SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Mephisto who wrote (3736)4/19/2002 6:43:45 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Bush shrugs off Powell's failure to halt violence

news.independent.co.uk

By Andrew Buncombe in Washington

19 April 2002

President George Bush, who has been
all but humiliated in his effort to broker
a Middle East truce, said yesterday he
believed Israel was keeping its promise
to withdraw troops from Palestinian
cities.


Mr Bush also renewed pressure on
Yasser Arafat, saying it was essential
the Palestinian leader acted against
terrorists. Ariel Sharon, the Israeli
Prime Minister, was a "man of peace",
he said.

"Mr Arafat did condemn terrorism and
now we will hold him to account," Mr
Bush said, after meeting Colin Powell,
the Secretary of State. Mr Bush tried
to brush off criticism that General
Powell's mission had failed to end the
violence. "One trip by the Secretary of
State will not prevent that from
happening," he said. "But one trip by
the Secretary of State laid out the framework and path to achieve
peace."

Mr Bush said he understood why Mr Sharon had not withdrawn all
his forces. "History will show that they responded," he said,
referring to his call for a withdrawal. "He gave me a timetable and he
met the timetable. I can understand why the Prime Minister wants
them brought to justice."



To: Mephisto who wrote (3736)4/20/2002 8:31:47 AM
From: Dorine Essey  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 15516
 
A coup d’état signed by Otto Reich

BY JEAN-GUY ALLARD (Special for Granma International)

HIS fingerprints are all over the perimeter of the crime. The disgraceful disinformation campaign carried out by the private Venezuelan media; the siege of the Cuban embassy in Caracas; the false resignation of President Chávez and his alleged plea for asylum in Cuba: everything bears the stamp of .Otto Reich.

.The former top official in the Reagan regime, buddy of the most fanatical anti-Cuba terrorists and now — incredibly — the number one man for Latin America in the U.S. administration, he has personally and clearly masterminded the subversive plans that have just failed in Caracas.

Recruited by the CIA while he was still in the university, Reich was a specialist in deception during the Reagan administration. Reagan’s vice president, George Bush was a former operative and then head of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).

From his Office of Public Diplomacy, Reich covered up all the dirtiest operations of the war in Nicaragua, circulating false information through the media.

When the narco-contra scandal — poorly named the Iran-Contra scandal— blew open with the discovery of drug trafficking operations managed by Cuban-American terrorists Félix Rodríguez and Luis Posada Carriles, Reagan was forced to remove him from the White House.

U.S. EMBASSY, HEART OF THE CONSPIRACY

Otto was appointed as ambassador to Venezuela, a disparaging gesture remembered for years in Caracas. There he dedicated himself to securing the release of killer pediatrician and CIA agent Orlando Bosch — detained there after the horrific sabotage of a Cuban airliner — and to act the mafioso on behalf of U.S. interests, particularly within Venezuela’s Cuban émigré business circles.

Reich, born in Cuba of an Austrian father and an émigré to the United States at an early age, established his Venezuelan network in military circles — thus obtaining an order for Bosch’s release from a military tribunal — and within the Venezuelan secret services, in which the CIA and the U.S. embassy had their people well placed.

That same U.S. embassy in Caracas is currently occupied by Ambassador Charles Shapiro, former head of the State Department’s Cuba Desk, who received the central civilian conspirators of the April 11 coup on a regular basis, for several weeks prior to that action.

During the ’80s, Otto Reich launched disinformation from his Office of Public Diplomacy, like the one about MiG fighter planes being purchased secretly by Nicaragua and allegedly ready to attack U.S. territory, and the story that the Miskito Indians were being persecuted by the Sandinistas. He also circulated rumors to discredit journalists who wrote about the Nicaraguan revolution in terms that were considered too positive.

Reich clearly threw himself into his passion for "slanted" journalism again, starting on January 11, when Bush handed him his new post, against the will of the Senate.

Since February, the U.S. press has been talking of an alleged malaise within the Venezuelan administration. The Washington Post wrote of a precarious and dangerous situation, quoting a senior State Department official.

On February 5, Secretary of State Colin Powell affirmed before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that Chávez had broken with democracy.

On February 6, CIA Director George Tenet and Carl Ford, aide to the secretary of state for intelligence, spoke before the Senate Intelligence Committee of a climate of crisis in Venezuela.

On February 7, Colonel Pedro Soto, former aide to Carlos Andrés Pérez (president at the time of the 1992 coup led by Chávez), affirming that he represented "75% of the armed forces," publicly attacked the Chávez government. (Invited by an international institute, a CIA client, Soto then visited Washington and Miami, where he was to be found on April 11, loudly celebrating the "return to democracy," along with Cuban-American terrorist leaders).

Thus a rapidly and steadily more brazen deception campaign was mounted, rapidly joined by the Venezuelan private press, which ended up running a grossly hostile campaign against the government. El Universal daily and Radio Caracas Televisión, Globovisión and Venevisión TV networks were already actively preparing the media-military coup, channeling information and systematically harassing the constitutional government and the head of state.

During the coup, the same disinformation gang cut off the broadcast the president’s speech to the people and repeated lie after lie, unleashing violent incidents that would subsequently serve to justify the subversive operation. Meanwhile, the representatives of the new "order" were destroying state television program material.

Then the communications junta shamelessly spread the false information that Chávez had resigned, silenced all public pronouncements by members of the government, and the played up declarations in favor of the criminal coup. One of these was made by Ambassador Shapiro, who affirmed that April 11 was an extraordinary day in the history of Venezuela.

In the morning of Saturday, April 13, speaking before more than 30,000 people at rally in the municipality of Güira de Melena, Habana province, in the presence of President Fidel Castro, Bruno Rodríguez, Cuban ambassador to the United Nations, clearly denounced the media disinformation campaign in Venezuela. "The truth is that a coup d’état has taken place in Venezuela and that a sellout and pro-U.S. junta is usurping, by means of force, the power invested in President Chávez by the Venezuelan people, with hopes of erasing decades of injustice and corruption by applying Bolívar’s ideals."

Other lies followed the one alleging Chávez’s resignation, including the assertion that Chávez had sought asylum in Cuba, which was rapidly refuted by Havana.

Indeed, the media complicity with the coup organizers was so strong that when the latter attempted to take the imprisoned president out of the country to the United States, it was planned to transport him aboard a private plane registered in the United States in the name of Gustavo Cisneros, the owner of the Venevisión TV network.

Meanwhile, CNN en Español linked up with Globovisión to finally announce the taking of Miraflores Palace by the people and the presidential guard of honor... five hours after it happened.

Lies, deception, violence, terror: everything smacks of Otto Reich in this failed coup. Even that hysterical rabble of Cuban-Venezuelan émigrés that surrounded the Cuban embassy in Caracas for a number of hours, destroying cars and threatening to enter by force – before fleeing when the Bolivarian leader’s return was announced.

Otto Reich, the White House’s top representative in Latin America, servant of the Miami mafia and protector of terrorists, had a fleeting triumph last weekend. But he also had to accept a bitter lesson: that the voice of the people is much stronger than a concert of lies.



To: Mephisto who wrote (3736)4/21/2002 3:16:56 AM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 15516
 
America Can Persuade Israel to Make a Just Peace
The New York Times

April 21, 2002

By JIMMY CARTER

ATLANTA - In January 1996, with
full support from Israel and
responding to the invitation of the
Palestinian Liberation Organization,
the Carter Center helped to monitor a
democratic election in the West Bank
and Gaza, which was well organized,
open and fair. In that election, 88
members were elected to the
Palestinian National Authority, with Yasir Arafat as president. Legally and
practically, the Palestinian people were encouraged to form their own government,
with the expectation that they would soon have full sovereignty as a state.


When the election was over, I made a strong effort to persuade the leaders of
Hamas to accept the election results, with Mr. Arafat as their leader. I relayed a
message offering them full participation in the process of developing a permanent
constitutional framework for the new political entity, but they refused to accept
this proposal. Despite this rejection, it was a time of peace and hope, and there was
no threat of violence or even peaceful demonstrations. The legal status of the
Palestinian people has not changed since then, but their plight has grown
desperate.

Ariel Sharon is a strong and forceful man and has never equivocated in his public
declarations nor deviated from his ultimate purpose. His rejection of all peace
agreements that included Israeli withdrawal from Arab lands, his invasion of
Lebanon, his provocative visit to the Temple Mount, the destruction of villages and
homes, the arrests of thousands of Palestinians and his open defiance of President
George W. Bush's demand that he comply with international law have all been
orchestrated to accomplish his ultimate goals: to establish Israeli settlements as
widely as possible throughout occupied territories and to deny Palestinians a
cohesive political existence.


There is adequate blame on the other side. Even when he
was free and enjoying the full trappings of political power,
Yasir Arafat never exerted control over Hamas and other
radical Palestinians who reject the concept of a peaceful
Israeli existence and adopt any means to accomplish their
goal.
Mr. Arafat's all-too-rare denunciations of violence
have been spasmodic, often expressed only in English and
likely insincere. He may well see the suicide attacks as
one of the few ways to retaliate against his tormentors, to
dramatize the suffering of his people, or as a means for
him, vicariously, to be a martyr.

Tragically, the policies of Mr. Sharon have greatly strengthened these criminal
elements, enhanced their popular support, and encouraged misguided young men
and women to sacrifice their own lives in attacking innocent Israeli citizens. The
abhorrent suicide bombings are also counterproductive in that they discredit the
Palestinian cause, help perpetuate the military occupation and destruction of
villages, and obstruct efforts toward peace and justice.

The situation is not hopeless. There is an ultimate avenue to peace in the
implementation of United Nations resolutions, including Resolution 242, expressed
most recently in the highly publicized proposal of Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince
Abdullah. The basic premises of these resolutions are withdrawal of Israelis from
Palestinian lands in exchange for full acceptance of Israel and Israel's right to live
in peace. This is a reasonable solution for many Israelis, having been accepted in
1978 by Prime Minister Menachem Begin and ratified by the Israeli Knesset.
Egypt, offering the greatest threat to Israel, responded by establishing full
diplomatic relations and honoring Israeli rights, including unimpeded use of the
Suez canal. This set a pattern for what can and must be done by all other Arab
nations. Through constructive negotiations, both sides can consider some
modifications of the 1967 boundary lines.


East Jerusalem can be jointly administered with unimpeded access to holy places,
and the right of return can be addressed by permitting a limited number of
displaced Palestinians to return to their homeland with fair compensation to
others. It will be a good investment for the international community to pay this
cost.

With the ready and potentially unanimous backing of the international
community, the United States government can bring about such a solution to the
existing imbroglio. Demands on both sides should be so patently fair and balanced
that at least a majority of citizens in the affected area will respond with approval,
and an international force can monitor compliance with agreed peace terms, as was
approved for the Sinai region in 1979 following Israel's withdrawal from Egyptian
territory.


There are two existing factors that offer success to United States persuasion. One is
the legal requirement that American weapons are to be used by Israel only for
defensive purposes, a premise certainly being violated in the recent destruction of
Jenin and other villages. Richard Nixon imposed this requirement to stop Ariel
Sharon and Israel's military advance into Egypt in the 1973 war, and I used the
same demand to deter Israeli attacks on Lebanon in 1979. (A full invasion was
launched by Ariel Sharon after I left office). The other persuasive factor is
approximately $10 million daily in American aid to Israel. President George Bush
Sr. threatened this assistance in 1992 to prevent the building of Israeli settlements
between Jerusalem and Bethlehem.


I understand the extreme political sensitivity in America of using persuasion on the
Israelis, but it is important to remember that none of the actions toward peace
would involve an encroachment on the sovereign territory of Israel. They all involve
lands of the Egyptians, Lebanese and Palestinians, as recognized by international
law.


The existing situation is tragic and likely to get worse. Normal diplomatic efforts
have failed. It is time for the United States, as the sole recognized intermediary, to
consider more forceful action for peace. The rest of the world will welcome this
leadership.

Jimmy Carter, the former president, is chairman of the Carter Center, which works
worldwide to advance peace and human health.


nytimes.com