Of course, I could be entirely wrong about Robertson’s motives here. Who knows? In his warped universe, maybe threatening to kill a democratically elected leader because you don’t like his politics qualifies as an act of Christian charity.
Back to Main
August 27, 2005
WB: Bring Me the Head of Hugo Chavez
Comments
No wonder the right wingers are getting a little hysterical about the guy. He’s holding all the high cards, and they know it. Assassination is the only trick that hasn’t been played. Thus do our warriors for democracy in the Middle East reveal their true colors in Latin America — by embracing the functional equivalent of the Brezhnev Doctrine.
No need for a Russian themed doctrine where a parefectly named American one will do, as in the Monroe Doctrine.
I think it might also be that Chevez is attacking the expanding Latin American Evagelical movement where it hurts. First, he is expanding his media empire with TeleSur(tm) thus edging in on the growing Evagelical media maket (most of them spewing from my home island of Puerto Rico, ‘must contain the impulse to hurl’ God is twice as bad coming down as it is coming up’).
Second by giving the ‘proverbial alms to the poor’ (by paying Cuba for doctors with petrol!) so cutting off the Evangelicals from the desperate masses that without land, food, of medice go to the “Christian” churches to be fed, cloth and enslaved by Robertson rhetoric.
Posted by: Rafael | Aug 27 2005 16:28 utc | 1
Big mistake, the first paragragh is a direct quoate from Billmon, not mine! Made a mistake in writing up the tag!
Posted by: Rafael | Aug 27 2005 16:30 utc | 2
Read “Waiting For Rain: The Politics And Poetry
Of Drought In Northeast Brazil” — by Nicholas
Gabriel Arons; Paperback (there are two other
books of sociology by the same lead title).
Only if you’ve lived and worked with the people
of Central and South America can you understand
that this region is the one we should focus on.
Middle East, smiddle east. They might as well
live on the dark side of the moon for any of US.
There is enough oil in the Americas to survive.
Improve US energy efficiency, cutoff the Middle
East, the price of oil would crash back to $15.
Then the aboriginal peoples of the Americas who
live on $1 or $2 a day, who have to pay the same
price increases for gas as you and I do, and the
same price increases and supply wars for grains
and proteins as you or I do, can breath a sigh.
It’s US! We are the 250,000,000# boss-hog that’s
sitting on the chest of peoples of the Americas.
If we spent $345,000,000,000 making the US more
energy sufficient, Americas could be a Paradise
so often spoken of in the Parables.
Leave the Old Testament world adrift. Americas!
Posted by: tante aime | Aug 27 2005 17:55 utc | 3
This is my first comment on ‘Moon of Alabama’. I have been reading billmon for the past year or so, having thoroughly enjoyed every post. The breadth of this man’s knowledge of history and his varied interests make him a very interesting blogger to read and the contributors on M of A make it an equally excellent stop in my daily browsing.
That said..
I’d like to comment on this whole Pat Robertson thing. First: it seems that big oil and big media really want to play ball with Chavez one way or another (seemingly for lack of choice); otherwise why would they come down as hard on Robertson as they have for this particular diatribe of his? Outside of the bible belt (and fox news), this is the most publicity/attention that old flake has gotten in years. I mean, it’s not like this was some unique fluke of an outburst on Pat’s part. He says things like that quite frequently.
What really amazes me is that scholarly christians don’t refute all of his nonsense (and that of all his ‘kin’). I know it’s cliche, but “where’s the outrage”?
While media discourse has been hijacked by the right (at least to my reckoning), an even more bizzare and seemingly under-reported story is the hijacking of christianity and of christian discourse itself. Be it protestant or catholic, there’s an unseemly chorus trumpeting a relatively new tune (or perhaps a ‘cover’ of one that has a lot of dust on it). It seems an innovation of the latter half of the 20th century and it’s message runs utterly contrary to the teachings of their supposed savior. To me their proscriptions sound more like those of the ‘old testament’ or ‘torah’ than the christ’s message. There’s a vacuous silence among those who could best argue this point, which is frankly alarming.
(I will grant that such voices have always been present, but never have they held the masses in such thrall nor gained so much power. they were the fringe.)
Now personally, I consider myself a ‘recovering catholic’, still working at undoing the sublime and invasive effect of that dogma. Thus, perhaps I am biased. However, part of my recovery (self perscribed) was an extensive study of ‘the book’ (..as well as many others for comparitive purposes). In the book one finds a huge divide between the doctrine of the old testament (Leviticus, Exodus, come to mind) and the message of the Christ (Matthew’s record of it in particular). Robertson and his ilk clearly fall in the former camp, certainly not the latter.
I am surprized, honestly, at the lack of outcry among the Evangelical and general/mainstream protestant community concerning this very real issue, especially since these folk are supposedly very astute in matters of scripture. As a spectator, I find it quite puzzling how these people can reconcile this clear difference in teaching.
This brings me to the whole ‘roe v wade’ issue. Abortion, as an issue, has facilitated the rise of these ‘un-christians’ and has given them a platform and pulpit for their ranting. Yet the bible is quite vague on that particular issue. While the commandments are quite clear about killing those that are born in flesh, it is unclear at best about the unborn.
Exodus 21:22 for example, merely proposes a fine, to be determined by ‘judges’. A legal transgression, not unlike one found in small claims court. Hardly a mortal sin, and in fact exodus demands far harsher punishment for someone who kills another’s servant. While Exodus 21:22 specifically pertains to a 3rd party causing a woman’s ‘fruit’ to be lost, it says nothing of a woman or couple voluntarily deciding against parenthood..
Yet, the most radical and pernicious of these so-called followers of christ have turned it into a launchpad for all of their political ambitions and social engineering aims.
It’s really quite bizzare.
While their crusade against ‘alternative lifestyles’ has a little more biblical ‘weight’ to it (at least as far as the old testament goes), even that runs counter to the teaching of Christ. Here was a man who gently ministered to the dregs of society (lepers, prostitutes, bums, etc.). He did not reject them, nor did he force them to follow him.
He merely imparted on them his message and led by example. That they followed him, was a testament to his charisma, kindness, and the validity of his message (overall). That message was clearly ‘inclusive’ and not some privilidge granted unto the ‘chosen’. His message was simply that salvation and redemption were available to anyone who chose to follow in his example and accept his message. (fairly standard religous boiler plate, but in his case the delivery was rooted in kindness and mercy) It is also crucial to note that he continued to comfort those that were cast to the fringes even when they did not accept his message. He never gave up on them.
This is so contrary to the message of those such as Robertson, as to border on unbelievable. Jesus was a figure (whether or not one believes in his divine origin) comparable to Siddhartha or Lao Tzu, in both acts and in doctrine. It could be said (on strong Biblical grounds; see Matthew, Luke & Paul) that he was the ultimate Liberal.
His aims weren’t in might or power or privilidge, they were in mercy and charity. He did not rub elbows with those among his people (the Israelites) who enjoyed wealth and power in his time, nor did he care for their endorsement. People such as Pat Robertson are such a stark contrast to their supposed ‘savior’, it makes one wonder if any of these folks south of the mason-dixon even read their Bibles.
Of course the same has occurred in Catholicism although, considering their 2000+ year history, it may be less surprizing. What amazes me about them however, is how they’ve chosen to so openly display their allegiances in the election of a former hitler jugend as their pontiff. Yet in the same stride they’ve spent decades protecting the homosexuals and pederasts in their ranks, while decrying those of that ilk outside of their ranks. It’s just one of many peculiar paradoxes.
Rome seems quite detached from the bulk of their fold.
Yet, even catholicism at large (particularly in the USA) has focused on charity and good works in recent times and has differed from their ‘leaders’ in Rome consistently for decades up until at least the 1980’s. I recall my own Catholic education during that time and it’s message was essentially Liberal (in a relative sense) at the time.
A real pardigm shift has occurred and I think it deserves attention. As a large and powerful community, Christians (protestant & catholic) could do much good in the world. If they followed the message of their Savior, think of what they could accomplish! One thing is for sure, if they were really ‘on message’ and ‘on the same page’ as the christ, they sure as hell wouldn’t vote Republican. A review of the aforementioned books of Luke, Paul, and Matthew (and John too) should make that clear to anyone with two brain cells to rub together….
That’s my two cents worth and I am sticking to it.
Thank you to the M of A and to Billmon, you are among my favorite depots on the grand information superhighway..
-JM
Posted by: John M | Aug 27 2005 18:04 utc | 4
Robertson sees the future of his christer empire in Latin America threatened by Chavez’s Bolivarian example.
The Bushites are pissed not so much because they oppose his prescription, but because he’s spooking the horses.
Posted by: Thrasyboulos | Aug 27 2005 19:09 utc | 5
No need for a Russian themed doctrine where a parefectly named American one will do, as in the Monroe Doctrine.
Yes, although in fairness to James Monroe, the doctrine was originally intended as a gesture of revolutionary solidarity with independence movements in Latin America — Simon Bolivar’s in particular. It was aimed at the imperialist powers that were either trying to reconquer their lost colonies (Spain) or that were thinking about moving in on Spain’s former turf (France and Britain). At the time, the United States didn’t have anything like the military power to actually intervene in South America, so it really was just a gesture — and a good one, too. It didn’t become a self-issued license for gringo imperialism until the Spanish-American War.
I still prefer to call it the Brezhnev Doctrine, though, because it pinpoints what a bunch of self-righteous hypocrites we are when it comes to the rest of the western hemisphere.
Posted by: Billmon | Aug 27 2005 19:10 utc | 6
I have a pet theory about Condi’s apparent reasonableness vis a vis Chavez, and her marginalization of the criminals Roger Noriega and Otto Reich. First, she is the one who got publicly burned so badly when the US rushed to recognize the coup plotters, thinking they had won, only to see pro-Chavez forces in the military regroup and oust them. Condi ended up with serious egg on her face and was severly criticized throughout Latin America, even by many friends. Since then, she has become rightly risk-averse on this one.
Second, Condi, who knows nothing about Latin America, presumably learned what little she knows from former Stanford colleagues such as Larry Diamond, Terry Lynn Karl (a Venezuela specialist), Steve Krasner and others, some of whom are conservative Democrats and all of whom are more-or-less centrist realists who take the line that Chavez is bad news but that openly overthrowing democracy in Venezuela to oust him a) would be wrong and b) would have very bad regional repercussions. Of course, if Cheney, who is wrong on everything, were to really get a Venezuelan bee in his bonnet, Condi fold in a second, so keep your eyes open.
Posted by: the exile | Aug 27 2005 19:16 utc | 7
Nice to have some new opinions.
My vote is that Robertson is an oxymoronic rational nutcase (now go figure that out), and that he is acting on orders of the Bush administration. Remember, administrations can (often) walk and chew gum at the same time–that is, they can be making nice AND planning a potential hit. The question is, what would happen if Hugo was taken out? Is his a “Cult of Personality” or a movement; is/are there leaders in place to suceed him and continue the Bolivarian Revolution?
I recommend everyone who can, see the film “The Revolution Will Be Televised.” Regardless of your feelings about Chavez, and the jury was out for the filmmakers at the time–there was far less of a record to judge by–it is an extraordinary film. The whole coup of 2002 is covered live, the cinematographers locked in a room with the cabinet and ministers, not knowing whether they would live or die! Talk about cinema verité–I doubt there have ever been events of such historical import ever covered live as intimately on film before or since. The hair literally stands up on the back of my scalp everytime I see the film, despite the fact that I know the outcome.
I not sure what will happen to Chavez. A lot depends on what happens in the neighborhood. The unprecedented illegal action of withdrawing all further financing and barring the use of oil proceeds to fund meager social welfare programs has already been taken by our old friend, Wolfiefarts, at the World Bank to “learn” them little brown people in Ecuador about how things work in our backyard. If the Revolution starts to drift over the border with Colombia, a country with some oil and lots of resources, that in an ideal world would be wealthy, then I think the Bushistas’ would be forced to go ballistic, maybe even including the Nuklear option.
But if I may indulge all of us “Moonies” (of Alabama), let’s put our Tin Foil Hats on for a second and see what kind of reception we are getting off of the ether. Here’s what I am receiving: Very strong signals of impending WAR, at worst, and chessboard maneuvering for position just in case, at best.
We all know that our position in the New Islamic Republic of Iraq™ is, to put it politely, fucked, for the time being. As the ruling elite likes to say “Our credibility is at stake.” Chomskian Translation: Our threats of terror and destruction to those who resist our theft and plundering of their resources are not being taken very seriously right now. The solution to this problem has always been a “test case”, setting an example of a small country that cannot possibly stand up to us. While all focus has been placed on the Middle East, our own backyard has been growing some very serious weeds.
The situation in Venezuela is known, with Chavez increasingly smearing our face in his largesse. This situation cannot be allowed to continue: The myths of WMD and Democracy surrounding our involvement in Iraq are cracking, the public cannot also be allowed to also question the myth of America’s benevolent intentions towards its little third world brothers. That is too much peaking behind the curtain. With our unemployment, economic crises, gas going up, housing about to crash, lack of credible medical program, having Chavez send gas and Castro send doctors to America’s poor could lead to some serious unrest in this country. For the ruling elite, the situation is dire.
Also looming on the horizon are upcoming elections in Mexico and Bolivia with leftists leading in the polls in both. Peru’s president, Toledo, also up for reelection, boasts the lowest approval rating in his country’s history, having just crept out of single digits. Brazil is already a military power with its own interests in controlling the Amazon. Argentina and Uruguay have leftist governments. The populaces of numerous countries are growing restive under neo-liberal policies and taking to the streets in record numbers. I mean, the whole damn continent is going to pot. And those ungrateful South American’s already boast the fourth largest ecological footprint in the world.
But, despite record high oil prices, the situation is also dire for Chavez: He is not buying all of this military hardware, kicking out our drug agents and making deals with China faster than Lance Armstrong can pedal, because Condi is suddenly singing lullabies in his ear.
The set pieces are being positioned very rapidly. But the really big action is now centered around Paraguay. Paraguay is home to one of the world’s largest aquifers, now controlled by a different type of Moonie—that is the Reverend Sun Myung Moon himself, and all from a private piece of property twice the size of Luxembourg. Recently, local communications have been taken out by his “company.” Bob Chapman reports this week that the U.S. is also building a large base in Paraguay, and that all military leave has been cancelled in preparation for an invasion of Bolivia. Wayne Madsen has been reporting on this story also, most notably on Aug. 9th. He states at the waynemadsenreport (always seek corroboration from this source) that the rulers of Paraguay sympathies are split, and that everyone entering and leaving the country is being photographed and fingerprinted with a system designed and financed by South Korea. Kurt Nimno now reports that Madsen has recently gone into hiding after hearing credible reports of a targeted assassination being set up for him.
So, let’s take off our Tin Foil Hats and examine what all of this means? It does mean that things are getting out of hand for Amurka’s ruling elite. It does mean that there is quite a bit of change that will be coming up naturally through elections (I wonder who has been supplying voting systems to the South Americans lately.) And it does mean that the Bushistas are setting up to take best advantage of the upcoming situation. It seems to mean that almost unprecedented attention is being focused below the radar. Beyond that your guess is as good as mine. Could we see a targeted assassination, a coup, an invasion, a bombing, a small war, mass protests, another front in the GWOT GSAVE, or simply the beginning of the application of creative chaos to control the downtrodden, as has been so successfully applied recently in the Modern Mullah© campaign on the other side of the world.
Your guess is as good as mine.
@John M – nice rant, thanks!
Anyone who denies that the new testament supersedes the before Christ old testament in all dimensions can not claim to call him/herself Christian.
Quite an easy rule, but Christ’s new testament message (as the Quram message later) is essentially socialist/communist and does not fit the concept of some profiteers.
Saddams Iraq, even though it was an autocracy was a socialist state. Chaves tries to build one. This ideological part of the American “crusade” in recent times is underestimated. The fight is still socialism against capitalism. That has not changed after the USSR breakdown. The name calling is different now. Islamists, terrorists, etc. – the scheme hasn´t changed much.
I am still working on that string of thought, but it seems to be more in the open any day.
I guess I was just waxing metaphysical. Not really addressing the geopolitical aspects of what Rev. Robertson was saying. Focusing more on the hypocracy of “christian” fundamentalists in this country and the sheep who “baaaaa” along to their tune. If there be such a place I am sure they’ll find their accommodations in hades most unpleasant. Although I imagine they’ll be quite favored by their host!
Now Chavez has been in the cross-hairs for years. The neocons are very sore losers. He seems pretty slick though. I don’t think he’ll go out as easily as Noriega. With China’s backing as well as the weakened but still notable ‘former’ soviet union, he just might be able to hold out, just as Castro has for all these years.
I think the commentary on this topic has touched on something else of significance; the neocons are still stuck in the ‘cold war’ world and still think that those methods will be effective in this new day we find ourselves in. While they pay such lipservice to a certain day in Sept ’01 “changing everything” what it really amounted to, for them, was a justification for what the neocons had been planning over at the PNAC for years (and their forebears for decades perhaps). They still see this as some sort of global idealogical war.
In a sense perhaps their right, but the question then becomes; “Just what are the competing idealogies, really?”.
Posted by: John M | Aug 28 2005 0:35 utc | 10
It could be simple selfishness.
Pat does own Powerine, a shuttered refinery in Santa Fe Springs, CA. Maybe he wants oil to stay high enough that he can finally sell the refinery at a profit rather than invest the money to modernize it and bring it up to current code.
But the rest of this stuff is really scary.
Posted by: Jim 7 | Aug 28 2005 1:13 utc | 11
A 50,000 BPD Refinery can’t be competitive nowadays. And I doubt they have enough land for a full sized refinery (10X). It would be easier and cheaper to just tear it down and start again. Robertson owns some chemical companies, though. Perhaps the refinery and its permits could be used along those lines, or maybe some toxic process, or military process.
its not that complex in regard to robertson. he is old school yank. if you don’t want to be our puppet, we are gonna oust you. its been US policy for a century. why stop now.
with china and india both desperate for oil to keep their growing economies cooking, chavez may not have much trouble getting nukes. it would be nice for someone sane in this hemisphere to have the bomb.
maybe its all that horrible education and healthcare pissing off robertson. stupid and sick make for good blind followers for the christian nutjobs.
Posted by: lenin’s ghost | Aug 28 2005 1:49 utc | 13
if these evil fuckers should lay a hand on the head of comrade chavez – a whirlwind will be brought down on them
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 28 2005 1:54 utc | 14
No one should be at all surprised that folks like Robertson, who want to get churches back into politics, can rationalize violence in the name of the Prince of Peace. At least Robertson hasn’t proposed burning Chavez at the stake, which would have been the favored means of the Church of an earlier era to keep an errant sinner from continuing in his course of public sin. That rationalization you quote near the end could, mutatis mutandis, have come straight from the mouth of some medieval churchman.
That is the point. However you prettify the movement by using such phrases as “values-based political advocacy”, what we’re talking about, theocracy, will, if we let it back in our politics, still be just what it was in the Dark Ages.
Posted by: Glen Tomkins | Aug 28 2005 2:21 utc | 15
What set off Robertson’s call to assassinate Chavez? Possibly this news — competition in the do-gooding business? Graduations of MDs, health news & medical research, etc. in Cuba and the area
Last Saturday, Aug. 20, Chavez was in Havana, one of many political leaders attending the first graduation of 1610 MDs from the new free Medical School. The new MD graduates are from poor families and are going to work in the poor communities where they came from. Chavez was so delighted that he will set up a similar medical school in Venezuela.
The graduation was big news and a source of pride in the Caribbean and Latin America — but either was not mentioned, or barely mentioned, in the US media.
How students got into the completely free program — Medical School Scholarship Program at the Latin American School of Medical Sciences, Havana, Cuba
History of the medical school, Q & A — it all started with two devastating hurricanes and Castro’s bright idea
According to the US Department of State – International Religious Freedom Report 2003 , there are 4000 missionaries in Venezuela.
What are the American missionaries doing to help with medical care? I don’t know how typical this man is – but he is no match for the 14,000 Cuban doctors (number going up) working throughout Venezuela.
Amazonas: Venezuela’s Forgotten State, part I
I walk into the house of Matthew Cochran, a white, red-haired man in his forties, who is busy with helping an ill baby as I enter. He is talking an incomprehensive language to the mother of the baby: Ye´kwane, he tells me later. The baby is suffering from prickly heat. Am I in a medical post here? “No, no, I am a missionary, from a Baptist church, although, to be honest, I do not even know myself from which branch exactly. But concerning the baby: I know a bit about health, that is why I am helping people, just as anybody would do. There are no doctors here, a few villages further down the rivers there are some Cuban doctors.”
Amazonas, Venezuela’s Forgotten State, Part II has more on missionaries and local opinions of them.
Robertson does not appear to consider that Chavez is immensely popular and highly respected in Latin America. In 2002, when a coup was organized against him with the help of the US, hundreds of thousands of people demonstrated and risked death to bring him back..
An assassination would cause intense anger and grief, in Venezuela and throughout Latin America. The US would have to kiss 15% of its oil supply goodbye.
On Tuesday, Aug.23, CNN’s Aaron Brown had a fascinating guest talking about the anger that Robertson caused. Noel Koch is a former Director of Special Ops for the US Dept. of Defense, and now CEO of TranSecur which provides private intelligence services to corporate customers. He gives them advice and risk assessment for their travellers and in-country operations.
See TranSecur web site — intriguing bios of ex-spies and academics working for it
Noel Koch said that within a few hours of the Robertson news, all his signals started fluttering.
The threat level to Americans was rising very rapidly.
In Koch’s opinion, there was no question whatsoever that Americans will be hurt and even killed, not just in Venezuela, but throughout the Southern Hemisphere because of Robertson.
Posted by: Owl | Aug 28 2005 4:09 utc | 16
nice summary, Malooga. what’s the story behind roger noriega’s exit? and is he really out of the picture?
Posted by: b real | Aug 28 2005 4:13 utc | 17
as pointed out over at the narcosphere, john dean examines the legal aspects of robertson’s public threat against a foreign leader.
It is a federal felony to use instruments of interstate or foreign commerce to threaten other people. The statute is clear, and simple. Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 875(c), states: “Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.” (Emphases added. -jd)
The interstate or foreign commerce element is plainly satisfied by Robertson’s statements. Robertson’s 700 Club is listed as broadcasting in thirty-nine states and the District of Columbia, not to mention ABC Family Channel satellites which cover not only the United States but several foreign countries as well. In addition, the program was sent around the world via the Internet.
however, since robertson is an agent of divine authority, and a faithful cohort in all the right power circles to boot, to attempt to evoke such laws of men hardly seems worth the effort.
Posted by: b real | Aug 28 2005 4:56 utc | 18
Not much that I know about. I don’t trust him just quitting and disappearing though. I suspect he is in charge of sureptitious planning right now.
LaRouche (a very suspect source, I know) has this article: Cheney’s Paraguay Caper Is Intended
To Produce `A Splendid Little War’ The following facts (not conclusions) from said article seem reliable:
U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld arrived in Paraguay on Aug. 16, with the principal mission of putting the final touches on Vice President Dick Cheney’s scheme of establishing a U.S. military base in that country, in the heart of South America.
On June 10, 2005, Paraguayan Vice President Luis Castiglioni travelled to Washington, D.C., where he held private meetings with Cheney, Rumsfeld, and neo-con hatchetman Roger Noriega, then Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs. The totally disproportionate attention paid to Castiglioni—in particular the private meeting with Cheney—indicated that the scheme had gone live, and that Cheney was hands-on.
On July 1, 2005, the first 500 American troops began to arrive in Paraguay. On July 7, the U.S. Embassy in Paraguay issued a public disclaimer stating that they had no intention of establishing a permanent military base in the country. But in late July, an unconvinced Brazilian Army launched military maneuvers along that country’s border with Paraguay, parallel to the arrival of the U.S. troops.
The silence is deafening.
Great Post Owl. I was going to include some of your links but I didn’t want to run too long.
b…wrote:
The fight is still socialism against capitalism. That has not changed after the USSR breakdown. The name calling is different now. Islamists, terrorists, etc. – the scheme hasn´t changed much.
The name calling is different now, but they do not mention ‘Socialism’ by name. Social security is the nemesis of the Neocon state as well as the church. Niether thrive when everyone has enough to eat.
Posted by: pb | Aug 28 2005 6:00 utc | 20
Re Paraguay and the base allowed for the Americans –
I don’t know if The War of the Triple Alliance, 1864 – 1870 would still be a significant factor in the way Paraguayans look at their neighbours Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay. This was an unusually nasty war
The war left Paraguay utterly prostrate; its prewar population of approximately 525,000 was reduced to about 221,000 in 1871, of which only about 28,000 were men. During the war the Paraguayans suffered not only from the enemy but also from malnutrition, disease, and the domination of López, who tortured and killed countless people. Argentina and Brazil annexed about 140,000 km2 (55,000 square miles) of Paraguayan territory: Argentina took much of the Misiones region and part of the Chaco between the Bermejo and Pilcomayo rivers; Brazil enlarged its Mato Grosso province from annexed territory by claiming for itself territories that had been disputed with Paraguay before the war. They both demanded a large indemnity (which was never paid) and occupied Paraguay until 1876.
Posted by: Owl | Aug 28 2005 6:41 utc | 21
what’s the surprise
us imperialism has been doing it for decades
a short list culled from counterpunch is by no means definitive & we know about many other instances of assassination or attempts to do so Chou en Lai, Kassim, Patrice Lumumba , Diem brothers Fidel Castro Omar Torrijos ,Sukarno,Mohammed Mossadegh, Jawaharlal Nehru, Gamal Abdul Nasser, Norodom Sihanouk, José Figueres, Francois “Papa Doc” Duvalier, Gen. Rafael Trujillo, Charles de Gaulle, Salvador Allende, Michael Manley, Ayatollah Khomeini, all nine comandantes of the Sandinista National Directorate, Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, Mohamed Farah Aideed Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein.
there have been succesfu assassination attempts, ones where the target was missed but many others died or there have been complete farces like the attempts on commandante fidel castro
there have been the murder of the chilean opposiion in america itself – latelier – there has been the assassination in concert with mossad of an entire generation of panarabist leadership especially amongst the plo
there have been the arrangements with fascist & mafia groupings in italy, france & turkey
it is endless
the school of americas taught this – assasination as a form of foreign policy
& if you can’t kill them, corrupt them & if you can’t corrupt them isolate them
the murderous & secret foreign policy of u s imperialism is drenched in blood
when the time comes – they will almost certainly assasinate the new democrats of latin america because they are an anathema to the interests of the united states
& this is nothing to what they will do in concert with others in central asia & in the old soviet republics
it will make the mattanzas of toot riina & his coreloneisi mafia look like a playground
how anyone can be surprised by the real voice of american foreign policy as articulated by the madman robertson is beyond me
it has always been mad & each minute it is getting madder
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 28 2005 17:48 utc | 22
re: what’s the surprize?
I don’t know that Pat Robertson’s comments are so much surprizing. What I am a little shocked at is the sheer arrogance of such a pronouncement. Not to mention the arrogance of the Religious and Political Right in this country in general, that they would so blatantly and openly reveal their true colors. They must really believe the ‘fix is in’.
Even at the height of the Reagan Era, an effort was made to gloss over the more unseemly aspects of covert US ‘foriegn policy’. Until Iran Contra broke, it was pretty much smooth sailing.
There’s an interesting parallel to that time going on now. We had an equally radical, if far more charismatic, president. The religious right was gaining a pretty strong foothold in politics and increased power in the media. The present really represents a return of all these players, reprising their reagan era roles.
I also see a lot of parallels to the Nixon era in this time.
I think the next couple of years are going to be very interesting..
Regarding the history of US Foriegn Policy in the Americas, it has been a long string of travesties. No one can deny that. The activities of the intelligence apparatus in the region, whether sanctioned by a sitting president or of their own accord, are nothing to be proud of.
I think the attemted ouster of Chavez in Venezuela was a big mistake and I think that an attempt on his life, successful or not, would be an even bigger one. As I said in an earlier post, Chavez could have been an important ally. He could certainly help relieve some of our dependence on middle eastern oil resources and in the short term relieve the price hikes at the pumps. Instead we forced him into the arms of the Chinese and Russians and have created a much more confrontational situation.
It seems just another ill advised neocon snafu.
Posted by: John M | Aug 28 2005 21:54 utc | 23
Scratch one thing: I intended to mention in an earlier post that I felt Chavez could have been an important ally, but didn’t. While I was composing that post, my second, I took out portions of it before submitting it..
I think he could be important because he seems to have strong popular support and staying power and if we forged a relationship with his government it could be one with lasting potential. Not to mention he’s got something we need..
I also don’t see an idealogical reason not to work with him, considering some of the other ‘allies’ we’ve had in the region.. I think it’s hard to parse the neocons being in bed with people like Noriega and Pinochet (even if they sold them out in the end), but objecting to someone such as Chavez. It is somewhat revealing though, isn’t it?
Sorry about the ‘quick and dirty’ edit.
Posted by: John M | Aug 28 2005 22:32 utc | 24
john m
the folly, the venal madness of american foreign policy is historically determined. all imperial powers know any sense of moderation until it is too late. & for the us empire it has been too late for some time
wht has has happened in the americas is not only a travesty but must be called by its real name, carnage. carnage that has included the campesinos, the innocent campesionos who have only wanted a little better than what they have had
the thugs of american foreign policy – yelp loudly about democracy, liberty & freedom when it concerns them & their rapacious kind – but once any of the peoples of the americas have acted to achieve femocracy, liberty & freedom – they have been met by tanks & truncheons. & then the endless assasinations. campesinos, comrades, bishops, trade unionists journalists & lawyers
tortured & mutilated bodies ending up on the side of the road or rubbbish dumps – all this care of the old school of americas
this bloody carnage has had a name & has had its principal support & funding from the united states
how the negropontes or the marshall greens of this world can sleep at night – i do not know
& the assasinations have been so systematic – wherever us imperial policy has had its hand, whether it was in the americas, or in africa where it is clearly responsible for the death of patrice lumumba – they would have dearly loved to have killed nelson mandela but the whole world was watching; it assasinated the people of indonesia – cut whole swathes through the phillipines, in greece had arrested & tortured the best of a generation & killing lambrakis, or an alekos panagoulis
in the middle east – there has been a long & consisten policy of murdering the giants that might have led their people out of the quagmire of imperialism – the mullahs & their support is a direct relation to the absence of secular leadership because they have been murdred & an absence of trust by the people in negotiators. the people want force met by force & in this moment the islamic militancy represents that firmness
pat robertson is as american as apple pie – he is the real face of imperial america – he says what donald rumsfield & his evil kind do. a seemingly endless massacre
how politics of any kind can be created from the destruction that america wreaks & it is a credit to the people of the americas , the vienamese & the greeks that they learnt again how to construct their world
this foreign policy of assassination will not end john m – not any time soon – it will stop when it is called by its real name & the people of americ look at their own morality & take a step back from the terror & horror they perpetuate
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 28 2005 22:40 utc | 25
there must come a day when the american people must realise what is being done in their name & at what price it is being done
the numbers are never enough though they are truly horrifying. of course there are those who will say my natural allies have also been responsible for such horror. but it is not a competition. it is an indictement of men & their inability to live with each other
it is an indictement of how barbarous we actually are. we live & have lived through the bloodiest century – we have lived through it & we have not stopped these monsters. far from it – we have created new ones – bushg is the apeothesis of all its stupidity, of all its criminality but also of its means to destroy human life & the natural environment
we have entered a period where the people of the first xorld simply do not care – they do not even bother to understand what happened in rwanda – nor understand why south africa did not turn into a bloodbath – they do not understand the enormous cost to south east asia of american foreign policy
they do not care for the people of latin america & never have. they fear the middle east because for the first time people are fighting back & bringing or risking to bring the war home – that is their real fear – that their foxnews or skynews will be interrupted with bombs going through their bedrooms
the foreign policy of the empire is rootedin this deceit – & the longer it takes for the people to decide – the harder will their fall be – as it was for the germans & germany will never be able to erase what it has done – how it went pass the line of murder. that is true too of the u s – they have gone so far beyond any norms – that the crash will be loud & long & it will need to be to wake people up
ward churchill was paranthetically correct to speak to his fellow americans & say do not be surprised that one day the people you are slaughtering or aiding in their slaughter will bring the war home – that will be the guiding reality of the next half century
william burroughs once sd a paranoiac is just a person in full possession of the facts – the facts are these – there is a growing movement – a movement outside the boundaries of normal politics – which will be articulated in the times to come – & they will not be happy times – neither for them or for us.
& the line between their sadness & our sorrow is already getting closer
the ‘iraq’ constitution is a scandal – morallly, jurisprudentially, politcally but above all in human terms/ a people are being turned from blood to water back into blood. the cynicism of this administration towards the people of iraq & their own people merits more than contempt
it merits whatever shall come & i will not be heavy of heart when that time comes
Posted by: remembereringgiap | Aug 29 2005 0:12 utc | 26
reuters:
Venezuela to seek legal action against Robertson
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Sunday his government would take legal action against Pat Robertson and potentially seek his extradition after the U.S. evangelist called for Washington to assassinate the South American leader.
…
“I announce that my government is going to take legal action in the United States … to call for the assassination of a head of state is an act of terrorism.” Chavez said in a televised speech.
the article itself is interesting for its ideologically-framed propaganda.
The fiery left-wing critic of Bush’s foreign policy who frequently charges the U.S. government is plotting to kill him, called Robertson “crazy” and a “public menace.”
…
Washington says it is not plotting to kill Chavez and denies involvement in the coup.
…
A close ally of communist Cuba, Chavez presents his self-proclaimed revolution as an alternative to U.S. policies in the region.
Washington says Chavez is a negative influence who uses oil profits to fund anti-democratic groups in South America while becoming more authoritarian at home.
meanwhile,
Venezuela Suspends Permits for Foreign Preachers
Venezuela’s head of the Justice and Interior Ministry’s religious affairs unit, Carlos Gonzalez, announced yesterday [Friday] that Venezuela would suspend the authorization of permits for foreign preachers while the government reviews and tightens existing regulations on preachers already in Venezuela.
According to Gonzalez, his department had been considering this move for a while, but Pat Robertson’s declarations “have made us speed things up.”
Posted by: b real | Aug 29 2005 17:33 utc | 27
good article from gary leupp at tuesday’s counterpunch – “Journalism” and the Neocon Pulpit – on disinfo flak martin arostegui, pat robertson, and the noble liars who love them. somebody get jerry springer on the phone…
Posted by: b real | Aug 30 2005 18:37 utc | 29
Levitra free sample.
Compare levitra cialis. Levitra attorneys. Levitra. Unfaithfullness and levitra..
Posted by: Generic levitra. | Jan 6 2010 19:55 utc | 30