Reply #54: Perhaps you haven't been paying attention [View All]

The narco-terrorists in Venezuela have ties with the anti-Chavez people who were behind the US backed coup. So that would lead one to believe that Chavez is actually fighting against the narco terrorists. You have simply bought into the US media spin, where black is white, and totalitarianism is democracy. Perhaps you need to do a little more research before expounding on a situation that you know little about. <http://www.narconews.com/threedays.html>

And the reason that Chavez is trying to torpedo the referendum is for two reasons. One, this is a constitutional ploy led by those same anti-Chavez forces that pulled off a three day coup two years ago. Why should he coddle such anti democratic forces? Secondly is that time and again, Chavez and the people of Venezuela have proven that the overwhelming majority of the population is solidly behind Chavez. Why should this government waste time and more importantly money on a referendum that is pointless. Chavez would be opening himself and his country up to massive voter fraud.

It is also interesting to note, from my above link, that many of those "narco terrorists" are actually US backed mercanaries and counter terrorists from over the border in Colombia, were they have been keeping that country in turmoil for years and decades now. Now isn't that interesting.

And no, constructive criticism of Chavez doesn't make Kerry anti-Chavez. However I hardly see how describing Chavez's policies as "detrimental to our interests" is constructive. This isn't the US that Chavez is in charge of, it is Venezuela and he has to look out for the best interests of his people. When Kerry is accusing Chavez of undermining democracy, even though it was the US who backed the anti-democratic coup, well I would have to say that Kerry, at the behest of his corporate masters, is anti-Chavez.

But hey Sang, keep on buying that propaganda. It make life so much easier to live when the world is spoon-fed to you, rather than actually having to dig into the facts and history of a situation.