Colombia, and the fascist mobsters planning coups within democratic countries like Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia and Argentina.

This is the context in which the Ecuadoran legislature has declared foreign bases--meaning U.S. bases--illegal in Ecuador. They KNOW what the Bushites are up to. We North Americans, for the large part, DON'T KNOW--because our war profiteering corporate news monopolies black-hole any real news of South America, and repeat Bush-CIA disinformation faxes word for word in their so-called 'news' articles.

Another reason that the Bushites hate and want to topple these governments is that Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia have rejected the horror-filled Bush-U.S. "war on drugs," in favor of a sane, common sense, EFFECTIVE strategy of good police work, stopping the criminal cartels, keeping simple coca leaf chewing and coca leaf tea (a thousand-year-plus traditional indigenous medicine--full of vitamins and protein and essential for survival in the high Andes) LEGAL, and encouraging ORGANIC agriculture by the small peasant farmers (who are the best producers of food, and who often grow a few coca leaves as well for local use).

Imagine a SANE drug policy! Well, the Bushites and our police state establishment DON'T WANT YOU TO imagine such a policy, or ever hear about one in this hemisphere. They have that and more, in South America. They have DEMOCRACY. We don't. We have "trade secret," proprietary vote counting machines, with the secret code owned and controlled by rightwing Bushite corporations, with virtually no audit/recount controls--in case you haven't noticed. And we are the nazis of the world now because of it. Not you and me. Our government. Our overseers. Our oppressors.

In South America, we are seeing the WILL OF THE PEOPLE in action, and that is something else that the Bushites and their global corporate predator string-pullers don't want us to know about. Imagine oil profits being used to benefit the poor! That is what the Bushites are intent upon destroying, by starting a 'hot war' this year, in South America, before their "unitary executive" leaves office.

------------------------------
*"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

Recommended:

www.venezuelanalysis.com
www.BoRev.net
Also, "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" (available at YouTube and www.axisoflogic.com).

[Judi Lynn]

37. So glad you threw light on the fact Ecuador's people ALREADY made the decision to close the base

when they endorsed the candidate who told them he planned to do it during his Presidential campaign against the U.S.-backed candidate who is also the wealthiest man in Ecuador, plantations owner Álvaro Noboa.

Their position on this was delivered the moment they voted in and greeted their new President, who had already made so many long-lasting friends and admirers during his stint as Ecuador's Finance Minister.

They have been expecting him to make the bold, Ecuador-centered changes his country has been needing desperately during some very dark years of unendurable exploitation and abuse by foreign powers.

[Dover]

54. I suppose now we'll see some sort of retaliation from the U.S. like a 'banana scare'.

Or some other trade-related scare to hurt Ecuador's economy. Oil and Banana's are among their biggest exports. Kind of like the trumped up "anti-French Wine" thing.

[annabanana]

143. Once again, your insight is tucked deep into another post.

when it ought to be at the top of "Greatest"

[lunatica]

43. If the US really had the best interest of the rest of the Americas in mind

Central and South America wouldn't have so many third world countries. The US never shared the wealth which it could have easily done, but they sure take it away from them through centuries of exploitation. Read the book Confessions of An Economic Hit Man

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confessions_of_an_Economic_Hit_Man

[phrenzy]

60. FightTheRight89 WTF?

Umm, you haven't made one coherent argument as to why Ecuador SHOULD want to allow the US Military to base operations from their SOVEREIGN country. Well, other than "We're the good guys!" and "They have teh drugs!"

Here's a news flash, other countries might want to handle things differently than we do - You should learn to accept that instead of putting them down or crowing about how they'll come "crying" the the good ole USA when they having a hard time.


And to sit there and basically say that a US Installed right wing dictatorship is better for the people than a DEMOCRATICALLY elected system that may not match our political philosophy? Kissinger much?

Jesus, man your arrogance is off the charts...

[FightTheRight89]

71. Never said they didn't deserve the right to kick us out.

Just said that I don't think it's in their best interest to do so. I am an economic socialist and I do agree with many of Chavez's economic policies. But his anti-American rhetoric and his blatantly dictatorial actions as President cause me to believe that he's a danger to the United States and to his own people.

And I don't think that right-wing dictatorships are good. I think in the context of the cold war they were better than pro-Soviet dictatorships. And I think that in the context of today's age of terrorism, that they're better than chaos like what we see in Iraq now.

[MUAD_DIB]

82. Any way you slice it; Dictators and Dictatorships suck.

The US supporting them is even worse: Regardless of context.

[Judi Lynn]

84. How about your President's Uzbekistanian puppet, Islam Karimov, who boils his political prisoners?

[MUAD_DIB]

89. ( ( ( Crickets ) ) )

[MarkR1717]

115. But surely Karimov is a good Communist???....

Karimov became an official in the Communist Party of the USSR, becoming the party's First Secretary in Uzbekistan in 1989. On 24 March 1990 he became President of the Uzbek Soviet Socialist Republic. He declared Uzbekistan an independent nation on 31 August 1991. He won Uzbekistan's first presidential election on 29 December with 86% of the vote. The elections were called unfair, with state-run propaganda and a falsified vote count, although the opposing candidate and leader of the Erk (Freedom) Party, Muhammad Solih, had a chance to participate. Shortly after the elections, a harsh political clampdown forced opposition leaders into exile, while many have been issued long-term prison sentences and a few have disappeared.

[phrenzy]

98. Ends Justify Means?

It's not in my "self interest" to avoid war profiteering, to buy American or to donate money to charity. WTF does that have to do with RIGHT AND WRONG?

You also create a false dichotomy between "dictatorships" and "chaos". Maybe some people prefer independence rather than the shame of being turned into a "client-state" to make a buck.

It never ceases to amaze me when some Americans are incredulous that some "3rd world" country doesn't want our "good will" in their country militarily.

What would they say if we had Chinese bases on our soil???

Did it ever occur to you that there comes a "price" with US "help" that Equador may not want to pay? Maybe the US would use their base as leverage in Latin America and threaten countries with leaders it doesn't like.

Nahh... That could NEVER happen, right?

PS

How in the hell is Chavez a "danger to the United States"???

How is he a danger "to his own people" when they are the ones who elected him?

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

108. Oh yeah because Washington's economic recipes have worked soooo

well in Central and South America. That's why you see all that prosperity all over the place. Are you Milton Friedman's illegitimate child by any chance?

[Peace Patriot]

112. Please tell us about Chavez's "blatantly dictatorial actions."

So far, I have found that not one of those Bushite/corporate media accusations against Chavez has held up, with even the slightest scrutiny. Dig deeper, get the facts, analyze, and you find that, not only are the accusations of "blatantly dictatorial actions" not true, the opposite is true. Chavez has run a scrupulously lawful, beneficial government for ten years. He remains immensely popular (60% to 70% approval rating), and has won two elections, and a recall election (funded by our tax dollars) with increasing percentages of the votes (63% of the votes in 2006). And the vote counting puts our own system to shame for its transparency. He has harmed no one, invaded no one, jailed no one unfairly, has bent over backwards to be fair to his opponents, is not corrupt, and has kept his promises--for instance, increasing Venezuela's share of its oil profits and using the money to bootstrap the poor and to vastly improve Venezuela's economy, and the economy of the region. And, in fact, ALL democratic processes--free speech, public participation, election transparency, vibrant debate--have improved--impressively improved--in Venezuela during the Chavez administration, and they have improved all over the region as a result of his influence and the influence of the grass roots social justice movement that put him in office. Other leaders praise him--for instance, President Lula da Silva, president of Brazil, and Nestor Kirchner, recent former president of Argentina, and Rafael Correa, president of Ecuador. He is well liked, and has many friends and allies throughout the region.

I think you're "whistling Dixie," as they say. You don't know diddle about this subject, and are just repeating a corporate news "talking point."

Please tell us why 60% to 70% of Venezuelans think highly of Chavez. Are they fools? Would they approve of someone guilty of "blatantly dictatorial actions"? Are you indicting Venezuelan voters? Are you indicting the judgement of President da Silva of Brazil, who said of Chavez that "you can criticize Chavez on many things, but not on democracy." He also called Chavez the "great peacemaker" in the recent U.S./Colombian attempt to entice Ecuador into a war, by blatantly violated Ecuador's sovereignty in a bombing raid.

Probably you buy the Bush/corporate media accusation that Chavez is a "dictator" because he decided not to renew the PUBLIC airwaves license of one corporate broadcaster, RCTV, which had actively participated in the violent rightwing military coup against the elected government in 2002. Tossing those traitors off the air was an improvement for free speech. The coup that they HOSTED ON TV had suspended the Constitution, the National Assembly, the courts and all civil rights--as their opening action! Talk about DICTATORS! How long do you think "free speech" would have lasted under them?

In any case, denying a license for use of the PUBLIC airwaves is a routine function of government in most countries of the world, including all democracies, and is in fact frequently done. It is only when a BIG CORPORATE behemoth of a broadcaster gets its licensed pulled, that the OTHER big corporate behemoths squawk about it. The RCTV license was given to independent producers--small producers--with encouragement to use it for public access to the airwaves by excluded groups, such as the indigenous and racial minorities--a distinct IMPROVEMENT in free speech and in democracy. Corporations have no inherent right to dominate the public airwaves. None! I would would ban every one of them, and encourage COMPETITION. These behemoth broadcasters are one of the chief reasons that our own democracy is in such trouble. I'm bloody sick of their fascist propaganda and warmongering. Have we forgotten what free speech is FOR? Have we forgotten WHO free speech is for?

One after another, every Bushite "talking point" falls to pieces, and the reality is revealed: Venezuela has a far BETTER democracy than WE do. And Hugo Chavez is not, and has no intention of becoming, a "dictator." He is in fact what our Democrats should be--and what our own FDR was--a true advocate of the people against what FDR called "organized money." "Organized money hates me--and I welcome their hatred," said FDR. The Bushites and their global corporate predator puppetmasters hate Chavez and I think he would say the same thing FDR said--"I welcome their hatred." He is the peoples' choice. He is the peoples' champion. He is strong and confident and visionary. But that is not the same thing as being a "dictator." You need to learn the difference between strong leadership--without which nothing can get done, and people starve, and economies languish, and the rich steal everything in sight--and "dictatorship," which is oppressive and undemocratic.

One final example of the Bushite bullshit you seem to believe: Chavez wanted to run for another term of office (like our own FDR who ran for and won FOUR terms in office as president, and died in his fourth term--he was "president for life"!). (And they called him a "dictator," too!) But Chavez respects Venezuela's Constitution, which requires a vote of the people to change the Constitutional two-term limit on the president. He and his government--and also the National Assembly--proposed 69 amendments, in total--on many issues (including, for instance, equal rights for women and gays), for a vote of all Venezuelans. That election occurred last December. And Chavez lost it, by a hair (50.7% to 49.3%). He would have been within his rights to call for a recount, it was so close. He did not. He quietly acquiesced to the will of the people and moved on. (He has four more years on his current term.)

Is that the action of a "dictator"?

"President for life" is not the same thing as "dictator for life." FDR was a "president for life" because he was ELECTED to be. That is all Chavez did--propose that he be able run again. To be VOTED ON. To be beholden to the people. It's unclear why the 69 amendments lost. It could have been gay rights in a very Catholic country. It could have been a lot of things. But the strangest thing about all this is that Alvaro Uribe--Bush's former Medellin Cartel tool in Colombia, a country with one of the worst human rights records in the world--has already sneaked in an extra term for himself, through the legislature--not by a vote of the people--and is working on getting a legislative committee to do the same thing for a third term. But that is never mentioned by the Bushites. If Chavez tries to do it--BY A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE--that's a "dictator." If a Bushite creep like Uribe does it, sneakily, that's okay.

[Ghost Dog]

123. Just to add that the said corporate broadcaster, RCTV,

(see wikipedia) continues to operate on cable and satellite and streaming on internet, for those that choose and can afford it.

[Solon]

119. You are really foolish, if you were born or lived in any of these Latin American...

countries during the Cold war, and labeled yourself a "Socialist" at least economically, that'd be enough to shoot you in the head and leave you in a ditch. Calling Chavez, or any of the governments of Latin America "Communist" is just fucking stupidity. Our government labeled anything to the left of Ayn Rand communist, and has for years. Its a meaningless "gotcha" phrase in the United States. I cannot believe you don't realize that, to the US government YOU are a Communist who deserves death if you also happen to be a foreigner.

[populistdriven]

78. ...

[Judi Lynn]

80. Reposted closer to the top of the thread. n/t

[MUAD_DIB]

83. Contrary to some posters here I think that it is excellent that Ecuador has the

good sense to push back on American colonialism.

That's the only way that they'll be able to stand on their own.

[Judi Lynn]

85. Ecuador assembly approves ban on foreign military bases, targeting US

Ecuador assembly approves ban on foreign military bases, targeting US

The Associated Press
Wednesday, April 2, 2008

QUITO, Ecuador: The only U.S. military post in South America, an important drug-interdiction center, would be banned under a clause written into Ecuador's new constitution, which faces a referendum this year.

Leftist President Rafael Correa, whose party controls the 130-member assembly writing the new constitution, has repeatedly said that he will not renew the 10-year U.S. lease in Ecuador's Pacific port of Manta when it expires in late 2009.

The measure approved Tuesday states that "Ecuador is a land of peace," and that "the presence of foreign military bases or foreign installations with military purposes is prohibited."

The U.S. is the only foreign country with a military base in Ecuador.

More:
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/04/02/america/LA-GEN-Ecuador-Foreign-Bases.php

[NBachers]

94. A Thread of Hope . . .

Latin America is the first site of modern American Imperialism. From there, it has spread throughout the world, and finally back into the USA.

If Latin America is effectively shutting down the enforcement arm of Corporate/One World American Oppression, then perhaps the rest of the world will follow . . .

And maybe that resistance will even flower in the USA.

[Judi Lynn]

97. It would be worth waiting a lifetime to see, wouldn't it? They are due their freedom.

Welcome to D.U., NBachers. :hi: :hi: :hi:

[NBachers]

120. Thanks

I've been around for awhile. I just don't always load up with comments and responses. A little too much bruising going on in the primary threads. I'd rather the vitriol was directed at repukes than fellow Democrats.

This thread is an example of what drew me to DU in the first place. It's nice to get away from the sandbox for awhile.

[fascisthunter]

88. Neo-Con Heads Explode

and I smile.

[Ghost Dog]

99. ...

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/South_America/South_America_page.html

Where the People Voted Against Fear

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Eduardo_Galeano/Eduardo_Galeano_page.html

...

Empire or Humanity?
What the Classroom Didn't Teach Me About the American Empire
By Howard Zinn
http://www.alternet.org/audits/81005?page=entire

[ronnie624]

125. Thanks for the links.

A good essay by Howard Zinn.

Reading outside the classroom, however, I began to fit the pieces of history into a larger mosaic. What at first had seemed like a purely passive foreign policy in the decade leading up to the First World War now appeared as a succession of violent interventions: the seizure of the Panama Canal zone from Colombia, a naval bombardment of the Mexican coast, the dispatch of the Marines to almost every country in Central America, occupying armies sent to Haiti and the Dominican Republic. As the much-decorated General Smedley Butler, who participated in many of those interventions, wrote later: "I was an errand boy for Wall Street."

At the very time I was learning this history -- the years after World War II -- the United States was becoming not just another imperial power, but the world's leading superpower. Determined to maintain and expand its monopoly on nuclear weapons, it was taking over remote islands in the Pacific, forcing the inhabitants to leave, and turning the islands into deadly playgrounds for more atomic tests.

[Judi Lynn]

127. Oh, my gosh. Eduardo Galeano, too! You have donated some important reading to the

DU floating "library!" Wow.

I got "Open Veins of Latin America" for Christmas, and I haven't had time to sit down and pour over it, yet, but I've skipped through it, long enough to find this treasure: he said he was walking down a street in Bogota when he ran into a view of a huge sign on the side of a building, saying "Let’s leave pessimism for better times."

You have given the serious ones among us a great running start at educating ourselves! Thank you so much, Ghost Dog, and thanks, also to ronnie624 for pointing out your links to those of us who may have missed them the first time around.

[Ghost Dog]

129. Oh yes. Galeano's "Open Veins of Latin America" /

"Venas Abiertas de América Latina" provides the seminal historical honest economist's perspective, and is the must read, imo. :thumbsup:

[ronnie624]

138. The excerpt I posted was from Ghost Dog's link.

I didn't mean to cause any confusion. Sorry about that.

[Judi Lynn]

139. I attempted to thank you for mentioning Ghost Dog's links, because I got sidetracked the first time

I saw them, and didn't take the time to click them to check.

After seeing your post, I recalled I had forgotten, went back and was VERY happy for both Ghost Dog's great post with links, and your reference to the post, as I've been able to save Ghost Dog's great links for my own files to study A.S.A.P., and looking forward to it!

Hope this is clearer. :hi:

[patrick t. cakes]

109. kick

this thread has been a great read.:thumbsup:

[SavageDem]

116. Wow!

Fantastic, educational thread! I applaud Ecuador for their decision, and can't fathom those who would criticize it. Just as another DUer pointed out, would we like Chinese, or British, or Cuban bases in the U.S.? We need to respect their sovereignty as we cherish ours.

I also thoroughly enjoyed the wealth of information on Venezuela and Hugo Chavez! Thanks to Judi Lynn and all the DUers who share great stuff like this to further edumacate the great unwashed like me!

[Judi Lynn]

126. We're all getting edumacated together, SavageDem! We sure have nowhere to go but UP

after the fine edumacation we all got on history as kids, right?

Just about everything we know today seems to have been learned decades after it happened! They can't keep it swept under the rug forever, apparently, but it doesn't keep them from trying.

If we see a few dinged and dizzy people showing up at DU telling us we're SUPPOSED to rule the world, we can only imagine it's all the home schooling they've been given by their winger parents, or maybe books like this prize, a revisionist look at history, being "gifted" to schools, written by our dear Vice President Dick Cheney's wife, Lynne:





See _George read Lynne's book? See _George and Texas Governor Rick Perry
both reading Lynne's book to unsuspecting school children? Ain't life grand?
Welcome to D.U., SavageDem. :hi: :hi: :hi:

[New Dawn]

128. K&R!

[Judi Lynn]

131. UPI; Ecuador wants foreign military bases out

Ecuador wants foreign military bases out
Published: April 3, 2008 at 12:17 AM

Print story Email to a friend Font size:QUITO, Ecuador, April 3 (UPI) -- Lawmakers in Ecuador approved a change to the country's constitution that would forbid foreign military bases on its soil, government officials said.

The change must now face a popular vote to be ratified into law, El Comercio newspaper reported Wednesday.

The United States has a small military operation in the Ecuadorian town of Manta, from where it conducts drug eradication operations in conjunction with Ecuadorian military.

However, the lease for the base is set to expire next year.

Even before the proposed constitutional amendment making the base illegal, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa suggested last year that the lease for the base would not be renewed.

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/04/03/ecuador_wants_foreign_military_bases_out/4601/

[kineneb]

137. our bases there only if they can put bases in US

I believe a previous statement by their gov. stated they would allow an US base only if the Ecuadorians could have base in the US.


hmmm, an Ecuadorian base in Texas?

[Vidar]

140. Bravo Ecuador!