<a href=www.voanews.com>VOANews David Gollust Santiago 09 Jun 2003, 05:16 UTC  

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell is in the Chilean capital, Santiago, with other hemisphere foreign ministers for the annual Organization of American States General Assembly. Mr. Powell says he sees no lasting harm to U.S. relations with key Latin American states, stemming from disagreements over U.S. military action in Iraq.

Mr. Powell says the Bush administration was disappointed that Chile and Argentina did not support its effort to get a resolution in the U.N. Security Council, in March, authorizing U.S. military action in Iraq. However, he says he does not see any "lasting scars" or consequences from the episode and says the parties are anxious to talk about the future and not the past, as evidenced by Friday's conclusion of the long-awaited U.S.-Chile free-trade agreement.

In a talk with reporters on the flight to Santiago, Mr. Powell said the brief Latin America visit will allow for some overdue diplomatic "garden tending" with hemispheric countries, after weeks of U.S. policy focus on Iraq and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In additional to joining in the OAS plenaries, the secretary has bilateral meetings planned Monday with Chilean President Ricardo Lagos, OAS Secretary-General Cesar Gaviria, and his foreign minister counterparts from Chile, Brazil, Colombia and Peru.

The theme of the annual assembly is how good governance, including combating corruption, can help boost the economies of Latin America, where key countries including, Argentina and Venezuela, are struggling with severe economic crises and overall economic growth is nil.

But there will be also discussion of the political conflicts in Haiti and in Venezuela, where an OAS/brokered agreement for an August 19 referendum on the Hugo Chavez presidency appears to offer a way to defuse a long running confrontation with his political opponents

The OAS ministers are expected to renew the organization's call on the government of Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide to restore security and human rights, to facilitate free and fair elections, later this year. There is reluctance among Caribbean and other ministers to discuss Cuba in the OAS, given that the Fidel Castro government has long been suspended from the organization. But Mr. Powell says he "will not shrink" from raising Cuba and what he calls its "increasingly poor" human rights situation, in his policy address to the assembly Monday.

In his airborne talk with reporters, the secretary said the Castro government, which sentenced 75 leading dissident to long prison terms in April, remains "the anachronism of the hemisphere." He welcomed a decision by the European Union to restrict travel by EU officials to Cuba, as evidence the rest of the world is beginning to take note of events in Cuba. Mr. Powell says he will discuss further action when he meets EU foreign ministers, later this month.

Mr. Powell will make a brief stop in Buenos Aires, Tuesday, to meet Argentina's newly-installed President Nestor Kirchner. Mr. Kirchner, a populist, has said he opposes a policy of "automatic alignment" with the United States and invited Cuban President Castro to his May 25 inauguration. But Mr. Powell says the Bush administration wants good relations with Argentina and stands ready to help that country overcome its economic difficulties. He says he wants to hear Mr. Kirchner's plans for his administration and expects the envoys will set a date for a Washington visit by the Argentine leader "in the not-too-distant future."

June 9 (<a href=quote.bloomberg.com>Bloomberg) -- The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, supplier of a third of the world's oil, will probably defer output cuts until later this year because prices are rising and Iraqi exports are delayed, officials and analysts said.

The group meets Wednesday in Doha, Qatar, to consider a response to the impending return of sales from Iraq, which pumped 3 percent of world supply before the war. Exports stopped when U.S. and British forces invaded on March 20, and looting since then has hampered efforts to restore production.

OPEC doesn't see any need to change the quota'' for now, said Leo Drollas, deputy executive director at the London-based Centre for Global Energy Studies, a consulting company founded by former Saudi oil minister Sheikh Zaki Yamani. Prices are too high. They will need a cut sometime in the summer.''

Crude oil has risen by more than a fifth in New York since April to around $31 a barrel, because of a drop in inventories and an April 24 accord by OPEC to lower output as of this month. A cut in quotas in Doha is unlikely, Qatari Oil Minister Abdullah bin Hamad al-Attiyah and Indonesian Oil Minister Purnomo Yusgiantoro said last week.

Crude oil for July delivery slid 36 cents to $30.92 a barrel in after-hours electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange, as of 11:40 a.m. in London.

Oil prices are at an acceptable level, said OPEC Secretary- General Alvaro Silva in an interview last week at OPEC's headquarters in Vienna, signaling he also favors no change in output. The 10 OPEC members outside of Iraq restrain production to keep their price index between $22 and $28 a barrel. The index was at $26.77 on Thursday and has averaged $25.41 a barrel for the last three years.

Waiting

This is a meeting to monitor the market,'' Silva told reporters in Doha today. After our decision in April to cut from the first of June, we have to know the result'' before taking further steps.

The meeting in Qatar, current holder of the OPEC presidency, is OPEC's fourth in 2003. Ministers later this year will have to decide when to reduce output to make room for Iraq, which pumped 2.5 million barrels a day before the war, analysts said.

``The main issue is going to be how we're going to insert Iraq,'' Venezuelan Deputy Oil Minister Luis Vierma said in an interview in Vienna last week. Eventually, OPEC will have to cut production, he said.

In a prelude to Wednesday's meeting, the oil ministers from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and non-OPEC Mexico met in Madrid on Friday to discuss the market. They took no action to limit oil output, saying supply and demand are in balance.

The three nations, which are usually among the top four suppliers to the U.S., have consulted on oil policy since 1998.

The market is receiving all the supply it needs,'' Juan Antonio Barges, Mexico's deputy oil minister, said in a telephone interview in Doha. The market is not calling for cuts.''

Four other independent oil-producing countries -- Russia, Angola, Syria and Oman -- accepted OPEC's invitation to send representatives to the Doha meeting. Iraq, under control of the U.S.-led coalition, wasn't asked to attend.

Officials from Algeria and Kuwait have left open the chance of a cut in quotas on Wednesday. OPEC should consider such a move because a slowing world economy may prevent demand from keeping pace with supply as Iraqi output recovers, analysts said.

`Fine Tuning'

Forecasters have cut estimates for oil demand as severe acute respiratory syndrome reduces travel and slows growth in Asia. The International Monetary Fund expects the world economy to expand by 3.2 percent this year, hindered by concern over war and terrorism. It predicted 3.7 percent growth in September.

OPEC needs to cut, but they might not do that just now,'' said Tor Kartevold, an analyst at Statoil ASA, Norway's biggest oil company. It's a question of fine tuning for OPEC, which is always very difficult'' given the situation in Iraq.

Iraqi shipments through a pipeline to the port of Ceyhan, Turkey, may not start for two more months because equipment for operating the route was stolen, Adel Kazaz, director-general of Iraq's North Oil Co., said last week in Kirkuk, Iraq.

The oil fields around Kirkuk accounted for half the country's exports. The pipeline closure to Ceyhan will leave Iraq dependent on shipments from the Rumaila fields in the south, where erratic power supplies and the loss of a pumping station have hampered operations.

Iraq

OPEC needs to know what Iraq is producing and exporting,'' said Adam Sieminski, an oil strategist at Deutsche Bank AG. Unfortunately, even the Iraqis don't seem to know that.''

Iraq is pumping 700,000 barrels a day, according to the nation's oil ministry. U.S. Vice President Richard Cheney has said output should reach prewar levels, or even 3 million barrels a day, this year.

While rising supply from Iraq may threaten OPEC's control of prices in coming years, industry executives expect the group to accommodate Iraq without a collapse in prices for now.

``We will see reasonable strength through the end of the year,'' said Paul Skinner, head of Royal Dutch/Shell Group's oil- refining unit, at a conference in London last week.

``OPEC has done a good job in the last three to four years in flexible management of the supply side of the market. I would expect that they would continue to demonstrate that flexibility.''

CommonDreams Published on Sunday, June 8, 2003 by the New York Times by Timothy O'Brien

Attention shoppers: Iraqi oil is for sale.

On Thursday, exactly two weeks after the United Nations Security Council lifted 13 years of economic sanctions against Iraq and gave the United States a firm grip on one of the world's most bounteous oil spigots, Baghdad put 10 million barrels of crude up for bid.

Although Baghdad is still mired in crime and no weapons of mass destruction have surfaced in Iraq, Washington is helping market Iraqi oil with all due haste. A former Shell Oil executive heads a panel supervising Iraq's oil fields and crude will now be sold directly to refiners, thus eliminating a middleman role once dominated by Russian oil traders. French refiners also once enjoyed a healthy foothold in Iraq before their government wound up on the wrong side of the United Nations war debate, giving a leg up to enthusiastic American and British refiners, which couldn't deal directly with Iraq during the sanctions era.

Call it a coup de petrole.

And since Iraq has the world's second-largest pool of known oil reserves, the Bush administration's handling of the money that flows from those fields is certain to ripple far beyond Iraq's borders - particularly because some two-thirds of Iraq's estimated oil bounty remains untapped.

Although Iraq's oil industry is being overhauled in a way that creates welcome opportunities for Fortune 500 oil giants, American authorities promise that oil riches will be spent on Iraqi reconstruction and humanitarian aid. Even so, Iraqis and others Middle Eastern countries remain wary about possible American shenanigans with Iraqi oil and are watching sales to see whether the United States waged a war of liberation or a war of occupation.

"People in the region and beyond have a great suspicion of U.S. intentions; and with the U.S. and the U.K. in control of the second-biggest pot of oil in the Gulf region those suspicions will be reinforced," said Judith Kipper, co-director of the Middle East Studies Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "I think they're unfounded suspicions because the U.S. won't play games with Iraqi oil."

"But since the U.S. and Britain have been busy trying to get U.N. sanctions against Iraq lifted, and haven't been perceived as being as busy restoring public services in Iraq, the perception that this is about oil is reinforced," Ms. Kipper added. "And in the Middle East, perception is everything."

Iraq's oil numbers are humbling.

The country has 112.5 billion barrels of known reserves, second to Saudi Arabia's 262 billion-barrel mother lode. The United States, Mexico, and Canada combined have only 64 billion barrels, and that supply is aging. Venezuela (78 billion barrels), Africa in its entirety (77 billion barrels), Russia (65 billion barrels, including the Caspian), and the entire Asia-Pacific region (44 billion barrels) also are comparative half-pints.

Other Middle Eastern oil titans like Iran, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates have oil reserves in the 90-billion- to 98-billion-barrel range. But those fields pump at a much fuller tilt than Iraq's outmoded, jury-rigged operations.

Once Iraqi oil pumps are back to speed, and the country's untapped fields are probed, it could become an even greater force within OPEC and the world oil markets. As Vice President Dick Cheney once observed in warning of Saddam Hussein's oil aspirations, whoever sits atop the Middle Eastern oil market has a ``stranglehold'' on the global economy.

It will take time for these dynamics to play out. Oil analysts say it will be at least five years, or perhaps a decade, before Iraq's oil output ramps up fully; it will cost at least $5 billion, they say, to rehabilitate its oil fields. So no tidal waves of oil from Iraq just yet.

The United Nations resolution lifting sanctions requires that Iraq's oil profits be deposited in a fund to benefit the Iraqi people.

The United States and Britain will oversee the fund, with outside monitors, including the United Nations, checking their work. Some analysts say that Iraqis, not the United States, will prove to be the dominant force in this new oil equation.

`"The fundamental decisions about the future of Iraq's oil industry will inevitably be made by the Iraqi people because those decisions will shape Iraq for the next 30, 40 or 50 years," said Daniel Yergin, chairman of Cambridge Energy Research Associates. "Those are decisions that a sovereign nation makes, not the United States government."

But that leaves the question of how much leverage over Iraq's future the United States has acquired simply by having ousted its government and now by determining the circumstances and timetable for the transition to a provisional Iraqi government. So other analysts think America will exercise much greater influence than Mr. Yergin predicts.

"I expect the United States to continue to play a strong role in the Iraqi oil market five years from now," said Michael Klare, a political science professor at Hampshire College. "It may not be directly, but the U.S. will have substantial power over who taps Iraq's oil market."

As time goes on, Iraq's oil riches may be seen as the limus test of Washington's intentions in Iraq. "I don't think we went there for the oil, and I don't think we went there for the things the White House said we went there for either," said Vahan Zanoyan, chairman of PFC Energy, a business consultancy. "The main reason was to consolidate our position as a superpower."

To dispel the notion that fossil fuel is what took the United States to Iraq, Mr. Zanoyan recommends a well-known remedy: daylight.

<a href=www.sfgate.com>SFGate.com Adam Sparks, Special to SF Gate Monday, June 9, 2003

Scores of brutal regimes around the globe routinely maim, torture and commit summary executions of its prisoners, criminal suspects and political opponents. Many of them imprison and torture children or put them on the front line of wars and terror campaigns.

The torture that occurs around the world, best symbolized by the terror conducted within Saddam Hussein's fallen regime, is a prime example of humans' continuing inhumanity toward others. But the savage cruelty -- eye gouging, nail pulling, electroshock therapy, severing of limbs, gassing, use of mechanical shredders on live prisoners and employment of children in armies -- is not limited to a few nations. The barbarity is widespread.

It should come as no surprise, then, that Amnesty International chooses as one of the world's most terrifyingly repressive nations the United States.

Don't be surprised. What you had thought is a beacon of freedom and economic opportunity for millions around the world is in reality a hate-filled nation that condones terror, permits capital punishment, sells arms and conducts torture. At least that's what Amnesty, the respected human rights organization based in London, and the appeasement-Left crowd thinks.

The capitalist press has apparently duped you if you actually think America is a liberator and a nation that has fought totalitarian regimes throughout its history. Wrong. The millions seeking freedom each year, risking their lives and meager fortunes to get to our shores, are merely chasing a myth.

Forget countries such as Africa's Sierra Leone, which has been nearly totally destroyed by armed conflict in recent years. Rebel forces have abducted, mutilated, tortured, raped and killed civilians. Government forces have done the same. Both sides have also used children as combatants.

And other nations, such as Iraq, have imprisoned children as young as 8 years old.

Now, comes Amnesty, which has just released its 2003 report, which states that confirmed or possible extrajudicial executions or otherwise unlawful killings occurred in 42 countries last year. They include: Argentina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Burundi, the Central African Republic, Colombia, the Ivory Coast, the Dominican Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Fiji, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Israel, Jamaica, Kenya, Lebanon, Liberia, Macedonia, Madagascar, Mozambique, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Palestinian Authority, the Philippines, the Republic of Congo, Russia, Rwanda, the Solomon Islands, Sudan, Thailand, Uganda, Venezuela, Yemen and Zimbabwe.

But this is by no means the entire list of rogue states. Others simply engage in the more run-of-the-mill torture: live amputations, eye gouging, electric cattle-prod therapy, executing children as their parents look on, etc. Amnesty maintains a running list of 106 states that engage in torture -- including the United States.

The leftist credo of Amnesty, which declares the United States bad and leftist totalitarian regimes good, has now infected what was once a respected human rights organization. Its leadership has been taken over by a cabal of activist leftists with a political ax to grind. How else can you plausibly explain an organization so intent on repudiating America for daring to take down totalitarian regimes? These are the governments that condone the real torture and brutal oppression of their own people. This is theoretically the very stuff Amnesty allegedly opposes. We don't see too many other nations stepping into the role of liberator.

Amnesty©ˆs members spend considerable time wailing and gnashing their teeth about alleged torture crimes, but when a powerful nation actually takes action to bring these dictators to justice, they just wail and gnash their teeth some more. At this rate, they won't have much in the way of teeth left to gnash.

The Amnesty report charges that "the U.S.-led war against terrorism is sowing fear and danger in the name of security across the globe and denying basic rights to those who have been arrested." Well, duh. We hope so. Amnesty may not be aware that there is an international terrorist war going on. Perhaps it hasn't been reading the newspapers for the past few years. We're supposed to be "sowing fear" -- fear among al Qaeda, terrorist organizations, assorted armed wackos and the rogue regimes that support them.

Amnesty also says the United States "continued to deny international recognized rights to people arrested in the context of the 'war against terrorism.' Thousands were detained from the war in Afghanistan in defiance of international law." Double duh. The war is not over in Afghanistan; our troops are still there. Should we return Afghan prisoners of war to their caves to rearm, or should we simply send them to London so these trained al Qaeda fighters can assist Amnesty in its struggle for human rights?

Cuba's Club Med under Attack

The crybabies at Amnesty continue: "Conditions in Camp X-Ray and, later, in Camp Delta, gave cause for serious concern. U.S. forces also held hundreds of detainees in Afghanistan, or in undisclosed locations." Camp X-Ray is a tropical Club Med compared to the barren, blistering-cold mountain caves these fighters operated from. Now, they're getting shoes (something many of them never had), clean clothing, warm Cuban sunshine and three squares a day. Sounds plenty tough. The only thing these prisoners are missing is the simple pleasure of smoking some fat, hand-rolled Cuban stogies. Amnesty staffers should have it so good.

The report adds that more than 600 detainees are still being held at Camp X-Ray, at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, "without being charged and without legal assistance." Yeah, that's right -- they want every al Qaeda member to be represented by Johnnie Cochran: "If the turban don't fit, you must acquit." Amnesty's battles against worldwide torture and killings by brutal regimes must be over if they have the time and energy to be pointing accusatory fingers at the world's greatest crime fighter.

The effects of the U.S.-led war on terror have been "far reaching," Amnesty says in its report. "Far from making the world a safer place, [the war] has made it more dangerous by curtailing human rights, undermining the rule of international law and shielding governments from scrutiny. It has deepened divisions among people of different faiths and origins, sowing the seeds for more conflict." Here we go: While our president has said that al Qaeda's leadership is decimated and on the run, the Left says the opposite. The United States, by beefing up security, has had to hurt the feelings of would-be terrorists and their sympathizers. It's a real tearjerker. Quick, get the hanky.

The Left, never having wanted to wage a battle against terror, has been calling the war against terrorism a failure even before it started. It now has reached a verdict: The world is worse off because free nations have the temerity to defend themselves. The imprimatur of Amnesty has now given the Left's war on America the Good Housekeeping seal of approval.

Amnesty Secretary-General Irene Khan said it is important that "we resist the manipulation of fear and challenge the narrow focus of the security agenda." Narrow focus? What narrow focus? If you're not protecting your freedom to survive, freedom from fear, there is no other focus. But because Americans overwhelmingly believe our security is the nation's No. 1 priority, that laserlike concern is now an international crime that Amnesty needs to report at press conferences.

Putting killers to death upsets Amnesty

Amnesty hates capital punishment, too, and it continues to press its attack on the United States with more lefty rhetoric. This time, it complains about the fact that we put serial rapists, cop killers and heinous murderers to death. "In 2002, 69 men and two women were executed, bringing to 820 the total number of prisoners put to death since the U.S. Supreme Court lifted a moratorium on executions in 1976," the organization reports. So what? Now that we finally get to mete out justice after decades of defendants' appeals, at huge expense to the taxpayers, we're now guilty of international crimes? Give me a break.

Just in case you weren't getting the message that freedom-loving democracies are under attack by so-called human rights groups such as Amnesty, here's the kicker. The organization also says that "although the human rights crisis in Israel and the occupied territories is among the issues most discussed, it is the least acted upon by the international community." Lemme see: I guess suicide bombers, supported by terrorist regimes, which target civilians on nearly a daily basis, don't rate much these days. I don't recall hearing about the Amnesty press conferences over those daily terrorist murderer bombers. Yet the world community apparently needs to condemn Israel for merely defending itself. Yeah, right. Apparently Israel's self-defense, involving uprooting terrorist cells and the villages that support them, is futile; it would only generate another report about "human rights abuses."

In other words, politically left-leaning agendas are OK as long as they're carried out discreetly and under the guise of "human rights." The human rights brigades share an ideology that only barely masquerades as human rights but is heavily laden with leftist dogma. It's an ideology that opposes democratic nations that either fight in their own self-defense, as in Israel, or that try to bring the torch of freedom to despotic nations such as ours. To groups such as Amnesty, these are "crimes against humanity" that merit a lot of investigation and hoopla. However, the support of tyrannical states and roving bands of "underdog" terrorists is basically no problem.

I think this is true for several reasons: Amnesty is sympathetic to the goals of the murderous groups that terrorize nations such as Israel. The Amnesty Web site wears its political ideology on its sleeve. It still refers to Israel as the aggressor and the West Bank as occupied territories. That's provocative.

Also, despotic nations have no free press, so it's hard to get the facts, but not in democracies. Democracies are open societies, so many human rights groups seem to find many more incidents of really bad things going on in these nations.

Amnesty Tearjerker

One example spoken about in a call for action on the Amnesty Web site is a request to protect the headache-relief rights of a terrorist collaborator. Here's what the organization had to say: "Asma Muhammad Suleiman Saba'neh, a 40-year-old resident of the Jenin refugee camp and mother of six children, was arrested by the Israeli army on 11 February 2003 and placed in administrative detention without charge." Sounds pretty frightening. But it gets better: "Until the beginning of this year, Asma Saba'neh was symptom-free but then began to suffer from severe headaches and edema. No diagnosis could be made by X-ray examination, and her doctor recommended a CT scan, which she still has not received."

So now Israel has to offer expensive, high-tech CT scans to deal with every headache terrorists claim they get while under detention? That's quite a grievance Amnesty is busy trumpeting from its London digs. Why bother ridiculing the organization, when it does such a good job of making a joke of itself? Israel is now supposed to jump at every headache symptom? What is Amnesty thinking, that Saba'neh checked into a five-star resort? What kind of medical treatment would she be getting back in the ol' refugee camp? What's more, readers of the Amnesty Web site are urgently asked to write to the prime minister of Israel about this case!

To understand Amnesty, listen to not only what's said against democracies but also what goes unsaid against despots and terrorist organizations. For example, neither al Qaeda nor Hezbollah are listed in Amnesty reports or on its Web site as organizations that Amnesty have any problem with, but the United States and Israel are listed. That's the human rights game. That's all you need to know.

Adam Sparks is a San Francisco conservative writer. He can be reached at adamstyle@aol.com.

<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic news Posted: Sunday, June 08, 2003 By: David Coleman

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez Frias has given additional fodder to the opposition media, describing himself as "ugly and sometimes coarse" ... but denies emphatically that he is a communist or that communism would ever be introduced in Venezuela. "The opposition keeps trying to compare me with Cuba's Fidel Castro ... but I am NOT a communist, if I were, I'd say so directly because I have no 'hairs on my tongue' ... Fidel Castro is my friend and brother, yes, he's a communist, but the Venezuelan project is NOT communist and could never be such."

Speaking on his weekly "Alo Presidente" national radio and television broadcast earlier today, Chavez Frias brushed aside opposition accusations that he is intolerant, and says he can readily accept that there are people who do not share his vision for Venezuela or his ideology ... "I understand that I am not a golden boy to the whole world ... I'm ugly ... I'm black with mixed indian blood ... that's me "I'm proud of my mixed-race ancestry and I'm a little coarse sometimes ... but what can I do? I cannot change the way I am."

The President has called on public institutions to act responsibly and in time to avoid major problems.  "We simply cannot have people calling for a coup d'etat ... we must act quickly to deal with desperate opposition sectors whose only goal is to overthrow the government.  I am calling on all members of the National Assembly (AN) to avoid violent confrontations like last week's rumpus in the Legislature -- that was a kind of coup d'etat aimed at overthrowing Congress itself."

Chavez Frias suggests that the citizenry and his allies in the Legislature, who command 51% of the 165 seats, should urgently ask for a judicial process against "rebel deputies who have attempted to sabotage and impede the proper functioning of parliamentary process." That session of Congress was suspended after opposition deputies brawled and began to set fire to parliamentary order sheets.  AN president Francisco Ameliach had suspended the session which was re-convened on the steps of El Calvario on Friday under a security blanket provided by 5,000 soldiers.

Former AN president Willian Lara said Friday's assembled quorum was able to approve a partial reform of the Assembly's Internal Debate Rules where the opposition has for three months attempted to block approval of 43 laws reforms seen as critical to getting Venezuela economically back on its feet again.

Vocal opposition leaders complain that approval of the reform laws poses limitations on fundamental rights in Venezuela but President Chavez Frias says "the majority of the Venezuelan people want peace ... what we want now is for public institutions to close ranks to avoid the violence and chaos that the anti-government conspirators want to spread.  The opposition should take pause to reflect on the fact that it is they who are creating violence, but it will not impede Venezuela's progress to transformation and peaceful reform."

"Part of this would be for the media to cease their poisonous campaign against the government, seeking to falsify what is good and true about my government and myself ... for example, they will be making little of the fact that today we can announce a loan of $250 million from the Central Bank of China to construct a 180 kilometer long aqueduct to secure supplies of drinking water to the people in Falcon State.