|
Edited on Fri Jun-10-05 10:56 AM by Peace Patriot
...over it, and has already tried to topple Chavez, and wants to topple him now, even to the point of invading the country (which they would be doing right now, if they weren't tied down in Iraq), because Chavez believes that some of Venezuela's oil profits ought to be spent on Venezeula's vast population of extremely poor people, and the Bush Cartel doesn't want that kind of precedent to be set anywhere. And, of course, they want all the profits for themselves and their oil company criminals.
Chavez is the popularly elected president. His most recent election was closely monitored by dozens of international election monitoring organizations, including the Carter Center, all of which declared the election fair, transparent and legitimate. Chavez himself helped write and pass the provision of the Venezuelan Constitution that permited his enemies (the country's rich oil elite) to mount a Recall election against him (which he won, hands down).
All of the media is owned by the rich oil elite--so Chavez's electoral victories are all the more remarkable. He is the chosen leader of the vast majority of Venezuelans.
The Bush Cartel is undoubtedly running all sorts of nefarious operations in Venezuela, to destabilize the country and topple Chavez, if not to assassinate him. (They tried that already--and tens of thousands of citizens filled the streets to stop it.)
The article's statement that, "Súmate's charges that Venezuela is losing its democracy have ample supporting evidence," is a complete lie. The exact opposite is true. Venezuelan democracy has been extraordinarily successful. In fact, it is so strong, and has such passionate commitment from the vast majority of its citizens, that I think it would survive Chavez's assassination.
The peasants and vast numbers of poor in the major cities have learned to organize, to stick together, and to vote. Is that not democracy?
The article is worth reading. It is a hit piece on Chavez. And I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that "Mary Anastasia O'Grady" (the writer) is a Bush CIA operative.
Here is some of it: (Ms. O'Grady writes that:)
"Ms. Machado is one of the leaders of Súmate, a nongovernmental organization resisting efforts by President Hugo Chávez's to turn Venezuela into a dictatorship. Because of its vocal objections to the many steps Chávez has taken to consolidate his power, Súmate has become an 'enemy of the people,' in the traditional language of tyranny. The conspiracy charge stems from the $31,000 that Súmate took for non-partisan educational work from the U.S.'s National Endowment for Democracy, which promotes free and fair elections abroad."
----
"...efforts by President Hugo Chávez's (sic) to turn Venezuela into a dictatorship."
Chavez has done just the opposite. He and his supporters have turned Venezuela from a dictatorship into a democracy! (And one of the things he is notable for is NOT jailing or suppressing his adversaries, and strongly supporting constitutional government.)
"...Súmate has become an 'enemy of the people,' in the traditional language of tyranny."
Who is using this "traditional language of tyranny"? No Chavez quote here. This is the writer's phrase, apparently. If Ms. Machado has broken the law in Venezuela, she should be prosecuted, no? (And, frankly, from what I can gather from this article, she IS an "enemy of the people"!)
----
"Ms. Machado could go to jail for up to 16 years. Yet, after the past two weeks, in which she met personally with President Bush in Washington and attended the general assembly of the Organization of American States in Fort Lauderdale, Fla., persecuting her would carry a high price, turning the millions of dollars Chávez has spent on polishing his image abroad into a waste of money. Her case has been internationalized by Mr. Bush himself as a means of showing Venezuelans and the region that he is watching Chávez's misbehavior."
------
For one thing, the US National Endowment for Democracy (Machado's funder) is a Bush-controlled, US taxpayer funded, propaganda machine. There is nothing legitimate about it. If such an operation from Venezuela were at work in the US, you think the Bush Cartel wouldn't be prosecuting it for fraud, tracking down every one of its bank accounts, and trying to get rid of it?
The US NED is about as committed to "free and fair elections abroad" as the Bush Cartel is committed to them at home.
Also, I would like to see documentation on the "the millions of dollars Chávez has spent on polishing his image abroad." (There is no documentation in the article.) The truth is that Chavez has poured government resources into medical and school facilities and community organizations in poor areas. If he has spent some money trying to counter the relentless propaganda of the Bush Cartel and its lapdog press, I doubt if Venezuela's poor would begrudge that expense. They and their democracy are at extreme peril from the Bush Cartel. And hardly anybody in the US is informed about this. I'm GLAD Chavez is spending some money on it, if he is. But more than anything, the following sentence tells you all you need to know about Ms. O'Grady, Ms. Machado, Sumate and the US NED:
"Her case has been internationalized by Mr. Bush himself as a means of showing Venezuelans and the region that he is watching Chávez's misbehavior."
Remember that liar, paid by Bush operatives, who claimed that Iraqi soldiers were throwing infants out of their incubators? (i.e., Persian Gulf War I).
That's what we have here, apparently. A Bush Cartel funded liar.
As for the writer, Ms. O'Grady, Judith Miller comes to mind (NYT columnist whom the NYT placed on the front page to promulgate lie after lie about Iraq WMDs, prior to the invasion of Iraq--using double agent and convicted bank fraud felon Ahmad Chalabi and other disreputable sources).
-----
I am actually impressed with Chavez's restraint.
|