Venezuelans prepare for invasion

VENEZUELAN military officers have started classes in unconventional warfare to repel an invasion left-wing President Hugo Chavez warns Washington is planning.

Snipers draped in foliage and civilian reservists armed with knives, catapults and handguns crawled out of a hidden tunnel in a mock demonstration as an instructor lectured officers on resistance tactics.

Venezuelan officers have also been sent to Havana to learn civilian-military cooperation from the Cubans as part of the training, said National Guard Gen. Juan Alberto Hernandez.

In April he drilled more than 20,000 civilian reservists he said were key to defending his "Bolivarian" revolution, named after South American liberation hero Simon Bolivar, and to helping with his social programs for the poor.

Link

Can't you just see Tony Blankley in fatigues with an M-16?

Just plant a naval fleet off their coast and bombard Caracas with cruise missiles. We can ask our friends in Colombia to offer us airbases so we can bring in the Airforce and bomb them some more with land-based warplanes.

is my guess. The Columbians are firmly in BabyBush's pocket.

He's got the cojones to stand up and call this Bush cabal a bunch of thieves and liars.

I wonder what arguements the Bush** media-blitz-of-lies will make to average joe six pack republican to justify dealing with the Argentine threat? Wonder what that will sound like?

South America doesn't have to worry about US intervention now that "A-rabs" and "towel heads" are keeping the CIA boys busy. All over that continent they are embracing democracy.

Dumb idea Chavez. People there are in all kinds of financial hardship and you spend money on teaching your soilders how to use a catapolt? Even if US forces did invade, Chavez forces wouldn't stand a chance. So why spend the money????

I hate military spending as much as you, but I also believe in reality, and the reality is that Venezuela is a top target on Bush's list and it needs to be able to defend itself against attack!

Whipping up hysteria and fear to control the masses. But at least Bush actually had something real to point to: 9/11.

The Bush administration supported it, but where's the evidence they were behind it?

http://www.socialconscience.com/articles/2002/chavez.htm

I don't know about you, but if I were Chavez, I would be planning a defense against somebody that supported my overthrow as well. It's just prudence.

Except what we already know: Bush supports and wines-and-dines the people who want to overthrow Chavez, and that Chavez keeps saying the U.S. is about to invade Venezuela.

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

...gets tied back to Wayne Madsen at one point or another. Never the hallmark of a properly researched story.

Irish documentary

<http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/03/05/1543207>

Main article: The Revolution Will Not Be Televised (documentary)

A television crew from Ireland (Radio Telefís Éireann) which happened to be recording a documentary about Chávez at the time recorded images of the events that contradicted explanations given by anti-Chávez campaigners, the opposition-controlled private media, the United States Department of State, and then White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer. The documentary features footage shot after the short coup that was based largely in the presidential palace with members of both rival governments and their supporters.

The film has won awards at many of the film festival screenings where it was shown. It has been widely debated among both supporters and critics of the Venezuelan government.

The film has been accused by the opposition of omitting and misrepresenting important events, and it is claimed that it has been widely used by the Venezuelan government for propaganda purposes. A summary of additional such alleged omissions and distortions has been compiled by an opposition website.<9>

Supporters of the Chávez administration and of the film claim that there has been intimidation by anti-Chávez groups and attempts to have the documentary quashed. They argue the events are in fact correctly portrayed in the documentary. <10>. Further it is claimed that Gustavo Cisneros was involved with the coup and behind attempts to quash the film.

ago, although it's sensible to recognize a lot of this dirty work was covert, of COURSE, like Nixon's destabilization of Chile prior to that filthy military takeover and placement of Pinochet in the President's office. Most DU'ers who have been interested in Venezuela have done at least the minimum amount of trying to inform themselves.

Expecting them to concentrate months, if not years of reading and offering it to you in a few easy to read paragraphs might be asking just a little too much. You're going to have to take a bit of initiative and do a lot of the work yourself, in order to have any grasp of the subject.

Here's a quick look:

U.S. Works Closely With Coup Leaders

President George W. Bush’s administration says it never backed a coup in Venezuela, but senior U.S. officials met several times with leading opponents of President Hugo Chávez Frías and agreed he should be removed. A former Navy official says the United States provided logistical support for the ouster. And, once the military had overthrown Chávez late April 11, the Bush administration tried to build support for the new regime.

Wayne Madsen, a former U.S. Navy intelligence analyst, told the British Guardian that U.S. military attachés had been in touch with Venezuelan military officers last year to examine the possibility of a coup. “I first heard of Lt. Col. James Rogers going down there last June to set the ground,” Madsen said, referring to the assistant military attaché now based at the U.S. Embassy in Caracas. “Some of our counternarcotics agents were also involved.”

In November, an eight-member delegation of Venezuelan business leaders traveled to Washington and met with John Maisto, U.S. national security adviser for Latin America, Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and Otto J. Reich, assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs. The delegation was led by Pedro Carmona Estanga, head of Venezuela’s main business federation, who was installed as Chávez’s replacement.
The Pentagon has confirmed that Gen. Lucas Rincón Romero, chief of the Venezuelan armed forces, met December 18 with Rogelio Pardo-Maurer, U.S. deputy defense secretary for Western Hemisphere affairs, who served during the 1980s as chief of staff to the U.S. representative of rightwing Nicaraguan rebels known as contras. On April 11, before Chávez was removed, Rincón refused an order to send tanks to protect the presidential palace. A few hours later, he announced Chávez’s “resignation.”

Military officers who won top posts in Carmona’s regime discussed Chávez’s ouster with U.S. officials. Rear Adm. Carlos Molina Tamayo said he met with a U.S. official outside the U.S. Embassy less than six weeks before the coup, according to the Washington Post. Molina led officers who publicly demanded Chávez’s removal in February. A U.S. diplomat said Molina and another officer each received $100,000 from a Miami bank account for denouncing Chávez, the Post reported.

Chávez foes visiting the U.S. Embassy during the weeks before the coup included media leaders, politicians and military officers. The New York Times quoted an unnamed Defense Department official involved in developing policy toward Venezuela: “We were not discouraging people. We were sending informal, subtle signals that we don’t like this guy. We didn’t say, ‘No, don’t you dare,’ and we weren’t advocates saying, ‘Here’s some arms; we’ll help you overthrow this guy.’ We were not doing that.”

A week before the coup, the Financial Times received e-mail purportedly forwarded from a U.S. official employed at the Pentagon who had lunched with a senior Venezuelan military officer. The e-mail detailed how protests were expected to lead to Chávez’s “constitutional” exit: A strike at Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), the state oil company, was expected to cause gasoline shortages, in turn generating chaos, calls for Chávez’s resignation, anti-Chávez votes in the National Assembly and Supreme Court, and finally military pressure for Chávez to resign.

The U.S. government backed its words with dollars. The National Endowment for Democracy, a nonprofit agency created and financed by Congress, quadrupled its budget for Venezuela to more than $877,000 in the year before the coup. Some of the money went through the AFL-CIO to the Venezuelan Workers Confederation (CTV), which called for Chávez’s removal and helped organize work stoppages leading up to the coup. Another portion went to the Caracas office of the International Republican Institute, an arm of Bush’s party. In an April 12 statement, institute President George A. Folsom hailed the coup: “The Venezuelan people rose up to defend democracy in their country.” The NED gained notoriety in the 1980s, when the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush used it to interfere with elections in Chile and Nicaragua.

To support the Venezuelan coup, U.S. Navy vessels in the Caribbean helped with signals intelligence and communications jamming, according to Madsen, the former Navy analyst.
(snip/...)

http://www.americas.org/item_227

That is very interesting and helpfull.

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

:eyes:

which never happened of course, a mythical tale of an invasion of Cuba by fanatical upper class exiles into a marshy region of the island populated by people who had been treated like dogs by the landlords of that area in pre-revolution times, who were returning to restore such people back to living like dogs, legend says that didn't work out so well for "us"
excellent CIA planning, that invasion

yet venezuelans are a very poor people.....how do you explain that? iran was a rich country, yet iranians revolted in part cuz of rampant poverty....the same with mexico, and of course nigeria!...even canada, with all its riches, cannot afford to keep up its health care system, or defend what 100 percent of its people consider vital, how do you explain these discrepencies between facts and the corporate pigshit we get fed as 'state of the union' news etc?
fyi 'left wing' means the needs of the many are of first importance, while 'rightwing' means the privileges of the few come first, yet you seriously compare a 'leftwing bush' to the rightwing sample that has cost americans untold billions?

and really let the PNAC agenda shift into high gear and how they really flew a 757 into the Pentagon and created a little hole in the wall with no visible wreckage.


Really!

Pat (dines at the White House every week) Robertson called for the assassination of this democratically elected president? Are you forgetting Rice's threats, Bush's threats, the CIA's false categorization of Venezuela as the "most unstable" country in the region, and the universal slandering of Chavez in the U.S. war profiteering corporate news monopolies? Are you forgetting the history of the Bushites in Latin America? Are you forgetting what we have done to Iraq for their oil--and that Venezuela provides 15% of our current oil supply? Are you forgetting that the Bush junta supported a violent coup attempt against Chavez, and then started pouring money (our taxpayer dollars) into his political opposition to fund a recall election against him, among other things (--a recall that he easily won, in a highly monitored vote)? Do you know that foreign money in political campaigns in illegal in Venezuela, and that there is a trial in the courts about it that is coming to a head--that will likely reveal more Bush junta dirty dealings in Venezuela and South America?

I'd say training the civilian population in resistance, and preparing the Venezuelan military as well, are wisdom, not hysteria. But perhaps you spoke in jest.

Chavez has no need to "control the masses." They are on his side--which they have repeatedly demonstrated in transparent elections over the last half decade (not to mention the tens of thousands of Venezuelans who went into the streets and surrounded the presidential palace, during the US-backed coup, to help end that coup attempt). The lives of the vast poor population of Venezuela have been improved in innumerable ways under Chavez's government--poor communities now have schools, medical clinics and community centers, all over the country, where there never have been any such services for the poor before; small businesses and coops are receiving startup grants and loans; the very poor receive subsidized food; small agriculture is being encouraged, for food self-sufficiency and economic diversity; indigenous land rights have been written into the Constitution--a Constitution to which the vast majority of Venezuelans are devoted (they hand out small pocket versions of it to everyone). The great majority has never had any rights, never had any representation, has never had anything but exploitation, corruption and contempt from the tiny rich minority. They now have REPRESENTATIVE government, and a leader who is beholden to all of the people--a socialist and Bolivarian (Latin unity) who supports and believes in a mixed economy, and in fairness and justice.

I would imagine that this example of what TRANSPARENT elections create--good government--poses a serious threat to the sultans of the Bush White House, even apart from Venezuela's oil. They would smash it like a bug if they could. Fortunately, the leftist revolution in South America is huge and deeply rooted, involving Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, Chile, Venezuela and Bolivia, virtually the entire map of the subcontinent. Peru will likely be next--and this peaceful, democratic revolution is moving north. The leftist mayor of Mexico City will likely be elected president this year--and I just noticed that Daniel Ortega (the revolutionary leader of the 1980s) may be running for president in Nicaragua. In truth, it is a revolution that cannot be "invaded" or "assassinated." It is too widespread, and too deep and genuine. But that doesn't mean that the Bush junta won't try. It HAS tried--and may try again.

Regimes like the one in Columbia are becoming very isolated. The pro-US oligarchies and juntas are now the ones who stand alone. I think it's very likely that regional security is being discussed among the others--the many leftist governments--along with their new economic and political alliances (among themselves and abroad). It is very, very changed situation from the easy US toppling of governments, and installation of dictators, in previous decades. Chile, for instance, just elected its first woman president, socialist Michele Batchelet, who was tortured by the US-backed dictator Pinochet, and lost her family to that junta. I don't think her government would sit by idly if the US bombed a fellow socialist democratic South American country--nor would the others.

www.venezuelanalysis.com is a good place to gain some understanding of the Bolivarian Revolution, and events in South America.

in the U.S.

We were attacked on 9/11, which some say we deserved, and we have many who hate us vowing to kill us (again, all our own fault it seems).

So what do we do? Homeland security, threat levels, duct tape, prepare people for the worst - which is called fear mongering when we do it. But when chavez does it? It is all well and good and makes perfect sense.

Fear sells no matter the political stripes. Should they be afraid and preparing? Well from what I have seen here by many DU'ers I consider fairly well informed indeed they should - won't hurt at any rate eh?

But then why shouldn't we do the same here and it be ok?

And why isn't Chavez and crew trying to make me love them more? After all, the perception I have of them is poor from our media and religious right, so my hatred is justified by the wrong doings I percieve being done to us. But then, one could say the same in some muslim countries where people are whipped into fear by leaders, religious and political, and their msm - against us.

And the band played on while the leaders worked on getting us to fear and hate one another's citizens - whereas it seems to be the leaders that cause all the issues.

Chavez may well be a swell guy that many here would elect president of US, I dunno. But the similarities, even when not to scale, are what I am thinking some are pointing out here. Why are the same things legit when someone else feels them or does them but not when it is done here (well, except the port deal - which brought out the terrorist fearing in all of us - even though many may think it was mihop and had nothing to do with muslims, et al).

I dunno, just seems confusing sometimes.

but yeah, I think it is always a good idea to train your citizens to defend themselves from agressors. And bush sucks. But in the end my friend I don't bush is the problem - I think it is people well behind the scenes pulling the strings and he is but one of many puppets. And a dumb one at that :)

There's no comparison, even if your postulate about "manipulation" is true. Venezuela does not ring the world with military bases and missiles, and does not portend to know the divine path for all other countries.

Bush is not like Chavez at all, unfortunately.

The people restored him to power. He doesn't want another coup.

PB

than we EVER had w/Iraq

anarchy. Look what we did to Haiti. How many died?

If it's good for the US, then why isn't it good for Venezuela? As far as I can tell, both countries are being led by megalomaniacal leaders...though one actually has a brain.

JB

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

1 - There has been a coup attempt there, that the U.S. supported.
2 - The U.S. has implied strongly on numerous occasions that his regime needs to be "changed".
3 - The U.S. has used military force to cause "regime change" in at least two other countries within the past 4 years.
4 - Venezuela has oil, and lots of it, just like Iraq.

Given those factors, fear of a U.S. military invasion is not paranoia, but a reasonable assessment of a possible future.

On edit:
5 - The U.S. has a history of military intervention and subversion in South and Central American that stretches back more than a century and includes nearly every country in the region.

is very dangerous to this country with all this give to the people and take from the corporations..you know one of those lefties...he may turn out to be a dictator but for now he is great..power does corrupt.

he's threatening to change the constitution again to allow him to serve another term! unheard of!

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1901

hasn't interfered in So.American coups. Usual CIA led, Chile, Grenada (Ronnys War), Venezuela, Panama, Honduras....on and on

he knows we're after his country;s resources... WE know it... AND we've tried to overthrow him once already... compared him to Hitler... demanded 'regime change' and called a democratically-elected president a "leftist strongman"

Chavez's actions seem moronic to you because you are missing the big picture. His actions are 100% sane

:shrug:

if I were him I'd be doing the same damned thing

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

no paranoia whatsoever.

He can accomplish much more if people take him seriously, and this kind of stunt will not help get people to take him seriously.

Redstone

so the people get a leftist despot maybe, who uses idealism to justify taxing foreign corporations...but if you're wrong and Mr Chavez is right, then what? How many millions suffer? How many activists get murdered? How much does the oligarchs shut out defiant media? How many generations suffer before another Chevez comes along to get Venezuela back to where it is now?

Venezuelans take him seriously enough. And I think the Bush bastards do too, which is why his preparations should be enough to give them pause.

There isn't one country that hasn't been a victim of American aggression. The only delusional people are those in this country that see our nation as a benign power operating under Divine guidance.

corruption, war, violence, and poverty.

none the less, I love latin america.

blowing yourself up on the launchpad.

Is parnoid big time. The US couldn't invade the Bahamas now if they wanted to. Chavez's new army will probally unseat his ass from power in a few years. A rocket scientist Chavez aint!

Learn from the best in the world's premier school for "terrorists".

:nuke:

it makes sense as to why Chavez is preparing.

Pat Robertson was right!

standard phrases and editorial tactics to mischaracterize and slander Chavez as are used by the US war profiteering corporate news monopolies. I don't know who owns this paper, but that's where I would look for the cause behind these phrases and colorations, and their playing up what is actually quite normal government behavior--even a duty of government--to see to their national security.

Here are some examples of the coloration...

"Critics worry about the reservists may be used to crackdown on foes of a president they say has become more authoritarian in a drive to copy Cuban communism."

This is quite standard NYT & Co. practice against Chavez. These "critics" are never named, and have been making unattributed, baseless accusations against Chavez all along--for instance, that he is "becoming dictatorial." No evidence whatsoever is offered, no name, no quote. And in fact there is ZERO evidence that Chavez is, or is becoming, dictatorial. "Critics worry...".

-------

The fascist Catholic Cardinal Castillo Lara--who spent his career in Vatican banking (during the height of the scandals, and was forced to resign)--has been quoted as saying this about Chavez--that he is "becoming a dictator." That's possibly the source of "critics worry." What a source! It is a complete lie--from a Cardinal who is so extremist rightwing that the Vatican has tried to distance itself from him. The phrase also has a Rovian "talking point" quality to it--it shows up often in the corporate news monopoly press, and has never been attributed to anyone, that I know of (and I read a lot about this subject). I wouldn't be surprised to find out that it was generated by some rightwing PR/'think tank' in a "talking point" fax to all anti-Chavez parties (--and could even be from Rove himself!).

-------

"...tensions are high as U.S. officials portray Mr Chavez, a self-styled socialist revolutionary allied with Cuba, as a negative influence in Latin America. Washington has opposed Venezuela's recent arms purchases and the reservist drive."

Notice the syntax. The article writer is ASSERTING that Chavez is a "self-styled socialist revolutionary." This is NOT part of the phrases saying what U.S. officials portray him as. It is a statement of the reporter. "...Chavez, a self-styled socialist revolutionary...". Chavez is the twice-elected (by big majorities) president of the country--elected in highly monitored votes (by the OAS, by EU election monitoring groups and the Carter Center). His government is an expression of the clear will of the vast majority of Venezuelans. He is not a "self-styled" anything. He is the legitimate representative of the Venezuelan people--thousands of whom are directly involved in the government, and millions of whom are indirectly involved or supportive. It is inaccurate--not to mention insulting--to call him a "self-styled" revolutionary. The NYT & Co. phrase is more often "self-styled leftist"--used in exactly the same way, to demean Chavez, his democratic government, and the people of Venezuela who elected that government.

-------


"(Chavez) has stepped up threats to cut off U.S. oil shipments."

He has not "stepped up threats." He said it once, and he said he would do it IF the US invaded Venezuela or tried to topple its government again.

-------

"Since surviving a 2002 coup, he has often accused U.S. officials of trying to topple him."

This is stated WITHOUT MENTIONING that the Bush junta publicly welcomed the coup--the overthrow of a democratic government--and that those who perpetrated it were allied with the rich oil elite, to whom the Bush junta has provided financial support for a crippling strike of oil professionals and the later attempted recall election. There was a murder by car bomb of one of the people investigating that financial support--and a current trial of people who broke Venezuelan law by accepting foreign donations to fund the recall. Further, the Bush junta has a STATED OBJECTIVE of toppling Chavez. The article makes Chavez's statements seem paranoid--because they are not put into a factual context. That's what the war profiteering corporate news monopolies want you to believe--that Chavez is paranoid, and the Bushites are innocent.


-----

And just listen to this litany of "communist," former "communist," and/or anti-Bush governments the article recites in connection with Venezuela, without ever mentioning any other Venezuelan alliances or diplomatic contacts or business deals (for instance, with Chevron!): (**emphasis added...)

"Instructors made comparisons to **Viet Cong guerrilla attacks on U.S troops**, including the use of secret tunnels, poisons and home-made weapons."

"Venezuelan officers have also been **sent to Havana** to learn civilian-military cooperation from the Cubans as part of the training, said National Guard Gen. Juan Alberto Hernandez.

"An ex paratrooper first elected in 1998, Mr Chavez has steadily cut U.S. military ties as he **strengthens relations with Russia, Iran and Cuba.** He has suspended U.S. anti-drug cooperation and ended most U.S. training programs."

None of this is untrue (as far as I know), but the emphasis is outrageously colored toward hostility to the U.S. (or rather to the Bush junta), and furthermore, fails to place this recitation in any context--for instance, a context of Venezuelan self-determination. Like all other legitimate governments, Venezuela has a SOVEREIGN RIGHT to create its own alliances for its own reasons. European countries have ties to Iran, for instance. So does China. So what? Venezuela is an oil producing nation and a member of OPEC. They would be crazy NOT to have diplomatic ties, and pending deals, with Iran and other oil producing and oil consuming nations (Cuba, for instance). In fact, in exchange for oil, Cuba is supplying free doctors and medical training to Venezuela--whose oil elite had so neglected the education of the poor--the great majority--that they had insufficient doctors, nurses and medical training available in the country.

You never hear about THAT in these kind of articles! --that Chavez made a GREAT deal with Cuba, for the beneift of Venezuelans--oil for doctors!

As for the Viet Cong, they defeated the mighty U.S.--in straw hats and sandals, and living in tunnels for ten years. What better example is there of resistance to the slaughterous bullying of a super-power, which killed upwards of two million Vietnamese and Southeast Asians, with all the horror of modern weaponry, and still couldn't defeat them?

And why IS this a story at all? Because the corporate news monopoly sent a reporter to find something scary they could say about brown people owning a big oil supply, that's my guess. And the Venezuelan government so UN-DICTATORIAL that they let this reporter freely wander around, watching defense training, hearing detailed descriptions of defense tactics and abilities, and talking to the participants. Some dictatorship!

Seeing through the clouds of propaganda can be rather difficult at times. Fortunately, we who frequent DU can depend on you and certain other posters to provide good sources of information. Even on this board one finds the deliberate attempts to distort and misinform as evidenced by certain posts on this very thread. I simply cannot understand why a seemingly intelligent and well read individual would put so much effort into deceiving others. Perhaps there is an idealogical ax to grind.

As for the Australian rag you referenced in your post, I would not be surprised to learn it is owned by Ruppert Murdoch's News Corp.

Anyway, thank you for your service in the cause for truth. I don't know what motivates you, but your efforts are much appreciated.

It does have a good sports page. :eyes:

Pull your heads out of the sand and study history,for pete's sake, the U.S. history in South America is STUFFED with examples of imperialism, murder coups and market manipulation.

Sheesh, doesn't history, true history, teach us ANYTHING?

I'd say he's taking a very prudent course of action given the belligerent nature of the rogue nation to his north.

the US isn't going to invade Venezuela. Chavez is delusional. A few airforce jets could effectively cut off Chavez's oil supply and therefore revenue. 20,000 Russian rifles aren't going to stop that.

but that isn't going to happen either.

If anything that is why an attack is far less likely than invasion.

It is actually of extreme importance that this occurs.

Chavez could cut off the oil right now. The US could respond by bombing the production capacity so he can't sell to other countries.

an invasion and occupation is certainly not going to happen. I believe it is very far fetched.

military occupation in far-flung regions ain't what it used to be- even for the most super of powers.

Where is the line between realistic self defense and furthering Nationalism to fuel ones personal gains?

you mean those of Bush and the Gang?

WTF! Yeah ... right ... especially with all the saber rattling from the Bush Administration.

1.Okay ... US is responsible for creating the impetus for regime change in Iran in the 50's and Iraq in the 60's.

2. US explore ways to assassinate Castro in the early 60's. One bizarre plans by the CIA sounds eerily like an inside job on the degree of 911.

3. The US involves itself in Vietnam during the 60's, not realizing or caring that Vietnam's struggle was one of nationalism.

4. The US helps the rise of the dictator Pinochet in Chile during the early 70's.

5. US invade Panama.

6. Current Bush Administration invades Iraq, against the will of the major part of the global community.

7. US says it will not take any actions off the table in dealing with Iran.

8. Strong evidence that the Bush Administration was involved with the coup attempt to overthrow Chavez.

9. The Bush Administration, with the help of France, overthrows Haiti government.

10. Condi Rice is now speaking out that Venezuela in a major threat to the region. Sound familiar?

Yeah ... it seems Chavez has learned a few examples from history, especially since the US provides and is replete with evidence of its actions. A hegemony in decline, or as Roger Water says in a song: "the toothless get ruthless."

I suggest everyone read this book for a closer look at American policy making in the global community.

Confession of an Economic Hit Man

(copy)

Official DU Hugo Chavez Right-Wing Falsehood Debunking Thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=311462
Edited on Fri Feb-03-06 10:37 AM by JohnnyCougar

Holy balls. I haven't been on here much lately, but I am shocked at the right-wing extremist propaganda floating around here about Hugo Chavez. DU is usually my safe-haven from this sort of propaganda, but to see Chavez baselessly trashed on here by so many has made me feel compelled to post this. I will try and identify the top falsehoods repeated about Chavez, and give some appropriate context to them that lay these "tyrant" and "oppressor" claims to rest. And the fact that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are being cited against Chavez irritates me on two levels. Firstly, these organizations put out reports on every country, and are almost wholly negative. Amnesty International's profile on France is about as long as the one about Venezuela. But I highly doubt France is considered a tyranny by anyone. Secondly, the reports ignore the context of the situation happening in Venezuela.

First of all, there are a few articles I suggest people read to get an understanding of Chavez's peaceful revolution in what once was a corrupt and oppressive state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20050411/parenti
http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/26/01/feature3.shtml

Secondly, if you read these articles (which I really, really recommend you read, because they are highly informative, well written and interesting) you will realize how desperate of a state Venezuela was in before Chavez took power. 80% of the country was poor, and 44% or so were officially in poverty (to the point where they couldn't afford proper diets). The former government was a band of corrupt cronies that languished of the profits of oil sales, and said basically "fuck the poor."

Chavez was the leader of a failed coup attempt in 1992 against the then scumbag of a president. But the coup failed, and Chavez took full responsibility, admitted his failure, and served his time in jail. The president whom he attempted to overthrow was impeached a year later.

Chavez gained a lot of supporters attempting that coup, and his base continued to believe in him. In 1998, Hugo ran for President and won. The poverty-stricken, starving, illiterate "brown skinned" Venezuelans supported Chavez in a landslide victory. Since then, Hugo has been trying to clean up a government that had run for decades on massive corruption. The middle and upper class in Venezuela hated him because he was "brown" and because of his fight against the kleptocracy they had grown rich with. The Venezuelan court was highly corrupt. The parliament was worse. The plutocracy used car bombs, coups and violent protests to try and undermine Chavez's democratically elected government. The right-wing television stations would run anti-Chavez propaganda uninterrupted for days at a time, using racist cartoons and outright lies to brainwash the middle class and the upper class into thinking Chavez was a tyrant. Right-wing publications in the US picked up on this propaganda and of course reprinted it here. Obviously, it still circulates.

Chavez has taken control of the Citgo oil company and used parts of its profits to start schools and free healthcare clinics for Venezuela's massive poor. This totally angered the right wing. But since Chavez has become president, Venezuela's poor are much healthier, millions of people can now read, and he is attempting to diversify Venezuela's economy. The people there love him. He is the first leader that actually cared about him in forever.

Here are some of the most prominent right-wing attacks on Hugo Chavez debunked.

Chavez is attempting to censor political speech and take control of the Venezuelan media.

After the corrupt right-wing media in Venezuela inspired a coup, kidnapping and later a ridiculous attempt to recall Chavez, as well as violent protests, Chavez made an anti-slander law to curb the false propaganda the private media was spreading. While no one, to my knowledge has been arrested for violating this law, it has worked to curb some of the anti-Chavez propaganda and racist remarks made in the private Venezuelan media. When asked in October if Chavez would actually arrest anybody with this law, he responded: "I am not going to accuse anyone because they insult me, I don’t care if they call me names, I don’t care what they say about me. Generally I do as Don Qixote said, if the dogs are barking it’s because we are working." Furthermore, there are many opposition media outlets in Venezuela, and only one state-owned outlet. Chavez could shut the opposition channels down, but he doesn't. He just limits the racist, riot-causing propaganda they usually encourage.

Chavez is packing the Venezuelan courts with cronies

This is true. But that's fine with me. The former judges were highly corrupt, and some were organizers of the coup. The Venezuelan courts were known for their widespread corruption before Chavez. These courts let off people that kidnapped Chavez at gunpoint during the coup attempt.

Chavez is hurting the economy

According to a press release in mid-2005, Venezuela has the fastest-growing economy in Latin America, with growth rates in the first two quarters of 7.5% and 11.1%, respectively. It had a 17.8% growth rate in 2004. The non-oil sectors grew at a faster pace than the oil sector, rising 8.7% and 12.1% in the first two quarters of 2005. Venezuela's economy is growing at the second-fastest rate in the world, topped only by China. Furthermore, Chavez's programs are wiping out illiteracy and providing healthcare to the poor for the first time ever. He has also been the first President to really enforce Venezuela's tax laws. The rich were getting away with cheating on their taxes time and time again. He has considerably raised the minimum wage. So basically, Hugo is allowing private enterprise to flourish (despite requiring them to follow tax laws) and still using money to support the poor. What he has already done has been nothing but a victory for human rights in Venezuela. Millions upon millions of people now have hope and health that would have never had it otherwise. But despite this, false right-wing anti-Chavez propaganda continues to circulate around the echo chamber...even on DU.

What Chavez has done is inspire a popular revolution with little to no violence at all, completely overthrowing a horrendously corrupt government in Venezuela and liberating masses of nearly starving poor. Instead of leading by force like he did in 1992, this time the revolution worked.

But I can say one more thing for sure: If I were next to Hugo Chavez, I would hug him, too!

If you know of more false propaganda being spread about Chavez, please debunk it below! I probably missed some things.

Here's to ya!:beer:

Venezuela probes group pushing secession

Monday, March 6, 2006; Posted: 12:03 p.m. EST (17:03 GMT)
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) -- Venezuelan prosecutors say they are investigating a group opposed to President Hugo Chavez that is promoting the secession of an oil-rich region in western Venezuela.

The attorney general's office announced in a statement Sunday that prosecutors began investigating the group, which was not named, last month to determine if its actions posed a threat to national security.

The announcement came hours after Chavez said U.S. officials were working behind the scenes with the governor of Zulia state, which is home to much of Venezuela's important oil industry, to create a secession movement loyal to U.S. interests.

Zulia state is governed by Manuel Rosales, an outspoken opponent of left-leaning Chavez.
(snip/...)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/03/06/venezuela.secession.ap/