- First some background. On March 1, the Colombian military
(with US Special Forces help) illegally attacked a FARC-EP rebel camp inside
Ecuador. US satellite telephone tracking located the site. Washington signed
off on the mission. Over 20 people were killed, including 16 or more FARC-EP
members while they slept. Key among them was Paul Reyes, the FARC-EP's
second-in-command, key peace negotiator and public voice, and lead figure
in the Chavez-led hostage negotiations with Colombia.
-
- The action was a clear act of aggression and premeditated
murder. It's not how the dominant media played it. Hostile verbal exchanges
took place between Hugo Chavez and Ecuador's Raphael Correa on the one
hand and Colombia's Alvaro Uribe and George Bush on the other. US presidential
candidates, as expected, supported the White House and Bogota.
-
- Tensions heightened further when Colombia's vice-president,
Francisco Santos Calderon, revealed his nation's army recovered three laptops
and other material at the FARC-EP camp with provocative evidence on their
hard drives. He claimed it showed Chavez and Correa have links to the FARC-EP,
and Venezuela provided weapons, munitions, and $300 million or so to the
rebel group. In addition, the FARC-EP was accused of acquiring 50 kilograms
(110 pounds) of uranium, that it wishes to sell it for a radioactive dirty
bomb, it also sold 700 kilograms of cocaine for about $1.5 million, and
more.
-
- The story is preposterous, but the media grabbed hold
of it. No evidence exists, so they invent it. In March, Colombian authorities
asked Interpol to examine the computer files for authenticity. The organization
released its report on May 15. On its web site, it states that Secretary
General Ronald Noble "advised senior Colombian law enforcement officials
that INTERPOL's team of forensic experts discovered 'no evidence of modification,
alteration, addition or deletion' in the user files of any of the three
laptop computers, three USB thumb drives and two external hard disks seized
during a Colombian anti-narcotics and anti-terrorist operation on a FARC
camp on 1 March 2008."
-
- But Interpol admitted that lacking evidence doesn't prove
"there was no tampering." In fact, some files had future date
stamps and other indications of data alteration. It questions their authenticity,
and Interpol (deep in its report) acknowledged that Columbia likely manipulated
the contents - with an explanation needing close reading to understand.
It delegitimizes Colombian claims and would get an international court
to dismiss them out of hand. Reporters doing their job should as well.
Data accuracy can't be verified or worse - they may be entirely fraudulent,
and made-in-Washington mischief may be behind it.
-
- Interpol's report continued saying "between 1 and
3 March, direct access to the seized computer exhibits....did not follow
internationally recognized principles in the handling of electronic evidence
under ordinary circumstance." Its experts "verified that this....had
no effect" on file contents, but other report evidence contradicts
that statement. Interpol, in fact, stated that "Direct access may
complicate validating this evidence for purposes of its introduction in
a judicial proceeding because law enforcement is then required to demonstrate
or prove that the direct access did not have a material impact on the purpose
for which the evidence is intended."
-
- In short, hard drive data prove nothing and may, in fact,
be fake. With US involvement clear, it wouldn't be the first time, and
Washington is rich in talent to do it.
-
- Independent computer experts are also troubled. They
believe that failure to follow standard evidence handling procedures seriously
jeopardizes its reliability. With care, forensic specialists or computer
professionals can add, delete or alter hard drive material without leaving
a footprint.
-
- Dominant media reports ignored this and more. They passed
over or played down key findings, including Interpol's statement: that
its experts didn't "evaluate the accuracy or the source of the exhibits'
content." How could they? The volume was enormous amounting to the
equivalent of "39.5 million pages in Microsoft Word...." At the
rate of 100 pages a day, "it would take more than 1000 years to read"
it.
-
- That alone begs the question. In a few days or even weeks,
how were Colombian authorities able to analyze the data to discover provocative
information therein. That notion also got no attention in the dominant
media. Neither did most other parts of the truth.
-
- Spinning the News - How Big Media Does It
-
- Here's how Murdoch's Wall Street Journal's played it
on May 16. Its editorial page said Interpol's May 15 report "won't
make Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez's day." It reported Interpol's
claim about no evidence of file tampering, but ignored the issues of authenticity,
accuracy, manipulation, or impossible "speed-reading" skills
of Colombian verifiers. It concluded that "Interpol's certification
proves that Mr. Chavez is trying to destabilize a US ally (and that he's
a) proven supporter of terrorism in our own hemisphere."
-
- The New York Times' Simon Romero was little better. His
May 16 article was headlined: "Files Tying Venezuela to Rebels Not
Altered, Report Says." He called Interpol's report "a setback
for Venezuela, which had claimed that the computer files....were fabrications...."
It "may advance efforts under way in the Congress to add Venezuela
to the United States' list of state sponsors of terrorism...."
-
- Well down in his report, Romero admitted that "Interpol
could not vouch for the accuracy of the files" and that "a Colombian
antiterrorism unit (seized them improperly and) in violation of internationally
recognized rules on handling electronic evidence...." No further comment
was added.
-
- In contrast, Romero played up State Department spokesman,
Sean McCormack, saying these "are serious allegations about Venezuela
supplying arms and support to a terrorist organization....that has deep
implications for the people of the region." He had to acknowledge,
however, what credible experts agree on. Given the importance of US and
Venezuelan relations, chances of declaring the country a state sponsor
of terrorism is highly remote - "particularly without more evidence
(read any evidence) of the country's support of the FARC..."
-
- Latin American history professor Greg Grandin goes further.
He believes "Almost all of Latin America and most of the world would
take Venezuela's side in this dispute. Any move (against the Chavez government)
would further isolate the United States in a region where it has been hemorrhaging
influence."
-
- That doesn't phase Romero. Piling on is his specialty.
Truth isn't. He returned on May 18 with a provocative feature story headlined:
"Chavez Seizes Greater Economic Power." Some key points in it
are:
-
- -- "Chavez is intensifying state control of the
Venezuelan economy through a wave of takeovers of private companies and
creation of government-controlled ventures with allies like Cuba and Iran;
fears are intensifying (over) more nationalizations;"
-
- -- it's happening "just months after voters rejected
a referendum to give the president sweeping constitutional power (leading
critics to accuse him of being) more interested in consolidating power
than in fixing Venezuela's problems;"
-
- -- "while he has argued that (he aims) to correct
social injustices and fight soaring inflation, his critics say his moves
are instead compounding these troubles;" no supporter voices in sight;
-
- -- to avoid "outright confiscation (he's) offering
'some' compensation;" unmentioned is it's fair market value and nothing
was, is or will be "confiscated;"
-
- -- Romero stresses Venezuela's ties to Iran and China
with joint ventures and infrastructure projects; also that Chavez will
"export more oil to China in exchange for more Chinese investment
in Venezuela;" implied, of course, are his relations with US rivals,
and, in the case of Iran, a country George Bush calls "the world's
leading state sponsor of terrorism;"
-
- -- he ignores Venezuela's successes; along with Argentina,
it's the fastest growing regional economy and one of the fastest in the
world at a time of economic weakness; its impressive employment growth
with most of it coming in the private sector; that Chavez is friendly to
business and boosts the private economy; the country's huge social gains;
and Chavez's immense popularity and growing world stature; instead he lists
problems - high inflation, less foreign investment, food shortages, capital
flight, and more that are only mitigated by "high oil prices;"
-
- -- near the article's end, he's forced to admit what
economist Mark Weisbrot explains - that Chavez "is so far mainly just
reversing some of the privatizations that took place in the 1990s;"
-
- -- Romero reverts to form with some provocative ending
quotes about Chavez "stimulating a pre-insurrectional climate;"
that his nationalizations aim "to annihilate the productive apparatus
so that we depend more on petroleum, which is to depend more on the state,
or in other words, to depend more on Chavez."
-
- For the dominant US media, Chavez-bashing is full-time.
Washington Post writers excel at it on any pretext, and Juan Forero's May
16 Interpol report article was typical. It's headlined: "FARC Computer
Files Are Authentic, Interpol Probe Finds." He echoed the Wall Street
Journal and New York Times and said files seized "contain e-mails
(Interpol never mentioned any) and other documents that show how Venezuela's
populist leader had formed such a tight bond with guerrilla commanders
that his key lieutenants had offered help in obtaining sophisticated weaponry
such as surface-to-air missiles while delivering light arms. The files
also document links between FARC and Ecuador's president, Raphael Correa,
a close ally of Chavez."
-
- Similar reports appeared throughout the US and western
media. They never miss a chance to play down facts and attack populist
leaders. In response, Hugo Chavez dismissed the allegations as "ridiculous."
He urged Colombia's president to have "a moment of reflection (and
added) The government of Columbia is capable of provoking a war....to justify
a US intervention in Venezuela." He also called Colombia's assertion
"a new act of aggression." It means relations with his neighbor
will come "under deep review," and Reuters reported May 15 that
"Venezuela is deeply revising diplomatic, economic and political relations
with Colombia" following Interpol's report and the Uribe government's
allegations.
-
- Ecuador's Correa was abroad in France, but took time
to say the computer file documents "prove absolutely nothing. We have
information that the Colombian government had the computers for some time
and prepared all this." Quite possibly because the entire story is
unraveling. But don't expect Big Media to report it.
-
- Revving Up Gunboat Diplomacy
-
- While it continues, the Pentagon announced in April that
it's resurrecting its Fourth Fleet in Latin America and the Caribbean after
a 60 year hiatus. It was created during WW II and disbanded in 1950. Reasons
given were vaguely stated - to "conduct varying missions including
a range of contingency operations, counter narco-terrorism, and theater
security cooperation activities."
-
- US Naval Forces Southern Command chief Admiral James
Stevenson said the move would send a message to the entire region, not
just Venezuela. Commandant of the National War College, General Robert
Steel added that: "The United States' obsession with Venezuela, Cuba
and other things indicates they are going to use more military force, going
to use that instrument more often." Bolivian President Evo Morales
called the move "Fourth Fleet....intervention."
-
- The Fleet begins operating in July and will be headquartered
out of Florida's Mayport Naval Station. It'll be part of the Pentagon's
Southern Command, extending from the Caribbean to the continent's southern
tip. Its strength will be formidable - aircraft carriers, submarines, various
attack ships, and several nuclear-armed ones.
-
- With no Latin American threat, why then this move, and
why now with an administration nearing its end and bogged down in two unwinnable
wars? Like the Middle East and Central Asia, the region's importance is
crucial. Venezuela alone is why. Its proved oil reserves were just raised
to 130 billion barrels, but include what's uncounted and they're far higher.
On its web site, the US Department of Energy (DOE) estimates the country's
extra-heavy oil at 1.36 trillion barrels, or 90% of the world's total.
That's more than all "proved" world reserves combined and in
addition to Venezuela's "proved" light sweet resources of around
80 billion barrels that alone ranks it seventh in the world behind the
five largest Middle East producers and Canada.
-
- With stakes that high, it's significant that Admiral
Joseph Kernan will become Fleet commander when it's activated. He currently
heads the Naval Special Warfare Command that includes Navy Seals and other
counterinsurgency units. His choice is troublesome, and regional leaders
are mindful. Hugo Chavez especially. It may be why he's buying nine Russian
submarines, but against America it hardly registers. In total, Venezuela
spends $1 - 2 billion on its military annually or less than half of 1%
of the Pentagon's budget. Nonetheless, it's another reason Washington targets
him with a hawkish commander now charged to do it.
-
- Rumor also is that the Pentagon plans building a Colombian
military base near Venezuela's border. Washington's Colombian ambassador,
William Brownfield, said it's possible if its Manta, Ecuador one is closed.
Its lease expires in 2009, and Raphael Correa said renewal depends on the
US granting Ecuador equivalent basing rights in South Florida - his way
of confirming renewal won't happen.
-
- Chavez is justifiably alarmed at the prospect of US troops
on his border. He warned Colombia not to do it and said this action will
force Venezuela to revive a decades-old territorial conflict over its possible
La Guajira location. He further added: "We will not allow the Colombian
government to give La Guajira to the empire." Stationing US troops
there will be "a threat of war at us." So far, neither Washington
or Colombia confirm what's planned. But Colombia's defense minister, Juan
Manuel Santos, denies the base rumor, at least in La Guajira. In a May
14 televised address, Chavez called it "good news." Nonetheless,
the situation bears watching.
-
- Chavez is justifiably wary. As long as he's president,
he'll be vilified and targeted. Latin America is vital to Washington. Venezuela
is a key part of it. But America's dominance is weakening, neoliberal pillage
caused it, the Bush administration accelerated it, Bolivarianism challenges
it, so muscular militarism may replace diplomacy to restore it.
-
- Colombia's belligerency, the FARC-EP files, Fourth Fleet
reactivation, continued funding of Venezuela's opposition, CIA's covert
mischief, disruptive street violence, and other planned schemes are troublesome.
They're to reassert regional control and rid Washington of its leading
hemispheric antagonist. No guessing who, and no telling when the next attempt
will come or in what form. Everything tried so far failed. Even worse,
it's been counterproductive. Chavez has enormous stature and immense popular
support.
-
- That makes him an even greater threat and hints at something
bigger coming. So far, it's just speculation, however, with the administration's
tenure winding down. But it may or may not deter those running it who are
always wrong, never in doubt, and apparently willing to risk making a bad
situation worse. Stay tuned, expect surprises, and be assured the months
ahead won't be boring.
-
- Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
-
- Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and
listen to The Global Research News Hour on Republic Broadcasting.org Mondays
from 11AM to 1PM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with distinguished
guests. All programs are archived for easy listening.
|
