May 9, 2008
Pincer Movement (John Feehery)
The Wall Street Journal reports today on the content of computer files closely tying Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez with FARC, a terrorist organization that makes its money running drugs to the United States and kidnapping people inside Colombia: “These documents indicate Venezuela appears to be making concrete offers to help arm the rebels, possibly with rocket-propelled grenades and ground-to-air missiles. The files suggest that Venezuela offered the FARC the use of one of its ports to receive arms shipments, and that Venezuela raised the prospect of drawing up a joint security plan with the FARC and sought basic training in guerrilla-warfare techniques.”
This is the same Hugo Chavez who has been praised repeatedly by Joe Kennedy in television commercials, and who Kennedy called his good friend. Such Hollywood left-wing luminaries as Kevin Spacey have paid visits to Mr. Chavez, giving the dictator even more credibility in the eyes of an unwitting public.
In related news, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi refuses to allow a vote on a free trade agreement with Colombia, a slap in the face of this struggling democracy. Pelosi cites concerns with labor and with the plight of unions in Colombia, but her refusal to send Colombia a lifeline works very nicely with the Chavez plan to arm the FARC rebels. It is almost as if it were a pincer movement meant to cut off democracy in a critically important area.
The Journal goes on to report, “The FARC, which has been fighting for control of Colombia for nearly a half-century, funds itself mostly through drug trafficking and kidnapping for ransom. The U.S. considers it to be one of the world’s main cocaine suppliers. The FARC is considered a terrorist organization by the U.S., Canada, Colombia and the European Union.”
The battle for Colombia is but one example of the complicated and dangerous world we live in. By improving a trade relationship with the Colombian people, we strengthen their legitimate economy, and reduce the power of drug lords that kill people not only in Colombia, but also in streets throughout America.
Speaker Pelosi doesn’t see it that way. She looks for excuses to stop a trade pact and her actions will undermine the security of a key ally, and in turn, hurt our own national security. Her actions, whether she knows it or not, help the cause of the drug-dealing, kidnapping terrorists known as FARC.
Hugo Chavez, of course, knows what he is doing. He is doing his best to support the rebels and undermine the Colombian democracy, because he sees democracy as a threat to his personal interests, because he wants a piece of the drug trade, and because he hates America.
House Democrats and Hugo Chavez are the two parts of a pincer movement that are squeezing Colombian democracy and undermining our national security.
16 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
It's really not all that surprising. Liberals love dictators.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — May 9, 2008 @ 12:33 pm
The leading Democratic candidate is a friend of one of the worst domestic terrorists. This candidate has also been praised by various thugs from Venezuela, Hamas, and Iran. The actions and words of other Democrats, as you illustrate, are clearly helping terrorists. Their plans to withdraw from Iraq come hell or high water will obviously, if implemented, strengthen the terrorists. Is there any doubt that the Democrats are a party of terrorism?
Comment by Igor R. — May 9, 2008 @ 1:34 pm
Here's one liberal who doesn't love dictators, or authoritarian conservatives like RR.
To make the jump from being cautious about trade agreements to "Liberals love dictators" should include at least a few logical steps between premise and conclusion.
RR, go back to school; you need a good education.
Comment by smilinjack — May 9, 2008 @ 2:30 pm
and Republicans are dictators who refused Chavez's aid during Hurricane Katrine just as the military junta in Myanmar refuses American aid for Cyclone Nargis.
Dictator abuse the troops by destroying the evidence of why they were sent to Iraq.
Convenient that the WSJ has documents to accuse Chavez, while it does not have the ten million email documents detailing why we invaded Iraq.
Amnesiacs unite!
Forget about America upending democracy in Iran by deposing Mossadeq, ignoring democratically-elected parties like Hamas, or using Iraq funds to covertly supply and train Sunni groups related to Al Qaeda in Syria and Lebanon who are now waging gun battles in Beirut.
Republicans love dictators so much they imitate their torture, kangaroo courts, fixed elections, censorship, and war crimes.
How noble is the cause of Iraq when the White House wants it kept a secret and destroys evidence?
How democratic is rendition and torture when the White House refused to release seven thousand pages of documents detailing its program?
Comment by Greg w. — May 9, 2008 @ 2:43 pm
Joe Kennedy, do you know how dumb Joe Kennedy is? Without the break in Oil prices that Chavez gives him he would have to go out of business and ruminate over why he can't get elected to office, even in MA.
I moved to MA in 1984 and was amazed that the worship of that family still existed; In 1980 I had worn a 'Kennedy for lifeguard' campaign button. So if Joe 3 has no political future here what's left for him but to suck up to Chavez ?
Comment by james d granata — May 9, 2008 @ 3:12 pm
Igor, Igor …
Jeeesh, man … get a grip!
I know it's hard to be on the wrong side of history, but I don't think your aware of the whole story!
The whole world is praisng Obama and eagerly awaiting the hope he brings that we can get out of some of the mess brought on by the world's perceived worst terrorist: George "Worst" Bush!
Comment by smilinjack — May 9, 2008 @ 4:05 pm
Greg w, it's so nice to see your pride in the bastion of democracy, Hamas, the true hope of the noble Palestinian people. These ingenious survivors killed a father of three in his home in Israel today with their home-made rocket under the glorious democratic leadership of Hamas and the stupid Israel doesn't even try to wipe of Gaza of the map. How great is that? It's also so interesting to learn how the US is responsible for the war in Beirut, whow would've thunk it? You're so educational!
Comment by Igor R. — May 9, 2008 @ 4:07 pm
War is hell and a racket when waged by democracies or dictatorships and funded by taxes, petroleum or any means.
http://www.lexrex.com/enlightened/articles/warisaracket.htm
This administration can't handle the truth. Why else evade the Federal Records Act, shred docs, withhold evidence and engage in "psyops on steroids" Igor R.? Even the war for hearts and minds is a racket whether won or lost.
The freedom agenda is not immune to blowback, see Hamas and the removal of Hussein and the secular Sunni Baathists who were a valuable buffer to Iran. America instead of paying Iraq to fight Iran as it once did may end up attacking Iran itself with Al Qaeda leader Zawahiri cheering on the sidelines. “We hope that war ’saps’ both Washington and Tehran,” [Zawahiri] said according to a press tv report.
“The dispute between America and Iran is a genuine struggle, and the possibility of the US striking Iran is real,” al-Zawahiri said.
“Whichever country that emerges victorious will find itself in an intensified and fierce battle [with al-Qaeda],” he continued.
On Lebanon.
The Redirection Is the Administration’s new policy benefitting our enemies in the war on terrorism?
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/03/05/070305fa_fact_hersh
CNN LATE EDITION WITH WOLF BLITZER
Interview With Seymour Hersh
Hersh: This administration has made a policy change, a decision that they are going to put all of the pressure they can on the Shiites, that is the Shiite regime in Iran, the Shiite - and they are also doing everything they can to stop Hezbollah - which is Shiite, the Hezbollah organization from getting any control or any more of a political foothold in Lebanon.
We are simply in a situation where this president is really taking his notion of executive privilege to the absolute limit here, running covert operations, using money that was not authorized by Congress, supporting groups indirectly that are involved with the same people that did 9/11, and we should be arresting these people rather than looking the other way…
Blitzer: And your bottom line, Sy…
Hersh: … and could lead to a real mess…
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0702/25/le.01.html
Comment by Greg w — May 9, 2008 @ 6:54 pm
smilingjack, Obama said he would nominate justices who shared "one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy."
His spokesman said he "has always believed that our courts should stand up for social and economic justice, and what's truly elitist is to appoint judges who will protect the powerful and leave ordinary Americans to fend for themselves."
For a Harvard Law graduate to say this, the only plausible explanation is that he fully intends to betray the Constitution of the United States. He whole world wants whatever fits the whole world's idea of what the US should do. What Obama wants is a United States not based on the Constitution.
Comment by Igor R. — May 9, 2008 @ 7:07 pm
smilinjack: Offering an opinion is not authoritative. Anyone can offer an opinion just like you did. I'm glad to hear you don't like dictators. Now just convince Jimmy Carter, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of the dictator huggers, and you'll convince me you meant it.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — May 9, 2008 @ 7:51 pm
Igor!
You find it interesting to learn that the US is responsible for the war in Beirut; wait til you hear about Iraq. That should be really interesting!
Comment by smilinjack — May 9, 2008 @ 8:09 pm
Greg w, Hersh has become a professional predictor of the immediate war with Iran, and it has been immediate for several years now.
I agree with you that this administration can't handle the truth. The biggest reason is that it doesn't have the communication skills to turn the truth into public support, so it has to resort to distortion. With that being said, to claim that because the US is fighint Iran and it's surrogates worldwide it is responsible for all consequences of this fight is, to put it mildly, one-sided.
Iran had by 2001 become the biggest terror-sponsoring state. While if was the Taliban that hosted Osama, the shere investement Iran had made in terrorism was overwhelming. To call them, though, a part of the axis of evil and not have a plan to get rid of the regime, was the height of strategic stupidity. Actiually, there probably was a plan, but it assume a quick victory in Iraq.
Nevertheless, the support for terror coming from Iran and their "policy" towards Israel, through their statements, support for Hizballah and later Hamas and Al Qaeda is not a result of American plicy towards them. They are an expansionist ideological regime spreading hate and violence near and far. Fighting them, incompetently or otherwise, is not the reason for their menacing presence. Jimmy Carter enabled them, and how did they repay him? And even if their nuclear ambitions are rooted partially in the axis of evil classification, they are still a terrible menace.
The fight in Lebanon obviously has a long history, and Iranian and Syrian fueling of it go back more than 20 years. Don't blame your country for all the evil in the world, for it is not the cause.
Comment by Igor R. — May 10, 2008 @ 3:47 pm
smilinjack, are you sarcastically implying that I haven't heard about the war in Iraq? Or that the US had something to do with it?
Let me put it this way: had Saddam not invaded Kuwait, or even kept the bargain he made after that invasion was stopped, he'd be building his 300th palace now and seeing one of his sociopathic offspring rape his 3000th victim by now in total peace and harmony.
Comment by Igor R. — May 10, 2008 @ 3:52 pm
Have you seen the crime statistics related to cocaine production in Columbia and distribution in the United States? The shear volume of product manufactured then moved across international borders indicates systemic corruption at the highest levels of the governments involved. Proposing free trade with the criminal organisation known as Columbia makes you either a fool or an accomplice
Comment by Pghremodeler — May 11, 2008 @ 6:37 pm
Hey Feehery, because of you Ref**cklicans, the only people who can afford to buy luxuries are the ones you Ref**cklicans made rich and the drug runners. Those drug runners are what is left of the middle class. My point: no one even cares about your drivel anymore.
Comment by Gary Anderson — May 11, 2008 @ 7:58 pm
Looks like Hugo Chavez is going for the Ronald Reagan Award for Sponsoring Latin American Rebellions. Will he also mine Colombia's harbors as Reagan did in Nicaragua? Will he also sell weapons to Iran and give the proceeds to FARC? He won't measure up to The Gipper until he really gets outrageous.
Comment by Don Bacon — May 12, 2008 @ 7:59 pm