<html>
<body>
<h1><font size=4><b>Spinning the News - The FARC-EP Files, Venezuela and
Interpol
</b></font></h1><font size=3>
<a href="http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/17686" eudora="autourl">
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/17686<br><br>
</a>May 20, 2008 By <b>Stephen Lendman</b> <br>
<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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." <br><br>
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.<br><br>
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." <br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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. <br><br>
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.<br><br>
Spinning the News - How Big Media Does It<br><br>
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."<br><br>
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...."<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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..."<br><br>
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."<br><br>
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:<br><br>
-- "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;"<br><br>
-- 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;"<br><br>
-- "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;<br><br>
-- to avoid "outright confiscation (he's) offering 'some'
compensation;" unmentioned is it's fair market value and nothing
was, is or will be "confiscated;"<br><br>
-- 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;" <br><br>
-- 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;"<br><br>
-- 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;" <br><br>
-- 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."<br><br>
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."<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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. <br><br>
Revving Up Gunboat Diplomacy<br><br>
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." <br><br>
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."<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
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. <br><br>
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.<br><br>
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. <br><br>
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.<br><br>
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.<br><br>
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
</font><a href="mailto:lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net">
<font size=3 color="#343F24">lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net</a></font>
<font size=3>. Also visit his blog site at
sjlendman.blogspot.com.<br><br>
<br><br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>