|
do you know this about venezuela?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ARNATINE |
I post this cuz all Venezuela know that Chavez(the ing president) is bad for our democrasy... he is allied of cuba... anyway do you know this:
1) he is chaeting in revocatory votes?
2) since hes goverment has been almos 200 dead people by his hand?
3) he pays to hes fans(to concetrate in meeting)
4) he forbit to all venezuela people to buy US$(so nobody can`t buy in USA,Canada etc)?
5) since his goverment the more than 200 private bissnes is broke?
6) Insicurity is +?
7) he tell to hes fan`s to kill opositor?
8) all channel in Venezuela is not with he?
9) microsoft,sony and many more leave the country?
10) we can bearely pay internet, phones, directv... money just for food?
11) If you work for the goverment you have to be a "chavista"
12) If you firm the revocatory vote you can`t find any job(I firm)
13) many people die for humger and he buy new presidental plane and he travel always?
14) In the las 4 days all venezuela is in riot cuz the the revocatory vote was denied?
15) he said something good to internacional press and then here he said all the contrary?
16) he won`t agree to the revocatory cuz the constitucion is wrong... and he remake the constitucion
17) in the last 5 day has been more that 35 dead people and more than 100 hurt people by the Nacional Guard?
Do you know all this?
please tell me you opinion? |
|
|
| Yoepus |
I know he's bad for the country, and do you know that the world won't let the USA do anything about it?
Yet they will cry and whine that the USA didn't act a day quicker then they should have in Haiti. :rolleyes: :(
I think the USA is good to wish for his overthrew, and wish it would be 'allowed' to do so in much more a public spirit if it weren't such an evil thing in the eyes of the world to dislike dictators.
Unfortunately for Venezula you are cursed with the gift of oil:( |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| sorry i didn't know about all that. what do _you_ think need to be done? |
|
|
| ARNATINE |
1/2 year he was take out of presidental charge but some stupid militar feel sorry for him and he back....he long 24 hour out... this time they have to kill him :happy2: .... I really don`t know... he don`t wanna a democrasy end
we are waiting for the nacional army ask chavez to leave |
|
|
| Shakka |
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the U.S. kind of stuck it's nose in the whole Venezuelan issue last year and ended up smelling like horse- for it. I think it was ultimately framed as another U.S. attempted oil power play. Oh well, in the end Chavez returned to power and anti-US sentiment in Venezuela ruled the day again.
My understanding is that Chavez is another of many power-hungry, anti-U.S. autocrats. I sympathize for the Venezuelans who suffer under him--I don't think a well organized coup would necessarily be a bad thing, though I don't think the U.N. is very good about supporting popular uprisings. |
|
|
| ARNATINE |
The U.N is not sopporting riot they just say:
We want a peacefull end of this conflict.... |
|
|
| DarkFall01 |
I hate Chavez, exactly for the reasons stated above.
What I don't understand is why there's still people that like him. I just hope all this comes to an end, the country is getting worse and worse :(
Btw, how's the situation in Caracas now, I read about the demonstration and the national military being on the streets. Did it calm down? |
|
|
| dj_Vendetta |
| I not know that life like that over there, sound like great tragedy, i would organize hunting party and kill bastard!!! |
|
|
| smokeape |
Sounds like it's time for a Revolution ala John Lennon!
:wtf:
[[[smoke]]] |
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
While Chavez is certainly no saint, he has some formidable foes to go up against. Esp. when those foes are so well financially supported by the USA and our idiotic global free-market coercion upon all countries (i.e. 3rd world). More specifically, the National Endowment for Democracy and it's chairman, Vin Weber:
| quote: | Venezuela at the crossroads
Bill Berkowitz - AlterNet.org
03.05.04 - While news about U.S. participation in what many observers believe to be the forced removal of Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide continues to unfold, the situation in Venezuela is once again reaching a tipping point. Over at David Horowitz's right wing FrontPage Web site, columnist and radio talk show host Lowell Ponte, overjoyed by Aristide's removal, hysterically called Venezuela President Hugo Chavez the "third domino in the axis of red evil." In an op-ed piece for the Houston Chronicle, Douglas MacKinnon, former press secretary to former Sen. Bob Dole, and a former White House and Pentagon official, called Chavez a "madman" and "an evil just as unpalatable, just as real and potentially just as lethal as Osama bin Laden."
With the U.S.'s oil supply threatened, is the Bush Administration organizing "regime change" in Venezuela?
For nearly two years Venezuelan government officials have hurled accusations at the Bush Administration, charging that it was involved in the aborted April 2002 coup aimed at overthrowing the democratically elected Chavez. Now, on the cusp of a possible recall election, President Chavez says he has evidence proving that U.S. officials "met with rebel military officers [and] U.S. military officers acted in the coup." Chavez also pointed out that, "the U.S. ambassador was at the Presidential Palace after the coup to applaud the dictator [Pedro Carmona]. The government of the United States must answer before the world about the deaths that occurred here in April of 2002."
The State Department's Richard Boucher dismissed Chavez's charges out of hand, saying that the accusations were meant to "'to divert attention' away from the referendum process currently underway in Venezuela," Venezuelanalysis.com reported. Boucher, however, acknowledged that the Bush Administration is providing "funding to groups that promote democracy and strengthen civil society in Venezuela and around the globe." Boucher claimed that the funds "are for the benefit of democracy, not to support any particular political faction."
One of the recipients of U.S. taxpayer money is a Venezuelan company called Sumate, the organization that has provided much of the logistical support for the signature collection process. Between September 2003 and September 2004, Sumate received more than $50,000 from the U.S.-based National Endowment for Democracy.
The "NED Report to the U.S. Dept. of State on Special Venezuela Funds" documents that the organization received a million dollars in April 2002, and since June of that year it awarded more than $800,000 to organizations working in Venezuela, according to VenezuelaFOIA.info. The non-profit Web site, sponsored by the Venezuela Solidarity Committee/National Venezuela Solidarity Network, found that among the organizations receiving funds were the Center for International Private Enterprise, the American Center for International Labor Solidarity, the International Republican Institute and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs.
The NED is no stranger to Venezuelan politics. According to the New York Times, the organization "funneled more than $877,000 into Venezuela opposition groups in the weeks and months before the recently aborted coup attempt." More than $150,000 went to "a Venezuelan labor union that led the opposition work stoppages and worked closely with Pedro Carmona Estanga, the businessman who led the coup."
At its Web site, the National Endowment for Democracy modestly describes itself as a "private, nonprofit, grant-making organization created in 1983 to strengthen democratic institutions around the world." But the NED is not merely a non-partisan election facilitator or educator. Over the years it has actively destabilized governments in Central America and Eastern Europe. According to William Blum's book "Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower," the NED "played an important role in the Iran-Contra affair of the 1980s, funding key components of Oliver North's shadowy... Project Democracy' network, which privatized US foreign policy, waged war, ran arms and drugs, and engaged in other equally charming activities." For years the NED supported the Cuban exile community in South Florida, contributing $250,000 between 1990 and 1992 to the right wing Cuban-American National Foundation.
In 1997, NED president, Carl Gershman told Congress that the group's "four affiliated institutes, the International Republican Institute (IRI), the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI), the Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), and the Free Trade Union Institute (FTUI)... operate a host of programs that strengthen political parties, promote open markets, advocate the rights of workers, and many related activities."
The NED functions as a full-service infrastructure-building clearinghouse. It provides money, technical support, supplies, training programs, media know-how, public relations assistance, and state-of-the-art equipment to select political groups, civic organizations, labor unions, dissident movements, student groups, book publishers, newspapers, and other media. The organization's aim is to destabilize progressive movements, particularly those with a socialist or democratic socialist bent.
Chavez's well-funded opposition also appears to be receiving the tacit stamp of approval from Henry Kissinger and his international consulting firm, Kissinger and Associates. In late-January, while the national elections council was preparing to evaluate the authenticity of the two-plus million petition signatures handed in by the opposition, former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was presenting an award to Venezuelan billionaire, Gustavo Cisneros, Chairman & CEO of the Cisneros Group of Companies. According to the Green Left Weekly, Cisneros has been "identified by Newsweek and Venezuelan publications as one of the protagonists and financiers of the April 11, 2002, coup against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez."
In a December 2003 press release announcing the upcoming awards ceremony, the IAEC described Cisneros as someone who "consistently sought to create an environment where business and government can work together in meaningful ways for the betterment of society." It went on: "The council seeks to create a forum in which effective policy making is made by the public and private sectors working together. Cisneros' life's work parallels the council's mission."
According to the Green Left Weekly, however, Cisneros is "credited with being a driving force behind the December 2002 nationwide lock-out and sabotage of the oil industry, which drove the Venezuelan economy into the ground by causing a historical drop of 27% in the country's GDP in the first trimester of 2003." And the US-based NGO Global Strike for Women condemned the IAEC's decision to give Cisneros the award, charging that he was a leader of the Dec 2002-Feb 2003 nationwide lock out "aimed at forcing President Chavez from office" and that "he played a similar role in the more recent oil lock out orchestrated by the CIA and aimed at paralyzing the whole country."
Cisneros owns one of the largest privately held media, entertainment, technology, and consumer products organizations in the world. His holdings include Univision Communications, Inc., AOL Latin America, DIRECTV Latin America, Claxson Interactive Group, Venevision, Venezuela's largest television network, Los Leones del Caracas, Regional Brewing Company, Backus & Johnston Brewing Company, and Pueblo International, LLC.
It should be remembered that two days after the aborted coup, Kissinger partner Thomas "Mack" McLarty, the Vice Chairman of Kissinger McLarty Associates, and former President Bill Clinton's top adviser on Latin America, penned an op-ed piece that issued a stern warning to Brazilian leftist Luiz Igacio Lula da Silva: "[W]hat happened in Venezuela could be perceived as a sign that messianic solutions, as opposed to genuine reform measures, lead to disaster. It bodes well for those in the region who advocate for open markets in the region. I don't think this is a net positive for Lula's candidacy." Despite the warning, six months later Lula was overwhelmingly elected president of Brazil.
Sumate has admitted "that there were instances where people signed the petition who were not supposed to or who did so incorrectly," Gregory Wilpert recently reported. But the company maintains that although the invalid signatures number around 265,000, there are still some 3.2 million valid signatures "which would be more than enough for a presidential recall referendum, which requires over 2.4 million signatures (20% of the registered electorate)."
On March 3, the national elections council said only 1.8 million signatures had been verified, which fell some 500,000 short of the needed number for the recall. According to BBC News, the opposition could "still reach" the target because the council will "publish lists of the disputed signatures and set up posts where people who find themselves on these listings can go and validate their entry." The opposition, however, declared that it would "not accept the electoral commission's plans for voters to confirm their signatures, complaining this was not included in the initial rules for the referendum."
According to Gregory Wilpert, international observers from the Carter Center and the OAS will judge whether the CNE is doing an evenhanded job. If the CNE changes it ruling, Chavez could appeal it to the Supreme Court, thus delaying the recall election until after August, which would then allow Chavez's vice president to succeed him should the election be held and he be defeated.
In President Bush's State of the Union address, he pledged to double the budget of the National Endowment for Democracy. When former Minnesota Republican congressman Vin Weber, a close ally of then-Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, took over as chairman of the NED's board in July 2001, he made it clear that the organization was interested in once again playing a more muscular role shaping and supporting U.S. foreign policy objectives. That's exactly what it appears to be doing in Venezuela.
(c) 2004 AlterNet.org
URL: http://www.workingforchange.com/art...fm?itemid=16547
|
Here's another article on U.S. bankrolling opposition to Chavez:
| quote: | FOREIGN DESK | April 25, 2002, Thursday
U.S. Bankrolling Is Under Scrutiny for Ties to Chαvez Ouster
By CHRISTOPHER MARQUIS (NYT) 885 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 6 , Column 1
ABSTRACT - United States channeled hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants to American and Venezuelan groups opposed to Pres Hugo Chavez of Venezuela in last year, including labor group whose protests led to Chavez's brief ouster this month; funds were provided by National Endowment for Democracy, nonprofit agency created and financed by Congress; endowment quadrupled its budget for Venezuela to more than $877,000 as conditions deteriorated in Venezuela and Chavez clashed with various business, labor and media groups; State Dept's human rights bureau is now examining whether one or more recipients of money may have actively plotted against Chavez; $1 million grant to endowment has been put on hold pending that review (M)
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstra...DAD0894DA404482 |
|
|
|
| MisterOpus1 |
More information on U.S. funding:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1190
Here's a transcript of a conversation between an independent Venezuela journalist from venezuelanalysis.com and a spokesman for National Endowment for Democracy:
http://www.democracynow.org/article...4/03/04/1554235
Even the ultra-conservative Cato Institute has some disturbing feelings about the National Endowment for Democracy:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-027.html
Perhaps this is the U.S. means of retaliation with Chavez refusing to join the FTAA, which is nothing more than the NAFTA expansion to more poorer 3rd world countries:
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=295&row=1
I believe the U.S. needs to keep our out of this mess, and allow democracy to take place as it has been in that country.
In closing, I'll leave with this article from Palast about those "huge" opposition crowds attempting to oust Chavez in the past:
| quote: | Hugo Chavez is Crazy!
Excerpt from Abuse Your Illusions [Disinfo Press 2003]
Tuesday, July 1, 2003
From the Project Censored award winning dispatches from Venezuela
Last June, on Page One of the San Francisco Chronicle, an Associated Press photo of a mass of demonstrators carried the following caption:
"TENS OF THOUSANDS OF VENEZUELANS OPPOSED TO PRESIDENT HUGO CHAVEZ..."
The caption let us know this South American potentate was a killer, an autocrat, and the people of his nation wanted him out. The caption continued: "[Venezuelans] marched Saturday to demand his resignation and punishment for those responsible for 17 deaths during a coup in April. 'Chavez leave now!' read a huge banner."
There was no actual story in the Chronicle South America simply isn't worth wasting words on just the photo and caption. But the Chronicle knew no story was needed. Venezuelans hated their terrible president, and all you needed was this photo to prove it.
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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at the Chronicle/AP photo of the anti-Chavez marchers in Venezuela. Note their color. White.
And not just any white. A creamy rich white.
I interviewed them and recorded in this order: a banker in high heels and push-up bra; an oil industry executive (same outfit); and a plantation owner who rode to Caracas in a silver Jaguar.
And the color of the pro-Chavez marchers? Dark brown. Brown and round as cola nuts just like their hero, their President Chavez. They wore an unvarying uniform of jeans and T-shirts.
Let me explain.
For five centuries, Venezuela has been run by a minority of very white people, pure-blood descendants of the Spanish conquistadors. To most of the 80 percent of Venezuelans who are brown, Hugo Chavez is their Nelson Mandela, the man who will smash the economic and social apartheid that has kept the dark-skinned millions stacked in cardboard houses in the hills above Caracas while the whites live in high-rise splendor in the city center. Chavez, as one white Caracas reporter told me with a sneer, gives them bricks and milk, and so they vote for him.
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.
Odd phrasings "dictator" and "autocrat" to describe Chavez, who was elected by a landslide majority (56 percent) of the voters. Unlike our President.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 12, 2002, Chavez resigned his presidency It said so, right there in the paper every major newspaper in the USA, every single one. Apparently, to quote the New York Times, Chavez recognized that he was unpopular, his time was up: "With yesterday's resignation of President Hugo Chavez, Venezuelan democracy is no longer threatened by a would-be dictator."
Problem was, the "resignation" story was a fabulous fib, a phantasmagoric fabrication. In fact, the President of Venezuela had been kidnapped at gunpoint and bundled off by helicopter from the presidential palace. He had not resigned; he never resigned; and one of his captors (who secretly supported Chavez) gave him a cell-phone from which he called and confirmed to friends and family that he remained alive and still president.
Working for the Guardian and the BBC, I was able within hours of the kidnapping to reach key government people in Venezuela to confirm that this "resignation" factoid was just hoodoo nonsense.
But it was valuable nonsense to the U.S. State Department. The faux resignation gave the new U.S.-government-endorsed Venezuelan leaders the pretense of legitimacy Chavez had resigned; this was a legal change of government, not a coup d'etat. (The Organization of American States bars recognition of governments who come to power through violence.) Had the coup leaders not bungled their operation the coup collapsed within 48 hours or if they had murdered Chavez, we would never have known the truth.
The U.S. papers got it dead wrong but how? Who was the source of this "resignation" lie? I asked a U.S. reporter why American news media had reported this nonsense as stone fact without checking. The reply was that it came from a reliable source: "We got it from the State Department."
Oh.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"He's crazy," shouts a protester about President Chavez on one broadcast. And if you watched the 60 Minutes interview with Chavez, you saw a snippet of a lengthy conversation a few selective seconds, actually which, out of context, did made Chavez look loony.
In the old Soviet Union, dissidents were packed off to insane asylums to silence and discredit them. In our democracy we have a more subtle and more effective means of silencing and discrediting dissidents. Television, radio, and print press obligingly sequester enemies of the state in the media's madhouse. In this way, Bush critic Rep. Cynthia McKinney became "loony" (see "The Screwing of Cynthia McKinney"); Chavez a mad "autocrat."
It's the electronic loony bin. You no longer hear what they have to say because you've been told by images, by repetition, and you've already dismissed their words ... if by some chance their words break through the television Berlin Wall.
Try it: Do a Google or Lexis search on the words Chavez and autocrat.
For who is the autocrat? Today, there are hundreds of people held in detention without charges in George Bush's United States. In Venezuela, there are none.
This is not about Venezuela but about the Virtual Venezuela, created for you by America's news wardens. The escape routes are guarded.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 5, 2003, New York City. Picked up bagels and the Sunday Times on Delancey Street. Looks like that s.o.b. Chavez is at it again: Here was a big picture of a half-dozen people lying on the ground. The Times story read: "Protesters shielded themselves from tear gas during an anti- government rally on Friday in Caracas, Venezuela. In the 33rd day of a national strike, several protesters were shot."
That was it the entire story of Venezuela for the Paper of Record.
Maybe size doesn't matter. But this does: Even this itty-bitty story is a steaming hot bag of mendacity. Yes, two people were shot dead those in the pro-Chavez march.
I'd be wrong to say that every U.S. paper repeated the Times sloppy approach. Elsewhere, you could see a photo of the big pro-Chavez march and a photo of the "Chavista" widow placed within an explanatory newswire story. Interestingly, the fuller and correct story ran in an outlet that's none too friendly to Chavez: El Diario, New York City's oldest Spanish-language newspaper.
Lesson: If you want to get accurate news in the United States, you might want to learn a language other than English.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, January 3, 2003. The New York Times ran a long "News Analysis: Venezuela Outlook." Four experts were quoted. For balance, two of them don't like Chavez, while the other two despise him.
The Times reporter wrote that "the president says he will stay in power." "In power?" What a strange phrase for an elected official. Having myself spoken with Chavez, it did not sound like him. He indicated he would stay "in office" quite a different inference than "in power." But then, the Times' phrasing isn't in quotes.
That's because Chavez never said it.
http://www.gregpalast.com/printerfriendly.cfm?artid=230
|
|
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by MisterOpus1
Even the ultra-conservative Cato Institute has some disturbing feelings about the National Endowment for Democracy:
|
Ultra-conservative??? What liberal rag did you pull that tagline from? :p One need only look at the Cato institute's opinions on the war on drugs and civil liberties as an indication that it's a strict libertarian organization.
Drugs:
http://www.cato.org/current/drug-war/index.html
Iraq:
http://www.cato.org/current/iraq/index.html
Small government advocate <> ultra-conservative |
|
|
|
|
