VENEZUELA: Fake CIA protests don't count!

[Joanne98]

President Hugo Chavez is shutting down a RW CIA operation mistakenly called a "TV" station and not only does he have a perfect right to do that, it's his patriotic DUTY to do so. For six years this RW nest of snakes has been trying to overthrow a DEMOCRATICALLY elected leader. This so-called TV station helped the coup in 2002 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Venezuelan_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat_attempt and they have never stopped aiding covert US forces since then. He gave them plenty of warnings but they just kept up their SHIT! It is time for the FASCIST media to get it thru there head that everybody is getting sick and tired of their FAKE NEWS CHANNELS which are being used to overthrow governments by creating FAKE CIA protests. This tactic which started in 1953 when it was used against Iran, http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/09/1526251 has caused nothing but trouble for US credibility. In other words IT'S NOT WORKING ANYMORE! Hugo Chavez was legally elected and he has duty to protect his people from covert attacks by other countries. RCTV is a threat to Venezuela's national security. Personally I think just shutting it down was being WAY TO NICE! The "reporters" cough cough, should be THROWN IN PRISON FOR TREASON! This should be a message to all in the FAKE MEDIA and their counterpart organizations...http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Reporters_Without_Borders http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=National_Endowment_for_Democracy http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=International_Republican_Institute
YOU ARE CRIMINALS and you are not getting away with this crap anymore.
If any "REAL" people are upset with the shutting down of the CIA front TV station it's only because they will miss their soaps. That can be fixed and I'm sure Chavez plans to do that. Hugo Chavez is doing a bang up job for his people. He's paid off their debt.http://venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=2270 and for that alone he needs to be supported by all good people. All you SELFISH GREEDY RW CRIMINALS can go right to HELL! GOD BLESS HUGO CHAVEZ!

[Louis Cipher]

1. Viva Chavez!!!

[papau]

184. Viva Chavez back at you :-) - it is funny to watch the children of the rich protest along with the

employees of the rich protest - Fox is going nuts - I am enjoying today more than I expected to.

[gorbal]

266. Oh god yeah!

I saw this fox reporter freaking out, trying to make things seem much worse than they really were. And do they once mention how much larger the pro-Chavez demonstration is?

[Flatulo]

2. Chavez has the power to bypass the Legislature and has eliminated...

... limits on how many terms he can serve, effectively giving him unbridled dictatorial powers.

Would you be comfortable if Bush had taken these steps?

Are leftist dictatorships OK?

Do you trust ANYONE with unlimited power?

[Buzz Clik]

4. It's his patriotic duty to assume all the power and suppress opposition.

Can't you read?

[Flatulo]

7. Oh yeah, I missed that part...

I am simply AMAZED at the level of hypocrisy some people here exhibit. Amazed.

[Joanne98]

12. I didn't say that. I said the "opposition" is being funded by the US!

RCTV brought this on theirselves and they deserve everything they get.

[Buzz Clik]

15. And we disagree.

[pork medley]

198. and public property is theft

isnt that right

[Buzz Clik]

204. That doesn't even make sense.

[pork medley]

220. then why did you argue in another thread that chavez bringing

the venezuelan OIL INDUSTRY under state ownership was tantamount to "stealing" all that OIL

[Buzz Clik]

226. You're just trying to suck me into a meaningless argument.

I won't bite. "Public property" is a very broad term, and includes places like parks and the Capitol Building.

Purchasing or building property with public funds is not even similar to simply taking a fully developed industry. Not even similar.

Run along now.

[Name removed]

228. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Buzz Clik]

231. Lovely. Quick with the insults, I see.

I have found that to be the refuge of those with no argument.

[pork medley]

233. since when was "libertarian" an insult?

:)

[Buzz Clik]

263. Ron Paul would think so.

I seriously doubt he'd like to think he's keeping company with me.

[NoPasaran]

34. Just like the "opposition" in the US

Is controlled by the terrorists?

[The Doctor.]

293. No, but if it were controlled by China or Iran, then that would be a foreign

entity working against the Administration on US soil.

For as much as I despise the BA, I'd be against this on principle.

[papau]

122. You are correct -RCTV attempted to overthrow an elected gov by force - they should be in prison

but on DU we get the CIA's protect big business propaganda and misinformation. Thank God for a free press in Europe.

[vincent_vega_lives]

299. "RCTV attempted to overthrow an elected gov by force"

People keep stating this. I am curious to see the source for this. What was actualy said and by whom?

[cherokeeprogressive]

168. I don't guess it matters that RCTV has been around 53 years.

I'm sure they've been subverting Venezuelan liberty for all that time too.

[Cleita]

248. So has CBS, ABC and NBC here in the USA and look what

has happened to their news departments. That means nothing.

[papau]

116. "suppress opposition"? - a law was passed the opposition did not like allowing the government to

undo what years of right wing dictatorship by our CIA financed/GOP approved/oil company controlled proxies had done to the country.

A freely elected legislature passed a law - somehow that part is always forgotten as we are fed the bullshit that with all 5 media operations against Chavez he brainwashed the people into voting for him and besides those international observers of the election and the subsequent audits of the votes that showed the election cleaner than any in the US was all irrelevant because we are to believe Chavez stole the election if our CIA responsive US media tells us this is true.

The power is temporary - unlike Bushes power under the Patriot Act and FEMA and his new Executive Order on government continuity.

[Flatulo]

119. I don't think anyone here has contested the legitimacy of the Venezuelan elections.

I think many of us are somewhat put off by the apparent cheerleading of actions that would be considered reprehensible if they were to occur here.

[papau]

131. There is nothing reprehensible going on - compensation is being paid as in any US government

taking of property.

Unlike the US's FEMA and Patriot act and now the Executive Order on Government Continuation powers given to Bush, this is a law that has a short duration.

Indeed we need some of that Venezuelan Democracy in the US - heck I'd be happy if we could just get their voting machines and used their auditing system.

[Buzz Clik]

173. Well, I see no hypocrisy in that.

:sarcasm:

[papau]

180. Public Domain takings with compensation is quite legal in the US - what is your point? n/t

n/t

[Buzz Clik]

203. Are you endorsing that behavior?

Are you suggesting that when Shrub's baseball team needed a new stadium (to increase its value) that taking private homes for the parking plot was okay?

My point is simple -- I hate it when it's done here, and I sure as hell don't endorse some big-mouthed thirdworld clown doing it.

[papau]

277. Yes - I am endorsing that behavior - takings for the public are very American - the Court in Texas

ruled for those home owners because that particular one was a screwing in terms of the compensation offered - The Court awarded $11 million more.

Should the state have invented the state agency that did the takings - I would have not done so as the economic development payoff I thought was not there.

but as a concept, the public taking with compensation is needed unless you want a few to be able to screw the many -

but then again that is indeed what the rich want, isn't.

[papau]

89. unbridled dictatorial powers? LOL - same logic applied to US from 1776 to 1952 - our Presidents

could be elected as many times as they could win an election (1776 to Washington it was President of the Congress - but same idea).

You are posting CIA/right wing - they are the same thing - framing meant to discredit an elected government - elected in an internationally supervised and approved election -that is taking away by not renewing a UHF TV license from a company that is allowed to stay in the media business with its cable and Sat operations despite it blatant attempts to destroy a Democracy by broadcasting lies and actually calling for people to rebel against the elected government so as to install a government of the rich that would sell the country out to our oil companies.

Just where is the "leftist dictatorship" - Venezuela actually uses a voting system that can be audited - and was audited - the auditing disproving the CIA bullshit about a stolen election.

If you are worried about Dictatorship, perhaps the election thefts of 00, 02, 04, and nearly 06 might concern you. A congress where the GOP will fight the Election Reform Bill - a country where a fake reformer - Bev Harris - can be purchased to demand the real election reform bill HR 811 be shelved and a substitute that doesn't protect us H.R. 2360 passed instead because the replacement bill gives local officials more power while still requiring a "trail with audit ability" - not mentioning her replacement bill does not require audits and also prevents the computer code from being reviewed by the States - read about our election thefts if you want to learn about the rich and their "dictatorship of the GOP" attempts that are sadly all too successful in the US.

[Enrique]

135. suppose Bush had been kidnapped by his political opposition

imagine what his reaction would be after regaining power a couple of days later. Would any of the coup plotters be alive today?

Suppose the "liberal media" played an outrageous, blatant role in the coup. Would Bush allow that media to continue?

Answer that, and then we'll discuss Chavez vs. Bush.

[Flatulo]

142. I'll answer your question if you answer mine...

If Bush was kidnapped by his political opposition, they would be arrested, tried and jailed.

> Suppose the "liberal media" played an outrageous, blatant role in the coup. Would Bush allow that media to > continue?

I honesly can't answer that, although I do not think that any media outlet would ever be shut down by executive decree.

'Outrageous' and 'blatant' are pretty subjective terms. There is so much disagreement (not necessarily here on DU) as to what constitutes factual news, mainly because there is so much disagreement as to what constitutes 'facts'. Many here accept it as 'fact' that Bush is not a legitimate president. Many others here accept 9/11 conspiracies as fact.

I am surprised and somewhat disturbed by the barrage of calls here to shut down FNC because they are not a legitimate news outlet. I can't imagine any justification for these calls, except a general feeling that they have a strong RW bias. I personally agree that they have such a bias, but isn't this a judgement call
that others would disagree with? I am sure that may RWers would love to see CNN or MSNBC shut down.

Whatever.

I am not aware of any instance in where a US media outlet was forced to close by government decree. If there is precedent, I'm sure someone will cite it. If it did happen, I would be outraged, even if I happened to disagree strongly with their content.

Now, my question is, would you feel comfortable with the US government shutting down FNC? If so, why? What safeguards would you insist were in place to ensure that such an act were not politically motivated? Who would make such a judgement call?

[Viva_La_Revolution]

152. He didn't "shut them down"

He did not renew their license to broadcast over the public airways. They still have every right to broadcast on their Cable and Satellite systems.

[Flatulo]

158. That's a pretty subtle distinction...

... and apparently thousands of CIA employees and US stooges agree, as they are clashing wiht riot police right now.

[Enrique]

163. how do you feel about the opposition to Chavez?

are you aware what they attempted to do during their breif reign?

[Flatulo]

165. As Rummy used to say "I don't know what I don't know..."

It would be presumptuous of me to respond that I know what you're going to say, so I won't.

My understanding of the issue is limited to the current events, not things that transpired 5 years ago.

I do think that if crimes were committed under Venezuelan law, they ought to be punished in accordance with said law.

However I am always against using force to silence the views of those who disagee with us. We should be able to pursuade people with our ideas, not our guns.

[Enrique]

182. you can't discuss this without discussing the coup

come on. The coup is central to the whole thing.

You can learn about the coup, or you can continue to wallow in your uninformed opinions. No offense meant, believe it or not.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144&q=revolution+will+not+be+televised

[fishwax]

205. their license expired and was not renewed

That happens here in the states too--for all kinds of reasons--and even to broadcasters who haven't aided an attempt to violently overthrow the government. I don't think the distinction is very subtle at all.

[Enrique]

162. my answer is no

i would not be comfortable with the govt. shutting down Fox.

But if what happened to Chavez happened to Bush, I doubt there would be any trials. I think not only would the offending media outlet and political opposition be destroyed, legally or more likely extralegally, but there would be a wave of "preemptive" strikes against other potential enemies.

[The Doctor.]

292. If Bush shut down an English Speaking Anti-Bush station run by the Chinese

Government, would you argue for 'free speech'?

[SOUTHERN_BOY]

308. You are kidding me

Jesus. I had no idea.

[NoPasaran]

3. Unitary dictatorship

Maybe we should try that in this country!
:sarcasm:

[Buzz Clik]

6. Indeed. Chavez is beginning to leave a residue of brimstone wherever he goes.

[Toots]

Compare how the Venezuelan people fare under Chavez with American under Bush*

While I am not much one for a single element of control it really is not much different than what we have here. Only thing about us here is the control is hidden from view and we live under the impression the people really have a voice. What needs to be done is a comparrison. How the people of Venezuela lived before Chavez and how thelive now with the same thing in America. The gap between rich and poor in America is growing by leaps and bounds while the exact opposite is true in Venezuela. The people can not remember a time they have fared so well. Do you believe Bush* would win the vote of almost 70% of the people? Until you can tell me how we are so much better then I don't find your disgust with Chavez credible. Chavez paid off the country's debt and used the money that used to be spent on Interest for schools and hositals. Bush* has almost doubled the US's debt in the same time frame. Imagine if we had four hundred billion dollars for our schools and hospitals? We were headed in that direction under Clinton but then came the "War Profiteers" How many wars has Chavez gotten his people involved in?

[Flatulo]

49. Would you sell your freedoms for a meal?

[Toots]

91. Did the Venezuela people do that?

Empty rhetoric...They are a free and Democratic people that vote for their leaders. You do know that there are other leaders in Venezuela besides Chavez. Every town has it's "elected" officials. The people have complete freedom to move about anywhere anytime. Exactly what freedoms do you think were sold for what meals?

[Flatulo]

97. The freedom to have their elected legislature represent their interests.

That's a pretty important rigiht in a Democracy, wouldn't you agree?

[Toots]

104. What you are describing is not a Democracy but a Republic

Representative governement is a Republic and not a Democracy. A Democracy can very well have a "benevolent leader" elected by the people. I never claimed they lived under a Republic although in many ways they do.

[dansolo]

138. We don't even have that here

When is the last time our representatives represented our interests?

[originalpckelly]

60. Does Chavez make the trains run on time?

:shrug:

[Buzz Clik]

145. You want me to compare a wannabe North American dictator to a bonafide dictator from South America?

No doubt, a Freeper might accept the challenge with glee, but I'll pass.

[Flatulo]

147. Hahaha, that was a good one!

[originalpckelly]

9. Personally, I think Bush sent away to Chavez's Banana Republic Dictator School...

He's learning thirty steps to make Executive Orders more like Chavez's decrees.

His first assignment was that stuff that RWer Corsi was worried about, I guess that shows he completed the assignment appropriately.

[jefferson_dem]

58. Hugo's perpetual power grabs and seamy demagogic flourishes should make Chimpy proud.

ack!

[originalpckelly]

5. Is Human Rights Watch a fake CIA organization?

Are they opposed to shutting down RCTV?

[Joanne98]

10. Who knows. It doesn't matter anyway. RCTV was involved in the coup. nuff said

[Flatulo]

11. Um, didn't Chavez instigate his own coup? Oh yeah, that's different...

[1932]

33. It was against a government that murdered thousands of people because they protested Chicago School

neoliberal policies designed to shift power and wealth to the powerful.

[Flatulo]

38. So I guess coups that you approve of are OK. I see,

[1932]

46. Caring enough to fight fascism -- how can you be upset. It's even better when

they do it democratically, which is what Chavez did after serving jail time and being pardoned by the president who beat the fascist Chavez tried to overthrow.

And judging from what Chavez has done since becoming president, it's pretty obvious that he is committed to giving working people tremendous devolved economic, political and cultural power.

[Flatulo]

55. I'm not upset. I just see a real problem here with a strong double standard.

Certain behaviors that would be considered criminal if Bush did them are waved away for the sake of the good that Chavez has done.

As Chavez consolidates his complete dictatorship, I think people will see that they have made a deal with the devil.

[EFerrari]

72. What crap. Chavez was trying to overthrow a criminal. The CIA

was trying to overthow a duly elected, progressive government. There is no comparison.

[Flatulo]

80. OK, so now that Venezuela has a democratically elected government

with a functional legislature and court, do you still support Chavez' moves to suspend term limits and bypass the legislature?

Why, if this activity is viewed as criminal when done by Bush, is it applauded when Chavez tries it?

It makes no sense.

[EFerrari]

84. You are comparing apples and oranges, that's why it makes

no sense to you.

[Flatulo]

93. I am not comparing apples and oranges. I am comparing

two democratically elected leaders of two nations. Both leaders are attempting to, or have succeeded in, vastly expandign the power of the executive branch.

One leader is villified, the other is lauded.

What am I missing here?

[EFerrari]

99. First, Bush has never been elected once. Second,

while he issues secret signing statements to scoff at Congress while the Venezuelan legislature gave Chavez specific powers for a specific and a specific period of time.

Oh -- and Chavez never tried to take over our government. lol

There is no comparison.

[Flatulo]

102. Now, with all due respect, you are changing the subject. If you want

to cover whether Bush is a legitimate president, fine, lets do it in another thread.

Let's stay on track, please.

If the US Congress granted Bush the right to override their every vote, would you be supportative of such a move?

[EFerrari]

106. I'm not changing the subject. I'm pointing out the problems

with your comparison.

Bush already ignores our laws via secret signing statements.

[papau]

136. the legislature voted him the power to bypass the legislature for a limited period - unlike

FEMA, Patriot Act and the new Executive Order on continuity which have no time limits, and in the case of the Exec. Order, was not passed by anyone - just claimed as an "inherent" power.

[Flatulo]

144. Does it concern you at all why they did this? Are they just lazy?

Isn't it their job to pass laws?

[papau]

178. Does not concern me in the least - a legal move approved by 80% of the population n/t

n/t

[EFerrari]

206. Lazy? Maybe dirty and infectious, too?

:wow:

[Flatulo]

215. How you leapt from lazy to 'dirty and infectious' is beyond me.

I wonder what other word I could have used that would not have offended you?

What do you personaly use to describe people who refuse to the the job for which they are being paid?

How about "under-motivated"?

Hmmm, maybe "Over-unenthusiastic"?

[EFerrari]

218. Why do you feel so entitled to impose your values

on the people of Venezuela?

Oops! I forgot! Americans are special.

[Flatulo]

227. My comment was not judgemental, it was ironic. One has

to wonder why an elected legislature would give such broad powers to any leader. They seem to have made themselves irrelevant, just like we accuse our own legislature of doing.

Sounds to me, on the surface at least, that the legislature is packed with Chavez allies who are prepared to rubber-stamp anything. I wonder what they'll get in return for their loyalty?

[eridani]

255. What's wrong with getting rid of term limits?

I'd trade that in a New York minute for real campaign finance reform.

[1932]

82. If the US murdered its citizens to protect neoliberal policies that turned society

into economic slaves, what would you do?

[Flatulo]

87. Um, become very frightened, I guess. I don't really understand the analogy.

[1932]

92. You don't understand the analogy because you don't know the facts in Venezuela?

Read the book in my sig line. It's not even particularly sympathetic of Chavez, but it will be a start to you having an informed opinon.

[Flatulo]

101. This is really pretty simple... if it is wrong for Bush to use his "Signing Statements"

to bypass the legislature, then why is it not also wrong for Chavez to do the same? The Venezuelans have an expectation that their democratically elected representatives will be free to represent their interests.

This has absolutely nothing to do with oil, the CIA or the price of cheese. It is about one man's attempt to grab power.

If it is wrong here, why is it not also wrong there?

[1932]

107. I didn't say that part was wrong. Democracy is corrupted by money in the US

so Bush's "decree powers" granted by the legislature enable concentration of wealth and power.

In Venezuela, there is a real committment to devolving economic and political power, so Chavez's decree powers granted by legislature are narrowly designed to do just that.

Do you get it yet?

[Flatulo]

111. I sure do get it. I expect you, too will understand as time passes.

[1932]

207. A lot of time has passed since '99 and since Venezuela's terrible neoliberal presidents

and their policies have show what they do.

Chavez has proved in 8 years what he's all about, and it's quite impressive to anyone who worries about the extreme polarizations of wealth and power on this earth.

[Unvanguard]

118. Congress doesn't approve the "signing statements."

Chavez's rule by decree must be granted to him by the National Assembly. How is that "bypassing the legislature"?

Since the opposition boycotted the last legislative elections, the National Assembly is composed entirely of his supporters, anyway.

[Flatulo]

120. The legislature has abdicated its responsibility. It would be the same

thing if our congress gave Bush the power to rule by decree.

Their legislature has made themselves irrelevant by voting for dictatorial powers.

[EFerrari]

127. Your subjective and hyperbolic evaluation doesn't change the

Constitution of Venezuela.

[Flatulo]

133. So if the elected representatives of the Venezuelan people

voted to sell the country to Exxon, that would be OK?

The Venezuelan constitution is not the document I refer to when I make subjective judgements of what is right or wrong.

Too much power in the hands of any one individual always, always, always leads to unsuccessful outcomes.

Always.

[EFerrari]

134. Well, the counter example is that they have done this before

without a negative outcome.

[Gabi Hayes]

225. so you're a big fan of King George III, I take it? by your idiotic logic,

all 'coups' are bad

unless, of course, there are coups of which you, in your infinite wisdom, approve

[High Plains]

143. Yes. He went to prison for it. Then he got out.

Then he was elected president.

[Joanne98]

71. Human Rights Watch...

http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=12200§ionID=80
ZNet | Human Rights

Human Rights Watch in Service to the War Party: Including A Review of “Weighing the Evidence: Lessons from the Slobodan Milosevic Trial” (Human Rights Watch, December, 2006)

by Edward S. Herman and David Peterson and George Szamuely; February 25, 2007

Part 1: Introduction: The Role and Biases of Human Rights Watch



Human Rights Watch (HRW) came into existence in 1978 as the U.S. Helsinki Watch Committee. Early documents affirmed that its purpose was to “monitor domestic and international compliance with the human rights provisions of the Helsinki Final Act.”<1> But though a private U.S.-based organization whose vice chairman once stated “You can't complain about other countries unless you put your own house in order,”<2> its main focus was on Moscow. Thus its literature also affirmed that founding the Committee “was intended as a gesture of moral support for the activities of the beleaguered Helsinki monitors in the Soviet bloc,” and its early work was well geared to advance the U.S. government's policy of weakening the Soviet Union and loosening its ties to Eastern Europe.<3> While the organization has broadened its horizons and grown enormously since its $400,000 seed money from the Ford Foundation, it has never sloughed off its close link to the Western establishment, as evidenced by its leadership’s affiliations,<4> its funding,<5> and its role over the years. Because of its institutional commitment to human rights and its broad purview, however, HRW has done a great deal of valuable work, as for example in helping to document the character and effects of the Reagan era wars across Central America, where its Americas Watch reports on the U.S. support for the Nicaragua Contras, the Salvadoran army and death squads, and Guatemalan state terror were eye-opening and led to intense hostility on the part of the Reaganites and Wall Street Journal editors.<6>



But despite these and countless other constructive efforts, the organization has at critical times and in critical theaters thrown its support behind the U.S. government’s agenda, sometimes even serving as a virtual public relations arm of the foreign policy establishment. Since the early 1990s this tendency has been especially marked in the organization’s focus on and treatment of some of the major contests in which the U.S. government itself has been engaged—perhaps none more clearly than Iraq and the Balkans. Here, its deep bias is well-illustrated in a March 2002 op-ed by HRW’s executive director, Kenneth Roth, published in the Wall Street Journal under the title “Indict Saddam.”<7> The first thing to note about this commentary is its timing. It was published at a time when the United States and Britain were clearly planning an assault on Iraq with a “shock and awe” bombing campaign and ground invasion in violation of the UN Charter. But Roth doesn’t warn against launching an unprovoked war—though wars of aggression had been judged by the Nuremberg Tribunal to be the “supreme international crime” that “contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.”<8> On the contrary, Roth's focus was on Saddam’s crimes, and provided a valuable public relations gift to U.S. and British leaders, diverting attention from and putting an apologetic gloss on their prospective supreme international crime.



Three years earlier, when the NATO powers had begun the bombing of Yugoslavia on March 24, 1999, HRW said nothing critical about that action; as we shall see, it focused mainly on the crimes of the target country then under attack. In a 1998 commentary for the International Herald Tribune, Fred Abrahams, an HRW researcher whose major focus has been Kosovo, urged regime-change for Yugoslavia, either through President Slobodan Milosevic's indictment or a U.S. war to affect the same outcome. “At what point will the Clinton administration decide that they have seen enough?” Abrahams asked. “he international community's failure to punish Milosevic for crimes in Croatia and Bosnia sent the message that he would be allowed to get away with such crimes again. It is now obvious that the man who started these conflicts cannot be trusted to stop them.”<9> This line also served the United States and other NATO powers well, and both cases show a clear adaptation of HRW definitions of human rights and choice of worthy victims to the needs of the Western powers and institutions that nurture the organization. (In Part 3, we deal with the mind-boggling misrepresentation of history in Abrahams' statement about Milosevic’s unwillingness to stop these wars—in fact, Milosevic signed-on to every major peace proposal 1992-1995, whereas Abrahams’ favorite state regularly sabotaged them.)



Roth’s “Indict Saddam” starts as follows: “The Bush administration’s frustration with a decade of porous sanctions against Iraq has led to active consideration of military action. Yet one alternative has yet to be seriously tried—indicting Saddam Hussein for his many atrocities, particularly the 1988 genocide against Iraqi Kurds.” This clearly implies that the sanctions imposed on Iraq were ineffective (“porous”) and that the administration’s alleged frustration on that account was real and well grounded, establishment claims that were false and misleading and that an unbiased analyst might have had some doubts about at the time. We may note also the lack of concern with the “active consideration of military action.”
http://www.zmag.org/content/print_article.cfm?itemID=12200§ionID=80

[papau]

137. They claim no government funding - but others point out State Dept influence n/t

n/t

[mcg]

224. HRW: Venezuela: TV Shutdown Harms Free Expression

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/05/22/venezu15986.htm
Venezuela: TV Shutdown Harms Free Expression

(Washington, DC, May 22, 2007)—The Venezuelan government’s politically motivated decision not to renew a television broadcasting license is a serious setback for freedom of expression in Venezuela, Human Rights Watch said today. The decision will shut down Radio Caracas Television (RCTV), the country’s oldest private channel, when its license expires on May 27, 2007.

...

The White Book accuses RCTV of “inciting rebellion,” showing “lack of respect for authorities and institutions,”

...

[Joanne98]

8. John Perkins (Economic Hitman) has a new book coming out!

This is a bad review of it but what can you expect from the FAKE MEDIA!

Author expands claims of U.S. corruption
By Jeff Ostrowski
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/business/content/business/epaper/2007/05/28/a3bz_pg3perkins_0528.html
Palm Beach Post Staff Writer

Monday, May 28, 2007

PALM BEACH GARDENS — Consultant-turned-activist John Perkins tapped into anti-globalization sentiment in 2004 with Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, a surprise hit that reached The New York Times bestseller list.

Perkins' latest book, The Secret History of the American Empire: Economic Hit Men, Jackals, and the Truth About Global Corruption, offers more evidence of American perfidy in the developing world. It's set to be published June 5 by Dutton Adult.

"It's clear that the world we've created is dangerous and no longer sustainable," Perkins writes.

In his 2004 work, Perkins, who lives in Palm Beach Gardens, recounted his work as an international financial consultant in the 1970s. He quit after realizing that the ultimate goal of his job, for all the do-gooder bluster, was not to ease the world's suffering but to make the rich richer.

A Publisher's Weekly review of the new book indicates Perkins is unlikely to change many minds.

"Gathering evidence is not Perkins' strong suit," the review said. "Typically, a shadowy figure pulls him aside, insists on anonymity, then reveals all."

- Jeff Ostrowski

[Flatulo]

13. That review is spot-on...

I read "Hitman" and came away with the very strong impression that 90% of his revelations were pure BS.

[Joanne98]

17. I read Hitman and I think it was one of the best books ever wrote.

VERY BELIEVABLE!

[Flatulo]

18. I guess it's believable if you come into it with a preconceived notion

that the US is responsible for every single ill in the world.

I read it with a bit more scepticism.

[1932]

31. What were you skeptical about?

[Flatulo]

47. I am sceptical of EVERYTHING. But since you ask,

I believe that Perkins tapped into a willing market of leftist "true believers" in the notion that America is pure evil. I believe he has hit pay dirt.

[1932]

53. So, nothing specific?

Were you skeptical of anything he said, specifically?

Or is this just a vague, usuportable feeling you had?

[Flatulo]

61. Well since you ask, in every chapter, every person he meets

is a sage, seasoned veteran of the screwings the US has given their country. In the chapters on Panama, even little children are running around yelling "Die Yankee".

Every single person he meets in the book seems to be completely aare of this huge conspiracy to cheat the third world out of their resources.

Now, I have done a lot of business with people all over the world, and not one person has ever pulled me aside and confided in me that we are screwing their indigenous population. It's all too convenient.

Maybe if people had travelled more they would also be suspicious of how convenient all these encounters are.

[1932]

66. That's absurd. You find it hard to believe that those college students in Indonesia

would have said what they said?

In ever country he was in, events played out that revealed that people's attitudes reflected popular sentiment.

And seriously, after reading about how Panamanians got no wealth from the Canal, and that the US undermined the government because they were thinking about allowing Japan to invest in a second canal that the Panamanians would control, you really don't believe and Panamians would be upset with the US?

[eridani]

256. Empires are evil by nature

We weren't always an empire, and we can choose to stop being one now.

[originalpckelly]

14. Yep, I view people like Chavez a direct result of our nation's destabilizing...

of other parts of the world. The corruption and absolutism of the past will probably have damaged Venezuela's hope for true democracy for a number of decades. Both side of the political spectrum seem very incapable of solving their problems with non-violent means, something that is indicative of extremism, an extremism that probably can be traced back to a dictator propped up by the CIA.

[Judi Lynn]

24. Just read your post, raced right off and ordered the new Perkins book. Can't wait 'til it's out.

Thanks so much for the heads-up. I had no idea he had done another hitman book.

Great O.P., Joanne98. It will be complete justice seeing the whole slimey bunch of them going down in flames. They're on their last legs and they must know it by now.

[Joanne98]

236. GREAT!

:hi:

[Joanne98]

16. Chávez' decision on RCTV supported in Nicaragua

REAL PEOPLE SUPPORT CHAVEZ!

http://english.eluniversal.com/2007/05/27/en_pol_art_chavez-decision-on_27A875787.shtml
Hundreds of members of the Nicaraguan-Venezuelan Solidarity Committee Sunday staged a rally to support President Hugo Chávez' decision not to renew the broadcast license for private television channel RCTV.

The rally took place at 21.00 GMT in south Managua, with the participation of artists, students and general public.

Venezuelan Ambassador in Managua Miguel Gómez told Efe that different people and social leaders showed up at the Venezuelan diplomatic premises to express support to the Venezuelan government refusal to renew RCTV broadcast license.

"This is not a rally, demonstration or march; it is all false news, but this is something modest," Gómez said.

He said the Nicaraguan-Venezuelan Solidarity Committee invited people to appear at the Venezuelan Embassy with blankets or statements of support for President Chávez' move.

The activity ignited controversial reactions, as local media rejected the call to support non-renewal of the broadcast license for a television station in Venezuela.

La Prensa de Managua newspaper described the invitation as something "unheard of."

"This should not be considered only as an abuse of the Nicaraguan territory by a foreign diplomat and complicity of the Nicaraguan government, but also and above all as an ominous warning of the regime of Daniel Ortega -Chávez' ally- that the same thing will or could happen here," the newspaper added.

http://english.eluniversal.com/2007/05/27/en_pol_art_chavez-decision-on_27A875787.shtml

[madokie]

19. I wish I had a president who cared for me like he cares for his people

been a while since america has had one of those, huh

[Flatulo]

20. Do you wish you had a president with unlimited powers like Chavez now has?

Have you heard that he has suspended term limits and can now bypass the legislature?

[EFerrari]

21. Thank GOD we don't have a unitary executive who writes

signing statements to flout our legislature! lol

[NNN0LHI]

23. Chavez won re-election 6 months ago. Apparently the people want him

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6205128.stm

Chavez wins Venezuela re-election

President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela has won a third term in office, securing a clear lead over rival Manuel Rosales.

With most of the ballots counted, Mr Chavez had taken more than 60% of the vote, officials said.

The president, who has secured the support of the poor by using oil to fund welfare, told crowds his left-wing "Bolivarian revolution" had triumphed.

Admitting defeat, his social democrat rival said he would go on "fighting for democracy" in the streets if necessary.

"It's another defeat for the devil, who tries to dominate the world," Mr Chavez told cheering supporters, mocking US President George W Bush, and sending out a "brotherly" salute to Cuba's President Fidel Castro.

[Joanne98]

27. He's got about an 80% approval rating but you can't tell that from the FAKE

news reports!

[NoPasaran]

41. I remember when that was true of Bush

But you couldn't tell that from the DU's members of the Dictator of the Month Club

[originalpckelly]

70. Actually, I think little boots was even higher, he was in the 90s.

Scary shit when you think about it, we're no better than Venezuela, I feel for these poor people, they're going through the same shitty dictatorship we are, it's just that their dictator talks up the socialist game instead of Bush's fascist game.

[Flatulo]

85. DING! Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

[1932]

28. Do you have a link for that claim?

[Flatulo]

32. Linky

http://www.guardian.co.uk/venezuela/story/0,,2002838,00.html

[1932]

35. Your 'linky' says nothing about term limits. Says decree powers are to increase democracy

by shifting political power down to people on the bottom.

[EFerrari]

39. And those powers are for a specific task and for a specific term

iirc.

[Flatulo]

42. How would you feel if Bush assumed these powers ...

... even if for a specified term? Sort of like Diktator for a Month?

I just can't get an answer to this question.

[Joanne98]

51. He doesn't need to assume these powers. He already has a RW cheerleading

Squad! I guess someday when the US has a REAL free press we can worry about it.

[EFerrari]

52. I answered you above. Wake up and smell the signing statements.

Bush already does this.

/typo

[1932]

62. And don't forget Fast Tack Trade Negotiation

which gives bush unilateral power to undermine protections for the working people and the enviornment to do the exact opposite of what Chavez is doing with his decree power (which is to counter neoliberalism and transfer power to people without it).

[Flatulo]

63. Were you upset when Clinton tried to get Fast Track authority?

http://www.aph.gov.au/Library/pubs/RN/1997-98/98rn16.htm

[EFerrari]

68. Yes. And NAFTA has been horrendous for American workers. n/t

[1932]

69. I am upset that Bush and Clinton used it to make wall st wealthy and increase

the polarization of wealth and political power between US an developing countries and within the US between the very wealthy and people who work for a living.

It's a decree power that does exactly the opposite of what Chavez is doing in Venezuela with his decree power.

You really felt you needed to ask that question?

[Benhurst]

103. I, for one, was against it. Clinton looks good when compared

to fascist Bush; but one could make a good case DLC Clinton was the best Republican president of the late Twentieth Century. Back in the days when the majority of Congressional Republicans were conservatives and not fascists,the majority of them would have found little to complain about in Bill's agenda.

America has been goose-stepping to the right for several decades now.

[originalpckelly]

117. Yep, Fast Track was approved way back in the 70s...

Anytime we've shor-circuited the democratic process of America, we've had horrible results. The NSC is one way that's short-circuited and so is Fast Track.

[eridani]

258. Fuck YES!!!

One of the worst things he did, besides the Telecommunications Act and welfare "reform".

[Flatulo]

65. Yes he does, and it's WRONG. So why is it OK for Chavez to bypass the legislature?

Still waiting...

[1932]

73. The LEGISLATURE gave him these powers to increase democracy. It's the opposite of Fast Track Trade

Negotiation power which the US legislature gave to Bush to increase the concentration of wealth and political power in the US.

[originalpckelly]

79. The problem is that you think it can be legitimate to violate separation of powers.

It never is, it's the reason our unPatriotic Act is so very horrible, it's why Bush's signing statements are so horrible. But of course, this Chavez fella's on our side of the political spectrum, so it's OK when he does it.

This is totally frightening listening to people on our side really defend this dictator, it make me wonder if you would defend a dictator in our own country, as long as the dictator told you what you wanted to hear.

[1932]

88. The rules in Venezuela are narrowly drawn to achieve a specific purpose because the country

realizes that the faster they devolve political power the safer their democracy will be.

It's a society that was the most polarized by wealth in the world ten years ago. They want and need to change fast, and I don't see how any sensible person can complain about that.

[EFerrari]

90. There is no violation of the separation of powers.

These measures have been used before and successfully to achieve specific goals and for a specified term.

[originalpckelly]

105. Last time I checked an executive wielding legislative powers violates the separation of powers...

doctrine.

Not only is Chavez executing the laws, he's writing them.

[EFerrari]

108. That's a circular argument. He was given specific powers

BY THE LEGISLATURE. There is no violation.

[originalpckelly]

115. Just like Fast Track "authority" it's a violation of separation of powers...

How hard would it be for the National Assembly to take part in the deliberations over new legislation? They are all Chavez allies after all, the opposition boycotted the elections for the National Assembly.

Does it take too much time or something?

[originalpckelly]

155. You know you still haven't responded.

I'm waiting.

[EFerrari]

190. It's not just like Fast Track. Fast Track benefits multinationals,

not the American worker.

[EFerrari]

75. What is it about constitutional governance that escapes your

understanding?

[originalpckelly]

86. The Bolivarian Constitution is so long I doubt that anyone who voted for it...

actually read the damn thing, it's got 350 different articles in it.

It's like what the Republicans did with the Patriot Act, they stuffed all the really nasty shit inside a bunch of other bullshit to make it look OK, it was so long no one could read it and really debate it.

[EFerrari]

94. Wrong. The Chavez government put in literacy programs

specifically so people could learn to read their own Constitution AND they distributed pocket copies of that document.

[1932]

98. Man, that argument is aiming really really low.

That sounds like something I might have heard in third grade.

[Flatulo]

40. Patience, grasshopper...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/10/AR2007011000468.html

[1932]

48. "by constitutional amdendment" fool. Do you hate constitutions and democracy?

[Flatulo]

67. How would you respond if Bush tried to get term limits removed

by constitutional amendment?

I just can't understand the double standard that is applied in all things Chavez. It's irrational.

[1932]

78. I would hope that it happend after Fox lost its license to broadcast

because I think a public informed with the facts should be able to elect their president to fix society's problems, like they did with FDR.

[EFerrari]

83. False dilemma. n/t

[Flatulo]

149. Well, I will not pressure you again to answer my question.

If you can't see the obvious analogy, then I have failed to pursuade you.

I sincerely hope I am wrong about Chavez.

[EFerrari]

151. I have answered your question and I have pointed out

the problems with the comparison.

[Flatulo]

167. You did point out that the Venezuelan legislature granted Chavez his powers, but

if you replied to my question of whether you would approve the US Congress granting such powers to Bush under any circumstances, I missed it.

I assume you would be against it, because you do not agree with Bush' politics.

[EFerrari]

171. Bush didn't wait for Congress to do that. He uses secret signing

statements to subvert the law.

[Flatulo]

172. We all know that, and we all know that it is wrong.

But I still think, with all respect, that you are being a little slippery here with regards to my question.

If the US Congress were to vote Bush the power to bypass the legislature for any reason, would you be outraged? Do you trust anyone with this kind of power?

[EFerrari]

175. There's nothing slippery about it. Bush flouts the law.

Mr. Chavez is not flouting the law.

And no, I don't think this Venezuelan practice would work in this country because our government is owned by corporate interests. That isn't the case in Venezuela today.

[Flatulo]

176. OK, now I understand... thanks for taking the time for all the replies.

[EFerrari]

186. I apologize if I was testy. There is a lot of reflexive Chavez bashing

here sometimes.

If you haven't watched "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised", I highly recommend it. It was put together with film taken during the failed, CIA backed coup. They didn't know there were two foreign filmmakers present when they laid siege to the Presidential Palace.

It does a good job of laying out who all the players are and it's light on pro-Chavez spin, imo.

[vincent_vega_lives]

300. Yep real shif in power.

Mr Chávez plans to give "power to the people" through thousands of newly formed communal councils, in which Venezuelans will have a say on spending on neighbourhood projects ranging from public housing to road repairs.

Now people get to determain which pothole gets filled first.

Meanwhile:

The former paratroop commander has already said he will use the law to nationalise Venezuela's largest telecommunications company and the electricity sector.

He also intends to impose new taxes on the rich and exert greater state control over oil and natural gas.

In 2001, by invoking an "enabling law" for the second time, he decreed 49 laws, including controversial agrarian reform measures and a ruling that sharply raised taxes on foreign oil companies operating in Venezuela.

Mr Chavez seems to keeping quite a bit of power at the top.

Note this phrase...

The national assembly president, Cilia Flores, said the special powers would enable Mr Chavez to enact new laws that "will benefit the people, those who were excluded their whole lives. They are laws for inclusion and social justice".

He enacts laws. He enforces laws. Thats power. And he means to keep it by investing in his constituancy, which is the poor that have been shit on for so long.

[EFerrari]

37. I'm so glad Death Squads Negroponte weighed in.

lol

[1932]

59. Seriously.

[Flatulo]

30. I see you choose to not answer my question. That's fine.

[Downtown Hound]

156. You mean, like a president that purges minorities from voting rolls,

has political allies build voting machines that have no verifiable trial, secretly grants himself dictatorial powers in the event of a national emergency, grants himself the power to arbitrarily arrest and detain people at will, concocts numerous lies that lead to a war that kills hundreds of thousands, maintains constant surveillance, spying, and harassment of people that oppose him politically including preventing a number of them from flying via a "no fly list," and does this all while not doing anything for the poor like Chavez has done?

Yeah, thank God I don't have a president like that. Oh wait a minute, shit, yes I do. Well fuck all, man.

[Flatulo]

160. OK, we've established that you do not approve of Bush.

Chavez now has dictatorial powers that cannot be checked by the legislature. Do you approve of this because you happen to agree with his politics?

[Downtown Hound]

166. What I really disapprove of is dickheads that are constantly meddling into

the affairs of other nations or passing judgment on them while ignoring the tyrant we have in our own office. But to answer your question, as others have pointed out, the decision to eliminate term limits is being done in Venezuela by constitutional amendment. And if it happens, Venezuela will still have free elections, unlike the United States, and if the bulk of his people ever become dissatisfied with him, they can vote him out.

The United States only developed term limits about 60 years ago. One of the greatest presidents in our history, Franklin Roosevelt, served four terms in office. But hey, even I'll admit that term limits aren't always a good thing. If we had no term limits when Bill Clinton was president, Clinton would have easily won a third term in 2000, and we never would have had this jackass that we have now. Now the bright side to term limits is that we know we can eventually get rid of the jackass we have now. So ultimately, term limits are both a good and a bad thing.

So in conclusion, I'd say that term limits are a good thing in countries that have stable forms of government, the kind where coups backed by foreign powers don't happen.This is not the case in Venezuela. Too much instability in Venezuela right now. Too many outside forces interfering. What it needs is a serious, long-term program to take control of its own destiny and do what's right for its people, and that is what I see Chavez as doing. Chavez is giving his people the chance to continue to vote for him so they can continue the reforms he has begun, by getting the Western corporations out of his country and providing literacy, health care, and education to the poor.

Now, if the people ever became dissatisfied with him and voted him out, and he refused to go, then you would have a dictatorship on your hands. A true dictatorship would be if Chavez were to suspend the right of his people to vote, or basically eliminate any resource they have to get him out of power, took away their freedoms, arbitrary, indefinite imprisonment, torture, excessive secrecy, rule through intimidation and fear, you know, all the things that we've seen here under Bush.

Until we start seeing those things out of him, I'd say all of you anti-Chavistas are basically blowing smoke out your collective asses. Let's pay attention to the dictator we have here at home, and stop pointing our fingers at other nations lecturing them on the benefits of democracy and freedom when we have media that routinely lies to the people and a voting system that's so corrupt you have no way of knowing if your vote really counted. Get off your high horse, friend. We got enough problems here to be worried about what's going on there.

[Flatulo]

170. What am I missing here? Chavez can bypass the legislature.

If the legislature acts to revoke these powers, Chavez can ignore them. They have given him carte-blanch.

Do you trust any individual with absolute power over the functions of government?

Sounds like the perfect recipe for a dictatorship, including the obligatory thundering applause.

[Downtown Hound]

174. What are you missing here?

The fact that the people of Venezuela can still vote him out. When that right is taken away, give me a buzz. Until then, keep on blowing smoke, no one is really listening. Shit man, Saudi Arabia has a human rights record that is one of the worst in the world. And yet do you see the same kind of condemnation of their regime that you do of Venezuela? No. And why is that? Because the Saudis are friendly to U.S. oil interests. That's it. If Chavez was to roll out the welcome mat for Exxon again, I guarantee you that all of this criticism would disappear overnight.

You say that Venezuela is the perfect recipe for dictatorship? Well, if and when it actually happens, like I said, give me a call. I'll be waiting. But I have a hunch I'll be waiting for that call for a long time. Because most of this anti-Chavez crap is just another example of Americans not getting their corporate way with another country, and spreading fear and propaganda about him because he refused to play with us any longer. Poor us. Oh well, like I said, when Chavez takes away the right of his people to vote, and really begins to oppress them, give me a call and we'll talk about dictatorship. Until then, don't waste my time.

[Flatulo]

183. You're right about one thing... time will tell.

I'd love to be wrong about him. I have no ego-driven need to be right about this.

And of course you are right about the Saudis and why the US takes such a keen interest in Chavez.

However, as Dr. Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. If Chavez is just another thug, which I suspect he is, then any meaningful opposition will soon start disappearing.

[Joanne98]

22. CARTOON COUP D'ETAT

Cartoon Coup D’Etat
by Paul Haste / May 28th, 2007
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/05/cartoon-coup-d%E2%80%99etat

‘The Presidential Palace is in our hands; why don’t you show that?’ Chávez’s supporters shouted to the journalists… instead, RCTV was broadcasting Looney Tunes cartoons.

Venezuela takes an important step towards democratizing its media on 28 May when a billion dollar media corporation loses its television broadcast license to ‘those who almost never have a voice,’ in President Hugo Chávez’s words.

Radio Caracas Television — RCTV — and its multi-millionaire owner, Marcel Granier, who are about to lose their unceasing political war against Chávez and Venezuela’s Bolívarian revolution, are claiming that ‘independent media are being closed down,’ that Chávez is a dictator intent on ‘restricting freedom of expression and democratic rights.’

Reporters without Borders declares that RCTV losing its license is ‘a serious attack on editorial pluralism’, while editorials in US newspapers have predictably misrepresented the controversy, claiming Chávez is retaliating against his critics in the opposition media who ‘disagree’ with the Bolívarian revolution.

The reality is rather different. As Reporters without Borders doesn’t mention, perhaps understandably so, given its financing by the US State Department’s National Endowment for Democracy — which also finances rightist opposition political parties in Venezuela — RCTV was an active participant in the violent coup d’etat that deposed President Chávez for almost 48 hours in 2002.

On the day of the coup, RCTV abandoned all pretense to report news impartially, calling opposition supporters to illegally demonstrate at the Miraflores Presidential Palace in Caracas while showing the constant on screen message ‘Ni un paso atras’: ‘Not one step back.’

It deliberately showed film from one angle to falsely claim that Chávez supporters were firing on opposition demonstrators, when another camera angle would have shown that Chávez supporters were defending themselves from sniper attacks — no opposition demonstrators were in sight. The constant repeated broadcasting of this film was then used as justification for some military officers to declare their ‘disobedience’ to the president, and these declarations were faithfully broadcast to attempt to legitimize a military takeover.

The American editorial writers who fail to mention all this, also fail to comment on the Venezuelan media’s support for the subsequent fascist junta that took control in Caracas and proceeded to dismiss the entire Supreme Court and the Congress, suspend the constitution, arrest the democratically elected president and then sent armed police onto the streets to suppress any resistance.

A junta member, Admiral Victor Ramírez Pérez, thanked journalists on live TV the day after the coup, saying that the organizers ‘had a weapon — the media — let me congratulate you,’ and the businessman the junta chose to be ‘president’, Pedro Carmona, summoned media executives to Miraflores to ensure that opposition to the coup was not reported.

RCTV’s boss, Granier, denied he ever met Carmona during the coup, despite film showing his presence at Miraflores, and while Granier still refers to the junta leader as ‘President Carmona’, RCTV’s subsequent actions demonstrated that no instructions were necessary to keep it on message.
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/05/cartoon-coup-d%E2%80%99etat

[EFerrari]

100. Note to CIA: Next time you fake a coup, make sure there are no

filmmakers in the building!

lol

[Emit]

148. The National Endowment for Democracy (NED)

~snip~

Carl Gershman, the founding and current president of NED, was an organizer with the Socialist Party. As a member of a right-wing faction of the party known as Shachtmanites (followers of Trotskyist leader Max Shachtman), Gershman challenged Michael Harrington’s leadership of the Socialist Party in 1972. While Harrington was a vociferous opponent of the Vietnam War, the Shachtmanites supported the war and favored Republican Richard Nixon over Democrat George McGovern in the presidential election campaign that year. ... After the Socialist Party split, Gershman—together with Rachelle Horowitz and Tom Kahn (both of whom worked with the CIA-funded International Affairs Department of the AFL-CIO)—founded the Social Democrats/USA (SD/USA). For many neoconservatives with Trotskyist backgrounds, SD/USA became their main point of entry into the struggles to break the control of the progressive “New Politics” faction of the Democratic Party. Although having only a few dozen members and associates, SD/USA exercised major influence in the AFL-CIO and in shaping foreign policy operations in the Reagan administration.4

In the late 1970s a bipartisan group of foreign policy hawks, led by neoconservatives, concluded that a new system was needed to channel “political aid” to an international network of “free” trade unions, anti-leftist political parties, publishing houses, and civic groups that would promote U.S. foreign and military policies. A faction of neoconservatives associated with the Social Democrats/USA and the AFL-CIO’s International Affairs took the lead in working with right-wing corporations and the U.S. government to address this need through the American Political Foundation, which received State Department funding to explore new avenues to offer U.S. government support for “domestic pluralistic forces in totalitarian countries.”5 ... Instead of clandestine financing for political and cultural organizations, the neoconservatives and their labor partners advocated that Reagan establish a quasi-governmental organization that would redirect funds from the U.S. Information Agency (USIA) and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to substitute for clandestine CIA funding, which had recently been prohibited by Congress after revelations that the CIA had been funding domestic academic and cultural organizations.

Not only did NED give neoconservatives a government-funded institute over which they exercised effective control, but it also facilitated close links with the U.S. government-funded international operations of the AFL-CIO while building new ties with business. NED supported the creation of a series of neoconservative-controlled front groups that sought bipartisan and U.S. public support for an interventionist policy in Central America, which was part of the larger rollback, containment policy advocated by groups such as the Committee on the Present Danger and the Coalition for Peace through Strength. One of the most prominent of these NED-financed front groups was the Project for Democracy in Central America (PRODEMCA), which merged the hard (military) and soft (political aid and public diplomacy) sides of the neoconservative agenda in Central America. On the one hand, it received clandestine support from the unofficial “Project Democracy” of the National Security Council, operated by Oliver North and supervised by Elliott Abrams. On the other hand, it received AID and USAID funding through NED for public diplomacy efforts.6

Neoconservatives have held tight control over NED’s agenda and its institutional structure since its founding. Cold War paranoia and nationalism explain in part the bizarre and intricate networks that brought U.S. government agencies together with the AFL-CIO, corporate America, and former Trotskyists. But the partnerships did not end with the Cold War. Carl Gershman, who has kept his position as NED’s president, is an enthusiast of Middle East and North Korea democratization as part of the Bush administration’s regional restructuring agendas.7 NED’s chairman is Vin Weber, who along with current NED board member Francis Fukuyama and former board members Paula Dobriansky and Paul Wolfowitz (both of whom joined the Bush II administration in 2001), signed the founding statement of the Project for the New American Century.8

~snip~

Vin Weber cofounded, along with William Bennett and Jack Kemp (who both served as cabinet members during the Reagan administration), the neoconservative Empower America institute. Another Empower America director, Michael Novak, also sits on NED’s board.10 Weber’s election as NED chairman in 2001 together with Julie Finley as vice-chair signaled that NED would closely follow Bush’s foreign policy agenda in its democracy-building efforts. Finley also has connections with various neocon-driven groups, including the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq and the American Enterprise Institute’s Project on Transitional Democracies.

~snip~

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1513

[Joanne98]

25. Salvadoran demonstrators show support for Chávez' decision on RCTV

Salvadoran demonstrators show support for Chávez' decision on RCTV
http://english.eluniversal.com/2007/05/27/en_pol_art_salvadoran-demonstra_27A875619.shtml

Around 1,000 demonstrators rallied outside the Venezuelan embassy to El Salvador in order to show support for President Hugo Chávez, who decided not to renew a broadcasting license for private TV station RCTV.

However, local media heightened their criticisms and stated that this is a "black Sunday against free expression."

The demonstrators arrived to the embassy carrying Venezuelan flags and placards that read "Sunday of justice," "the revolution must go on," and "long live Chávez," reported AFP.

Established in 1953, RCTV will cease operations at 11:59 p.m.

[EFerrari]

112. Cool. There's hope in El Salvador.

:)

[Joanne98]

26. Venezuela's RCTV: Sine Die and GOOD RIDDANCE!

May 28, 2007
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_stephen__070528...
Venezuela's RCTV: Sine Die and Good Riddance

By Stephen Lendman

Venezuela's RCTV: Sine Die and Good Riddance - by Stephen Lendman

Venezuelan TV station Radio Caracas Television's (known as RCTV) VHF Channel 2's operating license expired May 27, and it went off the air because the Chavez government, with ample justification, chose not to renew it. RCTV was the nation's oldest private broadcaster, operating since 1953. It's also had a tainted record of airing Venezuela's most hard right yellow journalism, consistently showing a lack of ethics, integrity or professional standards in how it operated as required by the law it arrogantly flaunted.

Starting May 28, a new public TV station (TVES) replaces it bringing Venezuelans a diverse range of new programming TV channel Vive president, Blanca Eckhout, says will "promot(e) the participation and involvement of all Venezuelans in the task of communication (as an alternative to) the media concentration of the radio-electric spectrum that remains in the hands of a (dominant corporate) minority sector" representing elitist business interests, not the people.

Along with the other four major corporate-owned dominant television channels (controlling 90% of the nation's TV market), RCTV played a leading role instigating and supporting the aborted April, 2002 two-day coup against President Chavez mass public opposition on the streets helped overturn restoring Chavez to office and likely saving his life. Later in the year, these stations conspired again as active participants in the economically devastating 2002-03 main trade union confederation (CTV) - chamber of commerce (Fedecameras) lockout and industry-wide oil strike including willful sabotage against state oil company PDVSA costing it an estimated $14 billion in lost revenue and damage.

This writer explained the dominant corporate media's active role in these events in an extended January, 2007 article titled "Venezuela's RCTV Acts of Sedition." It presented conclusive evidence RCTV and the other four corporate-run TV stations violated Venezuela's Law of Social Responsibility for Radio and Television (LSR). That law guarantees freedom of expression without censorship but prohibits, as it should, transmission of messages illegally promoting, apologizing for, or inciting disobedience to the law that includes enlisting public support for the overthrow of a democratically elected president and his government.

In spite of their lawlessness, the Chavez government treated all five broadcasters gently opting not to prosecute them, but merely refusing to renew one of RCTV's operating licenses (its VHF one) when it expired May 27 (its cable and satellite operations are unaffected) - a mere slap on the wrist for a media enterprise's active role in trying to overthrow the democratically elected Venezuelan president and his government. The article explained if an individual or organization of any kind incited public hostility, violence and anti-government rebellion under Section 2384 of the US code, Title 18, they would be subject to fine and/or imprisonment for up to 20 years for the crime of sedition.

They might also be subject to prosecution for treason under Article 3, Section 3 of the US Constitution stating: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort" such as instigating an insurrection or rebellion and/or sabotage to a national defense utility that could include state oil company PDVSA's facilities vital to the operation and economic viability of the country and welfare of its people. It would be for US courts to decide if conspiring to overthrow a democratically government conformed to this definition, but it's hard imagining it would not at least convict offenders of sedition.

Opposition Response to the Chavez Government Action

So far, the dominant Venezuelan media's response to RCTV's shutdown has been relatively muted, but it remains to be seen for how long. However, for media outside the country, it's a different story with BBC one example of misreporting in its usual style of deference to power interests at home and abroad. May 28 on the World Service, it reported RCTV's license wasn't renewed because "it supported opposition candidates" in a gross perversion of the facts, but that's how BBC operates.

BBC online was more nuanced and measured, but nonetheless off the mark in key comments like reporting "Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets in Caracas Sunday, some to celebrate, others to protest" RCTV's shuttering. Unexplained was that Chavez supporters way outnumbered opponents who nearly always are part of rightist/corporate-led staged for the media events in contrast to spontaneous pro-government crowds assembling in huge numbers at times, especially whenever Chavez addresses them publicly.

BBC also exaggerated "skirmishes" on the streets with "Police us(ing) tear gas and water cannons to disperse (crowds) and driving through the streets on motorbikes, officers fired plastic bullets in the air." It also underplayed pro-government supportive responses while blaring opposition ones like "Chavez thinks he owns the country. Well, he doesn't." Another was "No to the closure. Freedom." And still another was "Everyone has the right to watch what they want. He can't take away this channel." BBC played it up commenting "As the afternoon drew on, the protests got louder." The atmosphere became nasty. Shots were fired in the air and people ran for cover. It was not clear who was firing" when it's nearly always clear as it's been in the past - anti-Chavistas sent to the streets to stir up trouble and blame it on Chavez.

BBC's commentary ended saying "The arguments highlight, once again, how deeply divided Venezuela is." Unmentioned was that division is about 70 - 80% pro-Chavez, around 20% opposed (the more privileged "sifrino" class), and a small percentage pro and con between them.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_stephen__070528...


Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at [email protected] .

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Steve Lendman News and Information Hour on TheMicroEffect.com Saturdays at noon US central time.

Authors Website: http://www.sjlendman.blogspot.com

Authors Bio: I am a 72 year old, retired, progressive small businessman concerned about all the major national and world issues, committed to speak out and write about them.

[leftchick]

29. Venezuela's RCTV: Sine Die and Good Riddance

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_stephen__070528_venezuela_s_rctv_3a_si.htm

Venezuela's RCTV: Sine Die and Good Riddance - by Stephen Lendman

Venezuelan TV station Radio Caracas Television's (known as RCTV) VHF Channel 2's operating license expired May 27, and it went off the air because the Chavez government, with ample justification, chose not to renew it. RCTV was the nation's oldest private broadcaster, operating since 1953. It's also had a tainted record of airing Venezuela's most hard right yellow journalism, consistently showing a lack of ethics, integrity or professional standards in how it operated as required by the law it arrogantly flaunted.


Starting May 28, a new public TV station (TVES) replaces it bringing Venezuelans a diverse range of new programming TV channel Vive president, Blanca Eckhout, says will "promot(e) the participation and involvement of all Venezuelans in the task of communication (as an alternative to) the media concentration of the radio-electric spectrum that remains in the hands of a (dominant corporate) minority sector" representing elitist business interests, not the people.

Along with the other four major corporate-owned dominant television channels (controlling 90% of the nation's TV market), RCTV played a leading role instigating and supporting the aborted April, 2002 two-day coup against President Chavez mass public opposition on the streets helped overturn restoring Chavez to office and likely saving his life. Later in the year, these stations conspired again as active participants in the economically devastating 2002-03 main trade union confederation (CTV) - chamber of commerce (Fedecameras) lockout and industry-wide oil strike including willful sabotage against state oil company PDVSA costing it an estimated $14 billion in lost revenue and damage.

This writer explained the dominant corporate media's active role in these events in an extended January, 2007 article titled "Venezuela's RCTV Acts of Sedition." It presented conclusive evidence RCTV and the other four corporate-run TV stations violated Venezuela's Law of Social Responsibility for Radio and Television (LSR). That law guarantees freedom of expression without censorship but prohibits, as it should, transmission of messages illegally promoting, apologizing for, or inciting disobedience to the law that includes enlisting public support for the overthrow of a democratically elected president and his government.

[Joanne98]

44. Great minds think alike!

:hi:

[NoPasaran]

50. As do the great fans of dictatorship!

Imagine how orgasmically happy you'll all be when Chavez starts executing the opposition!

[Joanne98]

56. zzzzzzzzz

:boring:

[EFerrari]

95. LOL!

[leftchick]

96. ZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz

:boring:

[NoPasaran]

234. I thumb my nose at your smiley

:nopity:

[leftchick]

240. LOL!

and I laugh at yours.... pathetic indeed.

:rofl:

:rofl:

:rofl:

:rofl:

:rofl:

[NoPasaran]

245. Not as pathetic

As DEMOCRATIC Undergrounders (or 3.14ers for that matter) cheering ANY government shutting down the opposition media.

:puke:

:puke:

:puke:

:puke:

:puke:

:puke:

:puke:

:puke:

:puke:

[leftchick]

250. hey the clue bus is pulling up for you.....

the "opposition agenda" you are referring to are the ex ruling elite powered and helped financed by our very own CIA. Now if you chose to take that clue bus I will chat with you some more. Otherwise peddle your right wing crap to some one who cares.

here I will raise you a puke because it is deserved....

[jefferson_dem]

261. Thank you for interjecting genuinely *democratic* sensibility into the discussion.

A free-speech quashing tyrant is a free-speech quashing tyrant...even if his name is HUGO!

[originalpckelly]

109. Oh no, that'll look bad, people will just not be there.

Poof, gone without a trace, sort of like extraordinary rendition Venezuelan style. It's almost like the dictator in their country is reading the same book as our dictator.

[EFerrari]

114. You have no factual basis to make such a charge. Bush

on the other hand, has been disappearing people here and all around the world.

[leftchick]

181. yes we do!

:hi:

[Missy M]

36. When I read about the real people demonstrating.....

the first thing I thought of was they were worried about their soaps. My daughter lived in Venezuela for many years and she told me the Venezuelan's really love their soaps, they are fanatic about them. When the soaps come back on they will settle down.

[NoPasaran]

45. Don't worry about the soaps

I'm sure the "real people" will learn to enjoys documentaries about all the great things the dear leader is doing for them just as much. They will, if they know what's good for them!

[Joanne98]

54. Chavez has no intention of shutting down soaps, gameshows or sports.

JUST THE OVERTHROW THE GOVERNMENT SHOWS!

[Missy M]

76. I know that.....

I'm one of the people who thinks Chavez is good for Venezuela. I just wanted to mention why people were really upset and it was all about soaps.

[Flatulo]

161. I am so relieved that Chavez has moved to protect the SOAPS!

This would be funny if it weren't so sad.

[Missy M]

64. Well that will be nothing new.....

she only lived there a fews years under Chavez but many years under the opposition and one of the things I remember her telling me then was how the President's (before) Chavez were always on TV for hours yapping away.

[Joanne98]

43. Documents Reveal U.S. Effort to Influence Venezuelan Journalists

Caracas, May 26, 2007 (venezuelanalysis.com)—
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=2309
Several major Venezuelan journalists have received all-expenses paid trips to the U.S. for courses in an apparent effort of the U.S. State Department to influence the media in Venezuela, according to recently released documents. The Venezuelan-American attorney Eva Golinger, who released the information yesterday in a press conference in Caracas, also revealed evidence of a destabilization plan against the Chavez government to take place this weekend.

Golinger is the author of The Chavez Code, which documents U.S. funding of opposition groups and U.S. involvement in the 2002 coup attempt.

Under a program named International Business Leadership Program, many Venezuelan journalists, mostly from the opposition media, but also some from the Venezuelan government, have received "scholarships" from the U.S. government to attend training courses during the years 2001-2005.

Some of the most recognized opposition journalists of the country have participated according to the documents, including Miguel Angel Rodriguez of RCTV, who received more than six thousand dollars for his participation in 2003, and Maria Fernanda Flores of Globovision among others, according to the documents obtained by Eva Golinger through the U.S. Freedom of Information Act.

With the supposed intention of teaching journalists about the media and journalism in the United States, the program also has the purpose of influencing how Venezuelan journalists cover events related to the U.S. foreign policy. According to the documents released, the programs denominated "Journalism IV" seek to "influence the approach and ultimately the coverage given to issues of importance to U.S. foreign policy and to strengthen the Venezuelan democratic process."

The State Department gave special attention to the Venezuelan news channel Globovisión, which they believe to be "the most influential channel" and to have the most positive coverage of the United States. The State Department sought a special relationship with this particular news network, and especially with one important journalist Maria Fernanda Flores.

According to an unclassified State Department memo, “A program that gives Flores a better understanding of and closer ties with U.S. media executive decision-making policies and practices can help Globovision, already the country’s news leader, an even more professional responsible force in Venezuela’s media environment, with profound implications not only for more positive coverage of U.S. policies but for Venezuela’s evolving political situation as well.”

Golinger emphasized, though, that the journalists involved in these programs were chosen by the U.S. embassy and could very well be unaware of the program’s efforts to influence their coverage of U.S. foreign policy.

Golinger also spoke about other State Department programs including one to increase U.S. access to the Venezuelan Armed Forces through various training programs, whose objectives she said are similar to the program for journalists.

The Press Attaché of the U.S. Embassy in Venezuela, Bryan Penn, responded on Globovisión to Golinger’s press conference yesterday by saying that the programs she presented were common with governments around the world and that the U.S. is “proud of them.”

Destabilization Plan

Golinger also presented evidence of a destabilization plan for this Saturday, showing a flyer calling for people to come into the streets and march in the morning hours of Saturday, May 26th. According to the attorney, the campaign is designed by Freedom House, a U.S. organization dedicated to non-violent resistance.

Freedom House, headed by Peter Ackerman, has been involved in other countries and other campaigns to overthrow regimes such as Serbia and the Ukraine. According to Golinger, the flyers circulating in Caracas have the logo of a clenched fist, the same logo used in the campaigns in other countries such as Serbia, Georgia, and the Ukraine.

Golinger also made reference to the fact that leaders from the Serbian campaign, and people from the Center for Applied Nonviolent Action and Strategies (Canvas) have been involved with the Venezuelan opposition and have given trainings about nonviolent resistance inside Venezuela. According to the webpage of Canvas, Venezuela is one of three nations in which the resistance strategies are being used.

Golinger said that she found the presence of these programs to be "worrying" in light of the tense relations between the United States and Venezuela, as well as the aggressive media atmosphere in Venezuela in recent years.
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=2309

HA HA HA!

[Flatulo]

74. I suppose Chavez' offer of low-cost fuel to poor Americans is not propoganda?

I mean it's a very nice thing for the poor people, but do you think there is any possibility that it was an attempt to influence American public opinion?

[EFerrari]

110. But Mr. Chavez did not pose as an American journalist when

he did that. It was out in the sunlight.

And I hope his government is vigorous in defending itself from the constant demonization in the whore American media.

[Judi Lynn]

257. Democratic Congressmen and leaders of Native American tribes were blown off by our oil companies

when they originally approached them seeking discounted prices for heating for their poorer constituents. They were handed their hats and sent away unceremoniously.

It was ONLY AFTER BEING DENIED ASSISTANCE HERE THAT THEY WENT TO VENEZUELA FOR HELP, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. All those individual agreements were sought independently, and only after having been denied right in this country.

Don't try that baloney on DU'ers. We all know better.

[Wilber_Stool]

57. Here's the thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2183955&mesg_id=2183955

And here's the two posts that jump out of it. Two of the most passionate you will ever read. It's a long thread but well worth the read.

80. and most that ran Venezuela before Chavez were Updated at 12:41 PM

Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 12:30 AM by flyarm
US OIL puppets..i know..i lived there and i can assure you the way the government was in Venezuela before Chavez..only gave a damn about one thing..and that wa s the richest of the rich played ball with the US oil companies..and they didn't give one rats ass about the people..they ruled with an iron fist..

there were 18 yr old military boys on the streets with machine guns..every quarter of a mile..to keep the poor in control..

Americans were god and ruled Venezuela..to the bitter destruction of the Venezuelan poor!

Like i said..i lived there..and it was horrible..before Chavez for the majority of Venezuelans..

i saw little poor children who had people put their cigarettes out on their arms and chests for a boulivar..


there was no middle class..there was the oil boys and the companies that catered to the oil boys..and nothing else..

i saw children with their teeth rotted out with only points in their mouths..and blood on their gums..

there were no doctors for the poor..

there were only the very very rich..and the very very poor..

nothing in between..

i lived their 2 times with my husbands business..and each time we returned home i got down on the ground and kissed it!

the crimes against humanity before Chavez was disgusting..but it was run by our oil corps..and the Kuwaiti's had their hands in the oil as well.. so you heard little of it! there was no possibility of decent by the poor..they had no voice. NONE!

the pres of Venezuela and the VP were owned by US corporations..and don't you even attempt to tell me other wise..i knew the VP of Venezuela..and i danced with him 2 times on Christmas and New years and told him off..of what they did to their people..and he laughed at me..and said i was an

flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Thu Sep-21-06 02:03 AM
Response to Reply #95


111. i just get sick of people talking about what they know nothing of.. Updated at 12:41 PM

Edited on Thu Sep-21-06 02:07 AM by flyarm
when we lived there under previous governments ..one time machine gun fire went off in the caracas hilton where we lived..for 6 months..not once but twice!!..yes machine gun fire went through the lobby by young military ..

there was no freedom under previous presidents..

we were there 2 times through xmas..

my husbands boss sent xmas gifts to my son and myself..and for my husband in a duffel bag..a motorized car for my son..and the military was at the door of the hotel and took it all way from my husband and would not let him go into the hotel with gifts..xmas gifts!

my husband took a bus for some road trips..and several times had their bus stopped by military that got on the bus with machine guns..and put them in their faces ..and took their watches and money..and any other jewelry they had..

this was under the presidents that the * cabal liked, the ones that stole every thing they could from the people of Venezuela.


There were days my son and i sat at the hotel pool and we had helicopters flying over head and the pool,.. so close you felt like you could reach up and touch them..with guys hanging out of the helicopters with machine guns pointed at us..i would run my son and I up to our room and hide..as best we could..

it was terrifying...

there was no hope at all for the poor..none at all..the young men had only the choice of military unless they were from the very rich families..

or working in the american oil fields for pennies...

so bullshit is bullshit.,.

i saw it..and i lived it..and i can tell you..Chavez may not be perfect..and i am sure he is not..but he could be no worse than what those poor people lived under for so many years with our oil puppet presidents and governments down there!! and they were ours!..they were owned by our oil companies!

I lived with the oil people at the rich hotels i lived in..and the pilots for our oil companies..and the pilots for the Kwaiti's...they used to show me the Krugerrand they got as tips..big ones!!

my husbands boss had a Renior in his freaking bathroom!

yes a real one!!

like i said..bullshit is bullshit..the previous governments were American oil company owned..and our government ran them ...

[Joanne98]

81. That needs it's own thread.

[Beelzebud]

77. He's a Kinder, Gentler Dictator.

[EFerrari]

179. That can be repeated over and over but, the repetition doesn't make it true.

Edit: My grandfather, because he was in the military, worked for one of the most brutal dictators in the whole history of El Salvador. Believe me, that guy never opened medical clinics, he never provided hot meals to school kids, he never implemented literacy programs, he never helped people become home owners.

He never kicked a multinational bloodsuckers out of El Salvador and he never challenged American hegemony.

Chavez would have to work very hard to become a successful Latin American dictator, especially now that the people have been empowered. lol

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

113. Fuck Chavez.

[NNN0LHI]

121. I would take Chavez as president over our war criminal and tin-pot dictator any day

Not even close.

Don

[Flatulo]

123. Just wondering out loud how many applications for citizenship the Venezuelan Consul

is receivng from US citizens...

Not many I'd guess. Anyone know the number?

[NNN0LHI]

125. Why guess?

Look it up and let us know if you think it is so pertinent.

Don

[papau]

139. the CIA would know the number - and no doubt would take care of the problem n/t

n/t

[acmavm]

124. I would think you people would save your outrage for an unelected

dictator who does nothing at all for his people, starts wars he can't finish, lies to 'his people', thinks the laws and rules set down by men who were far more ethical and smarter than he ever will be a 'piece of paper', and gives himself the power over all three branches of government in a disaster (which apparently includes him getting a hangnail).

The owners of RCTV controlled 85% of the media in Venezuela. And they used it to try to overthrow a a government elected by the people. Luckily in that country the people don't take lightly to coup de etats like we do here.

[NNN0LHI]

126. Some have never heard of glass houses

Pity.

Don

[originalpckelly]

130. Actually, I have enough outrage to go around for our dictator, Venezuela's dictator...

and also enough for those poor gay rights marchers in Russia who had the crap beaten out of them. I feel bad for all of us, and it makes me worry to see people on our side support dictatorship. It's like listening to the Republicans praise our el Presidente.

[EFerrari]

132. No one here is supporting dictatorship. You are making

unfounded accusations.

Why don't you go read or even watch Greg Palast's reporting instead of repeating the same mis characterizations over and over? Or go watch the documentary on the CIA failed coup? It's on the net.

[acmavm]

153. What dictatorship? Don't you comprehend the difference between a

duly elected president and a usurper/dictator? What part of CIA agitated treason escapes you? If Chavez was what you insinuate, there would have been some people lined up against a wall and shot.

[originalpckelly]

159. What if the CIA is bad, yet Chavez is as well?

Isn't that a possibility?

You seem to think this is an either/or situation. I can criticize a dictator for shutting down his opposition, while also being intelligent enough to realize his opposition was probably an American hit job.

The shutting down of RCTV is only going to be the first step of many Chavez takes to secure power in Venezuela, his other recent actions taken together with this one suggest he has begun an active phase of consolidating power.

It's almost like we've got dueling crime families putting out hits on each other, I don't have to pick sides to criticize them, I'm an independent observer criticizing their activities. I don't have to support the retaliation of one crime family against another in order to criticize the retaliation, retaliation is just wrong in and of itself.

The world is not as simple as you would have it be.

[acmavm]

164. The only people who are bitching about what Chavez is doing are those

that controlled 95% of the land and wealth in that country. They (the majority of the people of Venezuela) elected him to straighten that mess out, to level the playing field. That is what he's doing.

How do you know he's going to pull a bush** and consolidate all the power into his hands? How do you know that he's going to make himself a dictator? And Chavez isn't retaliating against the BFEE. He's rectifying a unsustainable situation. He's ensuring that the same families that have destabilized the country for generations cannot keep on stirring up CIA-instigated unrest.

Don't ever think I view the world as being 'simple'. That was an arrogant remark and I resent it greatly. What ever makes you think that you have all the answers?

Do you think that the media in this country needs to be reformed? The print and television media. Are the slanted? Do they lie and cover up for this criminal cabal? Are they not responsible for colluding with this bush** administration and hiding/burying stories that the American people have a right to hear? Are they not complicit in the egregious wrongs being done to the American people all under the crock of shit mantra of 'defending democracy'?

Whereas you think my views are simplistic, I think you are seriously misguided. Let's leave it at that.

[EFerrari]

169. You are an independent observer who seems to know little

or next to nothing about Venezuela or Chavez. And that's too bad, because there are ample resources available to for your information.

[vincent_vega_lives]

304. Sorry folks

I don't buy that the CIA is "badder" than any other US Government agency. While most federal agents are arogant pricks until you get to know them, they love their wives and children too.

[Vidar]

128. Brilliant post, Joanne.

[Joanne98]

141. Thankyou Vidar!

:hi:

[WinkyDink]

129. Es verdad!!

[upi402]

140. Thank you for this post. It's a big "NO SH1T" for many of us

Sadly, it's still a big "BULLSHIT" to many Dems.

[EFerrari]

150. Joanne made me remember those fake protestors

rich ladies in designer clothes that were caught on tape in "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised". They were hilariously obvious especially compared to real people who came out to protest the kidnapping of Mr. Chavez. The oppressed Gucci misses, er, masses. lol

[Joanne98]

238. You made me remember the "Brooks Brothers" protestors in Florida 2000

They should really try shopping at Goodwill for clothes before they do their FAKE protests!

[Flatulo]

146. Apparently thousands of CIA employees are now clashing with

riot police over the closing of the US puppet TV station.

:sarcasm:

[EFerrari]

210. Here's thread that might interest you on the issue of executive transgression:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x986883

[Flatulo]

214. I think most of use here agree that Bush has overreached and the

legislature needs to assert itself.

I just see what appears to me to be a little reflexive cheerleadingn for Chavez.

I have a problem with all authority, whether it emanates from the right or the left.

[EFerrari]

221. I do, too. And so far, I don't see that happening in Venezuela. n/t

[Dave From Canada]

154. King Hugo is the real national security threat, not TV stations. I guess he only wants Fox News

type stations that only speak kindly of dear leader. Pathetic.

[EFerrari]

177. You have it exactly backwards. RW, Bush-backed media

who has done its best to depose Mr. Chavez illegally is what is being reined in. If any outlet tried to do the same here, they'd be in Gitmo right now. Hell, Greg Palast was arrested by Homeland Sekurity for accurately reporting on NOLA. Did you catch that?

[Dave From Canada]

273. Sorry, it's just an excuse to silence opposition. And he's reaching beyond this particular TV

station. You may give him a pass, but responsible people who truely believe in free speech won't. And what happened to Palast is just as bad, but two wrongs don't make a right. Just because I'm not a fan of King Hugo, doesn't mean I'm a fan of King George. Personally, I think they're two of a kind. At least King George will be leaving office soon, I'm sure King Hugo will find a way to stay in power for decades to come.

[leftchick]

193. pathetic indeed

apparently you know nothing of RCTV's history. Check the links I posted below.

[EFerrari]

195. Thanks, leftchick. I seem to have deleted my bookmarks

on the Chavez issue.

[leftchick]

199. my pleasure

Judi Lynn has a ton as well.

:hi:

[L. Coyote]

157. US Taxpayers Fund Media Distortions = $96M Propaganda Project & $1.6B spent

How do distortions enter the media in the first instance?
Why, you pay for it, of course.

Here is just part of the Iraq propaganda story.
=========================
US Journalist Quit Pentagon Iraqi Media Project = $96M Propaganda Project

Wednesday, January 14th, 2004
U.S. Journalist Quits Pentagon Iraqi Media Project Calling it U.S. Propaganda
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/01/14/1555223

Listen LINK

We talk to a longtime TV producer about the massive problems he saw in the new U.S.-funded Iraqi Media Network, which he said became an "irrelevant mouthpiece for Coalition Provisional Authority propaganda, managed news and mediocre programs." The U.S. has awarded a $96 million contract to a U.S. producer of communications equipment, Harris Corp., to create a U.S.-funded national media network in Iraq.

According to the head of Harris Corp, the Iraqi Media Network will have 30 TV and radio transmitters, three broadcast studios, and 12 bureaus around Iraq. .....

===================
MORE: BUSH's LIES: "federal agencies spent $1.6 billion on what some Democrats called 'spin.' "

Bush administration propaganda and disinformation
From SourceWatch
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bush_administration_propaganda_and_disinformation

The Bush administration "spent $1.4 billion in taxpayer dollars on 137 contracts with advertising agencies over the past two-and-a-half years, according to a Government Accountability Office report released by House Democrats" on February 13, 2006, Richard Williamson reported for Adweek. "With spending on public relations and other media included, federal agencies spent $1.6 billion on what some Democrats called 'spin.'" ............

The GAO reported that the "six largest recipients of ad and PR dollars were" Leo Burnett USA, $536 million; Campbell-Ewald, $194 million; GSD&M, $179 million; J. Walter Thompson (JWT), $148 million; Frankel & Company, $133 million; and Ketchum, $78 million. "The agencies received more than $1.2 billion in media contracts, according to the report," ........

FROM: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x980363#981252
===================================

Historical Context: Are the Sandinista terrorists on the Texas border yet? Rhetoric to haunt Freeepers.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x503712#504746

[EFerrari]

185. Once you recognize the pattern, it's pretty obvious, isn't it?

:hi:

[EFerrari]

187. Does anyone have a link handy for the film about the failed CIA coup?

I know there are two or three sites out there but am on a new machine and don't have those links any more. :(

[leftchick]

229. Here you go.....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144

HUGO CHAVEZ ELECTED PRESIDENT OF VENEZUELA IN 1998, IS A COLORFUL, UNPREDICTABLE FOLK HERO, beloved by his nation's working class and a tough-as-nails, quixotic opponent to the power structure that would see him deposed. Two independent filmmakers were inside the presidential palace on April 11, 2002, when he was forcibly removed from office. They were also present 48 hours later when, remarkably, he returned to power amid cheering aides. Their film records what was probably history's shortest-lived coup d'état. It's a unique document about political muscle and an extraordinary portrait of the man The Wall Street Journal credits with making Venezuela "Washington‚s biggest Latin American headache after the old standby, Cuba.

:)

[EFerrari]

270. Thank you!

:hi:

[leftchick]

188. "Reporting and Credibility: RCTV"

http://www.dominionpaper.ca/weblogs/dru/1206

There's another round of coverage of the expiry of RCTV's broadcast license in Venezuela.

It's entirely understandable that there would be concern about this, but news agencies are only damaging their own credibility by not reporting the relevant facts.

RCTV's role in the coup is consistently downplayed, or reduced to an accusation. The AP says: "Mr. Chavez, who says he is steering Venezuela toward socialism, accuses RCTV of supporting a short-lived 2002 coup..."

They make it sound like the coup was no big deal, and that RCTV simply expressed enthusiasm for it. Somehow, the idea that a military coup against an elected government is no big deal has started to circulate. RCTV went far beyond that: it was intimately involved in orchestrating the coup, and the evidence is readily available to be evaluated.

It's at best lazy and more likely intentionally misleading reporting, and one would think that the AP's clients like the Globe and Mail would ask for better.

[EFerrari]

189. OMG, they kidnapped him and told the people he had resigned!

Mendacity from hell. :wow:

[leftchick]

191. "Fox News is a kitten compared to RCTV."

http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=6780&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

<snip>

The accusations of "restrictions on the freedom of speech", which appear frequently in the international media, are not only inaccurate, but also simply frightening. Frankly, the discrepancy between what is reported internationally and what is happening on the ground raises concern that even respected groups like Human Rights Watch, the BBC World News, and CNN are out of touch with the real struggles of social movements in the Global South.

In Venezuela, as in most democracies, the right to broadcast TV and radio are public commons, which belong in the hands of the public in some way. Since representative democracy is such a predominant political model at this point in history, democratically elected governments like the one in Venezuela are supposed to control the public communications commons. The government gives concessions to private parties to use these commons responsibly, and the government has the right to take them away in the public interest at any time.

The decision not to renew the concession to RCTV was made after a thorough investigation of their journalistic ethics including accuracy, objectivity, and their compliance with the Law on Responsibility in Television and Radio (which was denounced by Human Rights Watch for being a restriction of free speech).

Since 1999 RCTV has spread blatant lies and outlandish manipulations of information directly attacking Chávez. It has broadcasted sexually explicit and other inappropriate material in such violation of the law (652 cases) that any honest assessment leads to the conclusion that their journalism is an attack on public health and decency. Fox News is a kitten compared to RCTV.

Beyond this, RCTV were leaders in the 2-day coup in April 2002. This coup was not only one that used the military, but also the media. During the coup, RCTV cancelled their usual programs and broadcast a two-day string of black and white fuzziness, Hollywood movies, cartoons, and infomercials. This is widely confirmed by Venezuelans. When RCTV finally covered the coup, they reported that Chávez had signed his resignation and peacefully left his post as president after his supporters had opened fire on an innocent opposition march. The images RCTV broadcasted of the violence among the marchers were later proved to have been secretively arranged so to block from view the reality; pro-Chávez marchers were firing in self-defense after having been attacked by hidden gunmen. Meanwhile, their president had been violently kidnapped. RCTV`s action were part of a blatant and well-coordinated attempt by the major media to assist the coup leaders by blinding the public to what was actually happening.

[Pavulon]

211. You people make me sick...Opportunistic speech

this magazine
http://progressive.org/?q=node/2252

published the first accurate design of the thermonuclear bomb. It was sued in court, in 1979. What is published was top secret and can be argued harmed the national interest.

The magazine was not shut down by the government. It published the most sensitive information on advanced weapon technology, during the cold war, and was allowed to operate. Only the material "born secret" was drawn into court.

It really is a simple issue.

[leftchick]

223. and you

make me laugh. :rofl:

[Pavulon]

242. The chavez shills here have a problem with a binary choice..

the press is either:

a puppet to the government and a tool used to control the population. (companies pay billions in advertising, it works)

or

the press is allowed to publish things the government does not like.

Pretty simple, not really funny, but with all the bullshit posted in this thread, never addressed.

[leftchick]

252. you never address legitimate links posted in this thread

apparently the world is all so black and white to some.

Thank God it is not to most.

[Pavulon]

286. Scary shit around here

pull fox, treason...Lots of stupid childish shit.

The silencing of voices, destruction of ideas made available to the public is wrong.

It is wrong here and wrong anywhere else. I do not like lots of what I see on media outlets from fox to liveleak, but I refuse to entertain the idea of a ban.

You have every right not to listen to FOX, or any outlet, you DO NOT have the right as president or any other political power, to remove it from the table.

I do not want to live in a country where access to information is controlled.

It is wrong to retaliate against their words by pulling them off the air.

[eridani]

259. Did The Progressive have a broadcast license?

What private interest of any sort has an automatic right to a share of a limited resource that is owned by the public, either here or in Venezuela? Your stupid analogy might work some day if trees quit growing and paper stops becoming a renewable and not at all scarce resource.

[Pavulon]

268. self kill double post

self kill double post

[Pavulon]

269. stupid because you cant follow the bread crumbs?

we can talk pentagon papers. Maybe the Times should be shut down, close minded people only like free speech when it reflects what they like.. Rather then insult your intelligence a bit more I will underscore the simple issue here.

A 53 year old media institution has been closed by one man, because they did not tow his line. This is a free speech issue.

[eridani]

278. Since when does any broadcaster have rights to any part of publicly owned airwaves?

And what does this have to do with newspapers or any other print media? There are plenty of anti-Chavez newspapers in Venezuela--have any been shut down?

They were denied access to publicly owned TV/radio spectra because they participated in a coup in which he was held at gunpoint. They have not been closed or shut down, since they can still broadcast on cable and via satellite.

A couple of questions for you-- you don't have to have a license to start a newspaper, but you have to have one to start a radio or TV station. Why do you suppose that is? Is everybody who wants such a license but doesn't have one being denied freedom of speech?

[Pavulon]

282. So the FCC should

yank fox or AA off the air because the position the put forward does not support those in power.

They are a 53 year old media outlet. Not some fly by night operation started by the CIA.

The man is consolidating power, knocking those who oppose him off the air.

Simple attack on free speech.

You think one of the big 3 is going off the air if it editorialized against bush?

It has to do with freedom of expression and retaliation for WORDS. That station did not supply weapons.

The Progressive did not arm anyone with the teller ulam design or The times kill anyone with the pentaon papers.

What did this group do to warrant removal. Other than piss off a loudmouth playing strongman with money we piss away on petroleum.

[eridani]

290. Where is is written that any TV or radio station anywhere in the world--

--gets an automatic renewal of its license? There is no right anywhere to public airwaves that I know of. Anyway, the station is NOT off the air. What part of "continuing to broadcast on cable and satellite" is is that you don't understand?

[eridani]

291. Fox is denying my freedom of speech by holding its broadcasting license

I demand that they respect my freedom of speech by turning it over to me.

[Pavulon]

313. Petition your government.

You could go bang pots and pans in the street. Saying something you dont like does not impinge on your right to speak. Your notion of silencing sources is ill informed.

Hopefully you are young and ignorant of history.

Otherwise you know full well what the effect of media manipulation leads too.

In stead of attacking a voice, get yours out. Load a vid on youtube or something.

[leftchick]

192. Venezuela: The case of RCTV and freedom of speech

<snip>

The decision not to renew RCTV’s concession has become the focal point of the latest campaign against the government of President Hugo Chavez by the US-backed, right-wing opposition, which claims that it amounts to an attack on freedom of speech. These claims have been echoed in the corporate media around the world. A mass demonstration by opposition-supporters on May 19 was widely reported, although the counter-demonstration the following day by supporters of the government’s decision was not.

Based on the claim that the non-renewal of the concession is due to the pro-opposition stance of RCTV and is an attempt to silence critical voices, a number groups such as Reporters Without Borders and Human Rights Watch have criticised the government’s decision. Motions criticising the decision have been passed by the US Senate, the European Union and the Chilean Senate.

However, the government has refuted the allegation that RCTV is being “closed”, as the station can continue broadcasting via satellite, or that the non-renewal amounts to an attack on freedom of speech. It has pointed out that the decision, carried out in accordance with Venezuelan law, to not renew the concession isn’t the result of RCTV being critical of the government, but a result of more than 600 violations of Venezuelan broadcasting law committed by the station, including the non-payment of fines. Not least of these violations was the role of RCTV in the US-backed military coup in April 2002 that briefly overthrew Chavez’s government.

Private TV stations, including RCTV, deliberately manipulated footage to make it appear that government forces had attacked peaceful protesters, and, after giving free advertisements and blanket coverage to opposition protesters before the coup, refused to cover the pro-Chavez uprising that restored the constitutional government. Instead, they screened cartoons and old movies. During their brief time in power, the coup plotters publicly thanked the private stations, including RCTV, for their role. Despite this, no station has been taken off air for its role in the coup. A May 18 statement by the communications ministry reported that, according to the government’s research, there have been more than 600 cases of non-renewal of TV broadcast licences around the world, but it is only the Venezuelan government that has been singled out and condemned for allegedly violating free speech.

<snip>

“It is almost amusing to see this international campaign against this decision by the Chavez government”, Fuentes said. “None of these organisations that have been outspoken in relation to the RCTV case have pointed out that at exactly the same time the Peruvian government shut down five to six TV stations. That is, not simply withdrawing their concessions, but actually shutting them down, which is what Chavez has falsely been accused of doing to RCTV.

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2007/711/36928

[shenmue]

194. So, you don't believe in free speech then?

Forcible takeovers of those who disagree with you are acceptable now? What Constitution are you reading?

If you think Chavez is so great, please go live with him. Suppression of free speech is one thing I would never do, even to lying sacks of RW crap like Fox.

Chavez worshippers have really gone around the bend. You should be ashamed of yourself.

[leftchick]

197. LOL! It is a tad more complicated than that

read between the right wing headlines and learn.....

http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=6780&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

The accusations of "restrictions on the freedom of speech", which appear frequently in the international media, are not only inaccurate, but also simply frightening. Frankly, the discrepancy between what is reported internationally and what is happening on the ground raises concern that even respected groups like Human Rights Watch, the BBC World News, and CNN are out of touch with the real struggles of social movements in the Global South.

In Venezuela, as in most democracies, the right to broadcast TV and radio are public commons, which belong in the hands of the public in some way. Since representative democracy is such a predominant political model at this point in history, democratically elected governments like the one in Venezuela are supposed to control the public communications commons. The government gives concessions to private parties to use these commons responsibly, and the government has the right to take them away in the public interest at any time.

The decision not to renew the concession to RCTV was made after a thorough investigation of their journalistic ethics including accuracy, objectivity, and their compliance with the Law on Responsibility in Television and Radio (which was denounced by Human Rights Watch for being a restriction of free speech).

Since 1999 RCTV has spread blatant lies and outlandish manipulations of information directly attacking Chávez. It has broadcasted sexually explicit and other inappropriate material in such violation of the law (652 cases) that any honest assessment leads to the conclusion that their journalism is an attack on public health and decency. Fox News is a kitten compared to RCTV.

Beyond this, RCTV were leaders in the 2-day coup in April 2002. This coup was not only one that used the military, but also the media. During the coup, RCTV cancelled their usual programs and broadcast a two-day string of black and white fuzziness, Hollywood movies, cartoons, and infomercials. This is widely confirmed by Venezuelans. When RCTV finally covered the coup, they reported that Chávez had signed his resignation and peacefully left his post as president after his supporters had opened fire on an innocent opposition march. The images RCTV broadcasted of the violence among the marchers were later proved to have been secretively arranged so to block from view the reality; pro-Chávez marchers were firing in self-defense after having been attacked by hidden gunmen. Meanwhile, their president had been violently kidnapped. RCTV`s action were part of a blatant and well-coordinated attempt by the major media to assist the coup leaders by blinding the public to what was actually happening.

[EFerrari]

201. Have you read this OP or the thread?

And how does it forward this conversation to say, if you love Chavez much, why don't you marry him?

:rofl:

[leftchick]

196. "Don't Cry for Venezuela's RCTV"

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=2048


As I write this, I am looking at a Venezuelan newspaper, El Diario, from February 10, 1992. The editorial that would have occupied half of page 2 is missing. Page 4 is completely blank. The contents were censored by the government of the then president Carlos Andres Perez.

The newspaper is just one of many horrible memories of the pre-Hugo Chavez days in Venezuela’s “exceptional” democracy.

U.S. newspapers seem to overlook what Venezuela used to be like as they today discuss the actions of the current government. I have lived in Venezuela for most of the past 22 years and have never experienced such freedom as that which the Venezuelan population enjoys today under Hugo Chavez. That would include freedom of information. Never, in the past 22 years, has the mass media experienced the freedom it has had during the presidency of Chavez. One can freely buy anti-Chavez newspapers on streets and the airwaves and television channels are amply filled with anti-Chavez commentators.

However, today, May 27, the Venezuelan government will not renew the license of RCTV, a television station that has been on the air for over 50 years. The owner, Marciel Granier, has been running around the world crying because he is about to loose his license. Even the millionaires in the U.S. Senate feel he should get to keep the license. Interestingly, Granier was president of the censored El Diario in 1992. He didn’t complain then. I bought his newspaper. He got his money.

What the news reports in the U.S. don’t tell us, and what the U.S. Senate doesn’t seem to understand, is that hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans will be celebrating tonight at midnight because RCTV’s license will have expired. They’ve been meeting on city squares and corners throughout Venezuela discussing who owns the air and what kind of programming they would like on their television sets. They are asking whether it is truly fair that if you are a millionaire, you can buy the air space of the people for the next 20 years. Independent producers will now have a chance to get their programs shown, without having to obtain the approval of Granier who has been something of a media dictator in Venezuela.

[NoPasaran]

235. So the previous government censored the news

And sometimes you only got half the newspaper.

The wise benevolent Chavez dictatorship prefers to just shut the opposition media down.

Gee, that's the sort of "progress" Bush would be proud of.

[leftchick]

254. again

you choose to ignore the facts. Who Owned RCTV? Do you know? Do you Care? Do you think they had an anti-Chavez agenda? Did they take money from the US CIA in part to foment the 2002 coup attempt? Does that bother you? Do you know how many times they violated the media laws in Venezuela?

I thought not. I also noticed, unlike myself, you have not provided one substantive link. Or any link at all for that matter to defend your right wing garbage.

[Pavulon]

200. And the water warms for the froggies...

I bet there are some here who would pimp Pol Pot..He wasn't all that bad, really disliked class separation.

RCTV was around for 53 years.

Not some fly by night CIA station started 8 years ago.

So each little controlling step warms the water, the froggies dont complain about the incremental steps. But before they know it they are soup.

Any person who truly promotes democracy would recognize this as an interference in freedom of the press. All the links and bullshit do not disguise the FACT that is the President of the United States personally shut down a media outlet (Mother Jones) hostile to him you would speak out.

[EFerrari]

202. What crap #2. How's your access to Al Jazeera these days?

I mean, the outlets we haven't bombed yet?

[Pavulon]

208. They are in operation

we have not attacked them. RCTV is a DOMESTIC operation. Not a foreign media.

my access is just fine..
http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F06E0D8B-BE98-445A-9752-8E7EA9DAD30F.htm

You bet he takes on the "dissidents" next? Cant have dissent, hurts the collective.

[EFerrari]

209. We have not attacked them?

:wow:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=21&ItemID=5377

http://electroniciraq.net/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/10/582

http://dontbomb.blogspot.com/

You might want to deal with the beam in your own eye.

[Pavulon]

212. Their office has not been attacked, by your bad logic, we attacked italy

when we shot their reporter at a check point. Try harder, the issue been attacked, by your shitty logic, is opportunistic freedom of speech. And where you stand on it.

[EFerrari]

213. We have killed several staffers and how you can elide that fact

is sort of creepy.

I think I will take a pass on the rest of this conversation, thanks.

[Pavulon]

We killed members of the UK and Canadian armed forces "staffers"

does not mean we are trying to "shut them down".

reporting is a dangerous job. I believe the reporter from the UK being held by hamas or whichever terrorist group in the west bank will attest to that.

You are passing on the simplest part. The part that leaves the blank you fill in with "I think free speech is critical," or "free press serves the government in power."

[EFerrari]

219. Have you ever heard of the Downing Street Memo?

[Pavulon]

222. Yep published

and the paper that published is still in business.

[Colobo]

216. Chavez, a man disrespectful of private property and freedom of opinion

A hero of radical lefties around the world.

[leftchick]

230. "radical lefties"

like the working class and poor who love and support him?

:rofl:

[Pavulon]

243. unlike the people here, not radicals

people with a D behind their name support free speech. I vote for my government to protect free speech. Even free speech I do not like.

Radicals nationalize stuff and play animal farm. This prevents companies from investing in infrastructure projects because they do not want their assets seized.

This is why foreign investment in the petro sector is CRASHING. Drilling oil is highly technical and usually requires first world technology to be productive.

He is creating his own disaster. Not really a new pattern in SA. But to the point..

Banning FOX is not an option.

No matter who supports it.

[leftchick]

251. I have provided many links showing that "free speech" meme to be BULLSHIT

and you are choosing to ignore reading it. So much for informing ones self. :eyes:

[Pavulon]

265. I read it, Just like I read Progressive VS US

I choose the rational process of civil litigation. The us did not destroy the publication. They disclosed information impacting the entire national interest, not just the strongman emm, president. But were dealt with rationally.

[Colobo]

217. Chavez, a man disrespectful of private property and freedom of opinion

A hero of radical lefties around the world.

[bvar22]

272. Quick Chavez inventory.

Chavez is using a percentage of the Oil Profits from Venezuelan Oil to:

*Heal the Sick

*Clothe the naked

*Educate the Ignorant

*Feed the Hungry

*House the Homeless

*Employ the unemployed

*Raise the standard of living for the vast majority of Venezuelans

YES! I can see why you hate him.

[vincent_vega_lives]

301. Few more to add to your list

*Madrid has agreed to sell military patrol boats and transport planes to Caracas in deal worth more than $1.5 billion

*Moscow's arms sales to Venezuela are now worth more than $3 billion (£1.6bn), including a new deal for fighter jets and helicopters.

this included the deal to deliver to Venezuela 24 Russian Su-30 fighter jets and 53 helicopters.

Venezuela has already ordered 100,000 AK-103s and wants to set up factories to produce Kalashnikovs under licence.

[leftchick]

232. For all of those here who have no idea about he 2002 coup attemp

watch this and then we will talk.....

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144

HUGO CHAVEZ ELECTED PRESIDENT OF VENEZUELA IN 1998, IS A COLORFUL, UNPREDICTABLE FOLK HERO, beloved by his nation's working class and a tough-as-nails, quixotic opponent to the power structure that would see him deposed. Two independent filmmakers were inside the presidential palace on April 11, 2002, when he was forcibly removed from office. They were also present 48 hours later when, remarkably, he returned to power amid cheering aides. Their film records what was probably history's shortest-lived coup d'état. It's a unique document about political muscle and an extraordinary portrait of the man The Wall Street Journal credits with making Venezuela "Washington‚s biggest Latin American headache after the old standby, Cuba."

[Joanne98]

237. If you don't know about the 2002 coup, you don't know nuthin.. MUST WATCH!

[Gabi Hayes]

239. Hey! all you credulous jackasses who are buying the Buscho, NED, CIA, AP swill, and

vomiting it forth here, have you read any of the myriad articles showing the complicity of the US government in the actions against not just Chavez, but any Latin American figure they view as even SLIGHTLY threatening to US corporate interests?

does the name Otto Reich ring a bell?

all you ignorant knee jerk Chavez-as-future-dictator predicgtors (the ones who don't already delusionally believe he is one) should take the time to read a few of these links before you throw yourselves in on the side of the likes of him and his fellow terrorist enablers

I can't WAIT for all you crystal ballers who so confidently predict that Chavez will turn into, what.....Bush?.....to see your hopes for a return to corporate control of a sovereign nation hoist on the petard of your own delusional worldview.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0419-03.htm

Latin America's Dilemma: Otto Reich's Propaganda is Reminiscent of the Third Reich
by Tom Turnipseed

The Bush administration is engaging in damage control for their questionable involvement in the failed 2 day coup against the democratically elected government of President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. Alarmingly, the ominous Otto Reich is emerging as a key player in the administration's role in the failed coup attempt to replace Chavez with an oligarchy of business, military and wealthy elites. Scrambling to distance themselves from the botched overthrow of the democratically elected Chavez government, the Bush administration admitted that Mr. Reich called the coup leader, Mr. Carmona, and asked him not to dissolve the National Assembly because it would be a "stupid thing to do". The next day the administration revised their story and said Reich only asked our ambassador to relay that message to Carmona.

The New York Times noted that the disclosure raised questions as to whether Mr. Reich and other administration officials were stage-managing the takeover by Mr. Carmona. Although the Bush administration admits their desire to replace the Chavez government because of its opposition to U.S. policies and friendship with countries like Cuba and Iran, they now insist that they were not involved in the armed coup. The administration also admits talking with various Venezuelan officials prior to the coup including General Lucas Romero Rincon, head of the Venezuelan military, who met with Pentagon official Rogelio Pardo-Maurer, a former close associate of the U. S. supported Contra forces in Nicaragua.

Mr. Reich's propensity to pernicious propaganda has once again emerged from events surrounding the coup. According to the New York Times, Reich told congressional aides that the administration had received reports that "foreign paramilitary forces"-suspected to be Cuban-were involved in the bloody suppression of anti-Chavez demonstrators, in which at least 14 people were killed in Venezuela. Reich, a former U.S. Ambassador to Venezuela and lobbyist with ties to Mobil Oil in Venezuela, further told the Congressional staffers that Mr. Chavez had meddled with the historically independent state oil company, provided haven to Colombian guerillas, and bailed out Cuba with preferential rates on oil.

Reich is a right-wing Cuban-American obsessed with overthrowing Fidel Castro's regime and is also a big political supporter of President Bush's brother and Florida Governor Jeb Bush, who needs strong support from Cubans in Florida in his re-election bid this year. Reich, along with fellow Reagan administration cohorts, Elliott Abrams and John Negroponte, were discredited for their covert activities and false assertions when the United States intervened in Central America in the 1980's and '90s, but have been re-instated in prominent positions in the second Bush administration. They abhor Latin-American governments that are elected by the poor and working class people, like the Chavez government in Venezuela and the deposed Sandinista government in Nicaragua.


...........


http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/South_America/US_Coup_Venezuela.html
these six stories at TWT link, including Turnipseed:

1) American Navy 'Helped Venezuelan Coup'
2) Washington channelled funds to groups that opposed Chavez
3) Venezuela coup linked to Bush team
4) US Papers Hail Venezuelan Coup as Pro-Democracy Move
5) Otto Reich's Propaganda is Reminiscent of the Third Reich
6) Venezuelan Media accused in failed coup


.............

plenty more here:

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=7718

Venezuela coup linked to Bush team | International | The ObserverThe failed coup in Venezuela was closely tied to senior officials in the US ... Reich also has close ties to Venezuela, having been made ambassador to ...
observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,688071,00.html - 46k - Cached - Similar pages

Jean-Guy Allard: A Coup Signed by Otto ReichOtto was appointed as ambassador to Venezuela, a disparaging gesture remembered ... violence, terror: everything smacks of Otto Reich in this failed coup. ...
www.counterpunch.org/allard0420.html - 29k - Cached - Similar pages

CounterPunch: Otto Reich Goes Back to School (of the Americas)The Coup Master. Otto Reich Named to Board for US Army's School of the Americas ... seized the presidency<during the failed coup in Venezuela last month. ...
www.counterpunch.org/reich0503.html - 21k - Cached - Similar pages
< More results from www.counterpunch.org >

Otto Reich - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaFrom 1986 to 1989, Reich served as Ambassador to Venezuela. ... State for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the time of the 2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attempt. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otto_Reich - 26k - Cached - Similar pages

Latin America's Dilemma: Otto Reich's Propaganda is Reminiscent of ...Alarmingly, the ominous Otto Reich is emerging as a key player in the administration's role in the failed coup attempt to replace Chavez with an oligarchy ...
www.commondreams.org/views02/0419-03.htm - 18k - Cached - Similar pages

Project Censored Media democracy in actionThe April 11, 2002 military coup in Venezuela was supported by the United .... out of State Department lifer Otto Reich’s ‘Latin American Chaos’ playbook. ...
www.projectcensored.org/publications/2004/12.html - 20k - Cached - Similar pages

The NarcoSphere || Otto Reich is Outa ThereWASHINGTON (Reuters) - Otto Reich, who took a hard line against ... Hugo Chavez of Venezuela gave him after Reich supported the failed 2002 coup d'etat in ...
narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2004/6/16/185819/808 - 24k - Cached - Similar pages

Bush's Latin diplomacy goes south - Salon... fails to condemn the Venezuela coup -- and the coup then collapses. ... later turned out to be an unsuccessful military-backed coup d'etat, Otto Reich, ...
www.salon.com/politics/bushed/2002/04/17/venezuela/index.html - 23k - Cached - Similar pages

Narco News: Open Letter to Bush on Venezuela from U.S. Congress ...... while the top officials of the White House have remained silent, Otto Reich, ... Groups involved with the coup also received financing from the United ...
www.narconews.com/Issue26/article562.html - 16k - Cached - Similar pages

Venezuela-US Relations Will Not be Affected by Otto Reich’s StatementsVenezuela-US Relations Will Not be Affected by Otto Reich’s Statements ... officials were stage-managing the coup by would-be dictator Pedro Carmona. ...
www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1139 - 44k -

[Gabi Hayes]

241. some more for you lot who throw yourselves in with the likes of Reich.

judge yourselves by those with whom you keep company

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB40/



your pal Reich has another friend you'll love:

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0419-26.htm

and to all you ignoramuses on other antiChavez who claim that our government hasn't put illegal, undue pressure on US news media, try this on for size, once again courtesy of your friend Otto Reich, when head of Reagan's notorious (except in the US corporate media) Office of Public Dipolmacy:

Reich also seemed to be keeping score when he confronted National Public Radio in 1984 with complaints that the network had run more contra" minutes versus "pro-contra" minutes. "We said, 'how could you decide what was anti-contra?" asked N's foreign editor Paul Allen. "But the point was, 'we're monitoring you- holding a stop watch on you.' The point was, someone was listening and they were doing it with a very critical view."

Bill Buzenberg, NPR's foreign affairs correspondent, later described the meeting with Reich in a speech in Seattle. Buzenberg said Reich informed the NPR editors that he had "a special consultant service listening to all NPR programs" on Central America, analyzing them for possible bias against U.S. policy. Reich also referred to his larger campaign to force changes in U.S. press coverage, saying he had "made similar visits to other unnamed newspapers and major television networks had gotten others to change some of their reporters in the field because of perceived bias," Buzenberg said.

For Allen, who oversaw NPR' s coverage worldwide, the intervention by a government official to pressure the radio network to alter its coverage of an important public topic was extraordinary. "Never in our coverage of Poland, South Africa, Lebanon, Afghanistan had they chosen to come in and remonstrate with us," Allen told me. "We understood what Otto Reich's job was. He was engaged in an effort to alter coverage. It was a special effort."

Given NPR's sensitivity to government strings on its public funding, the intervention also worked. At Allen's next job evaluation, NPR executives upbraided him for one of the stories singled out by Reich. A year later, Allen resigned from NPR and left journalism.

As Reich indicated to the NPR staff, he was busy with other news outlets, too. In April 1984, Reich visited the Washington office of CBS News after President Reagan got mad at the network's coverage of El Salvador and Nicaragua. After Reich's trip, Secretary of State George Shultz sent Reagan a memo describing how Reich had spent one hour complaining to the correspondent involved and two more hours with his Washington bureau chief "to point out the flaws in the information."

Shultz wrote that the CBS trip was just one example of "what the Office of Public Diplomacy has been doing to help improve the quality of information the American people are receiving . ... It has been repeated dozens of times over the past few months."

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Bush_Gang/War_Home_S&P.html



then, there's always the tie between your friend and renowned freedom fighter Luis Posada Carriles:

POWELL AND REICH INTERVENE

The text affirms that "according to sources with direct access to the presidency," the then US Secretary of State Colin Powell brought up the subject of Posada Carriles with {{Panamanian President}} Moscoso during a visit to Panama in December of 2003, and informed her that it was in the interest of the US government for the terrorists to "benefit from the legal process."

Powell "went to tell her in person that Bush was interested in the Cuban prisoners being judged in absentia." That information was reflected at the time by the Panamanian daily El Siglo.

Previously, during a meeting of the Panamanian National Security Council (CSN) at the end of 2003, US Ambassador Linda Watt intervened to ask for a solution to the Posada case that would not benefit Cuba.

On January 20, 2004, Otto Reich, assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs, met at the US embassy in Panama with the CSN coordinator, who assured him "that President Mireya Moscoso would pardon the terrorists before September."

Moscoso met with Reich on January 21. One of Posada’s lawyers later affirmed that Foreign Minister Harmodio Arias had confided to him that Reich had asked for the release of the extremists.

On another occasion, Mayín Correa, a former mayor and a radio personality on KW Continente, confirmed that information by specifying that Mireya Moscoso promised at the time to put an end to the trial once the sentence was handed down.

During that same period, information was circulating in Miami to the effect that Otto Reich had "arranged everything."

Nevertheless, in August of 2004, Moscoso, denying the existence of a plan to pardon them, affirmed: "I haven’t thought about it, but now I am going to think about it."

The document also indicates that the former Panamanian president made a "private trip to Miami" at the end of June of 2004, when she came under heavy pressure" from Bush administration officials and extremist Cuban-American groups in that city. In Panama, her decision to live in Miami – where she had previously lived for 10 years – is well known.

According to the document, in addition to the millions negotiated by her sister, Moscoso received a 2005 Lincoln Town Crown car, valued at $125,000.

Since September, Moscoso has been the object of various charges of embezzling $23.4 million in presidential discretional funds and $45 million donated by the Taiwanese government during her mandate (1999-2004).

The Panamanian press has published some details of the millions spent by the former president, including purchases of jewelry, fancy dresses, trips and gifts totaling $23 million.

http://www.walterlippmann.com/posada.html

[Judi Lynn]

288. I'm sure a bunch of DU'ers will be bookmarking your post. VERY important links.

Have scanned a few of them. They are absolutely valuable. Thanks a lot for posting them.

[acmavm]

244. This is just soooo friggin' weird. We here on DU post, every day,

day in and day out, that we are sick and tired of the way the top 1% have hijacked our country and are killing our democracy with the help of the corporate whores that do their bidding. We have a worthless media, we have a clown who NEVER was elected to the office of pResident writing signing statements giving him power over all three branches of government in the even of a national catastrophe (which when read includes ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING) and how we want our democracy back. The rule of the people as it was intended. We have a class of wealthy elite who, with their bribes and 'campaign donations' have turned our country into a the next best thing to a third world banana republic. And we hate it.

But people here bitch and complain when someone does everything (someone who WAS elected by the way) we need and want done here to level the playing field in his own country. He supports the people, he has bettered the lives of the lower and working classes. But he nationalizes a public television station that was part and parcel of a coup that tried to put him out of power and, given more time, maybe imprisoned him or even worse. AND THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE ARE ECSTATIC about what he's done. It's only the equivalent of the predator class we have here that are screaming foul. And it's not like he impoverished the family that founded the station. Here's a little background:

<snip>
The Oligarchy and the Media

Don't get me wrong, these shareholders are a fine bunch, and among the purest specimens of the rancid oligarchy that has controlled Venezuela since the colonial conquest. 1BC was founded in 1920 by William H. Phelps Jr. (then under the name Phelps Group), whose father emigrated to Venezuela from the United States. Phelps Jr. would marry Alicia Tucker, thereby giving rise to an oligarchic family tree of colossal proportions with 1BC and RCTV at its center. RCTV's broadcasting concession would pass from Phelps Jr. to his children Johnny Phelps and William Phelps Tucker, and the latter's wife Katherine Deery de Phelps, and finally on to Johnny Phelps' daughters Dorothy and Patricia.

Current 1BC stockholders reflect this dense tangle of blood and wealth: the principal stockholder is Peter Bottome (son of Deery, son-in-law of Phelps Tucker), as well as Alicia Phelps de Tovar (daughter of Johnny), U.S.-educated Mavesa grease magnate Alberto Tovar Phelps (son of Alicia), Guillermo Tucker Arismendi (related through Phelps' wife Katherine, as well as to one of the heads of the conglomerate controlling Globovisión). And then there is current 1BC president Marcel Granier, who entered the picture by marrying Dorothy Phelps, and to whom it now falls to convince Venezuelans that the conglomerate (which also controls radio stations, record stores, and an airline) is in some way "democratic." To emphasize the power that the Phelps wield in Venezuela, one need only note that Johnny Phelps' other daughter Patricia is married to Gustavo Cisneros, Venezuela's most powerful media magnate and direct competitor of 1BC.

Together, 1BC's RCTV and Cisneros' Venevisión control 85% of publicity investment, 66% of transmitting capacity, and 80% of the production of all messages, information, and media content in the country, according to a recent White Book on RCTV issued by the Ministry of Communication. As a journalist in the opposition-controlled newspaper El Universal argued a few years back: "On what moral basis can they come out in defense of free speech and competition when these are at risk, when they themselves propose to monopolize them?" If Venezuela relies on the likes of Granier and Cisneros to defend free speech, then the situation is indeed as bad as the opposition claims.

http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/cm260507.html

<snip>


Not as inbred and crooked as US oil companies but not for the lack of trying. But people here bitch and gripe when something happens to benefit the majority of the people of Venezuela and to put a stop to their conspiring with the US govenment againt the democratically elected president of that country.

Amazing. Fucking amazing.

[Pavulon]

246. A 53 year old media outlet

wiped out because it did not tow the line. Sorry, this is just power consolidation. Pretty simple.

What is a "predator class", sounds like a pentagon term for something that blows stuff up?

[Cleita]

249. Seems to me that CBS has been around for more than

60 years. That doesn't mean the the news department that was launched by Edward R. Murrow and that Walter Cronkite worked at for so many years hasn't turned into a Bush ass kissing distortion of tabloid news that makes anyone not a conservative Repuke look like they are unpatriotic. It means nothing. Also, Fox News plainly should be shut down as a subersive organization IMHO.

[Pavulon]

267. That is your opinion, it could be considered subversive

I choose not to burn books that I dont agree with, I just dont read them. Don't watch fox.

Fox then mother jones, Kos, DU, free republic. Who makes the kill list, you?

Sorry your opinion is yours, but not part of a functional democracy.

[Cleita]

280. Oh puleeze. Let's not get into the freedoms thing again. You

know whom it makes you sound like. The Nazis said it best. All they had to do was call Germans who weren't in lockstep unpatriotic. Seems to me your subversive comment falls right in there. I'll tell you what is subversive. It's believing everything the Bush media crams into your brain because you're afraid not to.

[Pavulon]

285. How are two spanish channels and BBC1

bush media. Think on your own for one second, form an independent thought. A government is retaliating on a media outlet, in place for two generations, for expressing in WORDS something disliked by the man in power.

Fuck if that is not wrong, what is.

I hate fox but the have a RIGHT to broadcast. You really think they should come off the air?

Put your ww2 talking points away, they make you sound silly.

You do NOT decide the choices available to me, you can decide not to watch it, to walk off if i discuss it, but not what is on the table for the rest of us. That is dangerous and any intelligent person of any political position will not accept the silencing of voices.

[Cleita]

296. First stop with the ad hominems, accusing me of not being

capable of thought and being silly. Even if I am you have no right to point these things out to me unless you are my mother. It's against the rules as well. Fox has committed treason in backing the illigitimate government we have now in the White House. Not only that they were complicit in the election of 2000 for calling precincts in favor of Bush before the counts were in effect influencing people to stay home who might have voted late.

Fox has the right to broadcast but not as hard news. They need to be forced to claim that they are a tabloid and do news for entertainment, are prone to lying and not fact checking and that they are not to be taken seriously. They have no right spinning elections in process to influence them. That is treason.

[bvar22]

309. They do NOT have a RIGHT to broadcast on the public airways.

They do NOT have a RIGHT to broadcast on the public airways.
They MUST be licensed BY the government, and they MUST operate according to the rules established by the FCC (GOVERNMENT).

NO ONE has a RIGHT to the public airways...HERE or in Venezuela!
The above has been stated and restated numerous times on this thread, but IT DOES NOT GET THROUGH TO YOU!



REPEAT:
They do NOT have a RIGHT to broadcast on the public airways. They MUST be licensed BY the government, and they MUST operate according to the rules established by the FCC (GOVERNMENT).
Promoting, advocating, endorsing VIOLENCE, or fomenting VIOLENT REVOLUTION over the Public Airways is AGAINST THE LAW, here, and in Venezuela.

NO ONE has a RIGHT to the public airways...HERE or in Venezuela!
The above has been stated and restated numerous times on this thread, but IT DOES NOT GET THROUGH TO YOU!

What about this do you not understand?

[Pavulon]

311. What part of retaliation do you not understand

you can pimp this guy all you want. I wonder what it will take for his supporters to drop the adoration for him and look through a realistic glass at the situation. Bottom line is he is targeting MULTIPLE media outlets.

No one pulled CBS when cronkite proclaimed the Vietnam war lost. They could have, you know CBS has no right to the airwaves.

Is this right? Killing off a 53 year old station for not backing him.

I argue for open speech, like the kind made here. You are advocating something else.

[bvar22]

314. I'm NOT advocating anything (though YOU are).

I'm stating simple facts.

FACT #1
No one in any country in the World has a RIGHT to use the public airways.
Radio and TV stations Worldwide are licensed and regulated by the appropriate GOVERNMENT agencies.

Fact#2
In EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRACY in the WORLD it is ILLEGAL to use the public airways to promote, endorse, or sanction VIOLENCE against the democraticaly elected government.

Fact#3
The station did not have its license renewed because it repeatedly BROKE THE LAW!!!!

Fact#4
The Venezuelan Government did not infringe on Free Speech, or "shut down" anyone. This station is still free to broadcast on cable and satellite.

Fact#5
I am not a shill for anyone.

Those are THE FACTS.
You have been spewing nothing but right wing talking points, PROVEN LIES, and unsupported opinion. You appear to be nothing but a rather poorly prepared propagandist who is incapable of supporting his spew.
If you can contest these FACTS, please do so.


My Opinion:
The FACT that Chavez did NOT "Shut Down" this station 8 years ago is a testament to his Tolerance.

My Question:
You are working very hard to catapult this right wing propaganda.
Do you get paid for this work?

If not, :dunce:

[acmavm]

253. Didn't 'tow the line'. That's cute. I've never heard treason described that

way before.

[jefferson_dem]

262. Media outlets that don't the regime in power, or the "President", are traitors? Now *that's* cute!

Hmmm...Where have i heard that before...?

I fear power grabbing demagogues a bit more than i fear a free press and opposition voices.

[acmavm]

275. Hmmm. You're being ridiculous. The 'regime' was elected by popular

vote. The media espoused overthrowing that government. There is no comparison to what we have here. bush** has never been elected pResident. But he is supported by a corporate media who doesn't hesitate to cover and lie for him.

What happened in Venezuela has nothing to do with a free press. Not until the license for RCTV was not renewed.

[Pavulon]

264. Treason like murder is a term one is convicted of

you opinion out of context. It is like me calling you a <insert crime here>.

What is what the Progressive did? I mean they released the design of the thermonuclear warhead used by the united states military.

This is retribution for a political act.

[acmavm]

274. Treason, like murder, is an act. Conviction is an afterthought, a

consequence. Just because there is no conviction does not mean that there was no crime.

[Pavulon]

284. It is easily thrown around, by people who lack

the context to make an informed decision. Treason in war depends on who wins. The signatories of the DoI would have been hanged had england won. That my friend is a fact.

[acmavm]

287. Yes they most certainly would have been hanged. The fact that they

weren't was decided by the act of victory.

The fact that they committed all the necessary acts to be declared traitors is the fact that matters.

You can split these hairs as fine as you want. It's gotten to the point where its silly now.

[eridani]

260. No, its the people who are outsoucing all our jobs and starting wars--

--to steal oil.

[Judi Lynn]

289. Those RCTV/Venevision stats are hideous, aren't they?

I really doubt the predators in the U.S. Republican Party have anything to do with them. It's only coincidental that Cuban-descended Venezuelan Gustavo Cisneros has been known as _{George H. W. Bush's} old fishing buddy for years and years.

http://www.soberania.org.nyud.net:8090/Images/Cisneros_bush_314.jpg http://viomundo.globo.com.nyud.net:8090/imagens/4229734_Cisneros_422g.jpg

Venevision's/Univision's/Galavision's Gustavo Cisneros and his American pal.

Oh, yeah. Just remembered. Right after the coup, Cisneros, who was one of the coup plotters, noted in many sources, went to stay on vacation with the elder _Bush at the resort owned by the Cuban "exiles," and sugar barons, with sugar plantations in both South Florida and the Dominican Republic, the FANJULS, Alfie and Pepe.

They withdrew for a conference to the Dominican Republic immediately after the coup failure.

[Cleita]

247. Thanks for a very informative thread.

I see the anti-Chavez hit squad has arrived but it doesn't diminish the importance of what you have posted. I put a link to your post in the Hispanic forum where your research will be better appreciated and won't get archived as quickly.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

271. WHO DOES THE CIA WORK FOR ANYWAY?

CIA CAPITALIST INTERVENTION AUTHORITY

[Cleita]

279. Mostly it protects American mining and oil industries overseas

from what I have seen.

[Pavulon]

283. Read something

The CIA has a long history in Washington. It is a fixture. At one point a massive player capable of nation state actions. It has served presidents from both parties.

It protects American interests, just like MI6 does its job, and does each service of similar nature run by first world nations.

No one here has an list of operational things they currently do, only what they did in the past, that has been selectively made public.

[Cleita]

295. I should have been clearer.

By American interests I meant those things that American business are interested in even if it's not theirs or ours. Noam Chomsky pretty much sums up what the CIA does for shadow organizations in the name of the USA>

[Pavulon]

312. Noam

does not have clearance to look into the compartments in the CIA. His opinion as a linguist on the CIA is interesting, but really no better informed than ours.

[Cleita]

315. Really he is far more informed than me

and I will guess you.

[vincent_vega_lives]

303. CIA Doesn't

Private contractors or state department types.

[murloc]

276. How does a TV station "help" a coup

I suppose the TV station could be supplying arms, hiring killers and staging quas-miltary operations. Maybe they were interviewing government agents and then delivering state secrets?

But if they are just expressing their opposition to the president, and calling for his impeachment and ouster. The how does that differ from what those who oppose George Bush do?

Using the Chavez playbook, Bush could seize a number of websites and Air America.

Of course Bush might have to declare himself dictator first.

Lets hope that Bush doesnt learn from Chavez.

[Initech]

281. Ha ha... Chavez doesn't play their game, and it's pissing the CIA off big time!

:popcorn:

[EFerrari]

298. You bet!

lol

[LeftishBrit]

294. Errr - you believe in throwing reporters in prison for treason?

I realize that Chavez didn't do so - but you seem to be recommending it. Not the way to go in a democracy, IMO. Also a dangerous precedent - what if Bush and Blair decided to throw journalists in prison for treason if they 'didn't report the good news from Iraq' and supposedly 'emboldened the insurgents', etc. - I'm sure some right-wingers would LIKE to!

As regards my opinion of Chavez: I think he's very far from ideal, but I think that any likely alternative at the moment would be worse, and possibly much worse.

[vincent_vega_lives]

297. Meanwhile

31 7th Day Adventists detained in Venezuela

http://vcrisis.com/index.php?content=letters/200704031210

Accusations of illegally practising medicine purportedly caused the arrest.

The 31 American citizens are kept incommunicado awaiting presidential orders, reported the source. It is believed that charges of spying or to be part of the CIA will be levied against them.

The group is composed by medical doctors, nurses and religious individuals.

[LBJDemocrat]

302. Detestable

That this tyrant is defended on DU is saddening.

[Cleita]

305. Excuse me but practicing medicine without a license in any

country will get you arrested and the same website has claimed that they are not in jail but asked not to leave the compound until the matter is resolved. Imagine if a bunch of Venezuelans came here to practice medicine without a license. Can you say Gitmo fast enough? Look at what we are doing to Mexicans who are picking our crops. Sorry, but there is no story here.

On edit: Update from your linked website:

Update II <05.04.07>: the group of detainees is composed by 7th Day Adventists. A source stated that the decision of detaining the group appeared to had been taken by local military that thought odd the increased number of US citizens arriving in the area. High officials of the Chavez regime were, as of early afternoon yesterday, unaware of the situation. Allegedly the group was to be transported in a military plane to Caracas so that they could leave the country without triggering a diplomatic incident.

[vincent_vega_lives]

306. Further clarification

Make if it as you will

We are grateful for the concern you have shown and we are pleased to tell you the group landed in Miami on Tuesday, April 10th, at 1:15 a.m. Now that the group of students, faculty, staff and family has returned to the United States from Venezuela, we would now like to clarify a few points.

The original article in Diario El Progresso had several rather glaring errors we would like to correct:
1. There were 32, not 31, Americans.
2. While the group was comprised of doctors, nurses, and students from a Seventh-day Adventist college, none of them are religious workers. They were in the country as part of a semester abroad program studying and offering humanitarian assistance as part of a practicum. At no point was religion an issue.
3. They were no accusations of CIA infiltration.
4. As you have pointed out, the group was never detained, though they were asked to remain for a few days on the mission campus where they were staying. The government described this as protective custody. They were well treated and had plenty of supplies. Three guards were posted who joined the students for supper and evening worship, even learning a few songs.

For more information about the recent events in Maurak and what the group was doing in Venezuela, please visit Union College’s news.

Sincerely yours,
Scott Cushman
Assistant Director of Public Relations
Union College, Lincoln, Nebraska

http://www.ucollege.edu/news/blog/archives/2007/04/entry_56.html

What documentation did Union College pursue prior to arriving in Venezuela?

Union College had signed letters of agreement with a local hospital and health officials, the governor of the State of Bolivar, the Civil Protection department for the State of Bolivar and had a letter of invitation from a recognized relief organization in the region. The group had the customary approvals by state and local authorities and when they asked about additional documentation, they were told that no further approval was needed. Also, because Duehrssen had traveled and served successfully with other groups using the same level of permissions with no concern, Union College leaders thought they had covered the documentation requirements.

What was the nature of the confusion with the government?

During the three years leading up to this year’s trip, Union College representatives completed all paperwork and obtained permissions they understood as necessary for the semester abroad. However, in the second half of the 10-week trip, Venezuelan officials questioned the group’s authority to practice medicine while in the country and the appropriateness of their tourist visas for the work they were doing. In addition, there were questions about expired medications that were found on the site of the mission campus, even though most of these medications were left in storage by previous groups. Union College does not know how the government initially became concerned about the group’s purpose and permissions.

[Cleita]

307. Your post indicates there was no problem just some

miscommunications. Your orignal post made it sound like they were in jail being accused of spying. Scary. I don't think Alexander Boyd is a good source for information about this.

I don't blame the authorities for being a bit apprehensive considering that our government is trying to kill Chavez and install a dictator more to Bushes liking.

[Dave From Canada]

310. Chavez = Bush, his defenders = Chavezbots

Now Khavez has warned he may take out another TV station in Venezuala because of its anti-government positions. Bush would be green with envy if he weren't already red with blood. Come'on all you Chavezbots, keep defending him. It makes me laugh.