Venezuela approves creation of joint venture energy firms
www.chinaview.cn 2006-04-01 16:56:13
CARACAS, March 31 (Xinhua) -- The National Assembly of Venezuela on Friday approved a government initiation to turn 32 privately-run oil fields into joint ventures controlled by Venezuela's state oil company.
The restructuring, part of the government's broader aim of guaranteeing domestic control over the energy sector, will ensure state-run Petroleos de Venezuela SA, or PDVSA, holds a minimum 60 percent stake in the new partnership.
The new joint ventures are replacing old agreements that gave private companies a bigger share.
President Hugo Chavez said Friday his government will sign the agreements with foreign oil companies later in the day. He thanked the transnational companies that operate in Venezuela for their willingness to cooperate.
Most affected companies, including Houston-based Conoco Phillips, France's Total SA, U.S.-based Chevron Corp. and Norway's Statoil ASA, were expected to sign the agreements in a later ceremony. Enditem
Scheduled demonstration in Washington by Manos fuera de Venezuela y Cuba
Campaign of solidarity with Cuba and Venezuela
Havana, Mar 30(ACN) Organizations of solidarity with Cuba and Venezuela called for an international campaign of support in the face of the US menaces and aggressions against them.
The U.S. coalition ‘Manos fuera de Venezuela y Cuba’ (Hands off of Venezuela and Cuba) made a call, in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas, for all nations to organize demonstrations in front of U.S consulates and embassies to protest against the aggressive policy towards those two nations.
According to Prensa Latina, the appeal states that the US government, helped by political parties represented in the Congress, has increased its interventionist and hostile policy against the Cuban and Venezuelan governments.
The demonstrators should also ask for the terrorist Luis Posada Carriles, responsible for the attack on a Cuban aircraft in which 73 people died in 1976, to be extradited to Venezuela, as the Venezuelan government is requesting.
The action also supports the liberation of five Cuban antiterrorist fighters imprisoned in US jails and the closing of the prison camp based in the Guantanamo Bay Naval Station, Cuban territory illegally occupied by the US.
The demand also includes the devolution of that territory to Cuba and the cessation of intervention by Washington in Latin America and the Caribbean.
It also accuses Washington of encouraging and supporting the coup d'etat in Venezuela on April 2002, that was defeated by a massive popular uprising that brought back Hugo Chavez to the presidency.
One of the actions scheduled is a march in Washington demanding the cessation of intervention and hostile campaigns against Venezuela.
The coalition is made up by the Círculos Bolivarianos of Minneapolis, New York, Connecticut, Chicago, Detroit, Los Angeles, Oregon, Boston, Miami, Canada and Italy.
Among the other supporting organizations are the All-African People's Revolutionary Party, A.N.S.W.E.R, Casa de las Americas, Colombia Action Network, the US Communist Party, Dominican Friends of Cuba, FMLN and FSLN of New York, the Frente Socialista de Puerto Rico, Fuerza de la Revolution, Haiti-Cuba-Venezuela Project, Pastors for Peace, the Dominican Popular Movement and committees for the liberation of five Cuban antiterrorist fighters imprisoned in the US.
There is something else going on with this immigration issue. The entire complexion has changed. The US government for a long time has virtually ignored its existence and now is scurrying to implement programs. While people argue the old standby issues of wages, fences, employers’ responsibilities it seems to me immigrants are infiltrating this country very much like sleeper cells awaiting orders and they are not just Muslim. If this were only about Mexican immigration the US would most probably continue to look the other way. If this pertained to terrorism why the changes now when after 9/11 our borders were left porous?
One thing, Mexico is in danger of going left, this being a new change on the horizon. #msg-10469596
The line of questioning below is very significant. He also was asked whether the U.S. government should have concerns about Venezuelan immigrants and whether they might act upon declarations or pronouncements from that country's embassy or consulate. #msg-10448619 #msg-10433548
The following text is one of the worst unreferenced pieces I have read by a crazy person no less. A few helicopter gun ships could seal the border instantly until a serious fence, land mines, or moat could be built or placed along the entire border. The loss of Mexican life would then be less than the loss currently incurred by Mexicans and others as they attempt to cross the long dessert; often on foot. Yes, yes it is politically incorrect and seemingly contrary to our Statute of Liberty image to use land mines and helicopter gun ships, but these would be trivial issues if there were 10 million dead Americans slowly dying from a chemical, biological, or nuclear attack.
However there are some proven facts that he cites but I would prefer to have more references on the China statement.
This underground pipeline originates in countries as far away as China, Brazil and Nigeria, where professional smugglers charge thousands of dollars to transport aliens to the United States.
Brazil is mentioned. For the past three years, an annual conference called the World Social Forum has been the biggest international gathering of radicals on earth, attended by all the leaders of the world left. Labor unions, Communist parties, non-governmental organizations, anti-globalization activists, anti-American 'peace' groups, multiple heads of state, and the representatives of armed guerilla insurgencies all gather yearly at Porto Alegre, Brazil, to make new connections and plan for the future.
And China is mentioned, a country for which the US is preparing for war and has previously stated is its number one enemy. #msg-10356292
I just don’t think that all of these immigrants from certain countries are here for a better life. This issue is no longer focused almost exclusively on Mexicans or Muslims. Something has changed. IMO
-Am
DEMOCRATS GAMBLE WITH 10 MILLION LIVES By Ted Baiamonte Comments: bje1000@aol.com (04/01/2006)
Here are some key facts: 1) The 9/11 commission has stated the al Qaeda considers it a solemn obligation to launch a nuclear attack against the United States.
2) The CIA has stated that it cannot account for missing nuclear material and that such material might already be in the hands of al-Queda.
3) The Mexican border is virtually wide open as an area through which such an attack might be launched. In some areas, such as Organ Pipe National Park, it has been possible to drive across completely undetected.
4) According to Adm. Loy, "al Qaeda plans to use Mexico's professional people smugglers, also known as coyotes, to infiltrate terrorists across our southern border. Adm. Loy's information is based on recent interrogations and has been confirmed by ongoing counter terrorist operations. This underground pipeline originates in countries as far away as China, Brazil and Nigeria, where professional smugglers charge thousands of dollars to transport aliens to the United States. Many of these smuggling networks converge in Mexico, where coyotes intimately familiar with the gaps in our security take over the task of transporting aliens beyond the border into our cities. Aliens who prefer can travel to Mexico's border towns and hire their own coyotes as guides for the final passage. To assist them, the Mexican Foreign Ministry has prepared a handbook for illegal aliens."
5) "Salim Boughader Mucharrafille was also ordered by U.S. District Judge Thomas Whelan to spend three years under supervised release and was fined $5,000. Boughader pleaded guilty in March to running a ring that helped more than 100 immigrants cross the border into San Diego. Most of the immigrants were Lebanese."
6) A few helicopter gun ships could seal the border instantly until a serious fence, land mines, or moat could be built or placed along the entire border. The loss of Mexican life would then be less than the loss currently incurred by Mexicans and others as they attempt to cross the long dessert; often on foot. Yes, yes it is politically incorrect and seemingly contrary to our Statute of Liberty image to use land mines and helicopter gun ships, but these would be trivial issues if there were 10 million dead Americans slowly dying from a chemical, biological, or nuclear attack.
7) The Statue of Liberty theme is dead and defunct. Half the world's refugees come to America now. Most of the world would become refugees and come to America because 200 years of Republican values have produced obvious results. That the America hating Democrats can't see is testimony to their treasonous stupidity. That Democrats would sell the Statue of Liberty theme and amnesty to every would be refugee on earth for votes is just another of their anti American tricks to maintain power.
8) We probably don't need Mexicans despite their cheap labor: 1) they consume more in social services than they pay in taxes 2) they steal jobs from poor Americans who then need social services 3) they encourage American poor to think of themselves as part of the entitlement class rather than the Republican working class, 4) their low wages discourage employers from automating many jobs such as lettuce and raisin picking 5) American poor are poor because of Democrats but vote for Democrats not realizing that Democrats have made them poor with immigrants and various welfare schemes 6) Legal Mexican poor and their sympathizers vote for Democrats who then favor more immigration and amnesty 7) they discourage respect for the law 8) they encourage the further Balkanization of America 8) they don't devote any energy to promoting Republican economic values in Mexico thereby further destroying Mexico and concomitantly creating the need for even more immigration to America.
7) "The polarizing debate over Proposition 187 (wherein Republicans favored modest just immigration "reform") in California has been correctly blamed for sinking the Republican Party in California, and possibly the entire country in the longer term, and allowing Democrats to dominate Sacramento."
8) The Democrats have concluded that the votes they get from an open nuclear border are more important than the potential nuclear attack on the United States.
Conclusion:
The Democrats subsist based on a subversive anti-American calculus wherein they buy votes from their various special interest groups by promising them amnesty or money (mostly taxed from their other special interest groups) and/or programs. In this case, to close the sale, Democrats are gambling with the life of a major American City (assuming al-Qaeda attacks only one city.) If the deal doesn't pay off, i.e., if an American City is successfully attacked, the Democrats should accede to a Constitutional Amendment banning them forever from American soil. Better yet, just for having the infinite and brain-dead audacity to make such a gamble with so many American lives in the first place they should accede to such an Amendment right now.
There is also a growing consensus that Iran's agents would target civilians in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, they said.
This is what I have been saying and it has to do in part with the immigration issue. #msg-10469596
I already posted I believe Hugo Chavez has an army of immigrants in California that have contributed to the immigration protests and this is the information for which the US is looking. I will go further, this country is already wired and an attack on Iran, a strong ally of Chavez , will light the fuse. #msg-10448619 #msg-10433548 #msg-10478468
-Am
Experts: Iran May Retaliate With Terror If Nuclear Sites Attacked
Saturday, April 01, 2006
Dana Priest, The Washington Post: As tensions increase between the United States and Iran, U.S. intelligence and terrorism experts say they believe Iran would respond to U.S. military strikes on its nuclear sites by deploying its intelligence operatives and Hezbollah teams to carry out terrorist attacks worldwide.
Iran would mount attacks against U.S. targets inside Iraq, where Iranian intelligence agents are already plentiful, predicted these experts. There is also a growing consensus that Iran's agents would target civilians in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, they said.
U.S. officials would not discuss what evidence they have indicating Iran would undertake terrorist action, but the matter "is consuming a lot of time" throughout the U.S. intelligence apparatus, one senior official said. "It's a huge issue," another said.
Citing prohibitions against discussing classified information, U.S. intelligence officials declined to say whether they have detected preparatory measures, such as increased surveillance, counter-surveillance or message traffic, on the part of Iran's foreign-based intelligence operatives.
But terrorism experts considered Iranian-backed or controlled groups -- namely the country's Ministry of Intelligence and Security operatives, its Revolutionary Guards and the Lebanon-based Hezbollah -- to be better organized, trained and equipped than the al-Qaeda network that carried out the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
The Iranian government views the Islamic Jihad, the name of Hezbollah's terrorist organization, "as an extension of their state. . . . operational teams could be deployed without a long period of preparation," said Ambassador Henry A. Crumpton, the State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism.
The possibility of a military confrontation has been raised only obliquely in recent months by President Bush and Iran's government. Bush says he is pursuing a diplomatic solution to the crisis, but he has added that all options are on the table for stopping Iran's acquisition of nuclear weapons.
Speaking in Vienna last month, Javad Vaeedi, a senior Iranian nuclear negotiator, warned the United States that "it may have the power to cause harm and pain, but it is also susceptible to harm and pain. So if the United States wants to pursue that path, let the ball roll," although he did not specify what type of harm he was talking about.
Government officials said their interest in Iran's intelligence services is not an indication that a military confrontation is imminent or likely, but rather a reflection of a decades-long adversarial relationship in which Iran's agents have worked secretly against U.S. interests, most recently in Iraq and Pakistan. As confrontation over Iran's nuclear program has escalated, so has the effort to assess the threat from Iran's covert operatives.
U.N. Security Council members continue to debate how best to pressure Iran to prove that its nuclear program is not meant for weapons. The United States, Britain and France want the Security Council to threaten Iran with economic sanctions if it does not end its uranium enrichment activities. Russia and China, however, have declined to endorse such action and insist on continued negotiations. Security Council diplomats are meeting this weekend to try to break the impasse. Iran says it seeks nuclear power but not nuclear weapons.
Former CIA terrorism analyst Paul R. Pillar said that any U.S. or Israeli airstrike on Iranian territory "would be regarded as an act of war" by Tehran, and that Iran would strike back with its terrorist groups. "There's no doubt in my mind about that. . . . Whether it's overseas at the hands of Hezbollah, in Iraq or possibly Europe, within the regime there would be pressure to take violent action."
Before Sept. 11, the terrorist arm of Hezbollah, often working on behalf of Iran, was responsible for more American deaths than any other terrorist group. In 1983 Hezbollah truck-bombed the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, killing 241, and in 1996 truck-bombed Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, killing 19 U.S. service members.
Iran's intelligence service, operating out of its embassies around the world, assassinated dozens of monarchists and political dissidents in Europe, Pakistan, Turkey and the Middle East in the two decades after the 1979 Iranian revolution, which brought to power a religious Shiite government. Argentine officials also believe Iranian agents bombed a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1994, killing 86 people. Iran has denied involvement in that attack.
Iran's intelligence services "are well trained, fairly sophisticated and have been doing this for decades," said Crumpton, a former deputy of operations at the CIA's Counterterrorist Center. "They are still very capable. I don't see their capabilities as having diminished."
Both sides have increased their activities against the other. The Bush administration is spending $75 million to step up pressure on the Iranian government, including funding non-governmental organizations and alternative media broadcasts. Iran's parliament then approved $13.6 million to counter what it calls "plots and acts of meddling" by the United States.
"Given the uptick in interest in Iran" on the part of the United States, "it would be a very logical assumption that we have both ratcheted up [intelligence] collection, absolutely," said Fred Barton, a former counterterrorism official who is now vice president of counterterrorism for Stratfor, a security consulting and forecasting firm. "It would be a more fevered pitch on the Iranian side because they have fewer options."
The office of the director of national intelligence, which recently began to manage the U.S. intelligence agencies, declined to allow its analysts to discuss their assessment of Iran's intelligence services and Hezbollah and their capabilities to retaliate against U.S. interests.
"We are unable to address your questions in an unclassified manner," a spokesman for the office, Carl Kropf, wrote in response to a Washington Post query.
The current state of Iran's intelligence apparatus is the subject of debate among experts. Some experts who spent their careers tracking the intelligence ministry's operatives describe them as deployed worldwide and easier to monitor than Hezbollah cells because they operate out of embassies and behave more like a traditional spy service such as the Soviet KGB.
Other experts believe the Iranian service has become bogged down in intense, regional concerns: attacks on Shiites in Pakistan, the Iraq war and efforts to combat drug trafficking in Iran.
As a result, said Bahman Baktiari, an Iran expert at the University of Maine, the intelligence service has downsized its operations in Europe and the United States. But, said Baktiari, "I think the U.S. government doesn't have a handle on this."
Because Iran's nuclear facilities are scattered around the country, some military specialists doubt a strike could effectively end the program and would require hundreds of strikes beforehand to disable Iran's vast air defenses. They say airstrikes would most likely inflame the Muslim world, alienate reformers within Iran and could serve to unite Hezbollah and al-Qaeda, which have only limited contact currently.
A report by the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks cited al-Qaeda's long-standing cooperation with the Iranian-back Hezbollah on certain operations and said Osama bin Laden may have had a previously undisclosed role in the Khobar attack. Several al-Qaeda figures are reportedly under house arrest in Iran.
Others in the law enforcement and intelligence circles have been more dubious about cooperation between al-Qaeda and Hezbollah, largely because of the rivalries between Shiite and Sunni Muslims. Al-Qaeda adherents are Sunni Muslims; Hezbollah's are Shiites.
Iran "certainly wants to remind governments that they can create a lot of difficulty if strikes were to occur," said a senior European counterterrorism official interviewed recently. "That they might react with all means, Hezbollah inside Lebanon and outside Lebanon, this is certain. Al-Qaeda could become a tactical alliance."
Iran would mount attacks against U.S. targets inside Iraq, where Iranian intelligence agents are already plentiful, predicted these experts. There is also a growing consensus that Iran's agents would target civilians in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, they said. #msg-10478578
What is being said is that Iranian intelligence agents are plentiful in Iraq thus it would be a simple matter to mount an attack against U.S. targets in Iraq. If there is also a growing consensus that Iran's agents would target civilians in the United States then it follows that Iranian intelligence agents are plentiful inside the United States or they have already invaded the U.S.
In addition the U.S. government is concerned about Venezuelan immigrants already in the U.S. Given the close relationship between Venezuela and Iran might not these immigrants strike a blow for Iran?
He also was asked whether the U.S. government should have concerns about Venezuelan immigrants and whether they might act upon declarations or pronouncements from that country's embassy or consulate. #msg-10448619
Pls see: #msg-10469596 regarding the Mexico/Chavez situation pertaining to Mexico’s forthcoming election.
In my opinion these people have already crossed over into the United States albeit there are more to come.
This is a tough situation for Bush who has run on a platform of protecting the United States. Thus he cannot admit his true concern regarding the immigration issue, that being his incompetence has led to an invasion of the United States not by migrants looking for a better life but rather by agents and sleeper cells from a plethora of hostile foreign governments. It is evident that Bush is now aware of the situation from his aggressive push for immigration reform but again we see, as in Iraq, a complete lack of reality and planning ending up instead with an after the fact attempt at a quick fix. Not good enough.
We are in much more serious danger now than during the Cuban Missile Crisis yet the people of the United States are oblivious.
-Am
INTERVIEW: Scott Gulbransen, Author of "The Silent Invasion", on Immigration Ryan Mauro - 4/4/2006 Scott Gulbransen wrote a book entitled "The Silent Invasion" describing Marxism, terrorism, intelligence operations, covert economic warfare, corruption and enemy operatives in Latin America. Gulbransen makes a stunning case that the rumors about units of Chinese, Cuban, Russian, and North Korean nationals being in Mexico, engaging in various anti-American activities. Armed with enough investigation, facts and eyewitness reports to make any defense lawyer whimper, Gulbransen reveals a fraction of the frightening truth about what is going on south of the border, where all threats to the USA mingle. With an overwhelmed and overestimated intelligence community, it is people like Gulbransen who we can rely on tinally notice these things.
WRM: Scott, could you explain how you got into this area of research, and the type of research you did?
SG: I really stumbled onto this subject. Through a relationship with author Kathleen Keating, I started tapping into my law enforcement sources that I've developed over the past 12 years and during the time I was a reporter. They began telling me stories about strange activity on the border with Mexico so I decided to do some more research. I researched the revolutionary movements in Mexico and also the radical MEChA and La Raza movements run by Mexicans here in the U.S. I needed to first understand why Mexico would sell us out to enemies like China, Cuba, etc. This research led me to conversations with Mexican nationals that convinced me something was going on and that Mexico was not looking out for its neighbor to the North. I then hooked up with a Border Patrol source who gave me an unreal story about a Border Patrol shooting in Copper Canyon in October of 2000. This event was reported by national media as a "skirmish" but no mention of Chinese and European military personnel accompanied those stories. I wrote that first story on the incident and soon was flooded with credible sources willing to talk to me in private.
WRM: What were your conclusions?
SG: I've come to some conclusions but still am skeptical on others. My main conclusion in The Silent Invasion is simple: there is something happening in Mexico and it's not good for the U.S. and its national security. I have a long way to go before I can prove much of this without a shadow of doubt but certainly the signs are there. Mexico is up to something and is at the very least complicit in allowing America's enemies to use its territories to spy on us.
WRM: Were the Russians, Cubans, Chinese, North Koreans, etc., working together in organized units or did they just have a common presence in Mexico?
SG: My sources tell me Russians, Cubans have been seen working together in organized units. The Chinese and N. Koreans also work together. I have no sources that put units of all four nations together.
WRM: The intelligence communities of the countries with nationals involved in the suspicious activity have long been involved in drug trafficking, organized crime and sometimes, terrorist-related activity. Do you believe this is all an example of their workings?
SG: I don't necessarily believe in the "our government is completely corrupt and evil" argument. Do I believe there are factions of our government involved? Yes, absolutely. But, much to the disappointment of some of my readers, I don't believe Bush and everyone else are pulling puppet strings here. That may not be a popular view with many of my readers but I have found no trail or inkling that is the case. If I do, I certainly would change my mind but I think this is more of a middle-management issue. I do believe there are those in government and law enforcement who know about this and hide it very well.
WRM: What would be the motive of the elements of the law enforcement, border patrol, and government in ignoring, covering-up or even assisting what is going on in Mexico?
SG: If you find the motive in betraying your own country, let me know. I think it's a cross between money, sex and power. These folks are greedy and selling us out to make a buck or are being promised something. They're being blackmailed or some just don't care...they are selfish and are looking out for their own personal interests. That's my own thesis based on the stories I've heard.
WRM: According to Joseph D. Douglass' "Red Cocaine", these activities were often used as intelligence operations to compromise officials, gain intelligence on security, etc. Is there any evidence the foreigners involved in the suspicious activity were involved in this type of intelligence gathering?
SG: I am not familiar with Douglass' work so I wouldn't comment on it. I would say that my research does show these foreign elements do use drugs, sex and other vices to compromise law enforcement and government officials to get them to be quiet. If you have pictures of a married agent with hookers or young boys, you can bet he'll keep things quiet!
WRM: Is there any evidence of a formal bilateral agreement for cooperation in the area of what is going on in Mexico between the participating countries?
SG: Depends on what you consider evidence. I believe, and the book states, that Mexico is complicit out of a desire to reclaim Alta California and other areas of the southwest. They don't sing bilateral agreements on television as they're plotting the downfall of the U.S...
WRM: What are the implications of the common trend among US companies of hiring immigrants from countries, some of us see as potential enemies, like China, the former Soviet republics and Russia, etc?
SG: The ramifications of moving all of our manufacturing jobs overseas are unknown but, in my view, it cannot be good. If an international war or incident broke out, we wouldn't be able to produce enough goods and services at home to compensate for the loss of overseas resources. In reality, we're all giving up economic freedom so we can buy items at Wal-Mart for less than we can elsewhere. We're selling our souls to save a few bucks.
WRM: What are the implications of the companies moving overseas, and doing such heavy investment overseas?
SG: The globalist movement is taking shape economically now after years of social reforms. It's bad for us...jobs, highly educated employees, are going to India, et al. It can only lead to disaster.
WRM: What do you believe are the geopolitical and national security-related ramifications on this activity?
SG: The geopolitical and national security ramifications are enormous. We're talking about our worst enemies surrounding us and testing our defenses on a daily basis. If the Cuban Missile Crisis almost resulted in nuclear holocaust, what would happen if the lid was blow of this thing? I shudder to think of what will happen when I am proved right and our nation gets off its collective ass and does something about it.
WRM: But once the country does find out about it, what is so dangerous? Can't simple anti-espionage security measures be taken? How come you feel this is so serious?
SG: If in 1962, we were at the brink of nuclear war over missiles in Cuba, what do you think the reaction would be of Chinese, Russian and N Korean soldiers on our border? A direct threat to the sovereignty of the United States is a serious matter, don't you think? When your enemies are on your border, abetted by an increasingly hostile and socialistic government, can't you see why that's serious? It threatens every American's safety and liberty
WRM: Is it possible these are just regular nationals or immigrants involved in these activities, rather than an organized effort by a government?
SG: No. There is no way Mexican immigrants or Asian immigrants would be conducting organized military activities in the Mexican desert. These are highly organized people.
WRM: How do you respond to the allegations that "sightings" of Asians in Mexican military uniforms may just be soldiers of the Indian population usually found in the southern portion of Mexico?
SG: I think the allegations that many make of the Asians being Native Mexicans is a smoke screen. If you're going to sit there and tell me that Border Patrol agents and Customs officers don't know the difference between those Mexicans and Asians, I'll say your nuts. These men and women deal with Mexican Indians all the time, they know the difference. These are not sightings by tourists or unqualified people. They are on the border every day and round up illegal immigrants all the time. To say they are mistaken questions their intelligence and is just another way to ignore the possibility that this is really happening.
WRM: Are these foreign units possible helping the Marxist, anti-American rebel movements in Mexico (particularly in the south) such as the Zapatistas, or are being used to assist officials seen as "favorable" by governments seeking to undermine American power?
SG: Absolutely. These Marxist elements are on the rise in Mexico AND America. The recent peace protests over the Iraq War was a clear sign that Communism is back strong in the Western Hemisphere and they are making inroads. We are being undermined internally daily and Mexico and its revolutionaries are aiding and abetting.
WRM: It has been said that the current mayor of Mexico City, who enjoys about 80% popularity, may run for president in 2006, and is highly likely to win. Analysts say he would be the Mexican version of Da Silva in Brazil, who is just one of the Fidel Castro fans taking over Latin American countries. Do you feel these activities have any connection to him? And do you see such a figure soon taking hold of Mexico?
SG: These actions very well could have a link to the mayor but Vicente Fox is also not a friend of America. He too, despite his current troubles, is a Globalist bent on destroying American independence. Da Silva and Chavez in South America all are Marxists. Castro is now a celebrity in America and only the older generations of Cuban-Americans are here to remind us what a murderous madman he is. When they are dead, who will hold the flag against Castro? It's very scary how our own media present him as a "hero". This all plays into the propaganda the Communists are using to brainwash the public. We better all wake up before it's too late.
WRM: As Marxists take over Latin America, what happens then? Of course they are hostile, but why is that so dangerous for the US? Many people feel that having an anti-American Latin America is not helpful, but not necessarily an imminent danger.
SG: To think Communism in Central America doesn't pose an immediate threat to the United States is both naive and unfounded. The Panama Canal and key shipping lanes that keep our economy and defense structure in tact all run through Latin and South America. These are all vital strategic areas for the United States. The Monroe Doctrine first established their importance and that importance continues today. I don't think the U.S. being surrounded by Communism/Socialism would be good for our future, do you?
WRM: What does the geopolitical situation look to you throughout Latin America?
SG: Back in the 1980s when President Reagan recognized the threat of Communism in S America, the American media railed against him as an oppressor keeping the poor of Latin American down. In reality, Reagan was a visionary who recognized the threat evil posed in our own hemisphere. During the Clinton years, Communism flourished in Latin American and America did nothing. Now, in the next few years, America could find itself surrounded by leaders who all abide by Marxist philosophies. It's scary, very scary.
Ryan Mauro is a geopolitical analyst. He began working for Tactical Defense Concepts (www.tdconcepts.com), a maritime-associated security company in 2002. In 2003, Mr. Mauro joined the Northeast Intelligence Network (www.homelandsecurityus.com), which specializes in tracking and assessing terrorist threats. He has appeared on over 20 radio shows and had articles published in over a dozen publications. His book "Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq" is scheduled to be published in the coming months. He publishes his own web site called World Threats. tdcanalyst@optonline.net
He also believes in the possible existence of the Israeli report.
I would be very careful if an Israeli report is involved by Israel’s own admission they delivered an erroneous assessment of pre-war Iraq’s weapons.
Parliamentary investigators have determined that Israel's intelligence services delivered an erroneous assessment of pre-war Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, an Israeli newspaper reported Thursday.
The Haaretz daily said the 80-page report had criticized all Israeli intelligence branches for providing erroneous assessments of Iraq's non-conventional weapons.
Last December, a former Israeli intelligence officer charged that Israel produced a flawed picture of Iraqi weapons capabilities and substantially contributed to mistakes made in U.S. and British prewar assessments on Iraq. #msg-2682946
If this is true Tehran must feel that sneaking in uranium is safer than mining their own?
-Am
Venezuela, Iran Vs. U.S.
Thu, 04 6 2006, 19:53 Djokhar Time
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is known for his anti-Americanism and public support for regimes that oppose the United States. But there is growing concern that Chavez’s government may have taken serious steps to go beyond mere rhetorical support with a deal that some experts say could allow Iran access to uranium deposits in Venezuela.
Public details of the Venezuelan-Iranian uranium deal are not clear, but an article on The Washington Post speculates that the agreement could involve the production and transfer of Venezuelan uranium to Iran. Media reports also talked of an alleged Israeli intelligence report that gave an account of the exact locations of uranium deposits in Venezuela and spoke of “extraction” already taking place in the State of Bolivar.
In addition to the Israeli report, Josй V. Mйndez, a Venezuelan expert in nuclear matters talked of the establishment of a “subcommittee of the U.S. Senate“ to probe the alleged Iranian-Venezuelan deal. “If the matter of the subcommittee is true, I must say that that is precisely like what happened before the Iraq invasion,” he said.
A U.S. State Department official said: "We are aware of reports of possible Iranian exploitation of Venezuelan uranium, but we see no commercial uranium activities in Venezuela."
But a Venezuelan diplomat, Julio Cйsar Pineda, said that uranium reserves in Venezuela “were estimated to be approximately 50,000 tons.” He also believes in the possible existence of the Israeli report. “Israel is on the alert as to what is happening because there is that Iranian threat of wiping it off the map. Europe is also on the alert and even the Arabic world…”
The speculations come at a critical time between Iran and the West, after the UN Security Council unanimously adopted a non-binding statement giving Iran 30 days to halt uranium enrichment activities.
In January, members of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) voted for sending Iran’s nuclear case to the UN Security Council. Only Venezuela, Cuba and Syria voted against it.
“The nuclear matter is very sensitive and the world powers are very perceptive of that. It is significant that China, who receives 15% of its oil from Iran, and Russia, who provided it with nuclear technology, have not voted in favor of Iran at the UN. And yet Venezuela did. They have already entered us in the game of nuclear chess,“ said Cйsar Pineda.
Last month, Chavez said that "it's absolutely false that the Iranian government is developing an atomic bomb." He also criticized the U.S. for being hypocritical for maintaining its nuclear weapons and those of friendly countries while demanding that others "paralyze their programs for peaceful uses of nuclear energy."
Venezuela insists, like Iran, that it seeks atomic technology strictly for civilian purposes. Chavez recently attempted to purchase his own nuclear technology from Argentina. But Argentina marked its distance from the idea of its wealthy neighbor. Iran, on the other hand, hinted that it will help Venezuela in developing nuclear energy for peaceful uses and always within the norms of the IAEA.
In February, Caracas and Tehran announced that they reached several agreements during a visit to Venezuela by the speaker of the Iranian parliament, Gholam Ali Haddad-Adel. One of those deals, perhaps the most important, could lead to the mining of Venezuelan uranium for Iranian use, prompting U.S. opposition figures to warn that Chavez’s government could be planning to provide Tehran with uranium for its nuclear program, according to The Washington Times.
Tehran and Caracas also agreed to set up a joint U.S. 0 million development fund aimed at promoting bilateral trade and consolidate a relation in which there already existed an old accord meant to oppose Washington’s imperialism. Both countries also signed bilateral agreements to build homes and factories in the South American country.
Allying himself with states that share his opposition to the U.S. is nothing new for the oil-rich Chavez, but any deal towards a joint nuclear effort with Iran is alarming for Washington.
The U.S. fears that Venezuela may be sharing uranium with Iran, and that Iran may be giving secret nuclear advice to Venezuela in order to avail itself of nuclear fuel. Both countries fear that the Bush administration may find an excuse for invading them.
According to Venezuela’s former Defense Minister Raul Salazar, Chavez’ support for Iran’s nuclear program was pushing relations with Washington past "the point of no return." Caracas’ support for Tehran has so far been purely political, he said, but "that is not to say [uranium transfers to Tehran] couldn't happen in the future."
But Chavez dismissed the reports of the Venezuelan-Iranian uranium deal as being part of an "imperialist plan" propagated by international news media. “Now they say I am sending uranium to make atomic bombs from here, from the Venezuelan Amazon to send directly to the Persian Gulf," he said last week. "This shows they have no limit in their capacity to invent lies."
Venezuelan Foreign Commerce and Integration Minister Gustavo Marquez also denied sending uranium shipments to the Middle East. "There is no sort of exploitation of that,” he said.
And Venezuela’s former representative to the IAEA, Leancy Clemente Lobo, said: “I do not believe that uranium is being taken out of Venezuela sent to Iran, because they have more of it there that we do here. Iran does not need Venezuela in the nuclear sector; quite to the contrary. But one must be careful to recognize and accept the rules of the game. There has always been this hullabaloo because it is a kind of neuralgia; it happened to Pakistan with respect to India, Korea lives it now, Brazil and Argentina expressed it in their time. And this is Venezuela’s moment.”
Iranian pact with Venezuela stokes fears of uranium sales Mon. 13 Mar 2006 The Washington Times
By Kelly Hearn
BUENOS AIRES -- A recent deal between Iran and Venezuela provides for the exploitation of Venezuela's strategic minerals, prompting opposition figures to warn that President Hugo Chavez's government could be planning to provide Tehran with uranium for its nuclear program.
The deal was part of a package of agreements, most of which were announced during a visit last month to Caracas and Cuba by Iranian parliament Speaker Gholam Ali Haddad-Adel. The two countries also established a joint $200 million development fund and signed bilateral deals to build homes and factories, and exploit petroleum.
Public details are vague, but Venezuelan opposition figures and press reports have said the deal on minerals could involve the production and transfer to Iran have said the deal on minerals could involve the production and transfer to Iran of Venezuelan uranium taken from known deposits located in the dense jungle states of Amazonas and Bolivar.
Mr. Chavez last week ridiculed such speculation as being part of an "imperialist plan" propagated by international news media.
"Now they say I am sending uranium to make atomic bombs from here, from the Venezuelan Amazon to send directly to the Persian Gulf," Mr. Chavez said during a meeting at a military club on Tuesday. "This shows they have no limit in their capacity to invent lies."
The speculation comes at a time of rising tension between the world community and Iran, which yesterday declared it had ruled out a proposed compromise under which it would process uranium for a peaceful nuclear program in Russia.
The five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council -- the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France -- are to meet this week to discuss a draft statement aimed at increasing the pressure on Iran to abandon its nuclear plans.
Retired Venezuelan Vice Adm. Jose Rafael Huizi-Clavier said the mining arrangements negotiated last month with Iran are broad and unspecific and could easily include uranium.
Other critics of Mr. Chavez point out that Venezuela recently voted against reporting Tehran to the U.N. Security Council for its uranium-enrichment program and that Mr. Chavez in recent months has attempted to purchase his own civilian-use nuclear technology from Argentina. Adm. Huizi-Clavier, who heads the Venezuela-based Institutional Military Front, a group of ex-military officials opposed to Mr. Chavez, said his group is "alarmed by a confluence of facts." He cited construction work at a small military base and the widening of a military airstrip near the Brazilian border, where uranium deposits are said to exist.
He also noted that Mr. Chavez expelled U.S. missionaries from areas known to have uranium in February. At the time, Mr. Chavez accused New Tribes Mission, a Florida-based group, of working for the CIA and foreign mining interests.
A Florida-based spokesman for the group said none of the missionaries knew anything about uranium-mining activities.
Venezuelan Minister of Science and Technology Yadira Cordova said on Thursday that the airfield belonged to the New Tribes Mission. She also denied uranium was being mined or processed in the area, saying such technologically demanding processes "would be detected easily."
In Washington, a State Department official said, "We are aware of reports of possible Iranian exploitation of Venezuelan uranium, but we see no commercial uranium activities in Venezuela."
Adm. Huizi-Clavier said Mr. Chavez was playing a "dangerous game" by backing Iran at the United Nations in defiance of overwhelming world opinion.
Former Venezuelan Defense Minister Raul Salazar said the country's support of Iran's nuclear program was pushing relations with Washington past "the point of no return."
Mr. Chavez's support for Iran's nuclear plan has thus far been purely political, he said, but "that is not to say [uranium transfers to Tehran] couldn't happen in the future."
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
