Home > Melanie Phillips

Sunday 8 November 2009

Axis of evil

Monday, 31st March 2008

Ken Livingstone’s chum Hugo Chavez, president of Venezuela, is known to be in cahoots with Iran and has given free passage to people associated with al Qaeda, Hamas or Hezbollah. Which makes him a pretty dangerous kind of guy. But a few days ago Reuters reported something which raises the stakes and should ring the loudest possible alarm bells: that the authorities in Columbia have seized at least 30 kg of uranium from the FARC terrorists — who have received financial support from Chavez.

Since the FARC revolutionaries don’t themselves appear to want to make a nuclear bomb to incinerate Bogota, it is most likely that the uranium stash was destined to be sold to a bidder who did want to make such a bomb. So to where was it destined — and where might other uranium from the same source have ended up?

This article on World-Check suggests that the answer may lie with Syrian-born Mustafa Setmariam Nasar, an al Qaeda man indicted in Spain for involvement in 9/11 and suspected of masterminding the Madrid train bombings.

Nasar lived openly in Venezuela for several months, traveling at all time with his Venezuelan government bodyguard, all the while wanted by Interpol for Spain, visiting Caracas' most important mosque, and holding meetings with Hizballah, ETA, FARC, ELN, and Cuban G-2members, amongst others, in support of their criminal and political activities in Latin America. He shows up on my radar holding meetings with one of Venezuela's most notorious terrorists, Carlos Rafael Lanz Rodriguez [UID 248222], a career Communist infamous for once kidnapping and holding an American businessman for six long years, part of which time he tied the executive to a tree.
What do these two terrorists have in common, you ask? Lanz is presently the president of Venezuela's state-owned aluminium company, Alcasa, which has been accused by former Venezuela government mining engineers of covertly mining Uranium for export to Iran, under the cover of aluminium production.

As this article also asks, in the light of such facts why the hell isn’t the IAEA crawling all over Venezuela? And when is the mainstream western media, which as far as I can see has scarcely registered the Colombian uranium seizure (the only reference I’ve found in Britain was 52 words on page 27 of the London Evening Standard on March 27) going to get off its collectively parked backside and start looking at this?

Previous Back to Melanie Phillips Next

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Alex Massie | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (15)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Ian C

March 31st, 2008 10:55am

Terrifying - and under 'the remotest sniff test' this requires the world's immediate action. Bush having blown the US's credibility and the UN being what it is we can only stand and watch the slow train crash.

BillyK

March 31st, 2008 12:43pm

I suggest that any one who takes this article seriously read http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/1705. Enough said.

BillyK

March 31st, 2008 12:43pm

I suggest that any one who takes this article seriously read http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/1705. Enough said.

Ian C

March 31st, 2008 12:57pm

BillyK, Please would you like to explain the relevance of an article written two years ago to something first reported happening less than a week ago?

billyK

March 31st, 2008 1:01pm

The "found" Uranium was no more "radioactive" that that mined in several areas of the world. To become "dangerous" it would have to be enriched and such technology is not available to FARC nor to the government of Columbia. It is bascially a harmless substance in its current form. See http://www.tri-cityherald.com/917/story/139947.html for further details.

Say No More

March 31st, 2008 1:07pm

I thought it was depleted uranium, a sub-product from the enrichment process used to make anti-tank projectiles, but not much radioactive. Am I wrong? There was this controversy over depleted uranium shells used in Iraq in 1991 which were suspected by some to have caused cancers, the "Gulf war syndrome", etc. I'm not sure.
Anyway, the response from the authorities was that depleted uranium was only a good armor-piercing material but not very toxic. In which case the question would still be: what the hell was it doing in Venezuela?

Bob Latchford

March 31st, 2008 1:31pm

hmmm, thats Ms Phillips and Peter Hitchens attacking Chavez within 24 hours of each other....I wonder what the real motivaton behind this is? Have our right wing journalists been given their instructions to go after a new target?

Edward

March 31st, 2008 3:58pm

I believe that Chavez wants his Venezuela regime to host nuclear missles as the Castro dictatorship did in the 1960's.

Here we go again...

Robert

March 31st, 2008 4:11pm

Bob Latchford - you bloodhound, you! Do you suppose this might be evidence for a "zionist right-wing conspiracy"? That's strong stuff! Very worrying indeed...

field

March 31st, 2008 10:53pm

Chavez is on the knife edge between democracy and despotism. He respected an anti-Chavez vote in a recent referendum, which puts him on the right side. But all those contacts with FARC, Iran, North Korea and Cuba puts him on the wrong side. Yes, he definitely is one to watch - and closely.

George Steiner

April 1st, 2008 12:31am

Chavez respected nothing Mr. Field. His army made him an offer, that was hard to refuse. Still, why does the FARC want Uranium in whatever form eh?

BrianR

April 1st, 2008 4:11am

BillyK,

You take the Chavez propaganda site www.venezuelanalysis.com seriously?

You must be joking!

Alek Boyd

April 2nd, 2008 1:19pm

On 1 March FARC's No 2, Raul Reyes, was killed in a raid in Ecuador. Colombian forces seized laptops, whose information led in turn to seizing the Uranium the author refers to. Pres. Uribe invited INTERPOL to determine whether information contained in said laptops is genuine or fabricated, findings are to be announced shortly. Chavez is a supporter of terrorism. How does one call supporters of supporters of terrorism?

Kenneth Rijock

April 4th, 2008 8:24am

Mr.Boyd is right; supporters of terrorism are also terrorists. Anyone wishing to see my entire article on the subject, please access it at:
http://www.world-check.com/
Kenneth Rijock, Financial Crime Consultant for World-Check

David Blomsrom

April 5th, 2008 1:28am

Wow. George W. Dumbass said their weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (along with a mention of "yellow cake" somewhere in Africa). Now the bushistas tell us they've found uranium in Colombia...and some VERY RELIABLE sources tell us of a Venezuela connection.

Get a clue, folks: If you want to find uranium, just check out the United States. I'm not aware of any Latin American nations quivering in fear over these allegations with the possible exception of U.S. proxy states, notably Colombia.

Right-wingers - Get a grip and go back to bed. Hugo Chavez is the legitimate ruler of Venezuela, and he's working hard to free Latin America from Corporate America's exploitation. After all the crimes you've committed against your own nation - not to mention Iraq and Afghanistan - your credibility is vanished.

I'll soon have more to say about global hero Hugo Chavez at http://www.seattle-mafia.org/.

Most read
Most commented on

1 There is only one question that frightens Brussels - Fraser Nelson (124)

2 Cameron hasn’t broken a pledge on Europe - James Forsyth (100)

3 What Cameron should now say about Europe - James Forsyth (79)

4 Motives for murder - David Blackburn (68)

5 A bit of French stock in play - David Blackburn (59)

Melanie Phillips is a Daily Mail columnist. She also writes for the Jewish Chronicle and is a panellist on BBC Radio Four's Moral Maze. Her most recent book is 'Londonistan', published by Encounter and Gibson Square.

For a complete set of Melanie's articles click here