EHM and the Assassination of Presidents Roldós and Torrijos in South America

  • News
  • Thread starter Burnsys
  • Start date
In summary: The American Servicemembers Protection Act of 2002 is a new law that authorizes the use of military force to liberate any American or citizen of a U.S.-allied country being held by the ICC. This provision, dubbed the "Hague invasion clause," has caused a strong reaction from U.S. allies around the world, particularly in the Latin American region. Many argue that this law is a blatant attempt by the Bush administration to intimidate countries that ratify the treaty for the ICC and dissuade them from doing so in the future. As of now, only three countries have ratified the treaty: Argentina, Romania, and the United Kingdom.
  • #36
More Pictures

Statues.jpg Leyends:

Profits are privatized, lossings are socialized.


Statues2.jpg Leyends:

75% of world commers are managed by the most whealt countrys

In 3 years bush spent more in weapons that the world spent in 1 year in education

Mr bush, we won't allow your "Bush" to grow in our land.
 

Attachments

  • McDonalds.jpg
    McDonalds.jpg
    64.5 KB · Views: 401
  • Statues.jpg
    Statues.jpg
    73.8 KB · Views: 442
  • Statues2.jpg
    Statues2.jpg
    48.7 KB · Views: 376
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
Anttech said:
Whats he doing there anyway?
Good question.
Deadlock over free trade at Americas summit
Associated Press
Nov. 5, 2005

MAR DEL PLATA, Argentina - Leaders from across the Americas, wrapping up a two-day summit overshadowed by rampaging protesters, faced a deadlock Saturday over the future of a U.S.-backed free trade zone spanning the Western Hemisphere.
----------
Protests have become commonplace at summits, especially those dealing with free trade and U.S. policies. But Friday’s violence was much smaller than massive clashes in 2001 during the Americas Summit in Quebec, when police detained 400 people and scores were injured.
----------
Free trade dominates summit
Summit participants were expected to include language in their final declaration about the FTAA, but appeared set to fail to include an April date to restart high-level talks wanted by 29 of the 34 Latin American and Caribbean nations holding the event.

The declaration also was expected to address key issues for Latin America — including job creation, immigration and disaster relief for an area that is often devastated by hurricanes and earthquakes.

But the battle over the future of the FTAA dominated the summit. Fox said the 29 countries want a version adopted that sets the April dateline for negotiations, but the dissenters were holding out for language that mentions no date and says “conditions are not right” for an FTAA because key issues like agricultural subsidies for American farmers have not been addressed. The declaration must be approved by all member nations.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9904968/

The underlined reports seems contradictory to me. Anyway, the question is, if the FTAA is such a wonderful thing for Latin America, why are many of these countries against it?
 
  • #39
Quote; 'In addition, the law provides for the withdrawal of U.S. military assistance from countries ratifying the ICC treaty'

Perhaps Iraq should ratify the ICC treaty!

Bush came to Scotland with the other 7 godfathers of capitalism in July for the G8 summit. I was there venting my displeasure.
 
  • #40
Bush came to Scotland with the other 7 godfathers of capitalism in July for the G8 summit. I was there venting my displeasure.
My Parents house had sniffer dogs round etc etc due to the close proximity of Prestwick airport... Not even Elvis got that treatment :wink:
 
  • #41
Anttech said:
My Parents house had sniffer dogs round etc etc due to the close proximity of Prestwick airport... Not even Elvis got that treatment :wink:

Yes that's true, but given the chance most of the world population would want to have hugged and kissed Elvis on his short and only visit to the UK.
I am pretty confident that would not be the case concerning George Bush.
 
  • #42
Burnsys said:
https://www.citizen.org/documents/FTAA_pamphlet.pdf
There was a thread on EHM last year, which made me think of the book "Conscience of an Economic Hit Men" by John Perkins.

Perkins writes, "The book was to be dedicated to the presidents of two countries, men who had been his clients whom I respected and thought of as kindred spirits - Jaime Roldós, president of Ecuador, and Omar Torrijos, president of Panama. Both had just died in fiery crashes. Their deaths were not accidental. They were assassinated because they opposed that fraternity of corporate, government, and banking heads whose goal is global empire. We Economic Hit Men failed to bring Roldós and Torrijos around, and the other type of hit men, the CIA-sanctioned jackals who were always right behind us, stepped in.

John Perkins goes on to write: "I was persuaded to stop writing that book. I started it four more times during the next twenty years. On each occasion, my decision to begin again was influenced by current world events: the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1980, the first Gulf War, Somalia, and the rise of Osama bin Laden. However, threats or bribes always convinced me to stop."

I would be interested to know what members from South America think of these claims.
 

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top