Panama’s top court silent on accusations of corruption in diplomatic cables on WikiLeaks

Panama’s top court silent on accusations of corruption in diplomatic cables on WikiLeaks
By Associated Press, Updated: Tuesday, May 31, 9:44 AM

PANAMA CITY — Panamanians are criticizing the silence of the country’s top court in the face of accusations of government corruption so wide-ranging that the U.S. Embassy said it affected U.S. national interests.

In diplomatic cables released this week on the WikiLeaks website, embassy officials said they had “credible and compelling information” that Supreme Court Justice Winston Spadafora took bribes to influence court cases.

~snip~
The president of Panama’s lawyers association says the court has instituted a worrisome policy of silence on the accusations.

Political science professor Miguel Antonio Bernal said Monday the accusations indicate “the high degree of corruption” in Panama’s legal system.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/panamas-top-court-silent-on-accusations-of-corruption-in-diplomatic-cables-on-wikileaks/2011/05/31/AGKR6QFH_story.html

Very unreliable sources, known for their lies, distortions and corporate/war profiteer agendas.

And they are, in this case, promoting the notion, from the composer of these low security cables, that the U.S. was "shocked, SHOCKED!" at the corruption in Panama.

The same Bushwhack-appointed ambassador wrote that she was "shocked, SHOCKED!" that the president of Panama (a U.S. client state) demanded U.S. help in spying on his political opponents.

It's hard to know if this U.S. ambassador--a career diplomat--was an "insider" in the Bush Junta, and was providing a low security (leakable) paper trail as cover for Bush Junta corruption and crimes in U.S. LatAm client states like Panama and Colombia. I think it's a possibility that she was "out of the loop"--although it's hard to figure even a career diplomat not knowing what these criminals were up to. Or maybe she did know, and was just keeping her head down.

Basically, what was going on is that Colombia was being run as a criminal enterprise, by Bush Jr. (and Martinelli) pal Alvaro Uribe, and "corruption" doesn't even begin to describe what was going on, including the murders of thousands of trade unionists, human rights workers, teachers, community activists, peasant farmers and others, by the U.S.-funded ($7 BILLION) Colombian military, and the forced displacement of FIVE MILLION peasant farmers with state terror; including a vast illegal spying network (spying on Colombian judges, prosecutors, congress members, trade unionists and others--likely to draw up "hit lists" for death threats and for assassination); and very likely including a plan to consolidate the trillion dollar-plus cocaine revenue stream out of Colombia into fewer hands and direct those huge illicit profits to U.S. banksters and others; and also likely including participation by the U.S. military and U.S. military 'contractors' in some of these crimes.

Martinelli, in Panama, is an ally of Uribe but apparently is not a "made man." He did not merit U.S. help in spying on his political enemies (as that cable indicates), but this does NOT mean that the U.S./Bush Junta was not spying on both Martinelli and his political opponents (including judges, as in Colombia), and spying on Martinelli FOR Uribe.

Subsequently, Matinelli gave instant, overnight asylum to the main spying witness against Uribe, his spy chief Maria Hurtado--over the objections of Colombian prosecutors, who are investigating Hurtado and Uribe in the spying scandal. They now have an international warrant out for Hurtado, which Martinelli is defying--and is taking quite a lot of political heat within Panama and in the region for doing this (a former president of Panama just publicly criticized him for it this week).

What was Uribe's leverage with Martinelli on granting his spy chief asylum? It could be something that Uribe obtained from his illegal spying network, or something the U.S./Bush Junta obtained from theirs. It could also be bribery, or pressure points on Martinelli as a lesser mafia figure (who might, say, lose certain privileges--cushy abodes, posh schools for the kids, topnotch security?) But with the prominence of spying in the Uribe-Martinelli tale, I suspect that Uribe has some juicy bits in a dossier on Martinelli, obtained by him or given to him by U.S. spies. The U.S. also colluded in getting death squad witnesses out of Colombia--out of the reach of Colombian prosectors and over their objections. It is reasonable to presume, then, that the U.S. has an interest in Hurtado's asylum (probably to protect Junior and the Bush Junta) and had a hand in getting her out of Colombia with asylum in Panama.

We should also seriously consider that Supreme Court Justice Winston Spadafora is entirely innocent of corruption, and could even be Panama's only honest judge in a sea of political/judicial corruption. We must not presume that a Bush Junta cable is telling the truth. My "rule of thumb" on Bushwhacks may be relevant here: Whatever Bushwhacks say, the opposite is true; and whatever they accuse others of doing, they are doing or planning to do. It's a very good guide on Bushwhack assertions. And here we have that very thing--a Bushwhack (if the ambassador was a Bushwhack or was carrying water for the Bushwhacks) assertion that someone is corrupt. My "rule of thumb" says that the opposite is true--he is innocent--and that OTHER judges and officials in Panama ARE corrupt and are U.S. tools (making decisions or about to make decisions that are not in the interest of the people of Panama or of the people and democracies in the region).

Another possibility is that Spadafora is somewhat corrupt, but in minor ways compared to Bushwhack operatives, and is being targeted (instead of those who are much more corrupt) because of something he did or may do. I'm not sure of the status of this international warrant against Hurtado in Panama's legal system, but that may be why this cable about Spadafora is being trumpeted by the Associated Pukes and the Washington Psst--to pressure him on that very important matter. My "rule of thumb" is not infallible (although it comes close to being); it is sometimes just a guide toward the truth or to a deeper truth--for instance, that Spadafora is not as corrupt as everybody else, but has some questionable bits in his dossier that can be used to pressure him. The APukes and the WPsst are helping to apply the pressure.

Yup, the more I think about it, the more I think it's Hurtado. This warrant is going to Panama's Supreme Court for a ruling on whether Martinelli can defy it. He may be violating a Colombia/Panama treaty on extraditing criminals, by defying the warrant--and that seems like the sort of thing that goes to a Supreme Court (president breaking the law).