Hugo Chavez supporters, how do you explain this??

[ShaneGR]

EDIT: No one trusts the evil corporate CNN, so I'm adding links to Reuters and the Associated Press.

I understand he's anti-Bush, which I like, but I'm not so sure about who he really is or whether or not he's a capable leader.



http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VENEZUELA_PROTESTS?SITE=NNCO&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/americas/03/06/venezuela.protests.ap/index.html

(snips from CNN)
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) -- Vowing not to abandon a push to force President Hugo Chavez's ouster, hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans took the streets Saturday to protest the denial of a presidential recall vote, a decision they say threatens to shatter trust in their country's election process.

Blowing whistles and chanting anti-Chavez slogans, protesters thronged one of the largest avenues in the capital of Caracas. Rescue officials estimated at least 500,000 people marched.

"It doesn't matter how many obstacles they put in our way!" bellowed opposition leader Enrique Mendoza, to an eruption of cheers. "Don't let them intimidate us!"

The peaceful demonstration contrasted with several days of rioting last week that killed at least eight people. Marchers also protested widespread arrests last week during clashes between National Guard troops and opposition activists. One protester's sign read: "I'm not armed. Don't shoot! I'm Venezuelan."

(snips from AP)
"It doesn't matter how many obstacles they put in our way!" bellowed opposition leader Enrique Mendoza, to an eruption of cheers. "Don't let them intimidate us!"

The march was peaceful, in contrast with last week's demonstrations. At least eight people were killed and hundreds arrested in five days of rioting set off by the National Elections Council's decision.

One protester's sign read: "I'm not armed. Don't shoot! I'm Venezuelan."

[lcordero]

1. I don't know enough about Chavez but I certainly do know enough

about CNN to know that their integrity is ALWAYS in question.

[ShaneGR]

3. Uhhh, ok, how about Reuters?

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20040306/wl_nm/venezuela_dc_32

[lcordero]

10. sorry dude

ALL network news is questionable. All of them have had a hand in passing deceptions as truth.

[ShaneGR]

13. Reuters isn't a television network

Just so you know. It's an international news consortium.

[AP]

18. How was their coverage up to the 2002 coup?

You know, the NY Times editorial board approved of the coup.

You know, the AP stringer in Haiti is a Duvalier crony?

You know, the NY Times stringer in Venezuela had close connection to the coup leaders.

Just because it's Reuters doesn't mean there isn't bullshit involved.

[KurtNilsen]

39. Where do you get your news then?

[private_ryan]

66. :)

I bet he has his own un-biased Havana Press sources.

[corporatewhore]

23. how about greg palast/alternet

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16255

[corporatewhore]

24. oops

[PVnRT]

79. Reuters

The head of the Reuters network is also very buddy-buddy with bigwigs at the WTO, so I don't know if they're exactly trustworthy in this matter.

[wjittermoss]

103. I explain it the same way that the anti-Bush, anti-war demos was explained

just ignore it. These are the money people and if the story is true, 500,000 is a blip for a country of about 10 million.

[wjittermoss]

109. OK, so now we are being primed for the invasion of Venezuela.

Haiti has no oil so no time spent priming us...just time spent justifying our behavior after the fact.

But the priming is full force with respect to Venezuela. I am sure you can get together a couple of hundred thousand of the oligarchy including their women anc children. Chavez supporters have no reason to march, YET, they aren't trying to unseat anyone. Remember, you had as many in CA to get Davis out. Problem is, we talk out of both sides of our mouth when it comes to "democracy." We are only for it when the leaders voted in are people who will kiss our ass. Otherwise, democracy is bad and the evil elected leaders will have to be overthrown. I only wish we could do it here.

135. bingo

& a coup was already attempted

[mot78]

2. I agree

Just because someone is anti-* doesn't make them a useful allie.

[MrSoundAndVision]

4. OK the BBC....

reported that there were "several hundred demonstrators in Caracas today. My take is, given that all of the major news outlets have been reporting on Venezuala just like they reported on Haiti about three weeks ago, that the picture that you present is probably a picture of YESTERDAY'S pro-Chavez rallies in Caracas.

[AP]

8. Some more pictures...

Hundreds of thousands of supporters of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez marched in Caracas against U.S. intervention in Venezuela's internal affairs.
Photo: Alvaro Cabrera

The streets of Caracas were a sea of red on Sunday, February 29, 2004, as thousands of pro-Chávez supporters demonstrated their anger at U.S. intervention in Venezuelan affairs. Recently declassified documents available for public viewing on www.venezuelafoia.info evidence millions of dollars of financing by the U.S. government to various sectors of the Venezuelan opposition. After President Chávez announced the discovery of this substantial U.S. support for the notoriously undemocratic opposition in Venezuela two weeks ago on his Sunday show, “Hello Mr. President”, Venezuelans have been in an uproar, demanding the U.S. stop intervening in Venezuela’s domestic affairs.


Working-class supporters of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez marched in Caracas against U.S. intervention in Venezuela's internal affairs.
Photo: Alvaro Cabrera

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1208

[ShaneGR]

9. So the Associated Press and Reuters are making it up?

See other replies with other links.

[AP]

17. Look at the crowd in post 8 and look at the crowd in your post and tell

me whose side you're on? The side of the people or the side of the fascists?

[tinanator]

25. bingo

whats your first clue worth?

[arcos]

38. no, they aren't...

hundreds of thousands support Chávez, and hundreds of thousands oppose him. He is a very polarizing figure.

They aren't making up stuff... they are just showing you one side of the story.

[PVnRT]

80. No, not making it up

Just reporting one side of the story so that it appears as if Venezuealans want Chavez gone, when, in fact, most of the country likes him quite a bit where he is.

[AP]

5. CNN does not come over too well in The Revolution Will Not Be ...

... Televised.

They told lies to Americans on behalf of the coup leaders and the US State Department.

[ShaneGR]

7. Ok, I provided Reuters... here's another

See the above Reuters article reply #2.

Here's AP:

http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VENEZUELA_PROTESTS?SITE=NNCO&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) -- Blowing whistles and chanting, hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans marched through Caracas on Saturday to protest the rejection of a petition aimed at recalling President Hugo Chavez.

Protesters streamed toward a central avenue from several gathering points in the capital, many dressed from head to toe in the national colors of red, yellow and blue. Officials said at least 500,000 people took part.

"It doesn't matter how many obstacles they put in our way!" bellowed opposition leader Enrique Mendoza, to an eruption of cheers. "Don't let them intimidate us!"

The march was peaceful, in contrast with last week's demonstrations. At least eight people were killed and hundreds arrested in five days of rioting set off by the National Elections Council's decision.

One protester's sign read: "I'm not armed. Don't shoot! I'm Venezuelan."

[AP]

12. See The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. Who's wearing the white hats

and who's wearing the black hats couldn't be more obvious if it were a John Ford movie (and western press is NOT on the side of the good guys in this fight -- much like November 2000).

[Supply Side Jesus]

142. fuckin awsome doc

[AP]

163. I don't know how anyone could be confused about right and wrong after

seeing it.

I think watching it should be a prerequisite for debating Chavez.

[politick]

11. I want to see that docu.

The lines seems to be pretty evenly split on Chavez, and I think it's difficult to find an objective source on him. As a result, I haven't been able to draw any conclusions on him -- some people are very wary of his tactics, which they see as tyrannical or, at the least, overstepping his authority. Others say he has no choice and should do anything he can to stay in power considering the forces allied against him, and his interest in the poor of Venezuela.

Does that offer any more confusion?

[AP]

14. That doc will clear everything up.

[Langis]

28. Where would I be able to see it?

I would love to see that docu, but don't know how :shrug:

[AP]

31. Screenings (and one in Cleveland or Columbus for sgr2)

Thessaloniki Documentary Festival – Images of 21st Century, Greece
1-7th Mar

Belfast Film Festival, Ireland
www.belfastfilmfestival.org
25th Mar– 2nd April

Cleveland Cinmatheque, Cleveland, Ohio
5th & 6th March

Tivoli Theatre, St. Louis, Missouri (Landmark Theatre Corp)
26th March - 1st April


April 04
Tower Theatre, Sacramento, CA. (Angelika Theatres)

Oriental Theatre, Milwaukee, WI. (Landmark Theatre Corp)

Royal Oaks Theatre, Detroit, MI. (Landmark)

Belcourt Theatre, Nashville, TN.

Bijou Theatre, Iowa City, IOWA

Ross Media Center, Lincoln, Nebraska

Avon Theatre, Providence, RI.

Oaks Theatre, Pittsburgh, PA.

Wexner Center, Columbus, Ohio

HKIFF, Hong Kong, China
www.hkiff.org.hk
6-21 April

Images du Nouveau Monde Festival, Quebec, Canada
www.festival-inm.com
31st Mar - 4th April

One World Film Fest, Prague, Czech Republic
15-22nd April

7th Singapore International Film Festival, Singapore
www.filmfest.org.sg
15 April - 1st May

Istanbul International Film Festival, Istanbul
www.istfest.org
10-25th April

Encuentros del Otro Cine,
International Documentary Film Festival, Ecuador
23rd April – 2nd

Distributor:
Deckert Distribution GmbH
Peterssteinweg 13
D-04107 Leipzig
Germany
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Web: www.deckert-distribution.com

http://www.chavezthefilm.com/html/film/screens.htm

[Langis]

32. Bah no where near AZ

Thanks though =)

[politick]

16. Oh yeah

Venezuela also has oil.

[DuctapeFatwa]

6. Chavez has the support of barely 90% of the population, maybe less

Almost all who support him are poor indigenous people who selfishly put their own trivial concerns above US business interests.

Chavez only encourages this with anti-American programs like schools and medical clinics.

[lastknowngood]

15. Good one! It seams that the sheeple will believe anything the

right wing media play. When the shrub's thugs tried to oust him before the people rose up and he was reinstated. The CIA is paying and orchestrating this anti Chavez movement so the shrub and his thugs can steal the natural resources of the country without giving the poor people of the country any benefit.

[Webster Green]

19. That is exactly what the reports on Pacifica have been saying...

and that the last thing the "rebels" want is another election, because Chavez will win in another landslide. The opposition is using the recall petition to stir shit up. They are backed by the CIA and their allegience is to the wealthy elite and the fascist government of the United States.

Personally, I will believe what I hear on the Pacifica network, and not what I hear from the mainstream media.

[PVnRT]

81. ROFL

Very well put.

[windansea]

168. 90%??? where you get that number??

this poll was taken in 2003, when he had 42% approval and 56% disapproval...when he was elected he had 80% approval...but a lot of people that once supported him don't now...will try to find a more recent poll as I think his support is even lower now

Chavez will do anything to stop the recall vote...he know he will lose it

[charlie]

170. 51% and trending upward

in a poll specifically on the referendum:

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1191

And he enjoys a comfortable buffer before he becomes vulnerable -- below 30% is where some experts peg the danger zone -- because in a new election, opposition votes will be splintered amongst more than one candidate. So while there may be a chance he'll lose the recall, it's not at all certain he'll be oustered.

[leftistagitator]

20. Because we still remember the last coup

I remember how a "popular" revolt unseated the president last time, and how peace and liberty were finally coming to Venezuala. At least, that's what the AP reported. In actuality, it was a military coup orchrastrated by the old upper class whose been fleecing the "peasants" for decades. I knew this because I went to narconews.com and heard from people on the streets who the public really backed. That's also how I knew 2 days before the press did that this coup would not hold. Because although the oppisition had been able to draw a few hundred thousand supporters, Chavez's supporters numbered in the millions. Which is why he overwelming won his election in 2000, unlike bush, and why his party swept the Senate, (the elections were verified to be clean, just to preempt you). It doesn't matter how much 10% of your country hate you, it's what the other 90% think.
Do you know that despite a capitalist economy and good relations with the US, 80% of Venezualans lived in poverty under the old system. There is a cartel of media corporations and old oil executives who are desprately trying to gain back thier old influence, and the courts have ruled that a 3rd of the signatures they claimed to have collected cannot be verified. Once again they failed to get the votes they need, and once again they will turn to violence. Hugo Chavez is the most restrained leader in South America, most would never allow outright calls to rebel like he has, certainly none of the crappy dictators we prop up down there.

[windansea]

182. re: the signatures....you are misinformed

The courts have not ruled on this...it is the Chavez controlled CNE
who keep moving the goalposts and using technicalities to derail the referendum on a recall.

The signatures collected by the opposition for a referendum are not being questioned by the electoral authorities. At question is not whether the signatures displayed similar handwriting.

The signatures show original and individual handwriting.

At issue is the data that corresponds to the signatures, such as the signatory’s full name in print, address and identification number.

Many people who couldn’t fill out the forms alone, be it for a lack of education, age, bad health, or confusion, were assisted by volunteers standing next to the tables. This took place under the watchful eyes of both pro-government and pro-opposition observers, electoral workers, and international observers.

The individuals who were assisted when filling out their forms provided their own signatures.

At the time, no one had a problem with the assistance provided. Not the electoral authorities, nor the pro-government witnesses.

It only became an issue when the opposition presented 3.4 million signatures, well above the 2.4 million required to activate the recall referendum.

It is imperative that anyone observing Venezuela’s electoral process understands this small detail. To write that 876,017 signatures “have the same calligraphy” or “display similar handwriting” implies that the opposition committed massive fraud, promoting Chavez’s accusations better than even him.

By rejecting the “assisted” forms, the National Elections Council violated its own norms.

Article 22 of the norms on recall referenda states that only the signature is required to be a “handwritten original”. It says nothing of the corresponding data.

[Toby109]

21. Want to make an enemy of the U.S?

Nationalize your oil interests. Peak Oil is coming and it ain't gonna be pretty.

[Peregrine]

22. Deja vu all over again

I don't know what to make of Chavez, like others have said, one should be skeptical of the information from either side. But, and that is a big BUT, all I see is Chile all over again. Strikes and demonstrations all paid for by the CIA and US business.

[corporatewhore]

26. hugo chavez is crazy!!

[corporatewhore]

132. heres the Greg Palast article i forgot to add to it

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16255

[bemildred]

27. Alan Cisco: Venezuela's opposition has good reason to be desperate

Caracas resident American citizen Alan Cisco writes: Venezuela will be the next Haiti ... or at least that's the hope of
the desperate Venezuelan opposition, whose "leaders" and media try to draw the analogy. Their fury is nominally
based around signatures for a recall referendum on President Hugo Chavez. In the 1999 constitution, product of
the constituent assembly fostered by Chavez, there is an unprecedented measure allowing for a recall vote on any
elected official after half their term of office has expired, if it is petitioned by 20% of the electorate. Half of the
Chavez's six year term ended last August 19, 2003.

much more

Vheadline

[Darranar]

30. Wow... excellent article!

Thanks for posting.

[bemildred]

33. I found it informative.

:hi:

[w4rma]

29. "picture, of the larger pro-Chavez march, did not appear in a single U.S."

...
And I could confirm the large protests. I'd recently returned from Caracas and watched 100,000 march against President Chavez. I'd filmed them for BBC Television London.

But I also filmed this: a larger march, easily over 200,000 Venezuelans marching in support of their president, Chavez.

That picture, of the larger pro-Chavez march, did not appear in a single U.S. newspaper. The pro-Chavez marchers weren't worth a mention.

By the next month, when the New York Times printed a photo of anti-Chavez marchers, they had metastasized. The Times reported that 600,000 had protested against Chavez.

Once again, the larger pro-Chavez demonstrations were, as they say in Latin America, "disappeared." I guess they didn't fit the print.
...
Why am I explaining the basics of Venezuela to you? If you watched BBC TV, or Canadian Broadcasting, you'd know all this stuff. But if you read the New York Times, you'll only know that President Chavez is an "autocrat," a "ruinous demagogue," and a "would-be dictator," who resigned when he recognized his unpopularity.
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=16255

[debsianben]

34. I'd like to know the income levels of those protestors

Keep in mind that the owners of the Venezuelan corporate mass media are FANATICALY anti-Chavez on account of his failure to bow under to the neoliberal economic agenda. Like, for instance, there's a Venezuelan baseball player who happens to have the last name Chavez, and every time he comes up to the plate, the sportscasters announces him with lines like "here comes Chavez....no, not the pro-Cuban dictator Chavez, the baseball player Chavez..."

That's relevant for two reasons. First of all, pretty much the entire media can be used to help promote anti-Chavez demos, thus swelling the numbers. (Kind of like those "support our troops" rallies last March sponsored by Clear Channel.) Secondly, unlike anti-government demonstrations in this country, where the private media is basically pro-government and as such tends to under-report anti-war and other dissident demonstrations, in Venezuela I would bet money that the numbers at anti-Chavez demonstrations are actually grossly inflated by the Venezuelan media. AND THAT'S WHERE REUTERS AND AP GET ALL OF THEIR INFORMATION ON VENEZUELA FROM, hence the biases of the local media are passed on to the international media that just copies off the wires. That's one of the reasons why the reporting of the coup back in 2002 by AP, Reuters, etc., was so bad.

Also, I don't think all mass movements are created equal. I.e. the mass movement of white people led by George Wallace way back when who didn't like the idea of black people moving into their neighborhoods or black kids being bused into their school districts didn't have the same moral status as the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King, Jr. Similarly, the backbone of the anti-Chavez movement in Venezuela (which is a MINORITY movement, Chavez got easy majorities in the last couple elections and the extremely poor majority still support him) are business owners, from the big media moguls with investments in everything who have an interest in privatization down to the small shopkeeper who doesn't like taxes.

Plus, I would bet money that any one who isn't in the "middle class or above" category in that picture was given the day off of work by their anti-Chavez right-wing boss and heavily encouraged to come out. Like how, according to some reports by international observers in Venezuela, most of the people showing up to sign recall petitions at a lot of the sites where signatures were being collected asked for paper verification that they could show to their boss when they got back to work.

[Pax Argent]

35. Once upon a time in a state called California

Unfortunately California's Government was on the wrong side of the Left/Right divide, so agents of the Right worked to destabilize the government in California by allowing their corporate cronies in the energy business to screw California over for several billion dollars by allowing rampant overcharging for energy. This coupled with 9-11 wrecking the tourism industry and the losses of high paying jobs in manufacturing and industry, led to severe deficits in the California budget. The time was ripe.

With the help of their corporate-controlled media services (talk radio), the Right attacked the rightfully elected Governor in a recall challenge shortly after his re-election. The media whipped the people into a frenzy while the Right paid to have people collect signatures.

With the help of die-hard partisans and people "informed" by talk radio and Jay Leno, the Governor that the Right didn't like was removed and we got a new Governor who's greatest claim to fame was that he played a sub-intelligible hero in the movies. We also got 27 BILLION more dollars in debt, but we haven't gotten any of the money back from the energy companies that were proven to be screwing us, and with Arnie's connections to Enron, I don't think this will happen soon.

What has this to do with Venezuela you ask? Well the moral of our story is that with enough money and corporate media, coupled with the help of those with agendas and the benighted and misguided, you can get even legally elected popular leaders out (ok, so with Davis this is a stretch, but work with me here).

And then there was that Gore/Bush thing back in 2000, but that is another story for another time.

The End

[KG]

36. incredible.

but hardly surprising.

[not systems]

37. A huge KKK rally is still despicable no matter how many...

racists attend.

I recommend seeing "The Revolution will not be televised"
to see exactly what the divide in that country is based on.

My best guess is that the preservation of the "natural rights of the
conquerer" is foremost in the minds of the mob in your picture.

[Toots]

40. What is your point? Are you suggesting we support a coup?

What do you have against Democracy? I noticed you were in favor of the Haiti Coup also. You seem to have a very real problem with Democracy. I guess in this new Amerika it is the "in thing" but I like the old America.

[Dirty Hippie]

41. I Heard on NPR

some time ago that Chavez had brought in Cuban doctors to staff neighborhood health clinics. He had instituted a program where people in poor neighborhoods could organize, start a clinic and the doctor was supplied. Some (most likely those who could afford health care) protested the program on the grounds that the Cubans were really there to indoctrinate the masses on the virtues on communism. The doctors interviewed denied this saying they were just there to help the sick.

Found the link to the audio

http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1540340

[AP]

42. Cuba has one of the best health care systems in the world, which is

amazing, considering their lack of resources, and Castro has been trying to export their knowledge to the rest of the world for the last couple years, and this was an example of that program.

[Duck90MPH]

50. How is Castro's record on human rights and political freedom?

I guess it's ok for Castro to abuse and torture those that speak out against his politics because Castro has the "best health care" to heal them from the beatings.

That's some real fine compassionate dictatorship-ism.

[AP]

52. If the US weren't plotting to destroy Castro, he could probably

lighten up a little, don't you think?

Do you think we hate Cuba because of human rights or because of capitalism?

[Duck90MPH]

72. Silly me

I should have know it's our fault Castro abuses political "criminals".

Oh, and I (We???) don't hate Cuba or its people. It's Castro and his dictatorship I despise.

[PVnRT]

83. How do you feel about China?

Or for that matter, our own country, with thousands upon thousands of de facto political prisoners of the War on Some Drugs?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

89. Do you support the sanctions against Cuba? Who do you think the...

...sanctions are hurting the most, the common everyday Cuban or the ruling Castro administration?

Same goes for every other country on whom we've enforced sanctions...it's the little guy that gets hurt. And that pisses them off to the point where they grow to hate the U. S.

Name one country that revolted because of sanctions.

[AP]

96. Sanctions worked against South Africa because punishing capatilism was the

point.

In Cuba, punishing socialism by punishing capatilism doesn't really make the point.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

105. The sanctions "worked" in South Africa only because there was already...

...a tremendous upwelling of suport for change within South Africa. Without that single most important factor, that change would never have taken place using sanctions alone.

And who was talking about punishing capitalism in the post to which I responded?

[AP]

110. I think I'm on your side. I'm explaining when sanctions work: when profits

were the goal to begin with.

When a country isn't motivated by corporate profits, but by a desire to spread wealth down and out, then sanctions just punish the people.

America RARELY punishes the capitalists and the fascists. Slave states, WWII and South Africa are the only examples I can think of.

[dpibel]

160. You go, bro!

Thank god we don't live in a country where people are rounded up because of their possible political affiliations, and where people are sent to offshore camps outside the jurisdiction of the courts, or to other countries where a little bit of torture is considered good for the soul. Thank god we don't live in a country where the leading law-enforcement officer is a loon with the right to put anyone he wants under surveillance. Thank god we don't live in a country where political protests are met with over-the-top police violence.

Oh. Wait. . .

[Vladimir]

65. I doubt the thousands

of children alive today troughout the third-world because of Cuba giving away meningitis vaccines to impoverished countries would agree with you.

But I forgot, only the middle class matters.

V

[Media_Lies_Daily]

85. How is America's record on human rights and political freedom?...

Have you looked around lately?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

43. Who do you think is funding Chavez's opposition?

[trumad]

44. SG2..Simple question...

Should the United States Government be involved in Venezuelan affairs?

I think that most here on DU have learned from the U.S's past mistakes that it's better to mind are own Fucking business...

But when we got Clowns like Otto Reich running the show we know that ain't gonna happen...

[radwriter0555]

49. BUSH is, Read my posts below.

Via otto reich.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

82. Believe me, I know exactly who's funding the opposition...

...to Chavez, and has been active in providing military and economic support.

But, I was very curious to see if sgr2 knew. Still no response from the direction.

[Cocoa]

45. Chavez has significant opposition

but I think their cause is bogus and antidemocratic.

Do the millions of dittoheads make Rush Limbaugh right?

[radwriter0555]

46. chavez has opposition because of the bush/cia inflamed coup attempt..which

has been going on since bush stole office.

[radwriter0555]

47. Venezuela coup linked to Bush team

Specialists in the 'dirty wars' of the Eighties encouraged the plotters who tried to topple President Chavez Observer Worldview <http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview> Ed Vulliamy in New York Sunday April 21, 2002 The Observer <http://www.observer.co.uk>

The failed coup in Venezuela was closely tied to senior officials in the US government, The Observer has established. They have long histories in the 'dirty wars' of the 1980s, and links to death squads working in Central America at that time.

Washington's involvement in the turbulent events that briefly removed left-wing leader Hugo Chavez from power last weekend resurrects fears about US ambitions in the hemisphere. It also also deepens doubts about policy in the region being made by appointees to the Bush administration, all of whom owe their careers to serving in the dirty wars under President Reagan.

One of them, Elliot Abrams, who gave a nod to the attempted Venezuelan coup, has a conviction for misleading Congress over the infamous Iran-Contra affair. The Bush administration has tried to distance itself from the coup. It immediately endorsed the new government under businessman Pedro Carmona. But the coup was sent dramatically into reverse after 48 hours.

Now officials at the Organisation of American States and other diplomatic sources, talking to The Observer, assert that the US administration was not only aware the coup was about to take place, but had sanctioned it, presuming it to be destined for success. The visits by Venezuelans plotting a coup, including Carmona himself, began, say sources, 'several months ago', and continued until weeks before the putsch last weekend. The visitors were received at the White House by the man President George Bush tasked to be his key policy-maker for Latin America, Otto Reich. Reich is a right-wing Cuban-American who, under Reagan, ran the Office for Public Diplomacy.

It reported in theory to the State Department, but Reich was shown by congressional investigations to report directly to Reagan's National Security Aide, Colonel Oliver North, in the White House. North was convicted and shamed for his role in Iran-Contra, whereby arms bought by busting US sanctions on Iran were sold to the Contra guerrillas and death squads, in revolt against the Marxist government in Nicaragua. Reich also has close ties to Venezuela, having been made ambassador to Caracas in 1986. His appointment was contested both by Democrats in Washington and political leaders in the Latin American country. The objections were overridden as Venezuela sought access to the US oil market. Reich is said by OAS sources to have had 'a number of meetings with Carmona and other leaders of the coup' over several months. The coup was discussed in some detail, right down to its timing and chances of success, which were deemed to be excellent. On the day Carmona claimed power, Reich summoned ambassadors from Latin America and the Caribbean to his office. He said the removal of Chavez was not a rupture of democratic rule, as he had resigned and was 'responsible for his fate'. He said the US would support the Carmona government. But the crucial figure around the coup was Abrams, who operates in the White House as senior director of the National Security Council for 'democracy, human rights and international operations'. He was a leading theoretician of the school known as 'Hemispherism', which put a priority on combating Marxism in the Americas. It led to the coup in Chile in 1973, and the sponsorship of regimes and death squads that followed it in Argentina, El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and elsewhere. During the Contras' rampage in Nicaragua, he worked directly to North. Congressional investigations found Abrams had harvested illegal funding for the rebellion. Convicted for withholding information from the inquiry, he was pardoned by George Bush senior. A third member of the Latin American triangle in US policy-making is John Negroponte, now ambassador to the United Nations. He was Reagan's ambassador to Honduras from 1981 to 1985 when a US-trained death squad, Battalion 3-16, tortured and murdered scores of activists. A diplomatic source said Negroponte had been 'informed that there might be some movement in Venezuela on Chavez' at the beginning of the year.

More than 100 people died in events before and after the coup. In Caracas on Friday a military judge confined five high-ranking officers to indefinite house arrest pending formal charges of rebellion. Chavez's chief ideologue - Guillermo Garcia Ponce, director of the Revolutionary Political Command - said dissident generals, local media and anti-Chavez groups in the US had plotted the president's removal. 'The most reactionary sectors in the United States were also implicated in the conspiracy,' he said.

[radwriter0555]

48. Bush regime linked via Miami banks to VZ 2002 Coup attempt...

Bush Officials Defend Their Actions on Venezuela

The Washington Post, Apr 18, 2002)

• Media's Role in Crisis Becomes the Big Story in Venezuela
• (The Washington Post, Apr 17, 2002)
• * U.S. Details Talks With Opposition (The Washington Post, Apr 17, 2002)
• * Oil Prices Surge on Turmoil in Venezuela (The Washington Post, Apr 16, 2002)
• * Chavez Rounds Up Officers Behind Ouster (The Washington Post, Apr 16, 2002)By Scott Wilson Washington Post Foreign Service Thursday, April 18, 2002;
• CARACAS, Venezuela, April 17 -- One reason Pedro Carmona, a bookish economist and alleged insurrectionist, was selected to run the interim government after a coup here last week was that he was one of the few people who didn't want the job. Those with presidential ambitions in Venezuela -- the aspirants are legion -- took themselves out of consideration Friday when the military was hunting for someone to head the junta. The condition was that anyone who had the job would not be able to run in presidential elections to be held within a year. Carmona was the face of Venezuela's short-lived coup, which ousted President Hugo Chavez last Thursday.

Behind him, however, were clashing agendas and personalities that doomed the change in government, and made possible Chavez's return two days later. "It was going to take time to put together the new government teams and consolidate our control over the situation," Carmona said today in an interview at his apartment, where he is under house arrest. "This was not something that was premeditated, as you can see from the ensuing confusion. That gave the Chavez forces time to reorganize and return." Untangling the various forces that contributed to the coup and its collapse is a consuming passion in Venezuela and beyond its borders. There is a vigorous debate about the possible roles of U.S. officials, powerful Venezuelans abroad and leading military officers. Carmona, who was an economist with the Foreign Ministry and has run a variety of trade associations, rose to prominence last year with the success of a national strike he called as head of Venezuela's largest business group. He joined a large labor group last week in a second strike, which became a catalyst for Chavez's ouster. Carmona also enjoyed support among a small faction of dissident navy and air force officers, some of whom had met with U.S. officials in recent months, that had begun organizing against the three-year-old Chavez administration last fall, according to former members of the provisional government. The role of the military and civic groups in the coup is the subject of an investigation by the Organization of American States. OAS Secretary General Cesar Gaviria, who left Venezuela today to deliver his findings to the organization in Washington, warned that democracy was being damaged by the military's involvement in politics. "This tradition has been established in Venezuela in the last few years that military officers are important protagonists in politics," Gaviria said. "It is very unhealthy. Close that door." A possible U.S. role in the coup is being scrutinized here by Chavez supporters and opponents. Western diplomats generally supportive of U.S. foreign policy acknowledge that severe damage has been done to relations between the Bush administration and the third-largest supplier of oil to the United States. U.S. officials have denied that they encouraged opposition members to overthrow Chavez, but diplomats here suggested that the large number of visits to Washington and the U.S. Embassy here in recent months by people hostile to his regime may have signaled tacit support for the opposition. "I don't think the U.S. provided any active or material support for this," a Western diplomat said. "But the people involved may have seen all of these meetings and visits, added them all up, and come up with an idea that they were on the same team." At least three people who landed key jobs within the provisional government have acknowledged that they met with U.S. officials in the past six months. One of them was Vice Adm. Carlos Molina, who said that he had a meeting with a U.S. official outside the U.S. Embassy within the past six weeks. But U.S. officials say that although they were aware of the growing dissent, they sought to distance the United States from opposition figures who might be plotting a coup. In November, the U.S. ambassador at the time, Donna Hrinak, took the unusual step of ordering the embassy's military attache to stop meeting with a group of dissident officers, according to a U.S. official. That group, according to a Western diplomat here, included Molina, Air Force Col. Pedro Soto and several other officers who in February publicly demand Chavez's removal. The U.S. diplomat said Soto and Molina each received $100,000 from a Miami bank account for denouncing Chavez. Soto and Molina could not be reached for comment today. Molina is under arrest and was the subject of a military hearing today. Soto is among three officers seeking asylum in the Bolivian Embassy. In his role as head of the business association, Carmona traveled to Washington in November with a delegation of seven business leaders. He said the delegation met with John Maisto, Bush's national security aide for Latin America, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and Otto J. Reich, then Bush's nominee to head the State Department's Western Hemisphere affairs division. Reich, a conservative Cuban exile who has expressed his deep concerns over Chavez's leftist agenda, now holds the post under an appointment.

Carmona characterized the meetings as a lobbying effort to have Venezuela included in a group of Andean nations that enjoy preferential trade agreements with the United States. Soon after Chavez's speech in October, U.S. officials informed him that Venezuela would not be part of the group. "They talked a lot about the difference they had with the government, and that getting into would be impossible," Carmona said. "They were very angry at Chavez, really tired of him." But Carmona said they gave no indication that they supported Chavez's removal, and he said he next spoke with U.S. officials after Chavez was ousted. He met with the recently arrived U.S. ambassador, Charles Shapiro, and the Spanish ambassador Saturday morning. Carmona said Shapiro was concerned about the dissolution of the National Assembly and suggested in general terms that he find a way to put the government back on a more democratic footing. Carmona is waiting to see if the government charges him with rebellion. The crime carries a sentence of up to 20 years in prison. "The crisis is still here," Carmona said. "It hasn't been resolved."

That group, according to a Western diplomat here, included Molina, Air Force Col. Pedro Soto and several other officers who in February publicly demand Chavez's removal. The U.S. diplomat said Soto and Molina each received $100,000 from a Miami bank account for denouncing Chavez. Soto and Molina could not be reached for comment today. Molina is under arrest and was the subject of a military hearing today. Soto is among three officers seeking asylum in the Bolivian Embassy. © 2002 The Washington Post Company

[RaulGroom]

51. This WHOLE thread (both sides) is a great example of fuzzy thinking

One reason message boards are somewhat dangerous is they reinforce sloppy thought patterns. This thread is a great example.

[hellhathnofury]

53. Echoed.

Chavez is no Pol Pot, but he's also not a saint. There isn't always right and wrong.

Yes, we should be suspicious of US intervention, but what the Bush administration does isn't always inherently wrong. You should look at the facts of each situation and then make a judgement instead of making assumptions. The facts of this case seem to lend the light that Chavez is on his way to communism, which is not acceptable. That doesn't mean that we should automatically overthrow him though, a recall monitored by the UN and OAS is probably the best route.

[not systems]

54. "The facts of this case"

What facts lead you to say "Chavez is on his way to communism"?

He is an elected leader, serving out a specific term.

Is it the medical care and education provided to the majority
of the people rather than the privileged few that is "not acceptable"?

Why should the oil oligarchs hold all the resources as their own?

They did before Chavez that is why they are so angry, he has made
some of the resources available to the majority of population.

[hellhathnofury]

55. Lot's of dictators are elected. Hitler for one.

Do you really think that after having nationalized his countries cash cow resources Hugo will peacefully transfer power to an opponent? If the election goes that way.

I'm sorry that I don't always favor radical wealth redistribution.

[not systems]

56. The oil company was state owned it was just...

being siphoned on by the old elites.

He didn't "nationalize" it you are wrong about that.

Hitler did have that on Bush, I grant you that.

"radical wealth redistribution" What?

In this case a state resources are just being redirected from
the rich white minority to the poor largely indian majority.

In a democracy the resources of a nation can be directed
by the will of the people through their elected representatives.

Just like here.

People have the right to representative government even if
they are not of an approved skin tone.

[hellhathnofury]

59. True. I was under the impression that he was nationalizing it.

The oppostition certainly believes he's marching towards Cuban-style dictatorship and the recall petition certainly seems to be legitimate in nature.

From AP:

The council accepted only 1.8 million of the 3 million-plus signatures submitted by opposition leaders in December. The minimum required is 2.4 million.

The council demanded confirmation of 1 million signatures, citing procedural violations. Another 140,000 signatures were rejected outright.

snip

Opposition leaders have appealed to the Organization of American States and the U.S.-based Carter Center for support, saying the stability of the world's fifth-biggest oil exporter is at stake.

Street violence abated last week after the OAS and Carter Center promised to help ensure that citizens would have a chance to prove they signed. Negotiations over the process continued Saturday.

What do you want to bet that if the OAS and the Carter Center show the recall to be legitimate that Chavez will completely grab the dictator reins?


"People have the right to representative government even if
they are not of an approved skin tone." What? Is that a vieled jab at me not falling in love with Chavez because he's Latin?

[K-W]

61. We cant declare Chavez guilty because you think he will be.

We cant assume he will become a dictator. Not all socialized reforms are meant to create a totalitarian government. The US has thier hands all over this mess anyway, so its not as if the anti-chavez people are on the up and up and a perfect democratic movement.

Until Chavez actually starts to abuse his nation, he has every right in the world to govern the way he wants to. If that means a full blown communism, that means a full blown communism.

[hellhathnofury]

63. So because Chavez is legally elected he can do whatever he wants?

Pardon my sense that the US has some interest in Venezuela remaining democratic. The anti-Chavez people aren't perfect either, but I'm not willing to let a rich country become vehemtly anti-American. I look at what the best interests of America are before anything else. The overthrow of democratic government is not in our interests. Communism is not democratic in practice, it never has been and never will be.

Let's see what the OAS and Carter Center say, I haven't judged him yet but I do recognize that there's something wrong in Venezuela.

[K-W]

68. Your ignorance of communism aside,

(it is probably the most democratic system yet concieved) I know it is hard for many people to destinguish between communism the theory and the totalitarian regimes that used the tenets of the theory as part of society that did not in any way resemble communism.

Chavez is legally elected, so he can do whatever he wants within bounds of international law. There is no international law that says that you must put the economic state of the US before your own country.

Now you want to control their thoughts as well as thier oil. You truely are a flag barer for democracy cynicalsob1.

Until the overthrow of a democratic government happens, you dont have a point. I would love to see the results of the OAS and the Carter Center, but trusting any group entirely in this situation is an error in judgement. The US has thier hands deep into everything that happens for just the reasons you mentioned. And the US is the anti-democratic regime for doing so.

[hellhathnofury]

74. Yes, Hugo Chavez will establish the ideal communist system.

None of those nasty camps or repressions of freedoms. I'm sorry, it doesn't work.

Chavez is legally elected, but that doesn't mean he's no longer accountable to his constiuents. The recall is allowed by the constitution, Chavez is biased and obviously interefered in the certification process. The OAS and Carter Center will now review them. If everyone is biased who's word do we take? The OAS's or Hugo Chavez's? I'll take the OAS any day of the week.

[K-W]

75. What doesnt work are your assumptions.

Where on earth is your justification that Chavez will create camps? What an over the top assumption on your part.

Chavez is accountable to his constituants, not the USA. Would you like to present proof that Chavez interfered? Or is this another one of those things you just know.

Getting information is not a yes or no choice cynicalsob1. You dont only trust the OAS and you dont only trust Hugo Chavez, but picking either one as your sole info is rediculous.

Edit: Think about your argument against communism in light of some of the things that have happened in capitalist societies around the world.

[hellhathnofury]

78. Well he hasn't done it yet, it's just that everyone who's gone down

that path has done it. But this time it will be different. ;-)

The flaw in your argument is that the United States should never act in it's interests. I'm an American.

You don't really have solid proof that the US is actively involved in the recall petition. A lot of questionable links is what's above. I'm going to take the OAS opinion first, theyre the international organization in this situation and I tend to be a big believer in international organizations. It's really really silly to believe that when Chavez refused to accept what was it 800000 signatures he wasn't interfering in bias.

[not systems]

87. I heard a guy from the NED on the radio...

Friday who admitted to supporting the opposition parties with cash grants.

How would you like foreign countries to dabble in our elections?

A story on Yahoo had a photo of signatures that appeared to
be one person signing for many people. That is why the
signatures need to be checked because the opposition has
a history of fraud as demonstrated by dissolving the elected
parliament after seizing the country in a coup in 2001.

These people still walk free, here they would be locked away for life.

[hellhathnofury]

93. That's why the OAS and Carter Center are looking at them.

[K-W]

88. Actually, you are wrong.

In europe, there are many nations with large socialist reforms who do not seem to have turned into oppressive totalitarian regimes. I dont have any names off the top of my head, but I would bet my life that there have been more than a handful of leaders in the world who held some socialist or communist ideals but did not become totalitarian dictators. You just arent thinking of communism/socialism as an ideology, like capitalism, like democracy that can arrive in many forms and to many degrees.

I never said that the US should never act in its interests. I said that the US should act in its interests within the boundries of international law. I am an American, but that doesnt make my life more valuable than someone born in Venezuala. I have no right to screw them over for my gain. And my country has no right to interfere with thier country simply to make my life better.

You dont have solid proof either. No one does. Why are you so suspicious of chavez, but not at all of his opponants. Do you really think that faking 800,000 signatures would be that rediculous? And even if they were sticklers for the rules on this issue, and discounted real signatures, as long as they worked within the rules, they are perfectly within thier rights.

The United States has had some pretty undemocratic election issues fairly recently. Would you support Venezualan intereference in our government?

[hellhathnofury]

95. This is South America, not Europe. Things work differently.

I'm going to dig up all the human rights violations of Chavez and then tell you why I'm suspicious.

"The United States has had some pretty undemocratic election issues fairly recently. Would you support Venezualan intereference in our government?"

That's such an absurd statement, our elections generally don't have grave violations. Minor problems yes, but the international community is generally involved in monitering these elections and that happens for a reason.

[K-W]

102. You are utterly missing the point.

The point is that having socialist/communist goals does not, as you claimed, automatically lead to totalitarianism. Of course Europe and Venezuala are different, so are Venezuala and the Communist nations you are using as your models. The point is that not all nations that make socialist reforms become totalitarian regimes.

It is not an absured statement in the slightest. The last election we had was certainly bigger than a dispute over signatures on a recall petition. Not only did we end up with a President who lost the national election (undemocratic), but there are several documented cases of election violations that could have changed the results of the election.

[hellhathnofury]

106. I don't think Venezuela is that different from Cuba.

The last elections weren't perfect, but we've had peaceful transfer's of power for 200 years.

Found the Human Rights Watch stuff I was looking for:

http://hrw.org/doc/?t=americas&c=venezu

sample of abstracts:


Venezuela

Venezuela: Investigate Charges of Abuses Against Protestors
The Venezuelan government should conduct a thorough investigation into allegations that state security forces have beaten and abused detained protestors this week, Human Rights Watch said today. The investigation should also examine the circumstances of killings that occurred during confrontations between protesters and police.
March 5, 2004 Press Release
Printer friendly version

Venezuela: Official Press Agency Distorts Human Rights Watch’s Position
Venezuela’s official government press agency has published an article that distorts Human Rights Watch’s position on freedom of expression, Human Rights Watch said today.
October 28, 2003 Press Release

Venezuela's Supreme Court Upholds Prior Censorship and "Insult Laws"
Venezuela's Supreme Court Upholds Prior Censorship and "Insult Laws"
A decision by the Venezuelan Supreme Court upholding prior censorship is a major setback for freedom of expression, Human Rights Watch said today.
July 18, 2003 Press Release

Venezuela: Limit State Control of Media
Letter to President Chavez
The main purpose of this letter is to urge President Chavez to take steps to address serious threats to freedom of the press in Venezuela
July 1, 2003 Letter

Venezuela: Protect Journalists, Revise Radio-TV Law
The Venezuelan government is not doing enough to protect journalists from violence, Human Rights Watch said in a new report released today. Human Rights Watch also urged the government to protect freedom of expression by ending its ongoing investigation of the country’s private television networks, and dramatically revising its proposed law to regulate the contents of radio and television broadcasts.
May 21, 2003 Press Release

[K-W]

116. You have yet to even approach the burden of proof to justify ousting him.

No one is arguing that Venezuala is a model of anything. But we have no right to be monkeying with thier governement.

[hellhathnofury]

118. And you have yet to prove we actually are besides...

international organizations intervening to certify the recall.

[K-W]

122. NO, the burden of proof is on you.

You are making major assumptions. I am not required to accept your assumptions as facts. You are the one making many claims, some fairly wild about Chavez's past and future actions. You my friend, must prove them, the burden is not on me to disprove them.

[hellhathnofury]

127. So what would you have the US do?

Hypothetical: Chavez nationalizes the oil industry, embargo's the US. What do we do?

Chavez is no saint and is obviously moving towards a dictatorship http://hrw.org/doc/?t=americas&c=venezu

[Media_Lies_Daily]

124. Oh, please...let's not go down that road. Here are some links...

<http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,688071,00.html>

<http://www.poptel.org.uk/scgn/articles/0205/page8.htm>

<http://cybercircle.org/english/coup.html>

<http://newsmine.org/archive/war-on-terror/venezuela/apr-2002-coup/venezuela-us-military.txt>

161. I think you should look at this which I posted in another thread

at least to get some understanding of why some might be suspicious of the United States

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0421-01.htm

[hellhathnofury]

171. I know. But alot of this is full blown paranoia.

I've also read statements by the Carter Center and Barney Frank supporting the veracity of the constiutional recall. I'm also well aware of Chavez's human rights record. Blood on all hands.

[not systems]

108. Minor problems like 50000+ voters disenfranchised in Flordia...

most of them black.

That minor violation flipped the election results, leading
to 4 years of non-elected government from the far right.

I for one think getting our own house in order should come
before meddling to preserve your natural right to cheap gas.

[hellhathnofury]

117. And I think that supply directly effects our economy.

Rationing anyone?

2000 pales to what goes on in some countries like Zimbabwe and others.

[not systems]

128. Wow your standards for US elections are so high.

As long as we have as clean elections that Zimbabwe everything is fine.

It is not rational to assume that your oil needs should be filled
just because you have them.

Your version of economics involves military intervention and
the suppression of the right of self determination of others
and you call your self rational.

[tkmorris]

165. So what?

Here's a newsflash for you.

IT'S VENEZUELAS OIL. It doesn't belong to the United States. We have no rights to it or to anything else in Venezuela. I really can't understand why such a basic human principle is lost on some people. Being American does not make you superior to anyone else, nor does it grant you the right to do anything you feel is "in your best interests".

[hellhathnofury]

174. We are their primary vendor,

we have no interest in seeing the security of our supply?

It's not our oil, but we've been buying it for decades. It's a hostage tactic.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

133. Not to mention the same things happening in Missouri, Tenneessee,...

...Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and South Carolina. Those events were overshadowed by the media seizing only on what was happening in Florida.

[Vladimir]

71. What's so undemocratic

about a democratically elected president?

Chavez isn't an idiot. He know that a referendum, once held would be disputed and provide the perfect pretext for shit to kick off. He has learned the lessons of Chile/Nicaragua/etc. It may not be in the interests of America, but it sure is in the intersts of the 80% of Venezuelans living in poverty.

Freedom is not a spectator sport, and freedoms do not exist in a vacuum. It is not good to give a person freedom of speech if he is starving and you don't give him food.

V

[TankLV]

180. Seems to work in the us - oh, wait, the OTHER guy got more votes!

Silly me.

[hellhathnofury]

64. So because Chavez is legally elected he can do whatever he wants?

Pardon my sense that the US has some interest in Venezuela remaining democratic. The anti-Chavez people aren't perfect either, but I'm not willing to let a rich country become vehemtly anti-American. I look at what the best interests of America are before anything else. The overthrow of democratic government is not in our interests. Communism is not democratic in practice, it never has been and never will be.

Let's see what the OAS and Carter Center say, I haven't judged him yet but I do recognize that there's something wrong in Venezuela.

[not systems]

73. "The overthrow of democratic government is not in our interests."

So I know how you feel about the 2001 coup attempt, you must be against it.

I also know how you feel about the coup in Haiti, you must be against it.

Or are those just words your using?

What do you recognize is wrong in Venezuela?

Has the natural order of people and things been overturned?

[not systems]

69. I doubt it.

I doubt Chavez will grab power because I think he will win
the recall election if it turns out that enough of the
signatures were not faked, by single people signing for
many people.

What will the opposition do when they lose the recall or next election?

Attempt another coup with the help of their friends in Washington?

They have no natural right to power because of who they are.

It was an unveiled jab at people who think only a person who identifies as of
white European decent can be a legitimate leader in this hemisphere.

If you don't feel that way, then it was not a jab at you.

If you do, it was.

[TankLV]

178. And bush* is another - oh wait - the OTHER guy got more votes!

Silly me!

[K-W]

57. Excuse me?

Since when do you or the US have any right in the world to tell another country what kind of economic structure they are allowed to have. A forced recall is absolutely no better than a militant overthrow, either way its a coup.

[hellhathnofury]

60. Since, that country is extremely important to the US economy.

We get 10-15% of our oil from Venezuela, you know who's going to pay for that hike when it's lost right? You and me. It's our national interest, and I'm not out of touch enough to not realize that we have to act in our interests. The recall is constitutionally legitimate, the OAS and Carter Center are going to review it to see if it is certifiable.

[K-W]

62. So its ok for the US to violate other nations to protect its oil supply?

Were you pro the Iraq invasion?

Pragmatism can be a beautiful thing, but only in moderation. If our options as a country are A) Keep up our style of consumption, but have to violate the sovriegnty of other nations. and B) Change our style of consumption, I have to pick B. This is the Venezualans oil, not ours. We are 1000 times worse than Chavez could ever be if our policy is A.

[hellhathnofury]

67. I opposed the war in Iraq.

If we lose this oil American business is going to hurt and that'll mean increased loss of jobs, more outsourcing to slave wage factories. We need to get ourselves off oil but that's a long term project, Venezuela is now.

Do you support Mugabe?

[K-W]

70. How is this different than Iraq?

You are claiming that the US has the right to intervene in countries whos oil effects our economy. Iraq was also a country whos oil supplies effect our economy. Where is the difference between the two in your rationale?

Your argument reeks of coporation-first economic thinking. If we give in to that, weve already lost. Companies are going to outsource and exploit cheap labor whether you give them cheap oil or not. I think its lovely that you place the blame for corporate abuses on resources, but for someone who is apparently a pragmatist on democracy and civil rights, i would have pegged you to be a little more pragmatic when looking at our economy.

[hellhathnofury]

76. Iraq wasn't giving us oil prior to the war. Venezuela is an existing

exporter. Unless you count the miniscule Oil-for Food program, that was going to the French I believe.

Labor is a resource. It's cheaper abroad. When the cost of business rises here because shipping costs go up in America, they're going to go to Honduras, Bangladesh and Jamaica. The cheaper labor will make up for the higher cost of shipping and the Wal-Mart system will expand.

$4 at the gallon, are you ready?

[K-W]

77. If you want to play by the corporations rules, they will screw us anyway.

If we must spend all our time simply pleasing corporations in a vein attempt to keep them from screwing us just a little more, I dont call that a victory for democracy.

And if you dont think that the oil supply underneath Iraq doesnt have a huge effect on the US economy, you need to look at things in a little more detail. They invaded iraq because of the economic control they could get by having influence over where that oil goes. They did it to preserve the United States' economic superpower status.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

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

[PVnRT]

91. I think it's really insulting

to start throwing around "communist" and imply that other people are incapable of thinking for themselves because they don't agree with your neoconservative world view.

[K-W]

94. I hate to break it to you,

but this isnt a forum for Imperialists.

The funny thing here is that I am just asking you to put some wheight on Chavez, while you are arguing for 100% sticking to thier opposition. I am pointing out that while the effect of oil prices in our economy is a concern, corporate abuses have many many non-oil related causes, some of which would be more ethical and better for our country to rely on than oil supply. You are asking for 100% alliagance to the current incarnation of free market economics.

You are the one blinded by ideology. I have not expressed a single pro-communist viewpoint in this thread, simply pointed out that it is not some evil demon tool for a totaltiarian governement, its a political ideology.

Well, believing that your country should lord over all the others and use them as tools to supply your quality of living is't exactly racism, its nationalism. Its really not much better.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

99. I think you need to ask what people in other countries think of the...

...U. S. since the NeoCon Coup of December 2000. I bet they don't like having their noses rubbed daily in the fact that we are the most powerful country in the world. I bet the same thought process applies to the opinions of the governments of those same countries, they just have to be more diplomatic when making public comments.

Bottomline? The NeoCons have squandered every bit of the tremendous global good will that the last legally elected president's administration built over an eight year period of time.

There are ways to maintain superpower status without making enemies of nearly every single country in the world, and subservient slaves of all others willing to do our bidding.

[hellhathnofury]

107. Chavez isn't exactly someone we want ot make friends with.

http://hrw.org/doc/?t=americas&c=venezu

I'm going to wait and see what the OAS and Carter Center say.

[K-W]

112. No ones talking about being his friend.

We are talking about the rights of other countries to govern themselves. IF the OAS and Carter Center say there was foul play, then a portion of your statements in this thread would have some validity.

[hellhathnofury]

120. Your judging that they won't.

I'm saying that if Chavez's history ( http://hrw.org/doc/?t=americas&c=venezu ) is any sign, he has interfered. What you've been doing is taking my statements and amplifying them in your head to conclude that I'm some sort of neo-con when in reality I'm just not in love with Hugo Chavez and would like to save the system of Venezula itself.

[K-W]

125. Perhaps you shouldnt have made contradictory statements than.

Either way you are being far far far more skeptical of Chavez than his opposition which is just foolish.

This is latin america, we arent going to have any saints come down from heaven to lead it, we need to accept that for the short term, perfection cant be expected. Not that perfection is even reached in the US.

[not systems]

134. On your source click 1993 and read ...

...

Serious human rights violations also continued to undermine the country's commitment to the rule of law. The past year witnessed arbitrary detentions; torture; extrajudicial executions; the unlawful use of excessive force resulting in physical injury and death; and abhorrent prison conditions. At least fifty-seven inmates were killed during a prison outbreak in November 1992, and numerous abuses were committed during the government's response to a failed military coup attempt that month and the one preceding it in February 1992. The number and nature of these abuses continued to be cause for concern. The government persisted in its traditional failure to curb and redress human rights violations. In addition to the absence of political will, problematic laws and the longstanding critical condition of the courts also contributedto the paucity of cases in which state agents were held accountable for human rights abuses.

...


Exercising his constitutional authority, President Pérez suspended a number of constitutional guarantees on November 27, 1992, including the prohibition of arrest without warrant, the inviolability of the home and freedoms of movement, expression and assembly. Most of these liberties were restored by mid-December, and all were again in place on January 18, 1993. During the unnecessarily prolonged suspension of guarantees, however, government forces detained hundreds of dissidents and others perceived as unsympathetic to the government; not one was charged with participating in the coup attempt. Unnecessary violence characterized some raids. For example, while raiding her house on November 28, police threw acid on the leg of Sonia Díaz, a relative of one of the February coup plotters. Americas Watch is aware of only one judicial proceeding initiated into any of the human rights violations associated with the November 27 coup attempt.

...

These are the forces your advocating should take power.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

119. The NeoCons aren't exactly people that ANYONE wants as friends...

...and by them trying to enforce a regime-change on a country where 80-90% of the country supports their government it becomes painfully obvious that we are just after their oil. Too bad nobody would even remotely believe that they have WMDs...we could just invade like we have in Iraq.

[hellhathnofury]

121. We'll the OAS and Carter Center are going to look at it.

Do you have any proof for those numbers?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

126. Do you have any proof for anything you've stated on this board?

[hellhathnofury]

129. http://hrw.org/doc/?t=americas&c=venezu

The AP wire report is around here.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

136. Two words: Operation Mockingbird...

Operation Mockingbird
<http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_louise_01_03_03_mockingbird.html>

"Starting in the early days of the Cold War (late 40's), the CIA began a secret project called Operation Mockingbird, with the intent of buying influence behind the scenes at major media outlets and putting reporters on the CIA payroll, which has proven to be a stunning ongoing success. The CIA effort to recruit American news organizations and journalists to become spies and disseminators of propaganda, was headed up by Frank Wisner, Allen Dulles, Richard Helms, and Philip Graham (publisher of The Washington Post). Wisner had taken Graham under his wing to direct the program code-named Operation Mockingbird and both have presumably committed suicide.

Media assets will eventually include ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek, Associated Press, United Press International (UPI), Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Copley News Service, etc. and 400 journalists, who have secretly carried out assignments according to documents on file at CIA headquarters, from intelligence-gathering to serving as go-betweens. The CIA had infiltrated the nation's businesses, media, and universities with tens of thousands of on-call operatives by the 1950's. CIA Director Dulles had staffed the CIA almost exclusively with Ivy League graduates, especially from Yale with figures like George Herbert Walker Bush from the "Skull and Crossbones" Society."

[not systems]

137. The opposition are linked to known torturers as per your source.

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1994/WR94/Americas-11.htm#P560_269853


...

Serious human rights violations also continued to undermine the country's commitment to the rule of law. The past year witnessed arbitrary detentions; torture; extrajudicial executions; the unlawful use of excessive force resulting in physical injury and death; and abhorrent prison conditions. At least fifty-seven inmates were killed during a prison outbreak in November 1992, and numerous abuses were committed during the government's response to a failed military coup attempt that month and the one preceding it in February 1992. The number and nature of these abuses continued to be cause for concern. The government persisted in its traditional failure to curb and redress human rights violations. In addition to the absence of political will, problematic laws and the longstanding critical condition of the courts also contributedto the paucity of cases in which state agents were held accountable for human rights abuses.

...


Exercising his constitutional authority, President Pérez suspended a number of constitutional guarantees on November 27, 1992, including the prohibition of arrest without warrant, the inviolability of the home and freedoms of movement, expression and assembly. Most of these liberties were restored by mid-December, and all were again in place on January 18, 1993. During the unnecessarily prolonged suspension of guarantees, however, government forces detained hundreds of dissidents and others perceived as unsympathetic to the government; not one was charged with participating in the coup attempt. Unnecessary violence characterized some raids. For example, while raiding her house on November 28, police threw acid on the leg of Sonia Díaz, a relative of one of the February coup plotters. Americas Watch is aware of only one judicial proceeding initiated into any of the human rights violations associated with the November 27 coup attempt.

...

These are the forces your advocating should take power.

[hellhathnofury]

138. I'm not advocating they take power.

I'm simply saying that the Venezuelan constitution allows for a recall. They've submitted signatures, Chavez rejected them. The international community is going to review it. I don't like either side, but people on this board by and large are leaning towards Chavez and I'm saying , slow down! Chavez is no hero of hte people.

[not systems]

141. Whatever ...

I thought you were saying they have our oil.

That must have been some other guy.

[hellhathnofury]

147. I'm saying that yes Chavez is an oil supplier.

But that alone doesn't warrant action. Chavez is hostile to the Venezuelan constitution and heading towards complete hostility towards us. If he winds this round we are facing a disasterous oil embargo.

[charlie]

140. Of course we're right to be suspicious

Within a half a day of the coup that drove Chavez out, our ambassador visited and recognized the new government. Not a peep regarding the decidedly undemocratic ouster of a country's leader. We welcomed with open arms a guy whose first acts were to disband parliament and the judiciary. When Chavez was restored, his return drew a testy lecture to "respect constitutional processes" from Condi Rice.

Who is the current Assistant Secretary of State for the Western Hemisphere? Otto Reich. If you're not familiar with this odious toad, Google him up. Ex-ambassador to Venezuela. Oliver North flunky. Ran covert ops out of his old state dept office. Indicted in Iran-Contra, pardoned by Poppy. Secured release for Orlando Bosch, convicted terrorist, also pardoned by Poppy, currently living free in Miami. Joshua Marshall reported at the time of the Venezuelean coup that Reich was in possession of remarkably precise details about Chavez's ouster. There's plenty more from his shady past, if you care to look.

[windansea]

169. sorry..your 80-90% figure is way off

[dpibel]

166. Well, jeez. How about the folks we DO make friends with.

Getcher self on over to Human Rights Watch and check out our dear friend an ally Pakistan. Have a look at Uzbekistan. Remember Indonesia. Chile ring any bells?

Your concern for human rights is touching. Too bad you're so selective.

Incidentally: I assume that, in the interest of being logically consistent, if there are countries around the world who could use some of the resources in the US, they have every right to destabilize the government and support a coup so they can get them.

Or is your thinking entirely based on the sound logical principle that it depends on whose ox is being gored?

[hellhathnofury]

172. Your accusing me of being selective in a thread about Venezuela.

Post a thread about Pakistan or Uzbekistan and I'll denounce our relationship there. I repeatedly state in this thread that I oppose coup's, the recall petition is not a coup.

[never cry wolf]

175. Not to mention 9 pages on Israel

http://hrw.org/doc?t=mideast&c=isrlpa

on edit: 44 pages for the good ole us of a http://hrw.org/doc/?t=usa

[PVnRT]

86. So you're for economic imperialism

I suggest you go look up PNAC's web site, I'm sure they'll have plenty of things to say that you'll like.

[hellhathnofury]

90. No I'm for world stability.

That doesn't happen when a little human rights violator like Hugo Chavez seizes 10% of our oil supply.

And for the Chavez defenders above:

Public Statement

AI Index: AMR 53/001/2004 (Public)
News Service No: 036
18 February 2004


Venezuela: President Chávez must recognize and respect legitimate human rights work
Amnesty International said today that President Hugo Chávez must respect the right of non-governmental human rights organizations to carry out their legitimate work, such work is underpinned by international human rights treaties which the Venezuelan Government has willingly pledged to uphold.

"In the current climate in Venezuela, random and unsubstantiated allegations against human rights organizations such as COFAVIC, PROVEA and Red de Apoyo, suggesting that their legitimate human rights activities are intended to fuel political turmoil could expose members of these organizations to serious dangers, including threats and intimidation", added Amnesty International.

Amnesty International said today it was also concerned that President Chávez did not appear to be familiar with the universal principal that all individuals and groups all over the world are free to collaborate and to exchange information and expertise for the purpose of protecting and defending universally recognized human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Amnesty International said it was deeply worried that slurs and attacks against human rights organizations could further destabilize the already difficult situation in Venezuela. Non-governmental human rights organizations have and do play a crucial role in upholding the rule of law in Venezuela. Most recently such organizations contributed to developing the new constitution and legal reforms, they have also defended the rights of the poor and most marginalised sectors of society and attested the break in constitutional order of the attempted coup of 2002.

The Venezuelan President should retract allegations against human rights organizations and recognize the important contribution these organizations have made, over several decades, in seeking to establish a country in which the rights and dignity of individuals from all sectors of society are converted from myth into reality.

http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/engamr530012004

[PVnRT]

92. But

You're arguing that world stability = U.S. controls everything. That's not stability, that is baldfaced imperialism.

Do you really think that human rights would improve in Venezuela or anywhere else with an American-backed right-wing dictator down there?

[hellhathnofury]

98. No, I'm arguing that US interference is sometimes neccessary and

generally for the better. We are a free society, with a strong democratic tradition. Who better to help spread democracy?

No, I'm supporting international involvement by groups such as the OAS and Carter Center. I don't like the US doing it because our track record isn't always great, better the UN. There's a problem in Venezuela, doing nothing is not an option.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

113. One country's definition of the "spreading of democracy"...

...becomes another country's definition of the following assorted words such as "invasion", "colonialism", and "enslavement".

Yes, there's a "problem" in Venezuela, but it's one that our covert forces have created because of oil. Look around the world at the various conflicts/wars in which we are involved and you will find oil, or a connection to oil.

[hellhathnofury]

100. No, I'm arguing that US interference is sometimes neccessary and

generally for the better. We are a free society, with a strong democratic tradition. Who better to help spread democracy?

No, I'm supporting international involvement by groups such as the OAS and Carter Center. I don't like the US doing it because our track record isn't always great, better the UN. There's a problem in Venezuela, doing nothing is not an option.

[hellhathnofury]

101. No, I'm arguing that US interference is sometimes neccessary and

generally for the better. We are a free society, with a strong democratic tradition. Who better to help spread democracy?

No, I'm supporting international involvement by groups such as the OAS and Carter Center. I don't like the US doing it because our track record isn't always great, better the UN. There's a problem in Venezuela, doing nothing is not an option.

[K-W]

104. Now you are changing your story.

You made it pretty clear that you support US domination of the world and interference to protect its percieved economic interests. That is a bit different than just wanting to help spread democracy and support international involvement.

[hellhathnofury]

111. No I didn't, you're distorting my position.

I clearly stated above that the US sometimes does have a right to act in it's direct interest, though in this situation I prefer to see the international community intervene. Chavez is going down the path of dictatorship, there's a constitutional recall. Let's see what happens.

You're just trying to paint me as something I'm not, if I didn't have the post count you'd be yelling freeper because this place is often such a vacum for differing opinions.

[K-W]

114. You have very clearly stated that you support US imperialism.

You stated that the US has a right to interfere in venezuala in order to protect its economic interests.

Everyone thinks tht the US sometiems has a right to act in its interests. All nations are allowed to do that within the bounds of international law. YOu have suggested that we have a right to act outside international law.

Are now saying that you mispoke then and you do not actually believe that?

[hellhathnofury]

123. I think this one of those cases where we do have to involve ourselves,

preferably through the international community as I always advocate. I think having the world moniter the recall process would be within international law. If Chavez makes the complete nationalization move and then embargo's us I think we would be justified in acting with either sanctions or other appropiate actions (not coup!).

[Media_Lies_Daily]

130. Hmmmm. Then how does this linked post square with your current...

...comments about using the "international community" as you "always advocate"?

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1202803&mesg_id=1204084&page=>

[hellhathnofury]

149. I've been silenced. How very Chavez of you.

I don't have a record of it. Looks like I won my appeal.

The US does have a right to act unilatterally when it is attacked, attack is imminent or when the international community is ignoring a grave violation of human rights or democracy. The international community has not ignored this as was made very clear above.

[K-W]

131. They have the right to govern themselves.

But even if he does, its his right. We have no right to use any method of removing him. If he nationalizes the oil, good for him. He has every right to. Its their oil, not ours. Until there is a shred of evidence of major problems in thier system no US or international involvement is justified. The international community is the arbiter of that, not the US. We need to worry about our own business and plan for the possibility that we may not be able to exploit venezualan oil forever and adjust our country, not someone elses country.

[Vladimir]

139. We are a free society, with a strong democratic tradition.

Who better to help spread democracy?

AKA the 21st Century White Man's Burden. At least you are honest about the motives, always ones own national self interest.

V

[hellhathnofury]

143. Thank you for the insult.

So the US shouldn't play a leadership role in the world? We don't know anything about democratic government and everything we do in the world is wrong.

[Vladimir]

146. The parallel is clear whether you like it or not

Those propagating the white man's burden would have been similarly offended to be told that they couldn't educate the savages. And in fact England at the time was more democratic than a lot of societies it invaded. But these days hardly anyone defends colonialism, because we all recognise the price that was paid by the natives for being enlightened.

And of course not everything the US does is wrong. But its record in the third world isn't exactly enviable, and in this case its gonna be the Venezuelans living in poverty and without food who will have to suffer the consequences of a more pro US government.

V

[hellhathnofury]

151. Our record is better than mosts. I think a UN mission is a good path.

Foreign Policy
“Americans deserve a principled diplomacy...backed by undoubted military might...based on enlightened self-interest, not the zero-sum logic of power politics...a diplomacy that commits America to lead the world toward liberty and prosperity. A bold progressive internationalism that focuses not just on the immediate and imminent, but insidious dangers that can mount over the next years and decade, dangers that span the spectrum from the denial of democracy, to destructive weapons, endemic poverty and epidemic disease. These are not just issues of international order, but vital issues of our own national security.”

-John Kerry

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/foreignpolicy /

He doesn't seem that far from me. Chavez is certainly a danger.

[Vladimir]

152. I never said I liked Kerry

I have always mantained that he is better than Bush, and that is all the matters for the moment.

Chavez is a danger insofar he might, just might, show people willing to look that Socialism can work. As Castro has been doing, under unbelievable circumstances, for the last 50 years. I agree that would be dangerous for the status quo.

V

[hellhathnofury]

153. I think that quote proves that I'm not....

a FLAMING NEOCON AS SEVERAL IN THIS THREAD HAVE ALLEGED! (not directed at you)

I'm not Castro fan either as far as human rights and freedom goes and in general I don't support open socialism, democratic socialism in the Swedish model works well. But Castro isn't doing that type and that's not what Chavez is leaning towards either.

[Vladimir]

156. No indeed

Its just that as a Socialist (and not in the Swedish sense), I disagree with you violently. But that's life.

Not many countries are in Sweden's position to be able to run what is effectively Liberal Socialism. When judging Cuba/Venezuela one should always compare them to their own region, not Europe. I think they win that one hands down.

V

[hellhathnofury]

158. Settled.

[charlie]

154. Our record in Central and South America sucks

And that the characters who ran the secret and bloody programs of the Reagan years -- Abrams, Reich, Negroponte, Armitrage -- are installed in the current administration should give you pause.

And the title of this thread sucks. It's baiting, akin to "Saddam supporters, why do you oppose the war?"

[hellhathnofury]

157. It does, but there's no one else....

and that's why I favor international action right now.

I didn't title the thread, I agree with you though that it is baiting.

[not systems]

97. "10% of our oil supply."

Your sense of entitlement blinds you.

Stability with every thing and person in their natural order, right?

[hellhathnofury]

145. See the problem is that:

Foreign Policy
“Americans deserve a principled diplomacy...backed by undoubted military might...based on enlightened self-interest, not the zero-sum logic of power politics...a diplomacy that commits America to lead the world toward liberty and prosperity. A bold progressive internationalism that focuses not just on the immediate and imminent, but insidious dangers that can mount over the next years and decade, dangers that span the spectrum from the denial of democracy, to destructive weapons, endemic poverty and epidemic disease. These are not just issues of international order, but vital issues of our own national security.”

-John Kerry

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/foreignpolicy/

That's pretty much what I'm saying if you actually read the course of the argument. Chavez and the opposition are both unsavory. A recall is allowed by the Venezuelan constitution, Chavez has an immense self-interest in thwarting it, let the OAS and Carter Center review it, and administer it if it passes muster.

[not systems]

155. I agree if they have the signatures let the recall vote...

take place if they don't then no recall vote.

If the oligarchy loses the recall then they can get used to
living in a democratic society where the votes of the darker
skinned people count as much as their own votes.

I agree with Kerry's statement and believe the knee-jerk
anti-populism against Chavez is largely because of a racist
belief that people of European decent should rule a population
of largely native American origin by natural right.

[hellhathnofury]

159. Kinda funny, how the disagreement is mostly semantic and knee jerk

reactions by everyone, including me, in this thread. I think it's false to conclude though that all of the opposition to Chavez is racist or oligarchical.

[not systems]

162. Notice anything about these these photos?

Have you seen the movie "The revolution will not be televised" ?

I suggest you do it shows the 2001 coup and gives alot of insight
into the divides in that society.

Race appears to be a big one the coup-plotters are very very pale
compared to the average citizen of that country.

I don't think that gives Chavez a blank check but I do think
oligarchy describes the political history correctly.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=oligarchy&r=67

1. Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families.

[hellhathnofury]

164. I'm sure I can photos proving the opposite.

I acknowledge that it is a factor but it's far from the defining issue.

I have not seen the movie.

[bicentennial_baby]

115. Whose oil supply?

Unfuckingbelievable! Imperialistic entitlement much? :puke:

[hellhathnofury]

144. So your ready for rationing?

Thank you for the insult.

I apologize for recognizing the fact that our economy is largely dependent on oil.

[ret5hd]

148. what do you propose when (note:not if) he is re-elected...

and then continues on that "evil path to communism"?

Maybe some here are adherants to Kissingers policy of "we can't allow a perfectly good country to go communist because of the stupidity of it's people".

If anything, we should be helping to convince the venezuelan oligarchy to accept the will of the people.

[hellhathnofury]

150. If he defeats the recall by legal mean's that's fine with me.

If he then embargo's us I fully expect us to counter that with appropriate measures (not coup!).

But what's absurd on here is the clear revision of history concerning communism. It's not a good thing and is never executed in the ideal. Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro..all very wonderful people.

[dpibel]

167. Would you be at all willing

Edited to add last two paragraphs.

To state the source of your profound fear that Chavez is going to embargo the poor, helpless, needy USofA?

There's a difference between trying to make the distribution of a country's natural wealth a bit fairer, and cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Why would Chavez embargo his most avid, most profitable customer?

And why would the price of US gas give the US the right to intervene in another country's government?

Oh, yeah. Because we need that oil. And the needs of American drivers easily trump the needs of poor Venezualans.

What was I thinking?

Please don't say, "He'll embargo the US because he's an evil, totalitarian commie, and they all do that." If that were so, why is it that China hasn't embargoed the US.

You are aware, aren't you, that the absence of trade with Cuba is not a matter of the evil totalitarian punishing the poor, needy US?

[hellhathnofury]

173. Redistribution is okay but by legal means, that does not include...

an overthrowing of the Venezuelan constitution and nationalization of industry. I'm sorry believing property rights.

Chavez will have no choice if the recall is certified and he objects. The US will have to take some action and Chavez's only leverage will be an oil embargo.

"Oh, yeah. Because we need that oil. And the needs of American drivers easily trump the needs of poor Venezualans."

That's disgenous. Are you willing to give up your job? Take a pay cut, lose your healthcare? Our economy is a factor in this discussion because we are so dependent on Venezuelan oil. There has already been destabilization and it has affected US markets. I can dig up links if you need them.

We can all hurl insults, I suggest you stop.

[dpibel]

181. Do you really not get it?

As a first matter, please point me to the insults I've been hurling. Accurately recasting a person's statements does not, to my mind, constitute hurling insults.

Pray tell: What is the nature of Chavez' threatened nationalization. I honestly don't know. Is it nationalization without restitution?

I realize that we're trained in this country to think otherwise, but it's not a given that natural resources should benefit only the wealthy of a nation. I realize that this country has a long history of turning over its natural resources to private industry (think $50/acre mining claims; think every other section of land along the railroad), but that doesn't make it the natural or best thing to do.

And, I'm terribly sorry, but saying "Are you willing to give up your job? Take a pay cut, lose your healthcare?" is just another recasting of the same statement: My personal interests trump those of an impoverished Venezualan.

As another poster points out, the oil market is global. Chavez can't cripple the US with an embargo. And, frankly, even if the US took a 10% cut in its oil supply, that would mainly mean a rise in the price at the pump. To tell you the truth, I would take a paycut; I might or might not lose my healthcare, to the extent that I have any, since I pay for it myself. The truth is, I don't believe that my comfort and (on a global scale) luxurious lifestyle are paramount over the needs of citizens of another country.

I'm sorry you don't seem to believe or understand that.

[never cry wolf]

176. It's a WORLD oil supply

If Chavez nationalizes it and decides he doesn't want to sell to the country that tried to oust him twice, they will still produce oil. They will sell it on the open market to China or europe or somewhere else and the oil those places would have purchased elsewhere will be sold to the US. Shipping costs may rise a bit due to distance but we will not have less oil. The market is global in nature.

[hellhathnofury]

177. Maybe. But it will still be a direct economic assault on the US.

If he does that, I would imagine that the US will push for a global embargo on Chavez. I doubt China will comply.

[TankLV]

179. What the Bush administration does IS always inherently wrong.

That's a fact.

That's why we're fighting to get democracy restored in the USA.

[bemildred]

58. Perhaps if you were more specific you would not be part of the problem? nt