Venezuela military 'seizes ports'

[dipsydoodle]

Source: BBC News

Venezuela's military has taken control of key airports and sea ports under the terms of a move rubber-stamped by parliament a week ago, reports say.

The move centralises the running of the country's main transport hubs.

President Hugo Chavez has pushed for the move, describing it as "reunifying the motherland, which was in pieces".

Critics of Mr Chavez says the plans are unconstitutional, but the National Assembly backed them a week ago, saying they would improve essential services.

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7957475.stm

[EFerrari]

1. This is a good idea. I'm glad to see the ports under federal control. n/t

[hack89]

3. Why?

doesn't decentralized power diffuse power down to a lower level? Local democracy is the only way.

[EFerrari]

8. In addition to all the practical reasons for securing the food supply

and integrating transportation systems into one coherent one, there is a war being waged against democracy in Venezuela. Do you remember this little gem from Rummie?

The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez
Sunday, December 2, 2007; Page B03

Today the people of Venezuela face a constitutional referendum, which, if passed, could obliterate the few remaining vestiges of Venezuelan democracy. The world is saying little and doing less as President Hugo Chávez dismantles Venezuela's constitution, silences its independent media and confiscates private property. Chávez's ambitions do not stop at Venezuela's borders, either. He has repeatedly threatened its neighbors. In late November, Colombia's president, Alvaro Uribe, declared that Chávez's efforts to mediate hostage talks with Marxist terrorists from the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, were not welcome. Chávez responded by freezing trade with Colombia.

With diplomatic, economic and communications institutions designed for a different era, the free world has too few tools to help prevent Venezuela's once vibrant democracy from receding into dictatorship. But such a tragedy is not preordained. In fact, we face a moment when swift decisions by the United States and like-thinking nations could dramatically help, supporting friends and allies with the courage to oppose an aspiring dictator with regional ambitions.
ad_icon

The best place to start is with the prompt passage and signing of the Colombian free trade agreement, which has been languishing in Congress for months. Swift U.S. ratification of the pact would send an unequivocal message to the people of Colombia, the opposition in Venezuela and the wider region that they do not stand alone against Chávez. It would also provide concrete economic opportunities to the people of Colombia, helping to offset the restrictions being imposed by Venezuela -- and it would strengthen the U.S. economy in the bargain.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

[hack89]

11. So Obama represents the same threat that Bush and Cheney did? Interesting nt

[EFerrari]

14. The interests Bush fronted for don't leave office.

[hack89]

18. So we should oppose Obama like we did Bush? nt

[EFerrari]

21. What does opposing Obama have to do with this thread about Venezuelan ports?

I support democracy in Latin America and it's a great time to do that because it is flourishing there.

[hack89]

23. You introduced the threat that America represents to Venezuela, not me. nt

[EFerrari]

25. Yes, I did. You may recall that we tried to kill the guy.

And that the NYTs, the WSJ and the WaHo all jumped on the coup bandwagon. It was just embarrassing for them that Venezuela wasn't having any of their bs.

But, it is true that even if Bush is out of office, the interests he represented are still around. You may have noticed, they're still robbing us blind right now. Obama is wrestling with them but that doesn't mean they still aren't powerful.

[bitchkitty]

190. Don't be simplistic.

American interests do not necessarily equal American people, or even the American President.

[Mika]

200. Exactly.

These same "American interests" are the enemy of the American working class. Just look at what they've done to the US.

[bitchkitty]

208. I just wonder what it would be like

to live under a government that really was by the People and for the People. I'm tired of fake progressives and what passes for a "liberal" in this country. I prefer the term Left.

[bvar22]

78. As long as Obama is continuing the policy supporting....

....the Right Wing and their death squads and illegal War on Drugs in Colombia, then

YES! I will opposed the policy whether it is propagated by BUSH or Obama.

[eridani]

132. Only when and if Obama cheerleads for imperial bullying n/t

[scarletwoman]

16. As long as Obama buys into the neoliberalism of the Clintonite faction, then yes.

He's already bad-mouthed Chavez on the campaign trail, and has shown little sign that he's not on board with the basic tenets of U.S. imperialism -- even if he's peddling a "kinder, gentler" version.

sw

[EFerrari]

27. Progressive leaders in Latin America have never, to my knowledge

been more unified than they are now. It sort of amazes me.

The Obama administration must be on a big learning curve. Everything here has been so focused on the ME and the very first Latino group Obama spoke to were the terrorist sympathizers, literally funders, in Miami, CANF. They have deep pockets there.

[scarletwoman]

31. It's very exciting. Sorta gives a person hope that eventually the People can win out.

Wonder how long it will take for it to happen here?

sw

[NashVegas]

44. You Didn't Really Think

He'd get elected by doing anything else, did you?

[scarletwoman]

50. He could have not even mentioned Chavez. I'll bet you that most Americans are quite unaware

of Venezuela. No one would have even noticed if Obama hadn't brought up the topic at all.

[EFerrari]

51. He did say that Chavez censored the media (false), that he

supported terrorism (not true) and that he was a bad influence in the region. :shrug:

[scarletwoman]

57. Right. In other words, Obama deliberately repeated neocon propaganda.

The poster I was replying to seemed to think this was necessary in order for Obama to win the election. I disagree. I think Obama could have simply not brought up the subject of Chavez at all. Aside from the fascist crazies in Florida, no one would have noticed.

But instead, Obama recited from rote the same bullshit we've been hearing from the neocons and fascists for years. He didn't have to. The fact that he did really sucks. Just like the fact that he has Summers and Geithner on his economic team.

I had "hoped" for better.

sw

[EFerrari]

72. I'm hoping this is just more "neglect" and that it gets better from here.

It's hard to say which way it'll go.

[Mika]

201. Plus, now he's repeating the neocon lines about Cuba.

First he said that the US sanctions on Cuba were a useless way of bringing our two nations together.

Now he says that Cuba must comply with US neocon/neoliberal global strategy in order to establish US/Cuba relations.

Plus, Mr Obama has relegated US citizens without relatives in Cuba as second class citizens - travel banned from Cuba!

The wrong people have Obama's ear.

[Zorro]

60. Certainly you have much better information than Obama has

[EFerrari]

65. I at very least have resources that he certainly has available.

[WriteDown]

188. Putin, is that you?

:evilgrin:

[Bacchus39]

104. well, yet another lie. Chavez supported the FARC and I posted a video him stating as much

look, it was Hugo saying it. why aren't you supporting him?? you mean you disagree with Hugo???

[cali]

123. lol. but Obama's "badmouthing" of Chavez is nothing compared

to what Chavez has said about Obama. Ooooh, I know. Chavez is justified and has every reason to badmouth Obama. Gad, the hypocrisy exhibited by both Chavez adorers and Chavez haters is stunning.

[scarletwoman]

141. Is Venzuela funding opposition groups in the U.S.? Does Chavez threaten military action against the

U.S.? Does Venezuela have intelligence operatives working in the U.S. to depose the president? Does Venezuela fund troops and private military contractors on U.S. borders?

There is absolutely no equivalence between the leader of the world policeman imperial power U.S. making untrue and propagandistic charges against the leader of another country, and the leader of that country making insulting remarks in return.

It's the difference between a mouse and an elephant. If an elephant tells the rest of the elephant herd that the mouse is evil and dangerous, the elephants can stomp him out. If the mouse sneers at the elephant -- yeah, well, so what? Fat lot of damage the mouse can do to the elephant.

And frankly, Chavez did Obama an enormous favor during the election campaign by badmouthing him -- it gave Obama total cover from republican charges that he was going to be in bed with that (horrors!) socialist "dictator" in Venezuela.

Had Obama been seen as receiving support from Hugo Chavez (OMG!) it could have been politically devastating. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Chavez insulted Obama on purpose because he DID want Obama want to win the election and knew that the best help he could give Obama was to put on a show of being against him. Chavez IS a smart politician, after all, whatever else one might think about him.

If, on the other hand, Chavez is putting on a show of dissing Obama strictly for domestic political purposes -- again, so what? It's not as if there aren't plenty of good reasons to see the U.S. as a hostile force. The long and bloody history of U.S. interventions in Latin America provides ample justification for such a view.

And Obama hasn't exactly repudiated the imperialist framework and mindset that led to those interventions. To the contrary, he has pretty much echoed the same lines we've been hearing from the Bipartisan Foreign Policy Establishment since the beginning of the Cold War era.

To complain about Chavez saying mean things about Obama is just plain silly.

sw

[Judi Lynn]

154. Completely odd, isn't it, to focus on comments made by a man who was violently kidnapped

in a coup engineered in concert with people in _Bush's State Department who conferred with the same clowns in advance of the dirty coup, and admits it.

Had someone NOT been able to get the news out THROUGH THE TOTAL NEWS BLACKOUT BY THE VENEZUELAN MEDIA to the people of Caracas, we wouldn't even be having these food fights with right-wing trolls, as their plan would have succeeded, and there's be an oligarchic dictator sitting in Miraflores right now, with the new government they were attempting to put together after they dissolved the Venezuelan constitution, the National Assembly, the Supreme Court, and sent out the police (with the cheerful assistance of a Caracas tv station in giving out the names and addresses of various Hugo Chavez supporters and cabinet members) to arrest Chavistas and throw them in jail.

It would have all be over and there would have been a fascist running Venezuela today, probably with a huge financial endowment from the U.S. taxpayers, like Uribe in Colombia, and these guys would be free to troll other message boards.

[scarletwoman]

162. Very little surprises me anymore when it comes to discussions about Chavez.

It's still a mystery to me why so many people feel the need to try to tear him down any way they can think of. It's like Hugo Chavez' very existence just bugs the shit out of some people.

:shrug:
sw

[Judi Lynn]

163. A great DU'er, rabs, has pointed out that their reaction to Chavez sounds like

something the head of the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, under Jimmy Carter, said about Cuba:

Wayne Smith, a former head of the US Interest Section in Havana, famously said Cuba had the same effect on American administrations as the full moon had on werewolves.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/08/cuba-obama-administration

In fact, in ALL the early AP and Reuters report, they were driven to include, in EVERY article, a reference to Hugo Chavez's friendliness to Fidel Castro. After they got some more distorted grievances to air, they started including all of them they could work into their articles, as well, as you've probably noticed.

[Mika]

210. And, as EFerrari points out, its no problemo when Obama supports the terrorist CANF agenda.

Interesting how politically "dangerous" is would be for any candidate to have the support of LatAm leaders soundly and solidly supported by their electorate if they are to the Left, but its no problem to have the support of RW terrorist organizations in Miami (that represent the stark minority in Miami) that are opposing the LatAM shift to the Left that are to this day organizing and committing violations of the US's Neutrality Act by running terra ops into Cuba from US shores and foreign shores.

Very strange indeed.

[Judi Lynn]

213. How could any national politician support a group which engages in acts of terrorism, anyway?

By the time they worked their way up to bombing a Cubana airliner in mid-flight, killing the entire Cuban fencing team, children, and medical students from Guyana, they had no moral center, and they should NEVER have gotten the ear of any responsible national candidate ever again.

[kwenu]

Is there a threat to the food supply?

[Mr Rabble]

111. Your premise is incorrect.

"decentralized" power does not typically diffuse power down to a lower level. It certainly has not had that effect in the US, or any other business run society that I am aware of.

What generally happens in these scenarios is usually quite the opposite.

Powerful central government "authorizes" state government to run things.
State government is then over-run by very powerful interests which could never have pushed around the Feds. Think about Microsoft and Washington State versus Microsoft and the Feds.

The Venezuelan Government is in a battle with their elite business community for control of power. Local democracy will flourish with the help of a strong Federal Government.

[dipsydoodle]

4. Quite right - so am I

Should always have been the case.

[EFerrari]

5. The writing is quite hostile, isn't it?

Not as bad as here, though. :)

[dipsydoodle]

7. Yes I noticed that

"seized" :rofl: :hi:

[EFerrari]

10. Yeah, and "rubber stamped". No bias there.

lol

[Swagman]

53. outrageous use of "rubber stamped" by the BBC !

which part of 'democracy' doesn't this BBC journalist understand ?. How insulting to Venezualan citizens when their elected representatives vote for a bill in their parliament and it's labelled "rubber stamped".:puke:

The continued implication that Chavez (love or loathe him) is a dictator and not a popularly elected leader is just to much.

[EFerrari]

55. Exactly. It's one thing to loathe Chavez. It's another entirely

to disrespect the citizens of Venezuela. :puke:

[paulk]

82. since Chavez's party controls all 167 seats of their

National Assembly, how is "rubber- stamped" not an accurate discription?

[scarletwoman]

91. You mean the representatives elected by the people of Venezuela?

[paulk]

97. the opposition boycotted the elections

they had no one else to vote for.

how is your post relevant to mine?

[eridani]

133. That's their fault. Anyone can be a candidate n/t

[Peace Patriot]

185. How did the fascists win the mayoralty of Caracas by boycotting the elections?

The fascist opposition in Venezuela did not boycott the last mid-terms. They lost the majority of elections for National Assembly.

Venezuela has elections that are far, far more transparent and aboveboard than our own, and which are furthermore heavily monitored by hundreds of international election monitors. The people voted overwhelmingly for a socialist National Assembly that largely supports Chavez policy. The Venezuelan National Assembly is no more a "rubber stamp" of Chavez than the U.S. Congress was a "rubber stamp" of FDR during the New Deal. In both cases, the elected representatives of the people agree with the policies of the executive branch because the vast majority of the people do.

[cali]

124. so when we used the term to describe what the US congress was doing

under bushco, we were disrespecting the American people?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

It's the height of foolishness to put any politician or any political body on a pedestal.

[ohio2007]

170. Congress doesn't read anything they rubber stamp. Haven't you heard of the bailout ponzy game?

or is it a non factor to this thread when speaking about current acts of congress ?:eyes:

[EFerrari]

99. How many seats does Obama's party control in the House and Senate?

How in the world do you think those reps in the legislature got there? They were elected.

[paulk]

105. they were elected with no opposition

which I'm sure you are aware of.

try to stay on topic - we were discussing your belief that the term "rubber stamp" was not proper, even though all 167 seats of the National congress are controlled by one party.

[EFerrari]

108. Try to focus, if that's possible. The term "rubber stam" is an insult

to the people of Venezuela who participate in internationally monitored, transparent elections.

There was a year the opposition boycotted the elections. Boycotting sounds better than losing, no? How long ago was that, do you know? How many of those seats came out of that election?

Thanks, paulk!

[Swagman]

120. if it's party policy which Venezualans voted for..it's not "rubber stamped"

..it is endorsing their policy...unless that term is used for every policy voted for by every politician in every news item.

The term has been selectively used to illustrate a Chavez news item.

Unless you can point to all the times US publications, news broadcasts said a Bush/Senate/Congess decision was "rubber-stamped".

If you have evidence that Jimmy Carter and the UN didn't have, that shows the National Assembley were not elected in free and fair elections..do tell.

[ohio2007]

169. The Venezuelans were "against it" before they were given a second chance to be "for it"

now that presedente for life got it his way the 2nd time around and I'm sure the supreme court will give it ( usurping states rights ) their seal of approval
even though the courts may not have been properly stuffed with chavistas.

But remember, the best is yet to come.

[EFerrari]

178. How do you feel about gay marriage being back on the ballot?

And, I have to tell you, my new hobby is collecting these predictions because they're funny and because they never pan out.

[Thothmes]

184. Most American ports are under the jurisdiction

of the State in which they are located. Security rules have been established recently that are required by the Feds. The daily operations of the ports are state responisibilities. The port authority in the Tide water Virginia is looking at a multi-billion dollar offer to allow a private company operate the port facilities in Norfolk and Porstmouth.

[caseymoz]

202. Interesting point. So the ports were under private control.

Did Chavez then fear that the private port operators would then close the ports in protest? That's not an angle I had looked at before.

[hack89]

2. How can centralized military control ever be bad?

perhaps dropping the 82nd Airborne Division on Wall Street will solve our economic woes.

[EFerrari]

13. Who controls air traffic in the United States? Airport security?

What is your point?

[hack89]

17. Name a federally controlled and operated airport and seaport

besides military bases and we can compare apples to apples.

[EFerrari]

20. Are you kidding? If you control security and traffic, you control it.

What am I missing? Seriously, I don't know if I am missing something.

[hack89]

22. OK nt

[EFerrari]

26. I don't want to pick a fight, hack. What I don't know about ports

is a lot. lol

[SpankMe]

61. Not really.

The City of Long Beach runs the Port of Long Beach. The City of Los Angeles runs the Port of Los Angeles. Saying that "...if you control security and traffic, you control it..." is not true in the American context. You're playing semantics.

The Cities of Long Beach and Los Angeles have full operational and business control of their respective ports. The Feds provide the security - either directly or through regulation. That doesn't mean they "run" it Hugo Chavez style.

Chavez is clearly on a power trip, taking control of anything he can from his political adversaries. He uses food safety, national unity and such as a smokescreen to justify it publicly. Bush-CheneyCo used similar scare tactics to butress their power.

I'm all for small countries "pushing back" against American imperialism. But, not in Venezuela's case.

Hugo Chavez is a corrupt, third-world despot with a hyper-ego trying to pick a fight. And, he's a fricking nut bag.

[EFerrari]

68. "Hugo Chavez style"?

Now, what better information do you have about that "style" since these ports were just nationalized?

That sound you hear is your credibility circling the bowl.

[Swagman]

62. oh yeh..let's have all airports privatelly owned like in Australia

where Bush toady John Howard sold of federally owned airports a decade ago

...and prices to customers have soared
..rents to shopkeepers have soared
..fees to taxi-drivers waiting more than 5 mnutes have soared
..parking charge have soared
..thus costs to all travellers have soared

meanwhile..

...services to passengers have plunged or become inaccesible because of cost
...airport security has plummetted as 'private contractors' with long criminal records are hired as cheap labout to replace unionists
...costs increase as the airport becomes yet another huge shopping mall
...travellers are forced to walk huge distances through shopping plazas to planes
...security guards are layed off and doors to secure areas left open
...customs officers and privately contracted baggage handlers are discovered running a racket pilfering traveller's luggage
...and then we can contract out maintenance of airlines to the cheapest 'contractor'..encouraged by the airport owner because...yes you guesed right
..airline's rental and handling charges have soared..and then as Qantas discovered you discover unqualified engineers fixing your plane.

..yes, Private Enterprise always does it better !

[bvar22]

81. Have tou tried to get on an airplane lately?

The Federal Government seized control of all the sirports in the US shortly after 9-11.
That was "rubber stamped" by our Congress too.

[Swagman]

121. "rubber-stamped" or just seized by Bush ?

was there a vote ?. (I don't actually know)

There was a vote for war but on false information. But why is that similar to this decision ?

I'd hazard a guess that Chavez is "seizing" ports and airports to pre-empt a coup. Good idea.

[bdab1973]

205. It's not that simple

The air traffic controllers at MOST US airfields that have a control tower are FAA employees, however the airports themselves are often run and operated by local governments (cities, counties and states) and even private owners in some cases. The vast majority of airports in the United States do not have an air traffic control tower, and are run by a variety of private and government entities, usually at the local level. Aside from military/government installations, there are very few (if any) civilian airports that are operated/owned by the federal government.

[bdab1973]

204. The military doesn't control air traffic in the United States

Civilian FAA controllers do, unless it's in the immediate vicinity of a military airfield.

[EFerrari]

206. We were talking about federal control, not military control. n/t

[Judi Lynn]

218. You, uh, mean there's a DIFFERENCE? Uh, oh! Back to the drawing board. n/t

[ohio2007]

127. That was the consensus reached in the beer gardens in Germany almost a century ago.

Military troops were dispatched to ports in the three Venezuelan states governed by Chavez opponents: Zulia, Carabobo and Nueva Esparta. Chavez said the takeover of air and sea ports in the state of Anzoategui, which is governed by a Chavez ally, was also under way.








“It is an impotent empire.” – May 16, 2006, referring to the United States, which enacted an arms ban.

“An imperialist invasion of Venezuela will be the start of a 100-year war.” – Nov. 5, 2005, amid protests during the Summit of the Americas.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18041726/
quotes of the western hemisphere's "Dear Leader"

jmo


-the frog is in the pot and sitting comfortably atop the back burner,comfortably numb,comfortably waiting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bDY0DfEjmo&feature=related

[bemildred]

6. Is this like the "Department of Homeland Security"? nt

[EFerrari]

9. I don't know yet. I dont think so. They've been trying to get their

transportation systems together for years. And the food supply has in the past been used as a political tool by the opposition. Lots of things going on at the same time.

[hack89]

12. BS - this is pure politics. nt

[EFerrari]

15. Really? Why don"t you enlighten us. I'm always happy to learn something new.

[hack89]

19. It is Chavez ensuring his opposition is weakened.

its right in the story.

[EFerrari]

24. These stories always say that everything Chavez does is to weaken his opposition.

They're already weak.

They have been weakened by the rejection of the people of Venezuela. They're about as viable as Republicans here are.

That the press continues to pretend Chavez does everything by himself like some kind of octopus is just par. Venezuela is a big country with lots of people in it.

[creeksneakers2]

42. Stories "always say"

Perhaps they know something. One time after another Chavez assumes more power. Each time, you dismiss the information as propaganda from Chavez opponents. How many times have you dismissed? How many sources have you dismissed?

[EFerrari]

43. Except what they say never comes true.

:shrug:

The predictions of crackdowns, violence, terrorism, what have you, just don't seem to keep happening.

So, after a while, you learn to recognize the pattern. It's Cheney journalism. Be VERY skeered.

It's been more than ten years and he just won a referendum by a big majority in a clean election.

You do the math.

As far as sources, these are the same sources who I busted in exactly the same way for screwing up their reporting of our 2004 election and for midwifing the FBI's fake Ivins case. You have it (or me) a little backwards. FIRST I noticed the media was full of it. Then, I learned something about Venezuela.

:)

[caseymoz]

203. That's the opinion of the story's writer, not part of factual reporting.

Separate the fact from the opinion when you read an article. Something can have both a political and public interest interpretation. If the ports were in private hands (the ports are run by the state governments in the US, BTW; it would give the wealthy a lot of power if they weren't), then he might be heading off an embargo by the wealthy opposition. It does weaken the opposition, but because previously they had the power to starve the people into submission. That's too much power. It's in the public good, as it keeps the people from being coerced.

Nevertheless, Chavez has turned anti-democratic and repressive in other ways. His repression of the press is inexcusable. He needs to be stopped, but the US isn't in a position to stop him-- and it's better for us to let things take their course.

[Judi Lynn]

207. Please provide a link discussing Hugo Chavez's inexusable repression of the press.

You'd be providing a service to the many DU'ers who've been reading and watching Venezuelan news for years here.

It would be completely useful, and so much better than dropping in an assertion without foundation.

[caseymoz]

209. Sorry, I thought Chavez' repression of the press was common knowledge.

And I'm not joking or being sarcastic about that. I thought people watching Venezuelan news would notice this. Okay, here's one:

In November 2006, Simon Romero reported in The New York Times the death of journalist Jesus Flores Rojas, who was shot in the head in his driveway the preceding August. Rojas was the fifth journalist killed since the beginning of 2002. Although there's no evidence to suggest that Rojas was murdered by Chavez supporters, "the killings and other aggression towards journalists point to a trend in which threats and intimidation have become all too common, even in what remains a flourishing free press under President Hugo Chávez," wrote Romero.

Now, there's no proof Chavez ordered that, nor is there any proof that Putin was really behind the chemical and nuclear waste that happened to end up poisoning his enemies. Let's just say it's suspicious, and the story goes on:

In addition to the alleged intimidation of journalists, the government has reportedly unleashed a wave of new legal restrictions on the private media.

Advocacy groups like Human Rights Watch and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have pointed to one recent law called the Law of Social Responsibility in Radio and Television, which imposes restrictions on content. The law, for example, forbids depictions of violence between 5 a.m. and 11 p.m. on television and radio stations, thereby making it illegal to show, for example, protests. The law also stipulates that insulting the president could result in six to 30 months in prison.

That will keep the journalists polite! It's the kind of law Nixon would have wanted.

"It's really the modern way of introducing a certain amount of regulation into television in a world that had hitherto been totally unbridled," Gott said in a 2005 interview. "And indeed anyone knows who's been the media are having a field day and are about 80 percent anti-Chavez. So there isn't much to complain about there."

But David Natera, who owns a newspaper in the Bolivar State within Venezuela, printed criticisms of the governor. In turn, the state ordered Natera's offices to be demolished so that the land can be returned to its natural state.

Decided that it would be a good place for a park.

Octavio also said that he has been threatened. In February 2004, he had taken photos of some violent demonstrations in Caracas and posted them on his blog. He received threats via email. "It said, We know who you are, where you work, and we're gonna go after you, you fascist."

But government supporters say the restrictions on the private press are needed to combat rampant anti-government sentiments.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/indepth_coverage/latin_america/venezuela/media.html

There, Chavez has throttled the press. Maybe not as hard as some, but you don't know where this might lead. As you could tell, I'm a bit disenchanted with Chavez right now.

[EFerrari]

211. There is zero evidence that the Venezuelan government

let alone Chavez, lol, had anything to do with any of that. And Simon Romero is a notorious propagandist. "Chavez has throttled the press" is patently untrue and a favorite meme of the Heritage Foundation. The opposition overwhelmingly owns the media and they blast Chavez all the time.

[caseymoz]

212. Heritage foundation? PBS was the source here.

It is hardly a propaganda machine, and I expect fact checking on their part, even when one source is a propagandist (and he wasn't the only source). Neither is Human Rights Watch as far as I know. I don't expect that journalists getting shot and a newspaper getting returned to "its natural state" are anything but direct facts; I mean, those can be checked repeatedly.

Now, whether Chavez was directly involved in it is a different point entirely. The open question that I haven't seen reported in the news is: how much has he discouraged it? That might sound unfair on the face of it, but it would be rather important for the press to know the government isn't doing it, Chavez isn't behind these crimes, that he is doing his best to have them. Otherwise, for the press, it has the effect of terrorizing them, and worse then if the government were directly and visibly doing it. It's an open question: have any of the shootings been solved? Does the government even look like it's investigating those assassinations?

Is it unfair to ask that? I think it was fair to say that the Bush administration encouraged the bombing of abortion clinics through refusal to renounce them and charge those responsible with terrorism. However, clearly there was no government involvement, so abortion clinics did not have to be terrified of some kind of secret government campaign. That wouldn't be true of the press in Venezuela, where the fear that the government has them targeted are quite common for reporters. It's hard to imagine that kind of terror.

Indications I've seen are that he's unconcerned. He has said about the shootings that the mortality rate among journalists is less than that for the country as a whole. That statement creeps me out.

There may be no proof that he had any involvement, but he had something to do with passing the law against "insulting" the President. Yes, having the press owned by the opposition, (as in the US, BTW) is a problem for him; it's also an excuse, a good one maybe, but that has no bearing on whether he has.

I didn't copy the meme from the Heritage Foundation. It was self-generated. Not throttled as in strangled, but throttled as in squeezed, implied by the phrase, "not as bad as some." He isn't the worst. Putin is one of the worst.

[EFerrari]

216. The film you're quoting didn't do any original reporting that I remember

so yes, there were sources for it. It ran down all the right wing top ten hits and was very disappointing.

The Venezuelan police are very good. Maybe you should try to track down the disposition of these cases just for your own peace of mind. One thing you have to remember is that every time someone is shoot or robbed in Venezuela (which is too often), and they belong to the opposition, Chavez is blamed for it. Do you remember the attacks on a synagogue just after Operation Lead Cast? Chavez was immediately blamed for that. It turned out to be a robbery put together by an ex-employee of the rabbi. Same with a murder of a student, iirc, that was sometimes active in the opposition on his campus. Turns out he was killed by a gang that he was selliing for on the black market. But, that's usually the way it goes.

If you believe those facts were checked, I'm afraid you are mistaken and I'd suggest you check them on your own because the media prints cr@p about Chavez all the time and I found that film to be so poorly sourced that I wrote to PBS about it.

The law about respecting public officials was in response to the daily abuse from the opposition who owns (I mean, dominates) the airwaves. If Chris Matthews started his show with the questions "What the hell is the matter with Obama, is he MENTALLY ILL?" we'd be outraged but that's what used to happen all the time. The media isn't muffled as much as it was made to be less horribly disagreeable. They still attack him all the time, which is fine, but they can't be so coarse about it. If reporters are afraid they have been "targeted", lol, they sure are doing a good job of hiding it. :)

[Judi Lynn]

215. Common knowledge? If it passes for "knowledge" anywhere, it's among idiots.

DU'ers have discussed the propaganda with visitors for years who come here to attempt to plant and maintain those same absurd claims. We know far better than that because we tend to do our homework, and have for years.

As DU'ERS know, the media is almost entire controlled by intensely anti-Chavez elitist interests, has been from the very first, and it blazes on 24/7 as always.

Here's a quick google grab on the subject:

Media, Propaganda and Venezuela

~snip~
Reporting on the ongoing issues, such as the protests and Chavez’s economic policies in Venezuela have shown similar signs of one-sidedness, from both the mainstream media of western countries such as the U.S. and U.K., and from Venezuela’s own elite anti-Chavez media, which “controls 95% of the airwaves and has a near-monopoly over newsprint, and … played a major part in the failed attempt to overthrow the president, Hugo Chavez, in April 2002…. The media is still directly encouraging dissident elements to overthrow the democratically elected president—if necessary by force.”

Charles Hardy, who lived in Venezuela for some 19 years and worked with the poor notes that “A great difference exists between what one reads in the U.S. newspapers and what one hears in the barrios and villages of Venezuela, places where the elite do not tread. Adults are entering literacy programs, senior citizens are at last receiving their pensions, and children are not charged registration to enter the public schools. Health care and housing have improved dramatically.” Reading mainstream versions, you would not get this picture.

http://www.globalissues.org/article/403/media-propaganda-and-venezuela#USInvolvementinVenezuelanCoup

Your decision to drag in Simon Romero was poorly timed. He has been a joke with DU'ers who've caught on to him, for many years. There's no one here, among the Democrats who considers him a reputable source on anything. He discredits what's left of his profession.

U.S. Media Wages Propaganda War in South America
by Randy Shaw‚ Sep. 19‚ 2007

Thanks to the Iraq War, George W. Bush has not focused on overthrowing progressive governments in South America. In fact, the Bush Administration has paid so little attention to the region that democracy and progressive economic policies have been allowed to flourish. But the United States media has not given up its historic role as spokespersons for the area’s elites. Led by Simon Romero of the New York Times, the traditional media portrays Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez as a left-wing caricature, almost spoofing his efforts to help the poor. Bolivia’s Evo Morales is another frequent target, and Romero’s September 18 Times story offers the perfect opportunity to dissect media bias against politicians whose greatest sin is actually fulfilling their promises to help the poor.

From the 1950’s through the 1970’s, the CIA retained reporters like Romero to write stories undermining U.S. support for democratic governments in South and Central America. Today, Romero and others need no outside compensation to write such stories, as editors allow them to produce articles that fail the most basic tests of journalistic fairness.

Consider Romero’s September 18th article, “Radical Brings Some Stability to Bolivia.” The piece profiles Evo Morales - one of the world’s most courageous, innovative, and charismatic leaders.
(snip)

Romero writes, “for all the worries that Mr. Morales’s radicalism would create economic and political turmoil in Bolivia, the reality of his tenure appears to be that the country is relatively stable.”

Who had such worries? The Bolivian elite who backed Morales’ opponent? Romero? It is left unsaid, but the reader is to understand that (1) Morales is radical and (2) this radicalism raised worries of turmoil.

One would never know from this article that Morales won the Presidency amidst major turmoil. These cataclysms even forced the James Carville-backed leader to flee the country. Instead, Romero wants readers to think that Morales inherited a stable nation and yet risked casting it into chaos.

More:
http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=4925

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

CIA Spins spider's web vs. Cuba and Venezuela

~snip~
On Aug. 25, for example, a few newspapers throughout Latin America, among them La Nacion of Buenos Aires, carried an article by Simon Romero of Caracas claiming that Venezuela has collaborated with Iran in a uranium enrichment program.

Journalists working with that paper and others told the Association of Media Professionals in Argentina that the CIA had fostered that line. They alleged that U.S. "diplomats" had offered them bribes to present the U.S. side in stories covering Venezuela's admission into the Mercosur trade group and Brazilian President Lula da Silva's bid for re-election in October.

The exposé by Victor Ego Ducrotto, appearing on the Rebelion web site on Aug. 25, claimed that CIA personnel worked "elbow to elbow" with the representatives of the right-wing Inter American Press Society, based in Miami.

More:
http://www.spinwatch.org/content/view/3475/9 /

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~snip~
Worse still is the dependably deplorable propaganda swilled by Simon Romero of the NEW YORK TIMES today, which is not dignified here with a link as Romero tells us that Venezuelan - Colombian relations have "moved toward a diplomatic crisis on Sunday after an exchange of insults between President Hugo Chávez and his Colombian counterpart, Álvaro Uribe." Because Romero does not report the facts and does not provide the actual words from Uribe, we do so here as above. Nowhere does Uribe insult Chavez nor does Uribe, as Romero soothingly tells us, spit in Chavez's face. The one doing the perp walk is....Chavez and Romero forgets again to report the facts.

http://ecrisis.net/2007/11/26/hugo-chavez-and-his-allies-are-state-sponsors-of-terror.aspx

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NY Times misleads on Venezuelan military spending
Submitted by jonathan on Sat, 2007-03-03 16:50. Media Literacy/Bias | Propaganda and War
Summary:
Comparison of 'arms spending' doesn't include all arms spending

Full Story:
(an action alert from Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting)

A February 25 report in the New York Times on Venezuela's international arms purchases ("Venezuela Spending on Arms Soars to World's Top Ranks") used selective information and an alarmist tone to suggest that Venezuela's military spending was a potential threat to regional stability.

Reporter Simon Romero's alarming lead read, "Venezuela's arms spending has climbed to more than $4 billion in the past two years, transforming the nation into Latin America's largest weapons buyer and placing it ahead of other major purchasers in international arms markets like Pakistan and Iran." By putting Venezuela in the company of Pakistan and Iran—whose military programs have attracted global suspicion—the report was clearly intended to stir alarm and frighten readers about Venezuela's military designs.

But there are several problems with this piece. First of all, as the article reveals further down, it was based on information provided by the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency. The Pentagon has a well-earned credibility problem when it comes to making intelligence claims about the threats posed by official enemies, and the fact that it was the source of the article's assertions should have been mentioned in the lead.
(snip)

Given that Venezuela spends at least some portion of its military budget domestically, this would imply a huge increase in military spending between 2004 and 2005--at least 50 percent, and perhaps more than doubling. Such a remarkable jump is hard to believe, particularly without Romero and his DIA sources calling attention to it, and raises doubts about the credibility of the article's entire premise.

More:
http://www.reclaimthemedia.org/media_literacy_bias/ny_times_misleads_on_venezuelan_military_spe

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Times’s Anti-Chávez Bias
By Amitabh Pal
December 6, 2006

The New York Times seems to have it in for Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez. The paper’s Latin America bureau chief, Simon Romero, has a big anti-Chávez bias, and it shows.

Take Romero’s story on Chávez’s massive electoral triumph the past weekend. The lead reads: “President Hugo Chávez won a landslide victory in the presidential election on Sunday. But campaign officials for the opposition candidate contended that the results were tainted by intimidation and other irregularities.” The headline writer adopted the same tone. “Chávez Wins Easily in Venezuela, but Opposition Protests,” the headline read, while the subhead stated: “Challenger’s Vote Exceeds Predictions.”

Now, charges of fraud should be reported on, but Chávez’s margin of victory should have made Romero question the opposition’s accusations, instead of giving them such prominence. The fact that these assertions were half-hearted can be seen by the fact that Chávez’s opponent, Manuel Rosales, conceded defeat the same day.

Curiously, it seems that the Times’s web editorial staff recognized the problematic aspects of Romero’s piece. The online version reads quite differently, with the headline and opening sanitized and the subhead taken out altogether.

Romero continued his anti-Chávez crusade the day after Chávez’s triumph. “If President Hugo Chávez rules like an autocrat, as his critics in Washington and here charge, then he does so with the full permission of a substantial majority of the Venezuelan people,” his piece opened. The pull quote for the piece referred to “some heads being chopped,” come January. (Interestingly, the person quoted is Steve Ellner, a progressive scholar who has written on Venezuela for publications such as In These Times, and his full quote is much less hostile to Chávez.) Another person cited in the piece says that “Chavez is not a dictator, but he’s not a Thomas Jefferson either.” Well, who is? Not too many current world leaders have Jefferson’s caliber, including the person currently occupying his post.

Romero’s hostility toward Chávez was also obvious in the run up to the presidential election. In a story two days before election day, he chose to highlight a crime wave in Venezuela, and quoted the opposition presidential candidate Rosales (without providing any balance) blaming Chávez for the phenomenon.

“Chávez nourishes the anarchic forces that are tearing Venezuela apart with a discourse advocating aggression on all fronts,” Rosales told the Times. And the Times accepted this tendentious sociological analysis without question.

Romero is not the only person at the Times with an anti-Chávez agenda. After all, the editorial staff at the Times gleefully supported the 2002 U.S.-backed military coup against Chávez, a duly elected leader. In a classic case of doublespeak, the Times stated that “Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator.” The Times gently explained to its readers that Chávez “stepped down after the military intervened and handed power to a respected business leader.” Chávez’s triumphant return three days later forced the Times to eat crow.

More:
http://www.progressive.org/node/4286

You might want to spend some time brushing up on who's behind violent protests in Venezuela. It's not the Chavez supporters, since it's the side which advocates GUARIMBA, which means VIOLENT PROTEST which uses violence as its method, getting DU'ers attention here years ago when they started bringing industrial strength slingshots to blast pro-Chavez people, the police, and by-standers. They succeeded in killing one man with a marble shot directly into his brain which dropped him where he stood. We discussed that here, even had the x-ray from the hospital.

The most well know proponent of guarimba is Miami-connected Cuban Venezuelan Roberto Alonso. There's nothing to prevent your informing yourself on the VIOLENCE ADVOCATES in Venezuela. This is a well-circulated photo of one of the Caracas guarimba pleasure-seekers attending one of the anti-Chavez protests years ago.

http://www.alpha66.org.nyud.net:8090/espanol/images/Amazona_Venezolana..jpg

http://www.worldpress.org.nyud.net:8090/images/0902venezuela.jpg

How far do you think this anti-Chavista would have gotten
had he brought his sign to a demonstration in the U.S.
with BUSH'S face on it?

[bemildred]

28. More like the US Customs service then?

Yeah, I think that's it.

[EFerrari]

29. More than that, less than fascist control. lol

The food supply WAS not secure -- and so much is imported. Their transportation systems did suck and there's been a lot of energy going into trying to manage / fix / improve that.

There are no doubt also political reasons. Zulia, for example, is a seat of the opposition and important to the oil industry. There may be other considerations that I'm not thinking of, too.

Imo, the federal system there is just the most reliable right now. So, it makes sense to put your ports under your most reliable system.

[bemildred]

34. Well, I do know California doesn't have it's own customs service.

And I can see how that sort of thing could be a security "loophole".

[EFerrari]

36. Sure! n/t

[rabs]

30. The other side of the coin re the BBC report

Venezuelan Minister of Public Works and Housing Diosdado Cabello today said:

1. Transfer of ports and airports is a act of justice in accordance with the revolutionary government.

2. In 2002, those installations were idled by order of the governors of the time in an action against the people because (through these ports) great quantities of food enters and they shut the doors, in addition to punishing the workers.

3. To give you an idea of what the oligarchy is doing, in the past three months the people who sell are pas (traditional Venezuelan pies), coffee and food to the workers were ejected from the ports because (sellers) are poor.

4. The opposition declared that when the operation began at dawn today, the installations were being militarized.

5. "We are not doing that, because it is a civic-military operation. The Bolivian Armed Forces are accompanying the people in the recuperation of (installations) that should belong to the central government.


(Spanish from official government agency)

http://www.abn.info.ve/noticia.php?articulo=174506&lee=2

[scarletwoman]

32. Thank you for that. (nt)

[rabs]

38. You're welcome and make it Bolivarian armed forces

instead of Bolivian :blush:

Fyi there have been many reports of the rampant corruption at the ports and airports by the administrations of what Chavez calls those "mini-republics."

The corruption includes shipping of tons of cocaine smuggled in from neighboring Colombia by paramilitaries.

[scarletwoman]

40. Thank you again. And I didn't even notice your typo, I knew exactly what you meant.

:thumbsup:

sw

[Judi Lynn]

41. Have been hearing for years about these places, particularly Zulia, where the huge landowners

import paramilitaries from Colombia to beat down, terrorize, even murder poor farmers who are part of the land reclamation programs by the government.

Also, have heard it's right along the border where the big trafficking problem is.

So glad to see your information. It all makes perfect sense.

[rabs]

48. NYT today says it is the FARC that is using Venezuela airstrips

to smuggle cocaine. Article is by the (infamous) Simon Romero.

The problem with the article is that it only mentions the FARC, not a word about the paramilitaries using those airstrips.

Romero forgot to mention that if it is the FARC, then the opposition governors of the departments bordering Colombia would be complict in the drug-trafficking trade. http://www.nytimes. :rofl:


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/21/world/americas/21colombia.html?_r=1&ref=americas

[EFerrari]

49. LOLOL!

:rofl:

[Judi Lynn]

52. What a laff-riot from Simon Romero! Always the comedian, isn't he?

So glad to have read that account, as it points out ANOTHER reason Venezuela would want to guard its airports better, although Simon Romero wasn't aware of it! Wow. He confirms a reason for taking a more serious attitude concerning those airports. Cool!



Mr. Corporate Venezuela news, Simon Romero!
A good laugh regarding Romero from BoRev:

Ha Ha Simon Romero Just Slays Me

Well the dust has settled, arrests have been made, and now we learn that the frightening Caracas synagogue attack was actually a robbery, hatched by former security staff. Even the guard who got tied up was in on it. Quico, the self-described "ranting Chavez hater" from Caracas Chronicles notes it was "an inside job relying on help from one of the guards, and that the desecration of the temple was an attempt to throw off investigators." Whew. Glad that's over. THANK GOD NOBODY JUMPED TO CRAZY CONCLUSIONS OR ANYTHING.

Naturally Simon Romero filed his hysterical rendition in the New York Times today, with none of this new, presumably noteworthy context included, because he just copied it from 3-day-old wire stories, like always.

http://www.borev.net/2009/02/ha_ha_simon_romero_just_slays.html

And:

Simon Romero Is So Full of Shit

Lordy, so much has happened since your editor "went rogue" in a Venezuelan seaside retreat last week that its hard to choose what to write about. Oh I know let's pick on Simon Romero, because hey what a moron, right?

As the media watchdog group FAIR pointed out, the New York Times' laziest little foreign correspondent doesn't even try to keep up appearances anymore. Last week he farted out two back-to-back stories about how by winning three-quarters of the elections last week, Chavez backers have 1) "taken a blow" and 2) "suffered a stinging defeat ." It's like an accurate reporting of events, only opposite.

http://www.borev.net/2008/12/simon_romero_is_so_full_of_shi.html

And:

Dispatches from the Bolivarian Revolution « Press Blackout Enters Second Day
| Main | Perfectly Good Economist Story Mocked By "Economic Reality" »


So You Want to Be a Foreign Correspondent?Looking for a glamorous new job in
an exotic land working for a bigshot international newspaper? It may be
easier than you think! Seriously.

As the New York Times' Simon Romero shows us, all it takes is a good grasp
of conventional wisdom, access to the wire services, and a short rolodex of
contacts for a couple of pithy new quotes. Oh and a blender! Fruity rum
drinks are a must in the tropics.

Once in a while you may want to mix it up with an original story on your
favorite local vacation spot, peculiar wildlife or cheesy local gossip, but
really, you don't need to get too crazy.

A quick look at Romero's Venezuela stories over the last few months shows
that roughly 80% of them came from sources other than…his own noggin.

Join us in Margaritaville, after the jump. We'll even bring along the
laz-o-meter to rank each story.

Here we go. In chronological order:

Legislature Grants Chavez Broad New Powers to Shape Venezuela
February 1
Storyline: Chavez gets supersized.
Point of Interest: Some Venezuelans like their president; others don't.
Originality: While short on substance, the article is long on…tardiness.
This had all been written up two weeks earlier by Voice of America, and
they're one of those ineffiecient state run news outlets. Hell, even I had
published an article on this two days earlier.
Laziness Score: ZZZZ (out of 5)

http://www.mail-archive.com/[e-mail]/msg24575.html

[EFerrari]

70. Borev rocks!

:rofl:

[Bacchus39]

85. yeah, they always use the same airstrips as the paramilitaries. well, they can tell their story

in a US court it seems. there is NO problema with the story. the two arrested were from the FARC.

[EFerrari]

33. So, the opposition is trying to frame this as a military takeover?

lol

They were fine with overturning the presidency, disbanding the legislature, the Supreme Court, the Comptroller's Office and the Elections Office when they thought the military was on their side. Man, what a bunch of effing hypocrites these crybaby rich racist vampires are.

[Judi Lynn]

45. It's also so bizarre when their well dressed, groomed little college students

pour out into the streets to attend their "guarimba" (violent demonstrations) knowing full well the country's police force has been treating the little pudgy darlings with kid gloves to keep from creating any mere appearance of a problem which they could then blow out of all honest proportion. I've seen the video images of the pampered narcissists, sporting nasty little snarls on their fat faces attacking police who are instructed to deal gently with them.

So we get the little bastards terrorizing the government-supporting people, chasing them into buildings on the campus, which you probably remember, then cutting the water and electricity, and setting fires outside the windows and inside the building, and going wild in the streets, even making lethal attacks on supporters at demonstrations with their industrial strength slingshots, like the man who was shot in the head and died instantly.

Who can forget the fact they control the media which is only too happy to LIE, to doctor photographs in order to create illusion until they get caught?

The idea they're all painting themselves as poor martyrs now is astonishing! They're congenital liars, with a contingent of their own fascist supporters here, unfortunately.

[EFerrari]

46. It's EXACTLY like hearing Caribou Barbie whining about being victimized by the liberal media.

Except they are probably dressed better than she is.

[Zorro]

58. So you disapprove of student protests against the government?

Your comments sound quite reminiscent of Republican fulminations against college students here in 1968.

It's quite remarkable for you to label those who don't agree with Chavez' policies as "fascist", since just the other day you were defending reported cross-border kidnappings by the North Koreans.

But I guess that's OK, since North Korea and Venezuela are allies, and the North Korean government controls all means of production, eh?

[EFerrari]

69. Judi is famously a North Korean spy. Get with the program.

[Zorro]

71. That's her business if she wants to defend cross-border North Korean kidnappings

[EFerrari]

73. You're so cute, Zorro.

lol

[Judi Lynn]

156. So you approve of misrepresenting Democratic posters here. A noble pursuit, for sure!

Think Tank CATO Institute Is A Prime Example Of Orwellism

Monday, 26. May 2008, 06:06:45

Sovereignty
Stephen Lendman exposes the Orwellian Cato Institute writing in Global Research article Grow Them Young, Pay Them Well - Anti-Chavistas, That Is writes that the Washington-based Cato Institute is all about "Individual Liberty, Free Markets, and Peace," or so says its web site.

(Richard: The Cato Organization is an example of an agent of Reality Control where its Good Think youth, like Hitlers youth, rally disingenuously for values such as liberty, freedom and peace; the Cato Institute's policy statements and actions are those of Doublethink and Newspeak).

It's been around since 1977 preaching limited government and free market religion with plenty of high-octane corporate funding for backing.

It better have it for the award it presented on May 15. It was to a 23 year old fifth year Venezuelan law student at Universidad Catolica Andres Bello. Yon Goicoechea was the fourth recipient of the "Milton Friedman Liberty Prize" in the amount of $500,000.

For what? What else. For serving the interests of capital back home and leading anti-Chavista protests.

Goicoechea is leader of Venezuela's "pro-democracy student movement" that in Cato's words "prevented Hugo Chavez's regime from seizing broad dictatorial powers in December 2007."

The reference is to the narrow defeat of Venezuela's reform referendum last December. Goicoechea led student-organized street violence against Venezuela's democracy, but don't look for Cato to say that.

~snip~
His "non-violent advocacy" and "peaceful" protesting went like this - promoting class warfare; wanting Chavez toppled; and following CIA diktats to:

-- "take to the streets; protest with violent disruptive actions across the nation; create a climate of ungovernability; provoke a general uprising; isolate Chavez" internationally; destabilize the government; disrupt the constitutional process; sustain aggressive agitprop; build unity among the opposition; and end Chavismo and Bolivarianism so capital can get back in control.

Last year, Goicoechea responded by engaging in violent street clashes; targeting pro-Chavez students, police and the National Guard; smashing windows; turning over and setting cars alight; starting other fires; burning tires; throwing rocks and bottles; engaging in a shootout at Caracas' Central University; seeing Venezuela's business media report "peaceful, civic and democratic" students were attacked without provocation; and getting full US (and Cato) backing for all of the above.

Like others of his class, Goicoechea enjoys privilege and wants to keep it. He's also unwilling to share it, and he puts it this way: "We have to fight for our future, for our rights," and you know whose he means. "If we don't fight for our freedoms, we won't be able to take part in a democratic Venezuela in the future." He means democracy for the few like in pre-Chavez days.

More:
http://my.opera.com/richardinbellingham/blog/show.dml/2137180

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Student Leader To Burn Caracas Down Gandhi Style, Bitches

http://image.blingee.com.nyud.net:8090/images15/content/output/000/000/000/3f9/243133676_1397700.gif

Quote of the Day:

"The national government is looking for violence....if they do not let us freely express ourselves and manifest our discontent with the government via the voting box, they are looking for us to burn the city down."

2008 Cato Institute Milton Friedman prize winner Yon Goicoechea, reacting to a Venezuelan Supreme court decision. The award came with a half million dollar prize to “help further his non-violent advocacy for basic freedoms,” which should buy a shitload of matches and lighter fluid.

http://www.borev.net/2008/08/student_leader_to_burn_caracas.html

[Zorro]

181. For someone who routinely labels Democrats "fascists" because they don't adore Hugo

you hardly have room to complain.

And didn't Bacchus already bust borev.net as a paid Venezuelan propaganda site?

[EFerrari]

183. LOL.

[EFerrari]

35. See this clip at 8:37, when the opposition publically declares

it's dismantling ALL of the democratic institutions of Venezuela during their coup attempt.

And, btw, see the same clip at 5:34 for RCTV and other media types patting themselves on the back ON THE AIR for facilitating treason against the elected government of Venezuela.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WynzygSANsM&feature=PlayList&p=BA1E52D4B94925A8&index=4

Military takeover, my bald headed granny. lol

[stillcool]

37. I hope they do a better job of it..

that we do.

[David__77]

39. Is "rubber-stamped" BBC newspeak for "approved??"

What's with all the blatant propaganda language??

[EFerrari]

47. Yes, it is. Ask John Pilger who can't get his film "The War on Democracy"

aired by BBC. BBC is better than CNN but they're still politically hostage to the usual suspects.

[kwenu]

54. Chavez is centralizing all power in his hands. At some point this is going to go horribly awry.

[EFerrari]

56. Hide your kittehs!

:scared:

[scarletwoman]

59. Hugo Chavez doesn't pay his parking tickets!

Oh, the humanity!

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

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

[kwenu]

74. You seem really touchy when it comes to Chavez.

Certainly you're entitled to your view, however, it seems to me that he is more concerned with his ego and paranoia rather than his people. His standing up to Bush may be admirable but in the end he's still a nutjob.

[EFerrari]

80. Project much?

[kwenu]

96. Provide an actual thoughtful intelligent response much?

[EFerrari]

101. You haven't read this thread, have you?

[kwenu]

103. You have no answers, have you?

[leftstreet]

67. Or maybe he's 'centralizing all power' in the hands of the people?

:shrug:

[kwenu]

75. Ummn. NO! That's just rhetoric.

[EFerrari]

76. Right. A ten year track record means nothing on the intertubes.

:crazy:

[kwenu]

77. A ten year track record of what?

[EFerrari]

79. Of delivering for the Venezuelan people by doing his job

and of frustrating cluesless naysayers like you. :hi:

[kwenu]

87. So poverty and homelessness has been greatly reduced in Venezuela?

Is the infrastructure of Venezuela much improved? What? What has he done?

The fact that you can't respond to a discussion about Chavez without engaging in childish namecalling says quite a bit about you. You might want to try using facts instead as they are more persuasive. Right now you aren't doing such a great job of defending the man.

[EFerrari]

94. The UN reported that poverty has been reduced by 50% since 2003

and extreme poverty by 75%.

And if you want me to do your research, I have an hourly rate! :hi:

[kwenu]

100. You haven't stated a fact yet. So NO! You don't get the research job.

[EFerrari]

102. LOL. I thought so.

[kwenu]

106. You thought what? You seem to have difficulty with complete thoughts or points.

[EFerrari]

116. Really? I think the problem is yours. I've been communicating just fine here.

[kwenu]

117. Does that mean you're going to provide a link the the supposed UN report showing Chavez's success?

[EFerrari]

118. No.

[bvar22]

83. A ten year track record of:

*Feeding the Hungry

*Healing the Sick

*Housing the Homeless

*Educating the Ignorant

*Giving Voice to the disenfranchised

*Returning Foreign Owned Colonial Plantations to Indigenous Farmers

Yes!
I can see why you don't trust him.

[scarletwoman]

88. Let me add to that: A 10 year record of being democratically re-elected and winning every referendum

by sizable majorities. Such a cheeky despot!

[Zorro]

90. Not quite every referendum

[scarletwoman]

112. Sorry. That's correct. He lost ONE referendum a few years ago.

[EFerrari]

115. And it was within the margin of error. And, he conceded gracefully. n/t

[kwenu]

93. I never called him a despot. I said I didn't trust him. Bush was re-elected too!

What's your point?

[EFerrari]

95. Bush was never elected once. First he was selected by the SC

and then, there was the debacle we call our 2004 federal election.

[kwenu]

98. Okay. Well now that changes everything. Thanks.

:eyes:

[kwenu]

92. I get you. You're saying that Venezuela has

No hungry people.
No sick.
No homeless.
Fully educated people.
Robust democratic institutions.
Farms for the farmers.

And apparently Venezuela far exceeds the living standards of her neighbors who don't have Chavez.

Sure. Whatever.

[bvar22]

119. No. That's not what I said.

That is what YOU said.
Most arguments that begin with the phrase "So what you are saying is..." are Strawmen Fallacies....as is in your case.

[bgr1938]

63. rubber stamped implies

the national assembly is under complete control of President Hugo Chavez. The msm aways use these little code words. President Chavez is only trying to do what is best for venezuela and the majority of it's people. I admire him greatly,even have two very large portraits of him on my walls. never had one of any american president yet, maybe President obama later but only if he goes to the left 20 degrees more

[Staneck]

150. Exactly. Congress is elected by the people

rubber-stamped to them is what some would consider support for their own principles. The lawmakers' principles, that is.

[classysassy]

64. Why

do some of the poster here get their dander up when Chavez, is the subject?

[EFerrari]

66. Because they've been told he is the devil? I don't know.

It's weird. Also, there are people who come here to spread cr@p about him. There were posters (later tombstoned) that registered here before the referendum last year just to disrupt about him. :shrug:

[Zorro]

86. FARC rebels in alleged Venezuela smuggling

Maybe this is also part of Hugo's motivation.

<snip>

The U.S. government says it will seek the extradition of two leftist rebel "cocaine brokers" arrested in Colombia on charges of conspiring to export a ton of the drug through Venezuela.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration identified the two, which it said were arrested in Colombia on Thursday, as Jose Joaquin Montes and Maria Lilian Castellanos. It said both were attached to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia's 10th Front in Arauca state, which borders Venezuela.

Colombian and U.S. officials have long said the rebel forces, known as the FARC, use Venezuelan territory for refuge, to treat its wounded, to regroup and rearm — and to export cocaine.

In September, Washington accused three security officials in the inner circle of leftist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez of aiding the FARC by supplying it with arms and drug-trafficking assistance.

<snip>

More at: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090321/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_colombia_rebels_drugs_1

This article has the added bonus of a reference to the FARC laptops.

[EFerrari]

107. LOL! It's too bad your post was pre-empted up thread and that the FARC bullshit was debunked months

ago.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3794204&mesg_id=3794377

[Zorro]

109. Keep awishin', Dorothy

References to those FARC laptops keep turning up, despite your desperate rhetorical attempts to claim they were "debunked" based on nothing more than your uninformed opinion.

[EFerrari]

113. You're very tiresome. You've read the same articles I have in the Latin America forum.

Yes, it's been debunked for months. That it keeps being repeated by the people who pay you surprises no one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=405x2458

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=405x4823

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2999703

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=405x3818

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x359850

And as the person who pushed this totally false story on DU, you owe an apology. :hi:

[Zorro]

145. More typical FUD from you

INTERPOL reaffirms key findings of its examination of seized FARC computers in response to efforts to distort conclusions

<snip>

...In fact, during the preparation of its report INTERPOL requested and was provided with documents and information relating to the chain of custody of the exhibits seized by Colombian authorities on 1 March 2008. Based on a review of all the information and material provided by Colombia, including a classified oral briefing, INTERPOL was able to satisfy itself, and clearly stated in its report, that the seized computer exhibits it was requested to forensically examine were taken from the FARC terrorist camp on 1 March 2008 and belonged to Raul Reyes. This finding was inextricably linked to INTERPOL's determination as to whether there was any manipulation or alteration of data contained in those seized computer exhibits.

The INTERPOL report clearly states that the overall conclusion of its experts was that ‘no user files have been created, modified or deleted on any of the eight FARC computer exhibits following their seizure on 1 March 2008’ (paragraph 99). The report also makes clear that after detailed and careful computer forensic analysis – comprehensively documented within the text - the experts excluded the possibility that the user files were tampered with after 1 March 2008, including the period between 1 and 3 March 2008.

<snip>

http://www.interpol.int/Public/ICPO/PressReleases/PR2008/PR200826.asp

Too bad if you find hearing the truth over and over tiresome. But then you probably consider INTERPOL to be an unreliable source of information, too.

[EFerrari]

146. Bad chain of custody ACCORDING TO INTERPOL

COLOMBIA: Interpol Notes Improper Initial Handling of FARC Laptops
By Constanza Vieira

BOGOTÁ, May 15 (IPS) - Interpol reported Thursday that the files found on computers that Colombia seized from a FARC guerrilla camp in March were not tampered with and did belong to the rebel group.

But it also said the handling of the laptops and hard drives in the first 48 hours after they were discovered "may complicate validating this evidence for purposes of its introduction in a judicial proceeding".

The computers were found in a FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) camp two kilometres inside the Ecuadorean border, which was targeted in a Mar. 1 aerial bombing by the Colombian armed forces that prompted Ecuador to break off diplomatic ties with that country.

http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=42391

But, go right on ahead spreading your bs. Why ruin a perfect record.

[Zorro]

147. You really are shameless in promoting blatant falsehoods

Apparently INTERPOL's explicit response to the "many inaccurate and misleading statements made in relation to INTERPOL’s findings" is too difficult to comprehend.

But then constant blabbing out of both sides of one's mouth leaves little time for the brain to engage.

[EFerrari]

149. Referring to a report out of ECUADOR, not out of Bogata quoting THEM.

Right. I'm the shameless one.

:rofl:

Okay, Zorro. You win. They found that laptop on JFK's gurney
next to the Magic Bullet and Mohamed Ata's passport.

[Judi Lynn]

152. Funny you should mention that! The Colombian government just issued a report

that there's an entry in one of the laptops which reveals how Mohamed Ata's passport managed to avoid being incinerated and simply float to the ground, as though a feather from the conflagration!

How DID Reyes ever hope to get anywhere lugging around all those computers in the jungle, anyway? No WONDER they were able to bomb him, then also shoot him in his pajamas. He wasn't traveling light, although "on the run," according to Colombian "authorities."

http://www.model-art.gr.nyud.net:8090/files/95.jpg

[Judi Lynn]

148. That leaped right out at most people from the very first.

Ecuadorean report says Colombia did manipulate computers Reyes
Thursday, 02 October 2008 06:51

A report by Ecuador's Public Prosecution says Colombia did manipulate files on slain FARC commander Raúl Reyes' computers before handing copies of those files over to international police organization Interpol.

The report, from mid-July already and leaked to Spanish radio station Cadena Ser, says the Colombian army manipulated the files between the day of the attack on March 1 and the day they offered the computers to be investigated by Interpol and the Ecuadorean Government.

Interpol had already said Colombian authorities "did not always follow internationally accepted methods for handling computer evidence", but no evidence was found that Colombia had tampered any files after March 3.

The international police organization also acknowledged having investigated copies of the original files allegedly found on the FARC commander's computers. Interpol never performed a physical electro-magnetic exam of the hard discs, which according to ict experts and Interpol itself is the only valid way to retrieve a copy of computer content.

According to the analysis of the Ecuadorean prosecution, Colombia did tamper the files before March 3. The report says that all 45 files handed over to Ecuador have the same creation, last modified and last viewed date. The timestamps on 40 of those files are before March 1, indicating that Colombia never opened the files they sent to Ecuador.

If Colombia had not tampered the files, the creation, last modified and last viewed dates would all be different and the last viewed date would have to be in between March 1 and March 3.

http://www.colombiareports.com/colombian-news/news/1522-ecuadorean-report-says-colombia-did-manipulate-computers-reyes.html

(My emphasis.)

[EFerrari]

151. And even after ALL of that study, he's STILL pitching the Magic Laptops!

:wow:

[Judi Lynn]

153. They put the facts on "ignore!" That might be a faulty plan. n/t

[Zorro]

158. Executive Committee unanimously affirms INTERPOL’s report on seized FARC computers

You seem to have an inability to distinguish rhetoric from reality. Incessant and repeated yammering doesn't turn a falsehood into a fact.

From INTERPOL's own site: http://www.interpol.int/Public/ICPO/PressReleases/PR2008/PR200829.asp

<snip>

...Unfortunately, there currently exists such a situation among some of our South American member countries related to the seizure of FARC computers and hardware by Colombia on 1 March 2008 and INTERPOL’s subsequent computer forensic examination and comprehensive report. INTERPOL’s report found that there had been no alteration or manipulation of any of the data contained in the user files of those computer exhibits following their seizure by Colombian authorities.

In our oversight role concerning the activities of INTERPOL’s General Secretariat, we have had an opportunity to review INTERPOL’s Forensic Report on FARC computers and hardware seized by Colombia, and we have received a detailed briefing on INTERPOL’s work that led to the publication of this report. Based on careful consideration of all relevant information, we endorse INTERPOL’s report and its findings in their entirety.

INTERPOL’s work in this matter was completely consistent with its Constitution, rules and regulations. Politics played no role whatsoever in INTERPOL’s determination that the eight computer exhibits seized by Colombia came from a FARC camp and had belonged to Raúl Reyes, and that the user files contained therein were not altered, modified or tampered with by Colombian authorities.

We thank the Organization of American States for its co-operation and appreciate OAS Secretary General José Miguel Insulza’s endorsement of INTERPOL’s findings in their entirety, as well as the comments of the European Union’s High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy, Javier Solana, who called INTERPOL’s report “good news.”

We also commend INTERPOL’s Secretary General, the General Secretariat staff and the independent computer forensic experts who conducted the examination for the thoroughness and impartiality of their work. We find very unfortunate the criticisms and personal attacks against INTERPOL made by Ecuadorian and Venezuelan government officials.

<snip>

But keep right on dreaming. I think your credibility on this issue has been quite clearly exposed.

[Zorro]

159. Talk about shooting fish in a barrel

[EFerrari]

160. The only thing you've shown is that Interpol contradicts ITSELF.

LOL

[Judi Lynn]

161. Well, nobody, I say, nobody's perfect. They ARE, after all, Interpol!

If a winger says they guarantee Uribe's claim they have information which will condemn every leftist in Latin America in time, then that's the way it is.

Maybe they contradicted themselves as a ploy, to fish people out to question them so wingers could try to pick them off! The next stage is that you'll be called a communist for doubting wingers' interpretations of what Interpol said.

http://www.jahsonic.com.nyud.net:8090/Invasion.jpg

[EFerrari]

179. LOL! Look at that FACE!

:rofl:

I don't know. I don't think we have ENOUGH posters in LBN slamming democracy in Latin America. My fav of the week was the Friday night troll telling me I was a fascist for opposing Chavez. :crazy:

[Judi Lynn]

199. He/she had to be wildly confused. Anyone that addled is too sick to post! n/t

[Peace Patriot]

186. "U.S. officials have long said..." blah-blah-blah...the FARC, Venezuela. You're citing Bushwhacks?

What has been "long said" by "U.S. officials" has been said by Bushwhacks who supported the 2002 coup against Venezuela's elected government, in which the coupsters suspended the Constitution, the courts, the National Assembly and all civil rights, and sent mobs to kill Chavez government officials (with RCTV's help), and continued aggressive destabilization efforts, funding of the rightwing opposition, funding of the recall election, funding of 'student' brownshirts, instigating the oil professionals' strike, and on-going coup and assassination plots out of Colombia, and furthermore, this last September, funded and organized fascist riots in Bolivia (right out of the U.S. embassy), in which the rioters sacked government and NGO buildings, seized the airport and wouldn't let President Morales' plane land, beat up the indigenous, blew up a gas pipeline and machine-gunned some thirty unarmed peasant farmers.

You're quoting those guys--the ones who funded and organized the fascists in Venezuela and Bolivia, and also slaughtered a million innocent Iraqis to steal their oil, lying through their teeth about Iraq WMDs? We're supposed to believe those war criminals about the FARC and Venezuela?

And the Associated Pukes (look for the tiny "ap" in the url) goes on...

"In September, Washington accused three security officials in the inner circle of leftist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez of aiding the FARC by supplying it with arms and drug-trafficking assistance."

In September, while they were running a murderous coup attempt in Bolivia, the Bushwhacks continued to lie about, slander and demonize one of President Morales' strongest allies. But you won't hear of this context from the puke-spewers at AP.

:puke:

[spag68]

89. Chavez

I need to get something straight here, when the person in office nationalizes industry takes over ports and effectively obliterates elections it's ok if that person is a lefty, but not so good for a right winger???? As a marxist thinking person, I see oppression of any political faction, Why is this man considered a hero? You can't let any leader slide or you end up with what we have, which is a failed democracy. There has to be something new for this world, as the old cliche governmental ways are useless for the new century.

[scarletwoman]

110. What elections has he "obliterated"? Seriously. How in the world did you come up with such nonsense?

Good grief. :eyes:

[EFerrari]

114. Wha? All of their elections are monitored.

[Judi Lynn]

122. That's got to be among the oddest claims anyone ever attempted here.

You should do us all a favor by backing up your odd assertion with some information for DU'ers like the information you used to come to that conclusion.

Don't be afraid, just find that information, get it out here so we can learn how wrong we are, how wrong all the international observers have been who've monitored every election.

Interesting you introduced yourself as being a "marxist thinking person." Did you imagine that would impress anyone?

Looking forward to being shown the facts we need to know about how Hugo Chavez "effectively obliterates elections."

[fascisthunter]

131. "obliterates elections"... either you made that up

or your sources for info on Chavez definitely made that up.

[ohio2007]

125. Rule by Decree

port tax revenues taken away from local governments

Venezuela government seizes ports
Airstrips also targeted in move said to limit power of president’s rivals

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29817390/

Power struggle


Soldiers were dispatched to ports in three states governed by Mr Chavez's opponents on Saturday - Zulia, Carabobo and Nueva Esparta.



The latest change to the law came just weeks after Venezuelans voted for a constitutional amendment granting Mr Chavez and other elected officials the right to stand for election beyond the previous limit of two terms.

The socialist leader has indicated on several occasions that he intends to run again for office in 2012 and has talked of remaining in power until 2021.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7957475.stm

[Warren Stupidity]

129. The latest change to the law came after parliament voted for it.

Oops - they left that part out. Venezuela is putting its ports under federal control. OMFG! Hide your kittehs!

How to analyze newspeak:

"move said to limit power of president’s rivals"

said by whom? Huh? And how exactly would federalizing the ports 'limit the power of political rivals', unless revenue from those ports was being diverted into funding for opposition political parties? O NOES! OUR GRAFT IS DONE GONE!

The political opposition is alive and well in Venezuela, they just aren't having much luck winning national elections, not because of shenanigans or malfeasance, but because the Bolivarian Party continues to be overwhelmingly popular with the people of Venezuela.

[EFerrari]

139. Something else comes to mind -- the BushCo sponsored "unrest" in Bolivia

where those white supremacists decided they were far enough away from the capitol that they could massacre themselves some native people. Remember? These guys wanted to secede from Bolivia and there is evidence that BushCo was funding them with our tax money. It took a long time for government forces to get there and secure the area.

I don't know why I thought of that this morning. A situation like that could account for Zulia and Maracaibo which are close to Colombia, and always more or less a hotbed of opposition shenanigans. Not so much for Nueva Esparta which is up on the Caribbean coast? I don't know much about that location.

[Bacchus39]

143. Nueva Esparta includes the island of Margarita and other islands, Maracaibo is IN Zulia

not too up on Venezuela geography are we?

[WriteDown]

164. Kind of like the TARP bill and the provision to allow

bonuses to executives. Our Congress voted for it almost unanimously so it must be okie dokie. :eyes:

[EFerrari]

175. Right. Kind of like that but completely different.

[WriteDown]

187. Nope, more like apples ane apples.

Almost identical.

[Judi Lynn]

165. You're so right. If the opposition had any intention of including the huge majority of Venezuelans

in its plans, they wouldn't be having to resort to underhanded tactics to try to steal all the power back.

The people in office now were elected very clearly, very openly in elections overseen by hordes of international observers for years, now, using completely transparent methods, far more transparent, far more accountable than our own, as most of us have known for years, also.

Sure they won't be winning. They are at total odds with the vast majority of Venezuelans.

You've probably noticed that only shrieking ignorance allows anyone to swallow without any hesitation the unadulterated crap which gets circulated as "news" on Venezuela. What a shame.

[Joanne98]

126. It's unconstitutional for Venezuela to control it's own ports?

That's BS! Go Chavez!

[ohio2007]

128. individual states rights decreased

Chavez said on Saturday: "Since this morning we began to reverse the disintegration of national unity."

The takeover, which was approved by the country's parliament, aims to bring the country's major transportation hubs under federal control this year.



Chavez announced the move last week and threatened to arrest opposition governors if they resisted.

Many opponents decried the order as unconstitutional and as an attempt to concentrate all power in Chavez's hands.




The measure also prohibits states and municipalities from collecting tariffs or tolls at transportation hubs or on highways, cutting off a key source of funding for local projects that could otherwise compete with federal handouts, Abelardo Daza, a Caracas-based economist, said.


http://english.aljazeera.net/news/americas/2009/03/200932123827496667.html

[EFerrari]

142. Local projects -- like money laundering and drug trafficking

both of which seem to be a problem in Zulia and in Nueva Esparta. Those folks should just move to Miami where they can conduct their business in peace.

[ohio2007]

166. Thats a rather lame status quo reply...drugs....Miami connection...US still out to get Hugo.

My comment was that the states rights ( including a pro Hugo governors state ) was being taken away and Hugo is ready to arrest anyone who defends the constitutional rights granted them.
Hugo may be calling Obama an "ignoramus" bully but it looks like the local "ignoramus" is doing just fine making the individual states more dependent on the central powers ...focused in the dear leader.

President Hugo Chávez threatened to arrest any opposition governors who resist the implementation of the recently amended Organic Law on Decentralization, which allows the Executive branch of government to take up the power granted to the regions

snip
Chávez said: "ou would better have an army, buddy, because the Navy will go there. I do not know what you are going to do; you will go to jail, then. No authority here -a mayor, governor, or whatever- may oppose the Constitution and the Venezuelan law, otherwise he will be arrested."





snip

Opposition leaders to Chávez: "You have the power of fear, we have the torch of hope"
Four of the five opposition governors elected on November 23, pledged to "pursue all legal actions foreseen in the Venezuelan laws and Constitution to defend Venezuela’s Magna Carta and the principle that it is the mother of all laws."

They are considering to challenge the reform of the Decentralization Law, which was passed on Tuesday by the National Assembly. They do not rule out to call a referendum in order to annul the law and evaluate the popular support to the new legal instrument that gives more power to the President.


snip

The governors invited people to join the demonstrations that will begin on Wednesday in Chacaíto (east Caracas) and will continue on Friday in Maracaibo


snip
http://english.eluniversal.com/2009/03/20/en_ing_esp_decentralization-law_20A2262005.shtml

[Judi Lynn]

167. Make the effort to be informed on the material to which EFerrari refers.You need to know

something about the subject before you attempt to dismiss a clearly informed comment.

[ohio2007]

173. Judy Judy Judy

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3330748&mesg_id=3330748

<delete message>


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3314134&mesg_id=3314161

"ignoramus" is a word Hugo has been throwing around lately.

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE52L19G20090322?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Analysts: "Venezuela needs the price of oil to exceed USD 90 to pay expenses"
Tue Oct-14-08
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=405&topic_id=8855&mesg_id=8855

[EFerrari]

168. That's a rather lame regurgitation of spin.

The Venezuelan government has the right to enforce their laws. If the Guccis have a beef, they need to go to court.

[ohio2007]

171. The supreme court is where they intend to take it. ( btw, how much do they pay you ? )

[Judi Lynn]

172. Now that's odd! n/t

[EFerrari]

174. No one pays me to have a brain. n/t

[Zorro]

177. That's good to know

You'd be broke otherwise. :-)

[EFerrari]

180. Yes, I know. In ZorroWorld, my PBK newsletter is confiscated

and my Scrabble game only goes to 100 pts, my tennies have velcro not ties and all the leaves are brown. I get it!

lol

[EFerrari]

176. These, btw, are the "states rights" champions you're defending.

Start watching @ 8:37 where they cheer as they dissolve the Legislature, the Supreme Court, the Comptrollers Office and the Election Board.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WynzygSANsM&feature=PlayList&p=BA1E52D4B94925A8&index=4

[fascisthunter]

130. good!

[Dreamer Tatum]

134. If this is such a logical move, that could NEVER stir unrest, why is he sending his military?

Do you need to be heavily armed to nationalize "main transport hubs?"

I guess Kim Jong Chavez thinks so.

[EFerrari]

136. If there was unrest, it would be plastered all over the papers.

The Gucci protestors went out and probably will again. There is no unrest being reported.

[Dreamer Tatum]

137. Well, there is none, because he sent the big guns in

Sort of self-fulfilling prophecy there.

Makes you wonder what other whims...er, DECREES K.J. Chavez effects using men with overwhelming firepower.

[EFerrari]

138. LOL

[scarletwoman]

144. Hugo Chavez stole his girlfriend.

[junior college]

135. This was an essential move

Taking the ports back from the right wing, corporate enemies of the Venezuelan people is an essential step toward peace and prosperity for Venezuela.

[EFerrari]

140. I found a story where this is framed as a budget cutting measure:

The budget changes, sanctioned by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, will include salary cuts for senior public officials, cutbacks on government and private executive vehicles, unnecessary advertising and a centralisation of the country's main airports and sea ports.

At the same time Chavez has recommended a 20% rise in the minimum wage.

http://www.calcuttanews.net/story/480777

Imagine that. He's recommending cutting back on exec pay and raising the minimum wage. No wonder our corporate owners hate him. :)

[iamthebandfanman]

155. ugh, i hate terms like 'motherland'

im starting to worry all this power is getting to his head...

hope we arent going to see greed quickly slide their socialist ideals back over to fascism.

it happened in russia and china.

[EFerrari]

157. He probably said "patria" which has never been out of use in Latin America.

It's not like the fake "homeland" drivel that BushCo uses here but more like the way we use "our country".

[EFerrari]

182. I have a stupid question. Who controls the ports in our client states --

Colombia and Peru? They've long been federalized in El Salvador, the one that got away.

[Judi Lynn]

193. Colombia's ports were nationalized until 1993. From what I've seen so far, searching,

all Peru's ports but one in the South, Matarani, privatized by Fujimori, are nationally controlled.

That's all I could determine in a quick look.

[EFerrari]

194. Were those Colombian ports subsequently privatized?

That's what I thought I read but not knowing much about the topic, didn't want to draw the incorrect inference.

[Judi Lynn]

195. It looks like it, but I'm not sure. Just found this non-endorsement for port privatization, however!

May 22, 2007
Cocaine Wars Make Port Colombia’s Deadliest City
By SIMON ROMERO

~snip~
Many of the residents of these hovels hesitate to offer their names out of fear of retaliation over what they might say. One middle-aged man, offering a visitor a cup of rum from the steps of his house, said he had worked as a stevedore at the port years ago before losing that job. “Now,” he said, “I do nothing.”

Some economists hold up Buenaventura as an example of the risks of exposing certain areas of developing economies to market forces. María del Pilar Castillo, an economist at Valle University in Cali, said many residents lost economic security when the city’s port was privatized more than a decade ago, cutting its work force and reducing benefits.

More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/22/world/americas/22colombia.html?pagewanted=print

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Can't tell if all the ports are privatized, or what. Looks as if that's the case, but can't quickly find any clear indications.

[EFerrari]

196. It does look like it. You know, I was reading a Plan Colombia doc last night

and nowhere did it specify federal control of the ports -- as if, this security flaw was being built in, no? It was creepy, to say the least.

On second thought, maybe I'm looking in the wrong direction. Maybe I should be looking for the privatization of the ports as Plan Colombia was put into place. That's the BushCo MO. :shrug:

[Judi Lynn]

197. Just saw this timeline which says US started supplying Colombia with military equipment

to use against drug people (leftists, that is) back in 1989, which would be Bush #41's term:

http://www.facts-about.org.uk/history-and-events-timeline-colombia.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~
This direct material military support goes back further than I thought. They were revving it all up during the first Bush, and we didn't know it.

[Judi Lynn]

198. During Bush #41's Presidency his friend. Argentina's Carlos Saul Menem

privatized their water, which turned out just goddawful, expensive, and actually dark and THICK, which horrified people, and then he drove Argentina into the ditch, and got involved in illegal weapons sales himself, got impeached, etc., etc.

If that weren't bad enough, the fascist who had tried to create a "white Bolivia" in his earlier years, in the 1960's, by driving native Bolivians off their ancestral lands, and giving it to his imported white South African settlers, Hugo Banzer ALSO privatized HIS country's water, using a subsidiary of the Bush connected company Bechtel, and as you remember they charged the people so much they couldn't afford water, they tried to collect rainwater, and the company attempted to charge them for the RAINWATER! They had no choice but to protest loudly, and at that time Banzer brought out his S.O.A.-trained sharpshooters to fire into the protesters, as well as sending troops to kick in doors and arrest people in their homes.

BOTH these privatization disasters happened during Bush #41, if I'm not mistaken.

So it looks as if a lot was going on then we couldn't see, not connecting the dots yet.

[Peace Patriot]

189. We need to do some thinking about the plan Rumsfeld alluded to, in his op-ed

in the Washington Post, 12/1/07 (a year after he was ousted from the Pentagon likely because of his war plan to nuke Iran--the guy wants oil!--keep that in mind), in which he urges "swift action" by the U.S. in support of "friends and allies" in South America. Since the U.S. (Bushwhacks) had almost no "friends and allies" in South America by that time, Rumsfeld likely meant fascist groups planning coups within leftist democracies such as Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia. This Rumsfeld op-ed was entitled, "The Smart Way to Defeat Tyrants Like Chavez." The "smart way" included "free trade" for the fascist thugs running Colombia, more psyops on the internets and "swift action, etc." The issue that the latter raised in my mind was, "swift action" for whom, in support of what? This op-ed was followed by the U.S./Colombia bombing/raid on Ecuador in March 2008, testing the northern border of Ecuador/Colombia (Ecuador's oil and the U.S. military base at Manta, Ecuador--which the President of Ecuador has vowed to evict this year, when its lease is up--are both located in the north), and U.S. funding/instigation of a civil war in Bolivia, in September 2008, in which the white separatists in the gas/oil rich eastern provinces sought, by rioting and murder, to split off those provinces into a fascist mini-state in the control of the resources.

These two Bushwhack war plans failed for many reasons--perhaps the chief reason being the solidarity against such actions that now exists among most South American leaders--but they may be indicative of what Rumsfeld & brethren planned for Venezuela--civil war initiated in the northern, oil-rich province of Zulia on the Caribbean. Several of their actions point to a Zulia plot--including their reconstitution of the U.S. 4th Fleet (mothballed since WW II) to harry Venezuela's oil coast and its off-shore islands. Rafael Correa, President of Ecuador, stated publicly that there was a coordinated, three-country Bushwhack civil war plot--Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia. I've also read a transcript of Colombian authorities (the military, the president) discussing a potential fascist civil war in Zulia. Recently, the Colombian Defense Minister stated that the Colombian military can violate the Rio Group agreements that followed the U.S./Colombia bombing/raid on Ecuador--that sovereign territory would be respected--by raiding over the border into Venezuela. This and other evidence points to a Bushwhack strategy of penetrating Venezuela's border--with illegal U.S. overflights and spying (which have already occurred) and Colombian military raids into Venezuela.

The question is: Can this strategy be pursued as a private corporate resource war, which perhaps would try to involve the U.S. military and Obama (a la JFK/Cuba and the infamous "Bay of Pigs")? Is it still a viable strategy, even with the Bushwhacks out of office? Do Rumsfeld, Exxon Mobil, the Colombian military ($6 BILLION in Bushwhack military aid) and its death squads, and other interested parties have the resources to conduct a private war that the U.S. might be dragged into?

The relentless psyops against Chavez in our corporate/fascist press tells us that the war may still be on. The mindboggling lies they propagate about Chavez are too similar to the lies about WMDs in Iraq for us to ignore the signals. It is a very worrisome sign. Controlled media like Rotters, the Associated Pukes, the Wall Street Urinal and the New York Crimes hate Chavez for many reasons, including, for instance, Chavez's leadership in evicting the World Bank/IMF loan sharks from South America, his example of using natural resources, such as Venezuela's oil, to bootstrap the poor, and his and the Venezuelan peoples' defense of their sovereignty and example to others that U.S. domination of, and dictation to, Latin American countries can be overcome. The Rumsfeld faction is desperate to control more of the world's last oil reserves. They have stolen trillions of dollars from us, have created private armies at our expense, and no doubt have operatives in many countries (and within our own government/military) ready to do their bidding. They had eight years to set things up.

All in all, I think this is why Chavez and the National Assembly have acted to secure the ports--especially those in the north (Zulia and others). They are dealing with traitors in their own midst, who have tried to overthrow Venezuelan democracy in cahoots with the corpo/fascist Bushwhacks before. Intelligence to South America's many leftist leaders seems to be quite good. They have foiled several coup/assassination attempts (notably in Bolivia and Venezuela). It looks like they may have intelligence that Rumsfeld's civil war plot for Venezuela is still alive, and they certainly have no reason for confidence, at this point, that Obama won't wink at it, or even support it. The ploy will be the fascists declaring their "independence" from that "dictator" Chavez (as the Bolivian white separatists tried to do to Bolivia's elected president) and parading as "freedom fighters"--to give the corpo/fascist media "talking points" and to give Obama/Clinton cover, if they are collusive. I don't know that they are; it's hard to tell. They've left a number of Bushwhack operatives in place in the State Dept. and at U.S. embassies in South America (notably Colombia), and have sent wildly mixed signals about their policy over the first months of their administration. Is this distraction, confusion--their minds on the Middle East and the Bushwhacks' Financial 9/11? Or deliberate? I don't know.

[Bo]

191. EL PRESIDENTE POR VIDA.....JUST BECAME DICTADOR

.....aaaaahhhhhhh the smell of absolute power...gotta love it.

[Judi Lynn]

192. Hugo Chavez has been elected by a huge majority of the public.

He also was given the opportunity to RUN again for election and be elected IF the people of Venezuela elect him.

Only idiots attempt to make the leap to something totally different.

[StrongBad]

214. And of course you're assuming that Venezuela has impeccable elections.

[Judi Lynn]

217. Please take the time to read this information from DU'er Peace Patriot:

~snip~
"Venezuelan Elections Transparent and Exemplary, International Observers Report

February 17th 2009, by James Suggett - Venezuelanalysis.com

International elections observers holding their post-referendum press conference. (CNE)

Caracas, February 15th 2009 (Venezuelanalysis.com) -- International observers of Venezuela's referendum Sunday, in which nearly 55% of voters approved a constitutional amendment to eliminate the two-term limit on elected offices, praised the security, transparency, and organization of Venezuela's electoral system, calling it an example for the region and for the world.

“The referendum complied with international standards and national legislation, especially with regard to communication and the transparency of the electoral administration,” according to Nicanor Moscoso, the president of the Latin American Council of Electoral Experts.

In a press conference Monday, Brazilian delegate Max Altman commented on the secrecy of the vote. “I was very impressed by how the Venezuelan electoral sysem is totally reinforced and how well-secured the voting is,” he said. “I hope this democatic feeling persists in Venezuela, as well as in all our countries in the region.”

Altman further highlighted the enthusiastic participation of Venezuelan voters. “When the Venezuelan people are called on to participate in an historic occasion, they make their presence felt,” he said, noting that more than 70% of registered voters went to the polls Sunday, according to Venezuela's National Electoral Council (CNE).

Paraguayan delegate Hector Lacognata also commented on the high turnout. “The electoral process is really a big celebratioin here. The people assume that voting is a duty and an obligation, a right to be acted upon,” he said.

“Paraguay is asking that the CNE transfer to us the electronic system ,” Lacognata added. “We have utmost respect for the Venezuelan electoral process, which is an example for Latin America and the rest of the world.”

The CNE set up 11,300 voting centers to serve 16.8 million registered voters, and activated 35,000 electronic voting machines, which were accompanied by cardboard ballot boxes in which voters deposited a paper record of their vote.

“We are observing the vote counting and this is an example for the world. This guarantees transparency and assures Venezuelans that their vote will be counted,” said the president of Nicaragua's National Council of Universities, Francisco Talavera.

“This electoral process was characterized by its transparency, efficacy, security, and organization. The referendum re-affirmed the democratic expression of the Venezuelan people,” said Talavera.

Manolis Glezox, an election observer from Greece, addressed accusations by leaders of the anti-amendment campaign that government institutions were biased in favor of the pro-amendment campaign.

“Those who were not in agreement had the opportunity to express their opinions in a democratic manner in newspapers as well as the audio visual media,” said Glezox. “The vote discounted the commentaries that suggested that in Venezuela there is a dictatorship.”

After the CNE announced the results Sunday, opposition leaders recognized the legitimacy of the results and conceded defeat.

A non-partisan national electoral observation organization called Ojo Electoral (Election Watch) noted the “tranquility and normality” of the voting on Sunday. Ojo Electoral spokesperson Luis Lander reported that the Venezuelan National Guard, which was deployed to secure voting centers across the country, displayed “correct behavior” throughout the day.

Also, Lander lauded the fact that people from both pro- and anti-amendment political groups audited the voting machines and served as witnesses within each voting center, and that problems with voting machines and other such irregularities “were resolved promptly and appropriately.”

Sunday's national vote on the amendment was proposed by the Venezuelan National Assembly at the behest of President Chavez, who is a vibrant proponent of Latin American integration and what many call 21st Century Socialism, to allow Venezuelans to elect Chavez to a third six-year term after his second term ends in 2012.

Chavez has announced that he will be a pre-candidate for the presidency in 2012, meaning that the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), of which Chavez is president, will decide in internal primary elections whether Chavez will become the party's candidate for president.

Tags: Term Limit Referendum"
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/4219

---------------------------------

*(For those who don't know, in the U.S., we use electronic voting run on 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, owned and controlled by rightwing Bushwhack corporations, with ZERO audit in half the voting systems in the country (--because there is nothing to audit--no paper trail at all), and only a 1% audit in the rest (they may have a paper ballot but 99% of them never see the light of day)--not nearly sufficient in a 'TRADE SECRET' code system. Compare and contrast to Venezuela's system--OPEN SOURCE CODE, 55% audit. Experts whom I trust say that 10% is the minimum audit needed to detect fraud or error. Our system doesn't even come close, while Venezuela does more than five times the minimum audit needed. Could this be why the Venezuelan government's first priority is social justice, and ours is bailing out corrupt, criminal bankers, and continuing the Forever War--hocking our children's future unto the 7th generation? Something to think about. Why do we have a nearly 100% non-transparent vote counting system?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=512187&mesg_id=512187