You may recall that a top leader for the terrorist group FARC was killed early this month during a raid by Columbian troops. They captured a laptop belonging to Raul Reyes and what they found was quite startling. They found connections between FARC and Ecuadorean president Rafael Correa. Records of a 300 million dollar gift from Hugo Chavez along with thank you notes dating all the way back from 1992 and Uranium purchasing records along with the directions on how to make dirty bombs.
Also found was the last letter from Raul Reyes to FARC which had this paragraph:
6. The gringos will ask for an appointment with the minister to solicit him to communicate to us his interest in discussing these topics. They say that the new president of their country will be Obama and that they are interested in your compatriots. Obama will not support “Plan Colombia” nor will he sign the TLC (Colombian Free Trade agreement). Here we responded that we are interested in relations with all governments in equality of conditions and that in the case of the US it is required a public pronouncement expressing their interest in talking with the FARC given their eternal war against us.
Obama gets in and they believe they will be sitting pretty.
What does Obama say about Hugo and the terrorists?
More recently, Obama as he traveled through Florida seemed to give some contradictory statements about Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and the Colombian terrorist group FARC.
On Thursday Obama told the Orlando Sentinel that he would meet with Chavez and “one of the obvious high priorities in my talks with President Hugo Chavez would be the fermentation of anti-American sentiment in Latin America, his support of FARC in Colombia and other issues he would want to talk about.”
OK, so a strong declaration that Chavez is supporting FARC, which Obama intends to push him on.
But then on Friday he said any government supporting FARC should be isolated.
“We will shine a light on any support for the FARC that comes from neighboring governments,” he said in a speech in Miami. “This behavior must be exposed to international condemnation, regional isolation, and – if need be – strong sanctions. It must not stand.”
So he will meet with the leader of a country he simultaneously says should be isolated? Huh?
Obama said later that its not unusual to call for talks with a country that is being isolated, citing North Korea as an example. Only problem is that there is NO Presidential meetings going on with North Korea.
Jake updates:
So, I just spoke to an Obama campaign foreign policy adviser and this is how he explains any confusion.
Obama, he says, believes that Chavez is supportive of the FARC, both ideologically and tangibly. The Obama campaign disagrees that Obama’s language — “if, in fact, it (Chavez) is trying to ferment terrorist activities in other borders” — is hedging language at all. Obama has been very clear that he believes that Chavez is supportive of the FARC, the adviser says.
As to the question of whether one can pledge to isolate a country while also proposing a presidential-level meeting, the adviser says that I was inaccurate in characterizing Obama as proposing such a meeting — the reality was that Obama was merely acknowledging a willingness to meet.
But “if we are going to isolate the Venezuelans, it may be that we have to engage in a full-on diplomatic strategy with them,” the adviser says. Obama was not saying he, himself, would propose such a meeting, nor that he would necessarily participate in that meeting. When Obama referred to “my talks with President Hugo Chavez,” he did not mean “my talks,” literally (necessarily) — he meant his administration’s talks — “though it could be him engaging in this diplomacy directly and personally,” the adviser says. The point is, all the tools need to be in the diplomacy kit — isolation, willingness to hold presidential meetings, and everything in between.
Got it?
Yeah, I think we got it and it explains why that letter was found on the laptop. Obama gets into the White House Venezuela and the terrorists will in fact be sitting pretty.
He wants to talk with Iran without preconditions. He wants to talk with another terrorist sponsor in Venezuela without preconditions. Basically it comes down to replacing cowboy diplomacy with appeasement diplomacy.
These terrorists must be shaking in their boots.
Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: “Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.” We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.
-President George W. Bush
See author page
Curt,
Don’t forget Congresscritter James McGovern – Dim – Massachusetts and his ties to FARC.
That was in the news briefly a couple of weeks ago. Interpol was investigating.
I don’t have time to find the links to the stories now but will do it later on.
Here’s the link.
online.wsj.com/article/SB120640555842961083.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Gateway Pundit has a pretty good synopsis and prior articles/posts:
gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/03/busted-democratic-point-man-on-colombia.html
There are other stories out there as well.
One does have to say, His Messiahship is certainly racking up an impressive list of foreign fans… impressive if you’re of a terrorist mentality, that is.
He recently got Castro’s blessing.
Maybe Cuba is going to be one of the 57 states on Obama’s flag??
Trust Fund Revolutionaries for Obama!
Has anyone ever heard of a terrorist who is opposed to Obama?
“Has anyone ever heard of a terrorist who is opposed to Obama?”
Yes, I think most of us have heard of George W. Bush.
David Blomstrom
Candidate for Public Office
& Webmaster of http://www.viva-chavez.com
*comment removed by author*
From the David Blomstrom website:
“In fact, Chávez is a far better leader and friend than his arch enemy, George W. Bush. After all, no world leader has done more to stand up to Bush, who can truly be described as this generation’s Adolph Hitler”
I think thoughts like this might fare better being posted on a FARC blogsite, not here.
Every time I conclude that I have seen the furthest depths of intellectual emptiness someone comes along and moves the boundary line.
David’s absolutely correct. I mean, look at how happy and well-off the Venezuelan people are now. They enjoy the greatest freedom of any nation on the planet-freedom to assemble, freedom of speech, freedom from bills, freedom in every aspect.
Right?
LOL! OMG!
Scott Malenske wrote, “David’s absolutely correct. I mean, look at how happy and well-off the Venezuelan people are now. They enjoy the greatest freedom of any nation on the planet-freedom to assemble, freedom of speech, freedom from bills, freedom in every aspect.”
They also enjoy the freedom to VOTE, and they’ve chosen Hugo Chavez time and again. In fact, Chavez has a much higher public approval rating than your hero, George Dumbya Bush.
LOL
“They also enjoy the freedom to VOTE”
The Iraqi people also had that “freedom” under Saddam. Saddam was “chosen” over and over again as well.
So, what’s your point?
By the way, I just visited a couple of your websites and I have to say, in all honesty sir, you are definitely a glittering jewel.
You’re comparing Venezuela with IRAQ???
Well, then, here are a few points:
1. There were no fair elections in Iraq.
2. Saddam was supported by the U.S. (Donald Rumsfeld shook hands with Saddam Hussein, NOT Hugo Chavez.)
3. Saddam wasn’t really keen on holding corporations accountable or helping Iraq’s citizens through various social services.
4. Saddam wasn’t regarded as a hero around the world.
David,
Your bait and switch technique won’t work here.
You addressed Venezuelan people’s right to vote.
So did I.
So, again, what’s your point?
Nice try, but you’re the master baiter.
And my point is perfectly obvious.
Thanks David.
You’ve proven my point.
Typical Leftist troll.
No, I’m a candidate for public office who posts under his real name, not a closet Republican who calls himself “Aye Chihuahua.”
It’s amazing how lefties worship Chavez and demonize Bush. What if President Bush changed the constitution to allow him to stay in office for an indefinite term without facing re-election?
What would they say if he passed a law that made it a crime to insult him?
How would they react if he summarily fired workers who opposed his policies, wiretapped, then broadcast their phone calls on television, ordered troops to shoot protestors, closed down radio and television stations?
What would their reaction be if President Bush refused to provide funds to state governments controlled by Democrats?
They would go absolutely bonking crazier than they are already! Yet, these same lovers of freedom embrace Hugo Chavez, the dictator of Venezuela, who has done all that and more.
It’s called Democracy Marxist Style and lefty losers love it.
uM … forgive my limited political depth, but Mr. Blomstrom, how do you feel about what the post was about? Do you feel that Mr. Chavez’s affiliation with FARC is acceptable, as you feel his elections are legit? Are you concerned that kidnappers and drug runners in the S. American jungle want Obama in? Do you feel this is a vast conspiracy?
… also, please forgive my lack of interest in your political aspirations, I can’t get past calling your political adversaries terrorists, or using phrases like master baiter to even care what your website says. Though I have already labelled myself in your world, that goes for all politicians, as I am a staunch moderate.
Mikes’ America (presumably not his real name) wrote, “It’s amazing how lefties worship Chavez and demonize Bush. What if President Bush changed the constitution to allow him to stay in office for an indefinite term without facing re-election?”
That would be terrible – but what’s your point? Venezuela has made no such change to its constitution. A bill that would have allowed Hugo Chavez to RUN FOR OFFICE again was submitted to the voters, who narrowly rejected it. Some dictatorship, eh?
“They would go absolutely bonking crazier than they are already! Yet, these same lovers of freedom embrace Hugo Chavez, the dictator of Venezuela, who has done all that and more.”
You BET he’s done more. Chavez has held Exxon accountable. That’s the corrupt corporation whose profiteering execs are getting richer while the cost of gas goes up, up, up.
Fester (now THERE’S a rael name!) wrote, “uM … forgive my limited political depth, but Mr. Blomstrom, how do you feel about what the post was about? Do you feel that Mr. Chavez’s affiliation with FARC is acceptable, as you feel his elections are legit?”
His elections were more legit than George Bush’s. But WHAT affiliation with FARC are you talking about? Colombia illegally invades another nation, murdering a couple dozen people, then the assassins claim they found a magic laptop computer that just happens to have files incriminating a man their puppetmaster hates. Yeah, that’s some evidence.
“Are you concerned that kidnappers and drug runners in the S. American jungle want Obama in?”
Are you considered that Elvis Presley might return to Earth and steal the election? Seriously, you need to get your fantasies under control.
“Do you feel this is a vast conspiracy?”
Absolutely, an army of media whores have conspired to brainwash one of the most stupid population’s on Earth, and right-wingers are their easiest targets.
“I can’t get past calling your political adversaries terrorists…”
Uh, you more or less referred to Hugo Chavez as a terrorist, yet you start sobbing when I label a man who has murdered tens of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan – and is the biggest champion of torture on the planet to boot – a terrorist???
H-Y-P-O-C-R-I-T-E
yeah – got it ! thanks!
1. Pick what you want to believe in, ignore all the rest of the facts.
2. Berate those that don’t agree with you.
3. Any facts to blaringly obvoius to just ignore are just another conspiracy.
yup – you really put me in my place!
thanks again!
To Mike and the rest of the staff at Flopping Aces:
Though your right-leanedness is a bit extreme to my liking sometimes, your site remains open to adverse opinions. When opposing viewpoints open with a salvo of insults, I tend to believe your statements have credence. Keep up the good work, and keep the blog postings open to everyone, regardless! It is a good thing to know what everyone thinks.
Regards,
Fester
(not my real name – like I want THOSE undemocratic thugs to know who I am! Ain’t livin’ in America great?)
You gotta admit we’re one heckuva country that so tolerates even the likes of Blomstrom to live, work and speak his mind. But putting the man in perspective, even slightly-to-the-right-of-Berkeley, Seattle, found him too radical even for them… losing his bid for Seattle school board district 3 … 72% to his 27%. Considering this is his sixth bid for a public office, I would guess that his reception in the area isn’t improving. I had to laugh at The Stranger’s comment on that race.
Go no.. there is hope for Seattle afterall.
What boggles the mind is why bother to run for office and try to ram his unwelcome changes down the majority of Americans, when he can move right to his Marxist utopia, Venezuela? Surely such a loyal constituent will never feel Chavez’s corruption. He will, instead, be among the select whom will benefit.
Ah yes… the dubious “equality” of Marxism. I’d have to say that you, Mr. Blomstrom, and your new political party (with a membership of one, perhaps?) are free to disagree in this country all you wish. But I wouldn’t give that a try in Venezuela. I suggest a great relocation company for you. I’m sure you can find suitable digs where your “mentally ill” notions are both shared, and welcomed.
Oh man….classic. Explains plenty.