2005-08-05 - 4:21 p.m.
BUSH GETS A LECTURE FROM URIBE
By Peter Fredson
August 5, 2005
NEWS ITEM:
“COLOMBIA'S PRESIDENT MEETS BUSH
“U.S. President Bush met with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe Velez at the Bush ranch near Crawford, Texas on Thursday, August 4, 2005.”
“President Uribe expressed appreciation for U.S. support in fighting drug trafficking and insurgency in his country. He said he hopes the two countries will soon conclude talks aimed at creating a bilateral free trade agreement to bolster growth and prosperity in his nation. Asked about human rights, the Colombian president said the struggle against violence and insecurity in his nation must be founded on respect for human rights.”
“He said Colombia's security policy must be sustainable and that for it to be sustainable there must be respect for public opinion and transparency in regard to human rights.”
We agree with President Uribe about respect for public opinion and transparency in regard to human rights.
It is unfortunate that he was speaking in the presence of someone who has absolutely no respect for public opinion but loads his interviews with fake journalists to ask him innocuous questions, and has pre-selected audiences which will never include any dissenting opinion, and has shown many times that he will go to great lengths to curtail dissent in any form.
As far as human rights are concerned, I can only point to the great pain and suffering Bush and Ashcroft, et al, caused by their disregard of human rights because Emperor Bush believes that he is above the law and does not need warrants to arrest people, or submit to any irritating provisions like trials, evidence, lawlike procedures, etc. He has a Big Brother approach to democracy, by which no American has any right to privacy at any time.
President Uribe also said:
"So that Colombians can gain trust in their homeland, we are working on five elements of a modern democracy. Number one is democratic security: security for all citizens, security for pluralism, security for all ideas and for all citizens."
"The second element is respect for public freedom. In Colombia we've had a dictatorship of terrorism, but the people, the government, and the nation of Colombia that are fighting terrorism will do so by respecting public freedom. They want to serve as an example, because that's the difference between what has happened in our country and in other Latin American countries, where it was government dictatorships. Here we have a democratic government that has full respect for public freedom and that fully intends to defeat terrorism."
"The third element is to build social cohesion, which is necessary in order to have sustainable democracy and a sustainable security policy. The election of Ambassador Moreno, as President of the IDB represents a great opportunity for our continent. It represents a new hope for us to combat poverty, and to build social cohesion.
The fourth element is transparency."
"The fifth is respect for the independence of institutions. Transparency in public affairs, transparency in friendship, transparency in partnership and in agreement and in disagreement. Transparency is critical for modern democracies in order for the people to have trust in the government that guides them."
"The fifth element is respect for the independence of our institutions, which is important for the rule of law. This is critical for a modern democracy. Colombia deepens its respect for its independent institutions, especially now that we're combating -- in this moment of time, when we're combating terrorism."
"As far as our human rights. This was discussed with great seriousness and with great respect. Our security policy must be sustainable. In order for it to be sustainable, there must be respect for human rights and there must be transparency for the -- so that it can be respected by public opinion. The respect for human rights needs transparency. This is what we work for in Colombia every day.”
All of that was laudable. And it was definitely not “preaching to the choir.” Security of pluralism, ideas, and for all citizens is definitely NOT the Bushite way of governing. Only neo-con ideas are acceptable, security by scaring the hell out of citizens is the tactic, and for the benefit of only a few selected people is the Bushite operating policy.
Respect for public freedom is shown by riot squads, tear gas, stun guns, night sticks, rubber bullets, real bullets, grenades, fearsome shouting, busting open of doors, slamming people to the ground, and handcuffs.
Terrorism is to be defeated by ignoring laws, using abuse and torture, extreme violence, denigration of persons, and continued occupation and destruction of sovereign countries.
Social cohesion is a laugh for the Bushites. Petulant division is the order of the day. It’s their way or the poorhouse, their way or indefinite detention, their way or eminent domain, their way or unemployment, their way or a kick in the nuts.
Transparency is something the Bushites never heard of. For them the approach is secrecy, sneak attacks, hidden agendas, cronyism, creative corruption, spying on one’s neighbors, fortress atmosphere, sealed documents, stalling tactics, bullying and railroading, midnight attacks, and similar scoundrel actions designed to hide vile actions from view.
Independence of institutions is a major laugh.
The True Believers and Corporate conspirators have completely suborned the Republican Party, Congress has become a kind of extension of the Oval Office, the Oval Office has become a kind of Christian Chapel with approved prayers and symbols, and the system of justice will do whatever the Neocons want it to do, with True Believer litmus tests obligatory and stealth at an optimum. Imperial fascism in on its way.
So my view of the meeting between Uribe and Bush is that Uribe may have been trying to teach a lesson in democracy to Bush, or was being either ironic or sarcastic in his itemization of democratic ideas and institutions.
I imagine that all of it went over Bush’s head, or perhaps Bush simply ignored the lesson as reflecting some smaller nation’s idiosyncratic views, not worthy of any notice.
