PDA

View Full Version : Interesting things happening in Colombia. Court says no to US bases



Magda Hassan
08-12-2010, 02:04 AM
Interesting things are happening in Colombia. Alvarez allowed an almost complete free reign of the US militarily within Colombia before leaving office by giving them carte blanche to several bases and freedom from prosecution for practically anything. Lots of on going saber rattling and incursions into Venezuela by the Colombian (and probably US) military resulting in the breaking of diplomatic ties between the two countries. Venzuelan president Chavez decided last week to meet personally with the new Colombian President in Colombia and have a chat macho a macho and all. And they found they actually agreed a lot on many issues. Now the majority of judges sitting on the Colombian constitutional court is saying that the agreement for the US bases is against the Colombian constitution - null and void.

http://www.lasillavacia.com/historia/17303

Wowsers! Colombia's airbase agreement with the USA may about to be voted inconstitutional by Colombia (http://incakolanews.blogspot.com/2010/08/wowsers-colombias-airbase-agreement.html)


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_7Se7iswAanA/TGLI5j97m9I/AAAAAAAAMUE/OQdxRLlED7w/s200/constitutional_court_colombia.jpg (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_7Se7iswAanA/TGLI5j97m9I/AAAAAAAAMUE/OQdxRLlED7w/s1600/constitutional_court_colombia.jpg)Colombia's Constitutional Court dudettes and dudes



If this happens, a very interesting turn of events is on the way. Colombia's interwebnetpipes site "La Silla Vacía", known for its insight and good contacts, today reports (http://www.lasillavacia.com/historia/17303) that Colombia's Constitutional Court is likely to throw out the USA/Colombia airebase agreement that allows the US to use Colombia as its own personal aircraft carrier. Here's the first paragraph of the Silla Vacia report translated, click through for the rest:


Yesterday for several hours, the meeting of the Constitutional Court debated the agreement that allows gringo military the use of seven military and concluded the session without coming to a decision. Today they meet again. Although the input of two of the judges is still needed, three different sources told La Silla Vacía that there is a clear majority to vote down the agreement between Colombia and The United States. Continues here. (http://www.lasillavacia.com/historia/17303)http://incakolanews.blogspot.com/2010/08/wowsers-colombias-airbase-agreement.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+IncaKolaNews+%28inca+kola+new s%29
Interesting times indeed. Stay tuned.....

Jan Klimkowski
08-12-2010, 05:24 PM
the Constitutional Court debated the agreement that allows gringo military the use of seven military

Gringo military? :D

I'll believe a ban on American use of military bases in Columbia when I see it.

Supreme Court Judges usually get to such elevated heights because they are either "owned" or "persuadable" - whether through bribes or blackmail...

Keith Millea
08-12-2010, 05:49 PM
Isn't trusting the new President of Columbia(Uribes secretary of defense)sorta like trusting Robert Gates or Donald Rumsfeld?And what would happen to all those BILLIONS we give Columbia if they said to us adios?Like Jan,I'll believe it when I see it......

Magda Hassan
08-12-2010, 11:51 PM
Yep. Not holding my breath either but it is amazing even to see this sort of theatre going on in such a place as Colombia. No doubt there is much going on behind the scene to remind some people there of their obligations to serve US interests :call:. If not we can look forward to some spectacular kidnappings and other false flags all done by FARC guerrillas of course. Or at least people dressed as them.

Magda Hassan
08-14-2010, 01:36 AM
Colombia offers $260K reward in Bogota car bombing
(AP) – 6 hours ago
BOGOTA, Colombia — Colombia has offered a 500 million peso ($260,000) reward for information leading to those responsible for a car bomb that injured nine people.
President Juan Manuel Santos says authorities are still investigating who may have placed the bomb and what the target was.
Santos said Friday that while the government does not rule out peace talks with illegal armed groups, they will not happen as long as terrorist attacks continue.
He called them "the last bites of a dying dog."
Thursday's blast was the first car bomb in the capital, Bogota, since January 2009.
Some 110 pounds (50 kilograms) of explosives shattered windows in at least 30 buildings and smashed the facade of a bank.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hB4P7UUGsLNmFp0oUyksHevzz02wD9HIP9A00

Keith Millea
08-18-2010, 05:35 PM
This is still not a done deal.The ruling means that the Columbian Congress must vote on the pact.I don't know about the makeup of the Congress,but I bet mucho denaros will be floating around to corrupt the process.Buisness as usual.....

Published on Wednesday, August 18, 2010 by Agence France-Presse (http://www.afp.com/) Court says US-Colombia Base Deal Unconstitutional


BOGOTA – Colombia's constitutional court Tuesday declared a US-Colombian accord that gave the US military access to at least seven Colombian bases to be unconstitutional.


http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/court-says-us-colombia-base-deal-unconstitutional.jpgBogota and Washington last October signed a military pact that allows US troops to use Colombian bases, drawing fierce criticism from many Latin American governments who called it an affront to Colombian and Latin American sovereignty. A Colombian now court says US-Colombia base deal was unconstitutional. (AFP)
The court ordered the government to submit the agreement to the Colombian Congress, arguing that it should be executed in the form of an international treaty that would be subject to congressional approval in order to comply with constitutional norms.

The court did not address whether the agreement itself was appropriate.
The agreement "is an arrangement which requires the state to take on new obligations as well as an extension of previous ones and as such should be handled as an international treaty, that is, subject to congressional approval," said the court's chief justice Mauricio Gonzalez.

The court decided in March to review the agreement after a group of lawyers filed a complaint arguing it was unconstitutional.
The lawsuit claimed the October 2009 military accord was invalid because it was signed by the government of President Alvaro Uribe without prior discussion in Congress, as mandated by the constitution.

The military pact, part of a joint effort to counter drug trafficking and insurgencies, has been denounced by neighboring Venezuela as US interference in the region, raising tensions between Bogota and Caracas.
Opponents also accuse Uribe of ignoring the advice of the State Council -- the highest court on administrative matters -- which also urged that the congress take up the agreement before it was signed.

The Uribe administration deemed the State Council's opinion non binding, and said the accord was not new but merely an extension of a 1974 military pact with the United States, and as such required no legislative oversight, government officials said.

Bogota and Washington last October signed a military pact that allows US troops to use Colombian bases, drawing fierce criticism from many Latin American governments who called it an affront to Colombian and Latin American sovereignty.

In a region in which the United States historically has been the power player, its partners still are keen to stress that they are not being dominated.
The United States since 2000 has channeled more than six billion dollars to Colombia through its Plan Colombia initiative to fight drug trafficking and insurgencies.


© 2010 Agence France-Presse

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/08/18-0

Magda Hassan
08-20-2010, 06:38 AM
Source: Colombia Reports (http://colombiareports.com/)
U.S. State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said Wednesday (http://www.abc.es/agencias/noticia.asp?noticia=489586) that Washington hopes Bogota "takes the necessary steps to preserve the bilateral military agreement," and that in the meantime cooperation will continue under pre-existing agreements.

Colombia's Constitutional Court (http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/11386-us-military-pact-unconstitutional-without-congress-approval-court.html) on Tuesday suspended the deal, ruling that it is unconstitutional until ratified by Congress.

"We will consult with the Colombian government, we understand the issues that this legal matter involves and we hope that the Santos government takes appropriate measures to guarantee that we can maintain our bilateral relationship," Crowley continued.

"Executive or legislative actions may exist that could overcome doubts" expressed by the court, and "these are the types of questions that we are asking the Colombian government in order to understand what they plan to do," Crowley said.

In the meantime "our close cooperation with Colombia will continue under previously existing agreements," State Department spokesman Charles Luoma-Overstreet told AFP.

Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos backed (http://elespectador.com/articulo-219735-santos-dice-cooperacion-eeuu-no-se-va-suspender) a statement made by his Defense Minister Rodrigo Rivera earlier Wednesday, saying that his government will abide by the court's ruling. (my bolding)

Santos said his government will study the agreement and will "decide if it is worth continuing with the pact or not."

By law, if the pact is to be ratified by the Andean nation's Congress, then it must also be ratified by U.S. Congress.

Former commander of the Colombian armed forces General Freddy Padilla said Wednesday (http://colombiareports.com/colombia-news/news/11394-padilla-us-congress-will-block-bases-treaty.html) that he doesn't think U.S. Congress will ratify the pact "due to their foreign policy circumstances."

According to Constitutional Court President Mauricio Gonzalez Cuervo, details such as "access points and the use of air bases, free movement within these installations, the freedom to carry arms, among other things" led the court to decide that the agreement was not simply an extension of previous treaties.

The controversial pact, which granted the U.S. access to at least seven Colombian military bases and civilian airports, was signed by U.S. President Barack Obama and former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe in August 2009, but was never approved by the country's Congress. According to Uribe, the pact was a continuation of existing policy and did not need congressional approval.

The agreement caused tensions in the region, as neighbors Ecuador and Venezuela consider U.S. military presence in Colombia a threat to their sovereignty.

The pact was also controversial within Colombia, with leftist opposition party Polo Democratico labelling the pact a violation of Colombian independence and sovereignty.
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/news-briefs-archives-68/2653-us-colombia-must-defend-military-pact-

Jan Klimkowski
08-20-2010, 05:02 PM
Language language....

My emphasis in bold:


U.S. State Department spokesman Philip Crowley said Wednesday that Washington hopes Bogota "takes the necessary steps to preserve the bilateral military agreement," and that in the meantime cooperation will continue under pre-existing agreements.

Bilateral definition:
1. Having or formed of two sides; two-sided.
2. Affecting or undertaken by two sides equally; binding on both parties:

Does this bilateral agreement mean that the Colombian military has "access points and the use of air bases, free movement within these installations, the freedom to carry arms, among other things" in military and civilian airports in mainland USA?

Nah - thought not. :creep:

Magda Hassan
08-20-2010, 09:25 PM
All the US bilateral agreements throughout the world are that the US gets to do what ever it wants and the other country gets to allow the US to do what ever it wants. That's more than fair and balanced. No? :dontknow:
Just like our 'joint' facilities here. They get to run them any way they like and we get to look at them from the outside. From a distance.

Ed Jewett
08-21-2010, 01:29 AM
It's an old tried-and-true principle. The Prez and the CIA lie to Congress and blackmail a couple of key committee members and then say "Congress was informed" and then Congress gets to charge some dried-up ballplayer for obstruction and perjury to prove to the American people that its oversight and accountability roles are being taken seriously. :deal:

Magda Hassan
11-03-2010, 07:39 AM
Colombian police raid drug assets office

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/49762000/jpg/_49762949_cashbetterpic.jpg The agency controls thousands of assets seized from the drugs trade, ranging from cash to property

(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11680522#story_continues_1)
Police in Colombia have raided the offices of the government body which controls assets seized from drug traffickers.
Officials said serious anomalies had emerged in the agency's book-keeping.
The government has taken control of the National Narcotics Office while the allegations are being investigated.
Police became suspicious after drug traffickers were found to be in possession of properties which had officially been seized by the agency.
Colombian Minister of Justice German Vargas Lleras said he had ordered the intervention after "hundreds of irregularities and many serious anomalies" had surfaced at the National Narcotics Office.
The government announced the contracts of 100 employees would not be renewed, and all remaining employees would come under close scrutiny.
'Not in order' National Narcotics Office director Juan Carlos Restrepo said he would turn the agency "into a goldfish bowl with total accountability".
Mr Restrepo took over the leadership of the agency in September.
His predecessor, Omar Figueroa, was asked to resign from his post after it was found that the person put in charge of managing the property seized from an infamous drug dealer had links to the dealer's cartel.
Mr Restrepo said that the officers who raided the National Narcotics Office had found evidence that its accounting system had been tampered with.
"There are indications that lead me to believe that the agency's inventory is not in order," he said.
But, he said, Tuesday's raid would be the start of a new era for the agency, which in future would become known for its transparency and accountability.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-11680522

David Guyatt
11-03-2010, 09:26 AM
Is the NNC the Colombian arm of the DEA?

(not a serious question :y:)