It turns out that an Argentinian prosecutor, on the eve of making allegations to the Argentinian congress that accused the President of deliberately covering up Iranian involvment in a terrorist attack that killed 85 Argentinians (in return for commercial advantages), was found shot dead in his apartment - locked from the inside.
At first, the official response was that this was a suicide (he was shot in the head with a .22, found next to him). Now, allegedly, the President is saying it was an assassination - designed to discredit her.
What do you think? Particularly if you are Argentinian? Sinister government murder plot to cover up wrongdoing - sinister anti-government murder plot to defame and discredit - or suicide?
…and this would be the same Argentinian president who has been stirring up anti British sentiment in relation to the Falklands Islands to distract the population from her economic record - the decline is greater than anywhere else in South America (admittedly some SA nations don’t really have much further to fall anyway), I take it that things are not going too well for her again on economic matters, so now she rolls out another distraction.
So everyone else is conspiring, and its nothing to do with any of her ministers. I note that she does not actually address the small matter of the relations with Iran, shame that he never got to appear at the hearing, convenient too. Now she does not have to produce any evidence to rebut his claims.
You see, if there had been no substance to his claims, and if he really had been fed a false trail, it would be in her interest to allow him to present his evidence, and then shoot it down, but of course if there really is any substance, that’s a bit more difficult to disprove.
With him dead she is trying to get it both ways, no embarrassing testimony, plus a bonus of getting to call it a conspiracy to smear her government, and no-one alive to gainsay her.
I am sad to learn this. It seems like just a few years ago South America was finally ready for prime time in this global world of tomorrow. I loved and was excited by the rises of Fernández Kirchner, Chávez, Evo Morales, Rousseff, and even Bachelet. What happened? Chávez degenerated from a good guy into a dark side and then kicked this mortal coil leaving Venezuela in near-chaos. And now Argentina, which has the potential to be a world superstar?* Cristina F.K., what the ¿chinga? Please tell me Evo Morales hasn’t turned into a rotter now. I am feeling so disillusioned. I remember the horrors—absolute nightmares—of South America in the 1970s, before Jimmy Carter brought up a little thing called “human rights.” And what a relief it was to reach the 2000s and feel happy to see our neighbors on the mend and actually looking good. It would hurt to see them fall from that so soon after practically getting there.
*I don’t know much about their present political relations with the UK apart from what’s on BBC World Service, but I’m norteamericana estadounidense and I do know one thing, kids: the good old Monroe Doctrine. Anyone remember that? Cause Ronald Raygun’s failing memory totally deleted it in the '80s under (eeeew) Thatcher. Can I get an amen, ¿Yanquis?
I, as well as like 70% of my fellow countrypeople, am sure that he was murdered, to cover up for the government’s amazing screwups re the Iran negotiations.
That’s more or less what I suspected - though I’m pretty ignorant of Argentinain politics.
I guess the government’s best defence is that the very obviousness of assassinating a prosecutor literally right before he’s about to publicly denounce the government (but after he’d made the charges publicly in writing) makes it unlikely - a sort of ‘we could not possibly be that dumb’ defence.
Nonsense. The Monroe Doctrine tells European countries not to meddle in the affairs of American nations. It says nothing about European countries not defending their overseas territories; as a matter of fact, it specifically says the U.S. will not mess with American colonies of European nations. The U.K.'s defense of the Falklands was no more a violation of the Monroe Doctrine than France defending St. Pierre and Miquelon, should Canada ever attempt to annex them, would be.
Claiming evil conspiracies is a relatively easy go-to gambit in Latin Am politics because over the last couple of centuries the instability of regimes ***was ***often enough the result of a ***real ***evil conspiracy.
Your mistake, Madam, was to be illusioned in the first place. Especially about the Kirchners, they were longtime Peronists, who got to power when Menem withdrew from the runoff because he knew he was spent. (And “even Bachelet”? She was one of the better among the New Left wave, a straight socialdemocrat who respected term limits and press freedom, like Vazquez and Mujica in Uruguay.)
And the folks in Santa Cruz have thought Evo’s a rotter since the very beginning, but they have axes to grind. He’s eccentric to say the least…