|
|
| House Rejects Bush Request on Colombia |
|
Posted by FoM on July 25, 2001 at 21:27:29 PT By Karen DeYoung, Washington Post Staff Writer Source: Washington Post 
The House last night rejected a White House request to allow unlimited numbers of American civilians to work under contract on U.S. military and other aid operations in Colombia, reflecting rising congressional concern over the deteriorating situation in that country and fears of expanded U.S. involvement.The House move came during floor debate on the Bush administration's $15.2 billion foreign aid bill, which includes $676 million in military, social and economic assistance to Colombia and six other countries in the Andean region. The Andean aid -- which emerged from committee at $55 million less than President Bush requested -- is the successor to last year's $1.3 billion Plan Colombia, the military-dominated U.S. anti-drug program. After 12 hours of debate, the overall aid bill was approved 381 to 46, the sixth of 13 appropriations bills passed thus far by the House for fiscal 2002, which starts Oct. 1. Although Plan Colombia passed as an emergency measure last year with strong bipartisan support, legislators hedged their bets against escalating U.S. involvement by capping at 500 the number of U.S. military personnel in Colombia and limiting the number of civilian contractors -- some of whose missions include flying aircraft into combat areas and aerial fumigation of drug crops in rebel-held zones -- to 300. Bush's Andean plan included a provision to eliminate the civilian cap. Instead, the House last night voted to retain a cap of 800 combined U.S. military and contractor personnel. The House voted to let the limit of 300 civilians be waived if the president certifies the total has not exceeded 800 and informs Congress whenever -- and by how many -- the number of civilians exceeds 300. The measure was a compromise reached between the bill's floor manager, Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.), who heads the Appropriations subcommittee on foreign operations, and those who wanted to retain the absolute limit of 300, led by Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.). The fact that the amendment passed quickly by voice vote, with virtually no debate, illustrated growing concern over the U.S. mission in Colombia. "Last year," Conyers said, "Congress assured the public that we would not be getting into Colombia's 37-year-old civil war, and there would be no mission creep." The administration's proposal, he suggested, would at the very least give rise to suspicion. The administration won a victory as two amendments were defeated that would have transferred a significant portion of the Andean funds into global health programs. Any cut, Rep. Cass Ballenger (R-N.C.) argued, would be "wrongheaded, dangerous and could jeopardize the future of the democracies in the Andes, as well as the lives of American children." But with few exceptions, even the strongest defenders of staying the military course in Colombia offered little testament to its success so far in stemming either the export of Colombian cocaine, which has a 90 percent share of the U.S. market, or the extent of human rights abuses there. Instead, they argued that the United States could not "surrender" the drug war by retreating just because success has been slow in coming. "There is no other alternative but to help Colombia," said Rep. Benjamin A. Gilman (R-N.Y.), one of the strongest defenders of aid to the Colombian national police. "We must work with them to try and improve their human rights" performance, he said of the Colombian military. Rep. Mark Edward Souder (R-Ind.), another ardent backer of the program, offered a muted defense of a U.S.-sponsored aerial fumigation program that sprays chemicals on Colombian drug crops, which also came under an attack led largely by Democrats. "It's a tough issue," Souder said. "Nobody wants to have children or families damaged" by chemical contaminants, he said. "It's important, though, that we do understand this is not Agent Orange," the defoliant used by U.S. forces in Vietnam. After listening to fumigation supporters, Conyers withdrew an amendment to stop the spraying program. Overall, debate on the foreign aid bill was far less contentious than in the past, when the Clinton administration and the Republican leadership battled over foreign spending -- and family planning aid in particular. The Bush administration's overall request, which includes economic and military aid to Israel, Egypt and Jordan, $474 million for international programs to fight HIV and AIDS, and half of the $200 million U.S. contribution to the global AIDS fund, comprises a 2 percent increase over last year's aid and emerged from the appropriations process largely intact. But most of yesterday's discussion centered on Colombia and what the administration calls its Andean Counterdrug Initiative. The bulk of the assistance in last year's Plan Colombia was earmarked for helicopters to give the Colombian military a rapid mobility capability to combat left-wing guerrillas and right-wing paramilitary forces in major drug cultivation areas. Along with the fumigation program, the aid also included alternative development funds to help Colombian farmers switch to non-drug crops, assistance to human rights groups and funds for judicial reform. But in the year since Plan Colombia was approved, there has been little apparent improvement in the problems it was supposed to address. Although about 123,000 acres of coca plants, the raw material of cocaine, have been fumigated under Plan Colombia, cultivation increased by 11 percent last year, and the U.S. goal this year is to keep it from increasing further. Most of the helicopters will not begin to arrive until later this year, and the human rights situation is arguably worse. Alternative development and judicial reform programs have been slow to get off the ground, with only about 5 percent of Plan Colombia's appropriated funds spent. Countries bordering Colombia have complained loudly that guerrillas, paramilitaries and coca cultivation are spilling over their borders and have demanded U.S. assistance. The administration's Andean plan attempts to address at least some of these concerns by allotting slightly less than half of the funds to Colombia, divided evenly between military aid on the one hand, and social and development aid on the other. The balance of the funds go to Ecuador, Bolivia and Peru, with smaller amounts for Brazil, Panama and Ecuador. Attention focused on civilian contractors after an American missionary and her infant were killed in April. U.S. contract employees working on a surveillance mission for the CIA targeted their civilian plane as a suspected drug flight and watched as the Peruvian Air Force shot it down. The limit on U.S. personnel in the Andean bill applies only to Colombia, where U.S. officials said they averaged about 180 contracted civilians and 200 military personnel last spring. The officials estimated the 300-civilian ceiling would be reached by December and that 500 contractor personnel would be needed next year. Note: Compromise on Personnel Limits Reflects Hill's Growing Concern Over Expanded U.S. Involvement. Related Articles & Web Site: Colombia Drug War News US Official: More Drugs in Colombia Drug Farmers Seek Alternatives House Vote Saves Colombian Anti-Drug Funds Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #13 posted by Doug on July 26, 2001 at 10:01:44 PT |
| I've long shed the illusion that we live in a democracy; there was a coup on July 26, 1947 when the National Security State took over, and they've been running things ever since, first with the Cold War, and now the War on Drugs. Their policy all along, as George Keenan said, was to keep us in fear and then we will follow them anyplace. This is documentaed in many books, but the most popular presentation is in various writings of Gore Vidal. The link below indicates one of them. Just voting does not make a democracy, and the previous election shows us that even voting has become pretty meaningless. As the saying goes, "If voting made any difference, it would be against the law". [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #12 posted by kaptinemo on July 26, 2001 at 07:29:14 PT:
|
| Friends, after the first bold italics of the last post, it was supposed to return to normal script, but I goofed with the HTML tags, again. But the point is the same; this should be shouted from the rooftops. These ignorant pols are, with all the fervor of zealots, poisoning one of the most important spots on this planet; I've heard the analogy of: if the earth is a living body, the rainforests are the lungs. Ask any unfortunate b*****d with emphysema how hard it is to breathe, and what it's like to struggle for a breath, and you get the idea. We got enough problems with polluted air; my old man has asthma and spends most of his time indoors to keep from having an attack. Which close contact with diesel fumes can initiate. The last thing we need is to reduce the oxy content of the atmosphere through poisoned terrestrial 'lungs'. That, and I know from my days in the Chemical Corps just how nasty and destructive organo-phosphates can be. That scheisse stays in the ecosystem for years as it is not truly biodegradable. That's why they were called 'persistant agents'; they hang around...and around...and around. And with this CosmoFlux being added to it...well, they admit that no trial studies have been published about the synergistic effects of Roundup + Cosmoflux on native flora. (Note: I said published; I bet somebody, somewhere does have the answer, but is keeping mum about it. It's what I call the 'clerk theory of history'. Somebody somewhere has the major pieces to the puzzle, but they're buried in a file cabinet, sort of like the very last frames of the first Indiana Jones movie.) This is the same kind of thing that comes back to haunt us 10, 20, 30 years down the road, when a new generation has to clean up the mess left by the previous one...and all unnecessarily. Because knowledge of the destructive nature of the actions performed is usually available after a little digging. By this stupid, unforgivable headlong rush to poison an vitally important area (suposedly for the benefit of saving America's Chil-drun from alkaline nose candy) we may condemn those same children to a nightmarish future where air quality is so poor, outdoor burning of combustibles might merit a death sentence. And everyone will have to carry portable chemical analyzers, so that any residual pesticides from poisoned crops can be detected in foods before they cause the already dangerous accumulations in everyone's cells to reach ultimate toxicity. Not the kind of future I'd wish on anybody, not even antis. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #11 posted by boppy on July 26, 2001 at 07:00:53 PT |
| As an Indiana resident, Mark Souder is our latest embarrassment. Dan Burton and Dan Quayle are tough acts to follow but he manages to do it very well. Please, pay no attention to that man behind the curtain... [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by dddd on July 26, 2001 at 06:54:07 PT |
| ...but I dont think that the "The American people are just sitting around and watching their country turn to Dictatorship. ",,is the only thing,,I think that the American people are being heavily manipulated by an empire of media propaganda,and most people are unaware of what is actually going on,,because the mainstream media is diverting their attention from the reality of the situation..... I know I'm always harping on this issue,,,but make no mistake about it,,,the biggest threat to our dying democracy,is the manipulation of the "news". dddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #9 posted by The Offspring on July 26, 2001 at 06:36:50 PT |
| I think Democracy is dieing. I hate to say it but I think it is. The American people are just sitting around and watching their country turn to Dictatorship. I was hoping on July 4 that some people would wake up and remember that this country was founded on freedom. Americans are losing their freedom slowly overtime but it is coming. I just hope people wake up and look whats going on. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #8 posted by dddd on July 26, 2001 at 06:18:57 PT |
| Dr. Nemo,,,am I correct in assuming that the all italics was unintentional? [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by dddd on July 26, 2001 at 06:10:26 PT |
| ...In case you miss with your new laser,,,I'll be there with my new Atomic Destructor Twelve Thousand hand held Bazooka, with Idiot,liar,and asshole seeking warheads..........I'm gettin' kinda mad about this whole charade. It's probably for the better that you didnt become a politician.. Guys like Conyers want to try and do something to appease what >"After listening to fumigation supporters, Conyers withdrew ...but if you're gonna play in the big leagues,,you learn to go
[ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #6 posted by kaptinemo on July 26, 2001 at 05:45:32 PT:
|
| ...One of the herbicides used was called Agent Orange (a 50/50 mixture of herbicides 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T), and it proved very effective. However, there was a problem: varying amounts of a breakdown product of the "dioxin" class called TCDD was part of the mixture. Later -- and far too late for many people -- TCDD was shown to have various, very serious toxic effects. According This was bad enough, but after the war it came to light that Monsanto had known about this toxicity many years before, as early as the late 1940s and had tried to cover it up. At that time, Monsanto workers had regularly become sick with symptoms such as skin rashes, joint and limb pain, after being exposed to 2,4,5-T, the specific Agent Orange component that breaks down to form TCDD. After the end of the war, U.S. Vietnam veterans sued Monsanto for causing their illnesses. The company settled out of court, paying them about $80 million in damages. The Vietnamese victims received nothing. Given this history, it is not surprising that neither U.S. officials nor Monsanto executives want a spotlight shone on the use of the company's products in Colombia, where many of the post-contact symptoms of those sprayed with Roundup are similar to those noted by the Monsanto employees in the 1940s and soldiers and civilians who were sprayed with Agent Orange in Vietnam. (Emphasis mine -k.) ... Last December, Dutch journalist Marjon Van Royen investigated the health reports on the ground in Colombia, and found that "because the chemical is sprayed in Colombia from planes on inhabited areas, there have been consistent health complaints [in humans]. Burning eyes, dizziness and respiratory problems being most frequently reported." ...Digging further, Van Royen found something alarming: another additive called Cosmo-Flux 411 F was being added to increase Roundup's toxicity. The Roundup/Cosmo-Flux mixture has never been scientifically evaluated nor has the public, either in the U.S., or in Colombia, been informed of this practice. (Emphasis mine, again -k.) Recently, Colombian biologist and chemist Dr. Elsa Nivia has shown that the enhancement of toxicity by theadditive could be responsible for the human health problems attributed to Roundup. In a talk at the University of California in Davis in May, Dr. Nivia said: "the [Roundup Ultra] mixture with the Cosmo Flux 411 F surfactant can increase the herbicide's biological action fourfold, producing relative exposure levels which are 104 times higher than the recommended doses for normal agricultural applications in the United States; doses which, according to the study mentioned, can intoxicate and even kill ruminants." (That's animals that chew their cuds, children, like cattle) The use of this enhanced Roundup would not be acceptable in the U.S. without prior testing and scientific evaluation. So, Souder, like all the DrugWar frips in Congress, is depending upon the corporate experts who peddle this scheisse that the stuff is safe. As if the corporate scientists were going to tell him otherwise. Just like the corporate scientists for Monsanto told the military Agent Orange was safe. Monsanto scientists must be required by regulation to carry pocket fire extinguishers in case their pants catch fire. Children, can you say, "Sucker!" Sure, you can! Souder must have it tattooed with ultraviolet ink on his forehead; you only see it if a 'black-light' is applied to it. But you don't need to see it; just listen to this guy and you know he's ignorant. Like I said, I love these guys; they make this soooo easy. [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #5 posted by kaptinemo on July 26, 2001 at 05:44:49 PT:
|
| But Souder is even worse; he's taken much deserved heat concerning his support of the HEA 'drug conviction, lose your loan' legislation, and the hairs on his bum have been righteously singed by angry former supporters of DARE whose kiddies have been denied a college education because of a possession bust. But he still hasn't learned: "Rep. Mark Edward Souder (R-Ind.), another ardent backer of the program, offered a muted defense of a U.S.-sponsored aerial fumigation program that sprays chemicals on Colombian drug crops, which also came under an attack led largely by Democrats. "It's a tough issue," Souder said. "Nobody wants to have children or families damaged" by chemical contaminants, he said. "It's important, though, that we do understand this is not Agent Orange," the defoliant used by U.S. forces in Vietnam. Opennnnn mouth! Inserrrrt foot! This fool just can't learn from his mistakes. Or from history. Please go to the following: From the following article: U.S. officials proudly point to the large number of hectares of coca and poppy eradicated as proof that the fumigation is successful. But they strongly discourage journalists from probing the effects of aerial spraying any further. Last January, during a meeting with U.S. Embassy staff in Bogotá, the top officer at the State Department's Narcotics Affairs Section was emphatic and his tone threatening: "You cannot mention Monsanto!" he boomed, spit flying from his mouth. CorpWatch was a little taken aback, but also very amused: Monsanto is a major part of the Colombia story, and there is no way to ignore it. Meanwhile, a State Department official in Washington recently told CorpWatch that the relationship between the U.S. Government and Monsanto "is proprietary information between us and our supplier. It's exempt from the FOIA requirements too, so I don't think you will be able to get it." Monsanto has been equally tight lipped. "We don't divulge information about who we sell our product to, or the size of the contract or anything like that, so I can't confirm that... I will not confirm that it is our product that is being used in Colombia, " says Janice Armstrong, Monsanto Public Affairs director for Roundup. U.S. officials proudly point to the large number of hectares of coca and poppy eradicated as proof that the fumigation is successful. But they strongly discourage journalists from probing the effects of aerial spraying any further. Last January, during a meeting with U.S. Embassy staff in Bogotá, the top officer at the State Department's Narcotics Affairs Section was emphatic and his tone threatening: "You cannot mention Monsanto!" he boomed, spit flying from his mouth. CorpWatch was a little taken aback, but also very amused: Monsanto is a major part of the Colombia story, and there is no way to ignore it. Meanwhile, a State Department official in Washington recently told CorpWatch that the relationship between the U.S. Government and Monsanto "is proprietary information between us and our supplier. It's exempt from the FOIA requirements too, so I don't think you will be able to get it." Monsanto has been equally tight lipped. "We don't divulge information about who we sell our product to, or the size of the contract or anything like that, so I can't confirm that... I will not confirm that it is our product that is being used in Colombia, " says Janice Armstrong, Monsanto Public Affairs director for Roundup. But, wait, there's more: Almost 70,000 gallons of Roundup have been sprayed in Colombia so far this year, according to calculations [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #4 posted by kaptinemo on July 26, 2001 at 05:29:23 PT:
|
| God, I love antis. I really do. 4D, scratch the turkey knives. And the chainsaws. And the Bush-hogs. I'm gettin' me a carbon-dioxide laser. I'm gonna need it after this: ""There is no other alternative but to help Colombia," said Rep. Benjamin A. Gilman (R-N.Y.), one of the strongest defenders of aid to the Colombian national police. "We must work with them to try and improve their human rights" performance, he said of the Colombian military. Yes, as we have 'helped' them to 'improve their human rights performance' in the past: I refer anyone who has not seen this in an earlier posting of mine to read the following: http://www.ciponline.org/colombia/082301.htm This is an official US document that rescinds earlier 'human rights' restrictions in prosecuting the War on Drugs in Colombia. In effect, it states that 'anything goes'. The Colombian Armed Forces and their paramilitary allies understood the import of this document immediately...and acted accordingly. The amount of slaughter on their part has risen markedly since the signing of this document by that staunch defender of human rights - and lying, adulterous intern-boinker - Bill Clinton. BTW, it was Gilman who said that the shootdown of Vicki and Chastity Bowers in April was acceptable 'collateral damage'. And what about their human rights? And this frip is going to be the champion of Colombian campesinos human rights? I'd sooner trust Dracula to guard the blood bank. (God, somedays I wish I had gone into politics, like my late mother used to say I should have. But I told her that telling the truth to this country seems to cause politicians to suffer sudden demises. Gilman and Mica and all the other DrugWarrior pols are living proof; they're still around, ergo they are flaming liars.) And now, Georgie Too's party wants to carry on a Democratic 'tradition?' Talk about 'strange bedfellows'. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #3 posted by dddd on July 26, 2001 at 03:23:46 PT |
| ..I've never lived in a "communist" country,but I have traveled in them years ago,.....Your comment hits the nail on the head! The label of "communist" is no longer necessary.The US government What we have now ,,is a government that is making decisions in It's a bizarre nightmare.......indeedddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #2 posted by E. Johnson on July 26, 2001 at 02:47:42 PT |
| But with few exceptions, even the strongest defenders of staying the military course in Colombia offered little testament to its success so far in stemming either the export of Colombian cocaine, which has a 90 percent share of the U.S. market, or the extent of human rights abuses there. Instead, they argued that the United States could not "surrender" the drug war by retreating just because success has been slow in coming. Anyone who has ever lived under Communism will recognize this typical speech in favor of increased vigilance to fulfill the next five year plan. Just because Communsim has been slow in coming, comrade, and left many lives overturned in the process... No, we shouldn't surrender just because success has been slow in coming. We should surrender because success has been slow in coming, AND because this mythical state of "success" will never arrive unless we perform feats of violently coerced social control that would leave Stalin himself breathless. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by dddd on July 26, 2001 at 00:13:46 PT |
| What a bunch of CRAP.......>"The Andean aid -- which emerged from committee at $55 million less than President Bush requested -.."< ..and what percent of 15.2 BILLION ,is 55 million?,(I'm too lazy to do the math), >"Instead, the House last night voted to retain a cap of 800 combined U.S. military and contractor personnel. The House voted to let the limit of 300 civilians be waived if the president certifies the total has not exceeded 800 and informs Congress whenever -- and by how many -- the number of civilians exceeds 300."< ..So,,in other words,all that has to happen is for the prez to tell congress how many All this "news release" is,is a fake-out to make it seem as if the issue has been dddd [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |