NationStates Jolt Archive

Have any of you heard about this? Why is Bush and Co. so bent on regime change around the world?


VENEZUELA FLORIDATED
Tuesday, August 10, 2004

Will The Gang That Fixed Florida Fix the Vote in Caracas this Sunday?
by Greg Palast

Hugo Chavez drives George Bush crazy. Maybe it's jealousy: Unlike Mr. Bush, Chavez, in Venezuela, won his Presidency by a majority of the vote.

Or maybe it's the oil: Venezuela sits atop a reserve rivaling Iraq's. And Hugo thinks the US and British oil companies that pump the crude ought to pay more than a 16% royalty to his nation for the stuff. Hey, sixteen percent isn't even acceptable as a tip at a New York diner.

Whatever it is, OUR President has decided that THEIR president has to go. This is none too easy given that Chavez is backed by Venezuela's poor. And the US oil industry, joined with local oligarchs, has made sure a vast majority of Venezuelans remain poor.

Therefore, Chavez is expected to win this coming Sunday's recall vote. That is, if the elections are free and fair.

They won't be. Some months ago, a little birdie faxed to me what appeared to be confidential pages from a contract between John Ashcroft's Justice Department and a company called ChoicePoint, Inc., of Atlanta. The deal is part of the War on Terror.

Justice offered up to $67 million, of our taxpayer money, to ChoicePoint in a no-bid deal, for computer profiles with private information on every citizen of half a dozen nations. The choice of which nation's citizens to spy on caught my eye. While the September 11th highjackers came from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Lebanon and the Arab Emirates, ChoicePoint's menu offered records on Venezuelans, Brazilians, Nicaraguans, Mexicans and Argentines. How odd. Had the CIA uncovered a Latin plot to sneak suicide tango dancers across the border with exploding enchiladas?

What do these nations have in common besides a lack of involvement in the September 11th attacks? Coincidentally, each is in the throes of major electoral contests in which the leading candidates -- presidents Lula Ignacio da Silva of Brazil, Nestor Kirschner of Argentina, Mexico City mayor Andres Lopez Obrador and Venezuela's Chavez -- have the nerve to challenge the globalization demands of George W. Bush.

The last time ChoicePoint sold voter files to our government it was to help Governor Jeb Bush locate and purge felons on Florida voter rolls. Turns out ChoicePoint's felons were merely Democrats guilty only of V.W.B., Voting While Black. That little 'error' cost Al Gore the White House.

It looks like the Bush Administration is taking the Florida show for a tour south of the border.

However, when Mexico discovered ChoicePoint had its citizen files, the nation threatened company executives with criminal charges. ChoicePoint protested its innocence and offered to destroy the files of any nation that requests it.

But ChoicePoint, apparently, presented no such offer to the government of Venezuela's Chavez.

In Caracas, I showed Congressman Nicolas Maduro the ChoicePoint-Ashcroft agreement. Maduro, a leader of Chavez' political party, was unaware that his nation's citizen files were for sale to U.S. intelligence. But he understood their value to make mischief.

If the lists somehow fell into the hands of the Venezuelan opposition, it could immeasurably help their computer-aided drive to recall and remove Chavez. A ChoicePoint flak said the Bush administration told the company they haven't used the lists that way. The PR man didn't say if the Bush spooks laughed when they said it.

Our team located a $53,000 payment from our government to Chavez' recall organizers, who claim to be armed with computer lists of the registered. How did they get those lists? The fix that was practiced in Florida, with ChoicePoint's help, deliberate or not, appears to be retooled for Venezuela, then Brazil, Mexico and who knows where else.

Here's what it comes down to: The Justice Department averts it's gaze from Saudi Arabia but shoplifts voter records in Venezuela. So it's only fair to ask: Is Mr. Bush fighting a war on terror -- or a war on democracy?


hmmmm, no It most certainly can't be about oil right? :rolleyes: Give me a break. Bush has got to go!!!!!! Vote Kerry bitch! :D

Sorry if that is too much to read, but I did bold the parts I found to be important and all that you lazy bastahds :D

Come on Bush supporters. Don't you want to defend your man or is this just too damning?

This was uncovered by the same award winning investigative reporter that uncovered the Florida scandal where tens of thousands of black democrats were purged from the voting roles and therefor not allowed to vote for Gore. Hmmm, no wonder Bush "won" Florida.

Maybe I missed it, somewhere, but I can't find the link to the original article website.

Please provide a URL.

--The Democratic States of Cogitation

I received it in an email as I am signed up to Greg Palasts newsletters but I am sure it is on his site.... give me a minute

http://www.gregpalast.com

yup - front page :)

Come on Bush supporters. Don't you want to defend your man or is this just too damning?


I think they're all to busy trying to claim success on the economy and jobs and discredit anyone voting for Kerry as only "voting against Bush."

Back to the top with you!

I think they're all to busy trying to claim success on the economy and jobs and discredit anyone voting for Kerry as only "voting against Bush."

Back to the top with you!


What success? :p

Oh you mean the claims that Bush is improving the economy even though they say that its the previous presidents policies that set the stage for the current economy (because they just can't stand that Clinton presided over such a boomign economy)? They always want to have it both ways and I think thats a bit kinky.

Why is Bush and Co. so bent on regime change around the world?

Maybe they were once frightened by a regime in early childhood.

Maybe they were once frightened by a regime in early childhood.

lol
Well to be fair Kerry wants regime change too. He wants Bush out of office.:p

Wow, I wouldn't think this article is biased a bit. Especially looking at the author's other ones.

If you know anything about the situation in Venuzuela, you'd know that Chavez has been a horrible leader who's been anything but benevolent or democratic. Of course Greg Palast has his anti-Bush agenda, so we can't really expect much from him.

"Venezuela Floridated"

We must protect the precious bodily fluids of Venezuela. We must preserve their purity of essense!

"Flordiated" made me think of "The Governator." I don't know, just the choice of word usage, that's all.

Bush wants regime change anywhere democracy isn't fluent, simple as that; he's a crusader, to be tact, and a bad one at that as he, himself, isn't even on the frontlines.

It's a shame, too. :headbang:

Wow, I wouldn't think this article is biased a bit. Especially looking at the author's other ones.

If you know anything about the situation in Venuzuela, you'd know that Chavez has been a horrible leader who's been anything but benevolent or democratic. Of course Greg Palast has his anti-Bush agenda, so we can't really expect much from him.

Yes he dislikes Bush very much but I think he gives good reasons for it as evidenced by his articles.

So what is your problem with how Chavez has been running Venuzuela and why do you think that it's okay for any US administration to pursue regime change.

Yes he dislikes Bush very much but I think he gives good reasons for it as evidenced by his articles.

So what is your problem with how Chavez has been running Venuzuela and why do you think that it's okay for any US administration to pursue regime change.
This isn't actually a new development. When a failed coup happened a year or two back, it was an open secret that the US supported those who wanted Chavez is out.

Now, Palast likes to paint Chavez as the hero of the worker or something, but the fact is the biggest unions, oil and non-oil related, have all had huge protests related to Chavez's leadership. And Palast also, in order to help his Bush smearing, makes Chavez seem democratic. According to Venuzuela's constitution, a referendum can be organized to recall bad leadership. The Economist, if you read the magazine, covered the situation quite well, and in Sept. 2003 Chavez does nothing else but threaten Venezuelen citizens who signed the petition and raid the offices of the places organizing the recall.

In spite of the constitutional crackdown, the people persisted, until they got enough signatures at which point Chavez just decided to ignore it anyway. So they got another recall drive going, and that was turned down. Keep in mind that both were well over the amount needed. In fact, the second one (The first was turned down on a technicality) was reviewed by the judicial system and said to have enough signatures. Not good enough for Chavez though. In fact, the government fired all the people in the public sector who signed the recall. Only now, after a huge time in court and the realization that recall petitions would only continue to come, has there agreed to be a referendum. Chavez has proven before, though, that it dosen't really matter, he'll just find a way to nullify it anyway. In fact, since he took office, he's managed to crack down on the media, whittle away at the legislative branch's power, and even ruled as a dictator (by decree) at times. A quote,
"we can intervene in any police force in any municipality, because we are not going to permit any tumult or uproar. Order has arrived in Venezuela."

Palast dosen't need to worry about things like, this though. Because in his mind an enemy of Bush is his friend, and his friends are good, Chavez must be good!

Hmmm seems like a democracy to me when you are a populist president that is supported by the majority of the people and were elected into office. Just like any populist president he is opposed by the rich and middle class but the majority of the people, the poor (ain't that always the way?) support him and his policies. He is just doing what the people want him to and crushing the minority uprisings of upper class backed militants (which are very violent by the way). Once he gets reelected by the popular vote we will see the oppositiotn get violent once again because of course, money if their god, and they cannot accept that chavez is putting much of the countries wealth into helping the poor.

Chavez fired the oil executives who were striking and opposing him and trying to get him out of office. I'd probably do the same.

Cavaz was against the recall because he said that it wasn't in the constitution. I myself haven't read their constitution (have you? maybe you can point me to the spot in their Constitution where the recall referendum is) so I can't say if this is true but in negotiations with former President Carter he agreed to the recall according to this link (http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0302/S00016.htm). Can you site a source which shows this to be untrue?

I guess it's all in how you interpret the news eh? I am not saying i agree with everything Chavez has done but seeing as how he is still president after the coup should show how much the people want him there.

Hmmm seems like a democracy to me when you are a populist president that is supported by the majority of the people and were elected into office.
Yes he was elected fairly. That by no means indicates that now he's supported by the majority of the people.

Just like any populist president he is opposed by the rich and middle class but the majority of the people, the poor (ain't that always the way?) support him and his policies.
What do you consider the poor? The working classes in the Unions that have led massive strikes and protests against him? Yeah he's bribed a bunch of unemployed people - he screwed up the economy, too, doing things like suddenly raising minimum wage 20% - but its by no means a clear-cut class conflict.

He agreed to a recall - much after the first attempt a while back - only after dragging his feet at which time the courts finally declared it legal, but even then he was still trying to stop it. From the article :
“The government of Venezuela respects the independence of the Supreme Court,” says the statement. However, a group of pro-government politicians introduced yesterday a “constitutional protection” appeal before the Court.
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1229


On the subject of its constitutionality :

Article 72: All [...] offices filled by popular vote are subject to revocation.
Once one-half of the term of office to which an official has been elected has elapsed, a number of voters representing at least 20% of the registered voters in the affected constituency may petition for the calling of a referendum to revoke that official's mandate.
When a number of voters equal to or greater than the number of those who elected the official vote in favour of the recall, provided that a number of voters equal to or greater than 25% of the total number of registered voters vote in the recall referendum, the official's mandate shall be deemed revoked and immediate action shall be taken to fill the permanent vacancy as provided for by this Constitution and by law.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venezuelan_recall_referendum%2C_2004

Yes he was elected fairly. That by no means indicates that now he's supported by the majority of the people.


What do you consider the poor? The working classes in the Unions that have led massive strikes and protests against him? Yeah he's bribed a bunch of unemployed people - he screwed up the economy, too, doing things like suddenly raising minimum wage 20% - but its by no means a clear-cut class conflict.


He is supported by the majority of the people right now. His approval ratings are at 54% (I heard this on the radio news today but i do not have linkage to back that up at the moment because I can't find that online). The massive protests are led by the rich and middle classes, but are minor compared to the rallys in the streets in support of him. Reporters on the ground say that he is is the favorite of the majority of venazualians in the street. 9 days and we will know for sure though.

What organization are the polls conducted by? Saddam himself had a 99.9% approval rating, he was voted in by everyone wasn't he?

What organization are the polls conducted by? Saddam himself had a 99.9% approval rating, he was voted in by everyone wasn't he?

This poll was conducted internally by the elections commission (I think that was the name of the agency but I have a poor memory), the reporter said that the poll hasn't been officially publicized yet though and is a week old. I don't deny that polls can be fixed though, i don't know how this agency is run or by whom and who those who run it are loyal too. Just stating what I heard ont he radio. Anything is possible *shrug*

bumb for the night watch.

This has nothing to do with the Bush Administration. Venezuela has been through some tough times, and in the Venezuelan process, Chavez is recalled. It is enough to motivate extreme violence that looked close to civil wars a few times in the past. Believe what you want regarding Chavez, but the Bush Administration isn't involved. If they are, however, half of Venezuela is thanking them.

They won't be. Some months ago, a little birdie faxed to me what appeared to be confidential pages from a contract between John Ashcroft's Justice Department and a company called ChoicePoint, Inc., of Atlanta. The deal is part of the War on Terror.



This is the part that has me questioning the validity of this:

I didn't think little birdies could work fax machines. If there are any little birdies operating fax machines in the Justice Department, I think we ought to be concerned about the little birdies, not the venezuelans! :eek:

This has nothing to do with the Bush Administration. Venezuela has been through some tough times, and in the Venezuelan process, Chavez is recalled. It is enough to motivate extreme violence that looked close to civil wars a few times in the past. Believe what you want regarding Chavez, but the Bush Administration isn't involved. If they are, however, half of Venezuela is thanking them.

Then is the list purchase by our govt and given to the Chavez's opposition a lie? Didnt you hear about the US supported coup of chavez which he overcame because he saw it coming?

The violence is first being propogated by the uppperclass (because they cant stand a populist leader that doesnt allow them to accumulate wealth without restriction) and so of course there is violent retaliation.

And no half of Venezuela is not thanking them, if youw ant to show some polls where half of the population supports Chavezs' opposition go ahead but I doubt you can find them. As I stated earlier, more than half of the population supports chavez and only about 20% is in support of the upperclass opposition.

Then is the list purchase by our govt and given to the Chavez's opposition a lie? Didnt you hear about the US supported coup of chavez which he overcame because he saw it coming?

The violence is first being propogated by the uppperclass (because they cant stand a populist leader that doesnt allow them to accumulate wealth without restriction) and so of course there is violent retaliation.

And no half of Venezuela is not thanking them, if youw ant to show some polls where half of the population supports Chavezs' opposition go ahead but I doubt you can find them. As I stated earlier, more than half of the population supports chavez and only about 20% is in support of the upperclass opposition.
Well they certainly are a roudy bunch. They've nearly started a civil war, and have gotten oil workers to strike quite a few times.

This is the part that has me questioning the validity of this:

I didn't think little birdies could work fax machines. If there are any little birdies operating fax machines in the Justice Department, I think we ought to be concerned about the little birdies, not the venezuelans! :eek:

lol

Parrots can mimic speech, so maybe they can mimic actions too :p

lol

Parrots can mimic speech, so maybe they can mimic actions too :p

Parakeets in the circus can be trained to ride bicycles. The more I think about it, the more I think that birds are setting us up for a fall.

Well they certainly are a roudy bunch. They've nearly started a civil war, and have gotten oil workers to strike quite a few times.

yes they can be. it's not often you get a president that actually cares about the people and isnt on the side of the rich.

Go Chavez! I would fight to the death too for a true populist president if I had the chance. Not for myself but for the millions that go hungry and homeless.

Thanks to Chavez, hundreds of thousands of lowerclass people who couldn't read or write before can now do so. He has charged Venezuela politically and enabled so many of the poor to have a better life or at least a chance at a better life, when before there was none.

Do you not agree that this is a good thing? Or are you just inf avor of the rich getting richer no matter what it takes and how hard it makes it on the lowerclass?

Parakeets in the circus can be trained to ride bicycles. The more I think about it, the more I think that birds are setting us up for a fall.

just as with people... they take opposing sides. With the help of our feathered friends we may just be able to take back the world from the Gophers.

I think they're all to busy trying to claim success on the economy and jobs and discredit anyone voting for Kerry as only "voting against Bush."

Back to the top with you!
yeah thats what killed kmy make your case for bush thread, they were too busy making cases against kerry to make one for bush that would stand up to scrutiny

Also I want to point out that Chavez has the Venezuelian oil industry back on its feet again. The country is producing as they did before and after the strike ended Chavezs' popularity actually rose.

I think that it's good that Chavez has gotten rid of those executives in the oil industry that were trying to oust him.

what would you do? Give in and say... "Okay, I guess you are right, we should just let the world bank and the oil industry walk all over us and not try to make things better for those in our country who are struggling the most." well maybe as long as you are getting kickbacks from the upperclass it's easy to turn a blind eye, but i admire Chavezs' resolve in this and anyone who could truely look openly at what he is trying to do shoudl as well.

Do you think that the rich and middle class have it bad over there? I think not. The strife is much worse for the poor and its the poor that are takign the biggest hits by the militants.

Also the venezuelian military are mainly for Chavez. Well the lower ranks are pro-chavez anyway, The officers are split. Of course.

yes they can be. it's not often you get a president that actually cares about the people and isnt on the side of the rich.

Go Chavez! I would fight to the death too for a true populist president if I had the chance. Not for myself but for the millions that go hungry and homeless.

Thanks to Chavez, hundreds of thousands of lowerclass people who couldn't read or write before can now do so. He has charged Venezuela politically and enabled so many of the poor to have a better life or at least a chance at a better life, when before there was none.

Do you not agree that this is a good thing? Or are you just inf avor of the rich getting richer no matter what it takes and how hard it makes it on the lowerclass?
It depends on what else he did. For one, he is semi-autocratic. He's one of those creatures that are new to this world, called an elected autocrat. Putin is another one, though he's a more mild offender. Chavez has usurped several powers from the legislature, but also from provincial governments. Because of all these actions combined, I doubt that Chavez has as little opposition as you say. A leader with nothing to fear doesn't need to turn autocratic.
As for the results that you say are happening, more literacy, for example. Do you know why that's so? Because they don't just produce crude oil. They refine it, and sell it as diesel and gas to the American market. This has been happening since the 1980s, when the Venezuelan government bought Citgo. That's a big reason for Venezuela's sucess, and not exactly an attribute of Chavez's time in office.

"Venezuela Floridated"

We must protect the precious bodily fluids of Venezuela. We must preserve their purity of essense!
LOL!

It depends on what else he did. For one, he is semi-autocratic. He's one of those creatures that are new to this world, called an elected autocrat. Putin is another one, though he's a more mild offender. Chavez has usurped several powers from the legislature, but also from provincial governments. Because of all these actions combined, I doubt that Chavez has as little opposition as you say. A leader with nothing to fear doesn't need to turn autocratic.
As for the results that you say are happening, more literacy, for example. Do you know why that's so? Because they don't just produce crude oil. They refine it, and sell it as diesel and gas to the American market. This has been happening since the 1980s, when the Venezuelan government bought Citgo. That's a big reason for Venezuela's sucess, and not exactly an attribute of Chavez's time in office.


What has Chavez done that was so evil and wrong again? He is using his powers to overcome the policies previously installed by the uppeclass to help the lowerclass. Admirable for sure.


And how exactly do you figure that: "As for the results that you say are happening, more literacy, for example. Do you know why that's so? Because they don't just produce crude oil. They refine it, and sell it as diesel and gas to the American market.": created more literacy among the poor? chavez may be using the wealth from the oil to help them but these are the policies of Chavez. He made a commitment to the poor to help them gain more education.

http://www.citgo.com/AboutCITGO.jsp
There. Citgo is a subsidiary of the Petroleos de Venezuela S.A., the Venezuelan state oil company. Even if the oil workers at home went on strike, Citgo would still be able to operate by buying oil from other sources to bring to its gas stations. This is a undoubtedly a moneymaker, folks.

What has Chavez done that was so evil and wrong again? He is using his powers to overcome the policies previously installed by the uppeclass to help the lowerclass. Admirable for sure.


And how exactly do you figure that: "As for the results that you say are happening, more literacy, for example. Do you know why that's so? Because they don't just produce crude oil. They refine it, and sell it as diesel and gas to the American market.": created more literacy among the poor? chavez may be using the wealth from the oil to help them but these are the policies of Chavez. He made a commitment to the poor to help them gain more education.
Good for him. Of course, it had consequences. He's repeatedly spending overbudget, and in Venezuela's struggling economy, that's disastorous. This is the beginning of another petrostate, like Saudi Arabia. Autocratic rulers can placate the people by bread and circuses. As we've seen in the Middle East, it leads to terrorism. This is extremely dangerous. Latin America is volatile enough, especially when Colombia is next door. Combine this all, and pretty soon, a Latin American version of al-Qaeda will exist. I don't think the Bush Administration is actively trying to oust Chavez, but I would love it. He's strangling the free markets, democratic institutions, and trying to make Venezuela into a mirror image of Saudi Arabia. The only difference is that Venezuela's not a Muslim country. If the next leader continues Chavez's socialist policies, I'll be content with that. But it mustn't come at the expense of the republic in Venezuela, nor should it foster terrorism. Basically, all I want is the next president to drop Chavez's autocratic policies, and do whatever this guy feels through proper democratic channels. That should stop terrorists before they form.

Good for him. Of course, it had consequences. He's repeatedly spending overbudget, and in Venezuela's struggling economy, that's disastorous. This is the beginning of another petrostate, like Saudi Arabia. Autocratic rulers can placate the people by bread and circuses. As we've seen in the Middle East, it leads to terrorism. This is extremely dangerous. Latin America is volatile enough, especially when Colombia is next door. Combine this all, and pretty soon, a Latin American version of al-Qaeda will exist. I don't think the Bush Administration is actively trying to oust Chavez, but I would love it. He's strangling the free markets, democratic institutions, and trying to make Venezuela into a mirror image of Saudi Arabia. The only difference is that Venezuela's not a Muslim country. If the next leader continues Chavez's socialist policies, I'll be content with that. But it mustn't come at the expense of the republic in Venezuela, nor should it foster terrorism. Basically, all I want is the next president to drop Chavez's autocratic policies, and do whatever this guy feels through proper democratic channels. That should stop terrorists before they form.
god forbid we have one less big business controlled police state mockery of justice and free trade. and when was the last time bush was spending below budget (or at least without spending more money than , you know, we actually have)? oh that right never, and somehow those policies are supposedly helping us, why wouldnt it help venezuela

There's no way Venezuela is going to go broke with the amount of oil they have. Why do you think we pay so much attention to them?

Also, the only terrorism that will come about from Chavez's policies to help the poor is the militias (funded by the upperclass with allt he money) that will be used to terrorize people to vote against Chavez and to go against chavez's forces as well. Well, that or if Chavez is ousted by the Candidate that is pro-rich anti-poor, there is likely to be a violent opposition to that as well. I'm pretty sure there are no candidates that want to pursue Chavezs' policies. If there were, he wouldnt have the popular support that he does if his rule is so terrible.

Chavez is by no means trying to become Saudi Arabia. If he was so concerned about becoming king and making enough money to shit in a golden toilet he would not be pursuing the policies that he is.

god forbid we have one less big business controlled police state mockery of justice and free trade. and when was the last time bush was spending below budget (or at least without spending more money than , you know, we actually have)? oh that right never, and somehow those policies are supposedly helping us, why wouldnt it help venezuela
Because, theres a lot of things you can spend on. Just becuase one country is spending above their budget and something is happening dosen't mean that if another country is spending too much the same exact thing will happen.

from this site and the people on it.

from this site and the people on it.

:) that is my favorite thing about this site! I have stated it a few times before.

If you can get over all the flamers and trolls and just see different points of views and how "facts" are interpreted and what different opinions different people have you can gain a wealth of information.

So many people teach us different views from the same information in history or add to it as they learned different things since they went to school in different countries (i.e. American history books see things in such different ways than some other countries will).

Some people can be so eloquent and make you question your own view on things... although many wont admit it because they are stubborn but others will concede sometimes. I myself hate to give up old ways of thinking sometimes but I strive to overcome that.

There are some brilliant debaters on here and some not so brilliant (hello :p)

god forbid we have one less big business controlled police state mockery of justice and free trade. and when was the last time bush was spending below budget (or at least without spending more money than , you know, we actually have)? oh that right never, and somehow those policies are supposedly helping us, why wouldnt it help venezuela
Because Venezuela's in a prolonged recession, where there's no chance in hell of a recovery in government revenues. On top of that, Chavez is eliminating any previous checks and balances that were once on any spending. Chavez is dangerous, threatening to turn a republic into an autocracy. Then there's is Castro-style socialism, and as you know, Marxist guerillas (often kingpins of the drug trade) operate in surrounding countries. If Chavez wins, he's sending Venezuela down the path to be the Latin American Afghanistan, and those guerillas may try to target us, like the drug cartels of the past did. Then, a decade or so from now, US troops will have no choice but to intervene. The good news, however, is that our patronage of Citgo helped financed the Afghanization of Venezuela.

Because Venezuela's in a prolonged recession, where there's no chance in hell of a recovery in government revenues. On top of that, Chavez is eliminating any previous checks and balances that were once on any spending. Chavez is dangerous, threatening to turn a republic into an autocracy. Then there's is Castro-style socialism, and as you know, Marxist guerillas (often kingpins of the drug trade) operate in surrounding countries. If Chavez wins, he's sending Venezuela down the path to be the Latin American Afghanistan, and those guerillas may try to target us, like the drug cartels of the past did. Then, a decade or so from now, US troops will have no choice but to intervene. The good news, however, is that our patronage of Citgo helped financed the Afghanization of Venezuela.
why would they target us? reagan funded them and bush is the proto reagan

why would they target us? reagan funded them and bush is the proto reagan
Why did al-Qaeda target us? They were crucial to fighting the Soviets, and recieved our aid.
The reason is because they have a grievance against America. Part of them are real: the region got a screwover from the US in the sixties and seventies. Part of them are imaginary, because we are a powerful neighbor. Plus, don't forget that the US's main export to the region is capitalism, the nemisis of communism. Besides, the drug trade would be easier without those pesky cops and judges in the US.

Why did al-Qaeda target us? They were crucial to fighting the Soviets, and recieved our aid.
The reason is because they have a grievance against America. Part of them are real: the region got a screwover from the US in the sixties and seventies. Part of them are imaginary, because we are a powerful neighbor. Plus, don't forget that the US's main export to the region is capitalism, the nemisis of communism. Besides, the drug trade would be easier without those pesky cops and judges in the US.
they are religious fanatics, thats why they attacked us

Its strang that an american site worldnetdaily they say some BS about him giving 1mil to al'qaida go to something non-american, BBC NEWS (British) and suprise suprise they dont have that BullS story.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/2790605.stm

they are religious fanatics, thats why they attacked us
Not exactly. They had idealogical grievances against the US, too. They saw the US as surpressing the Islamic revolution, such as that in Iran. They thought that it was universally applicable, as they tried in Afghanistan to do. However, they saw the US as stopping the revolution in the Middle East, and that's why America became target #1. As the US has actively sought to surpress the "Islamic revolution" in the Gulf, so has the US surpressed communism. So far, they've had no idealogical leader to rally around, like Aylotollah Kohemeni, or Osama bin Laden. This is what I fear Chavez is doing: laying the foundations for a new, militant breed of communist ideaology.

Not exactly. They had idealogical grievances against the US, too. They saw the US as surpressing the Islamic revolution, such as that in Iran. They thought that it was universally applicable, as they tried in Afghanistan to do. However, they saw the US as stopping the revolution in the Middle East, and that's why America became target #1. As the US has actively sought to surpress the "Islamic revolution" in the Gulf, so has the US surpressed communism. So far, they've had no idealogical leader to rally around, like Aylotollah Kohemeni, or Osama bin Laden. This is what I fear Chavez is doing: laying the foundations for a new, militant breed of communist ideaology.
which falls udner religious fanatics

which falls udner religious fanatics
Yes. But my concern is that the idea of terrorism can creep into everything. Why does the IRA exist? Are they religious fanatics? Not to the same degree, yet they're enough to get the British army involved.
Besides, if Latin American guerillas want to inject religious fanatiscism in there, they always have the Roman Catholic Church. Being a Catholic, I find it hard to believe that every Catholic in the world isn't a communist.

Cuba became a very said example for Latino America and showed the people of south america ther choices. Either a capitalist dictatorship that is loyal to America and big business or a communist dictatorship loyal to Soviet that is maybee poorer but still a bit more equal like for example have a higher litracy right. Becuase Castor revolution got ride of a very brutale dictator that USA supported and also improved the living for the poor, but they didn't managed to give democracy to the people or a economic standard like that in the west. The in the 70 we have the very said example of Aliende who was both a socialist and a democrate (to some Amerícan and other like them the combination exist just look at europe) tried by democratic means increase the wellbeing of the peopel by for example nationalize the copper industry. The reaction from the America and other capitalist countries like UK was harsh the helping of overthrowing Aliende and installing Pinochet. Who killed thousands of people during the coup and during his regime. Now I think we risk seing the same (but probably not in the same brutale form) espicially with Bush in the white house. Then especially USA now support forces who worke against democratic elected leftist leaders in countries like Venezuela and Brazil. In Venezuala have it already been a coup that USA welcomed and during the new regime short time they both dismanted the constituon and the parlament.

Yes. But my concern is that the idea of terrorism can creep into everything. Why does the IRA exist? Are they religious fanatics? Not to the same degree, yet they're enough to get the British army involved.
Besides, if Latin American guerillas want to inject religious fanatiscism in there, they always have the Roman Catholic Church. Being a Catholic, I find it hard to believe that every Catholic in the world isn't a communist.
but their target is the british empire, not the world as a whole

but their target is the british empire, not the world as a whole
That's because they have the most beef against the British. Communist guerillas have beef against not only the regimes they wish to change, but also the US, the communists' worst nightmare. Plus, Latin American guerillas get their funds by selling their drugs on the US market. I admit, there are right wing guerillas, too. But currently, their are no dangerously right wing regimes. Chavez, however, is not only dangerously left wing, but he's also autocratic. Should he win, then he's consolidating communist guerillas. Chavez may not support the drug trade, nor may any of his successors. But with the way his state is going, he may get arrogant, seeking to export communism any way necessary.
He could politically and financially support FARC, or the proto-Marxist street gangs in Brazil. Plus, in ten years or so, Venezuela's climate will be condusive to bringing a Latin bin Laden about. One way or another, Chavez will go. He can either go this Sunday, and not a shot will be fired. Or, in a few years, the US will be provoked to remove him. It's ultimatly up to Chavez.

Read this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3479113.stm

Read this http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3479113.stm

Thank you for sharing that. it's interesting how two people can look at the same man and the same actions and see two entirely different things.

Undoubtedly both have valid points and I am sure that the truth lies in teh middle somewhere.

I am glad that Chavez has the majority support though and that his re-election looks hopeful.

http://www.counterpunch.org/wilpert09232003.html read this its an interview with Hugo Chavez

Chavez won referendum the opposition has rejected it

Down with Chavez!!

Why?

What has Chavez done nothing except help the majority of his country THE POOR! Hes done things america doesnt like

oh-no, done things america doesnt like he must be a dictator who gives millions to Al-Qaeda and supports the colombian rebels

What has Chavez done nothing except help the majority of his country THE POOR! Hes done things america doesnt like

oh-no, done things america doesnt like he must be a dictator who gives millions to Al-Qaeda and supports the colombian rebels
hey didnt we do that :rolleyes:

I think you did lol. But the CIA had to create a coup(which Chavez now says he has evidence showing they did).

DICK CHENEY, HUGO CHAVEZ AND BILL CLINTON'S BAND
Why Venezuela has Voted Again for Their 'Negro e Indio' President

Monday Aug 16, 2004

There's so much BS and baloney thrown around about Venezuela that I
may be violating some rule of US journalism by providing some facts.
Let's begin with this: 77% of Venezuela's farmland is owned by 3% of the
population, the 'hacendados.'

I met one of these farmlords in Caracas at an anti-Chavez protest
march. Oddest demonstration I've ever seen: frosted blondes in high heels
clutching designer bags, screeching, "Chavez - dic-ta-dor!" The
plantation owner griped about the "socialismo" of Chavez, then jumped into his
Jaguar convertible.

That week, Chavez himself handed me a copy of the "socialist"
manifesto that so rattled the man in the Jag. It was a new law passed by
Venezuela's Congress which gave land to the landless. The Chavez law
transferred only fields from the giant haciendas which had been left unused and
abandoned.

This land reform, by the way, was promoted to Venezuela in the 1960s
by that Lefty radical, John F. Kennedy. Venezuela's dictator of the time
agreed to hand out land, but forgot to give peasants title to their
property.

But Chavez won't forget, because the mirror reminds him. What the
affable president sees in his reflection, beyond the ribbons of office, is
a "negro e indio" -- a "Black and Indian" man, dark as a cola nut, same
as the landless and, until now, the hopeless. For the first time in
Venezuela's history, the 80% Black-Indian population elected a man with
skin darker than the man in the Jaguar.

So why, with a huge majority of the electorate behind him, twice in
elections and today in a referendum, is Hugo Chavez in hot water with our
democracy-promoting White House?

Maybe it's the oil. Lots of it. Chavez sits atop a reserve of crude
that rivals Iraq's. And it's not his presidency of Venezuela that drives
the White House bananas, it was his presidency of the Organization of
Petroleum Exporting Countries, OPEC. While in control of the OPEC
secretariat, Chavez cut a deal with our maximum leader of the time, Bill
Clinton, on the price of oil. It was a 'Goldilocks' plan. The price would
not be too low, not too high; just right, kept between $20 and $30 a
barrel.

But Dick Cheney does not like Clinton nor Chavez nor their band. To
him, the oil industry's (and Saudi Arabia's) freedom to set oil prices is
as sacred as freedom of speech is to the ACLU. I got this info, by the
way, from three top oil industry lobbyists.

Why should Chavez worry about what Dick thinks? Because, said one of
the oil men, the Veep in his bunker, not the pretzel-chewer in the White
House, "runs energy policy in the United States."

And what seems to have gotten our Veep's knickers in a twist is not
the price of oil, but who keeps the loot from the current band-busting
spurt in prices. Chavez had his Congress pass another oil law, the "Law
of Hydrocarbons," which changes the split. Right now, the oil majors -
like PhillipsConoco - keep 84% of the proceeds of the sale of Venezuela
oil; the nation gets only 16%.

Chavez wanted to double his Treasury's take to 30%. And for good
reason. Landless, hungry peasants have, over decades, drifted into Caracas
and other cities, building million-person ghettos of cardboard shacks
and open sewers. Chavez promised to do something about that.

And he did. "Chavez gives them bread and bricks," one Venezuelan TV
reporter told me. The blonde TV newscaster, in the middle of a publicity
shoot, said the words "pan y ladrillos" with disdain, making it clear
that she never touched bricks and certainly never waited in a bread
line.

But to feed and house the darker folk in those bread and brick lines,
Chavez would need funds, and the 16% slice of the oil pie wouldn't do
it. So the President of Venezuela demanded 30%, leaving Big Oil only
70%. Suddenly, Bill Clinton's ally in Caracas became Mr. Cheney's -- and
therefore, Mr. Bush's -- enemy.

So began the Bush-Cheney campaign to "Floridate" the will of the
Venezuela electorate. It didn't matter that Chavez had twice won election.
Winning most of the votes, said a White House spokesman, did not make
Chavez' government "legitimate." Hmmm. Secret contracts were awarded by
our Homeland Security spooks to steal official Venezuela voter lists.
Cash passed discreetly from the US taxpayer, via the so-called 'Endowment
for Democracy,' to the Chavez-haters running today's "recall" election.

A brilliant campaign of placing stories about Chavez' supposed
unpopularity and "dictatorial" manner seized US news and op-ed pages, ranging
from the San Francisco Chronicle to the New York Times.

But some facts just can't be smothered in propaganda ink. While George
Bush can appoint the government of Iraq and call it "sovereign," the
government of Venezuela is appointed by its people. And the fact is that
most people in this slum-choked land don't drive Jaguars or have their
hair tinted in Miami. Most look in the mirror and see someone "negro e
indio," as dark as their President Hugo.

The official CIA handbook on Venezuela says that half the nation's
farmers own only 1% of the land. They are the lucky ones, as more peasants
owned nothing. That is, until their man Chavez took office. Even under
Chavez, land redistribution remains more a promise than an
accomplishment. But today, the landless and homeless voted their hopes, knowing
that their man may not, against the armed axis of local oligarchs and Dick
Cheney, succeed for them. But they are convinced he will never forget
them.

And that's a fact.

---

Greg Palast's reports from Venezuela for BBC Television's Newsnight
and the Guardian papers of Britain earned a California State University
Journalism School "Project Censored" award for 2002. View photos and
Palast's reports on Venezuela at www.GregPalast.com.

Viva Chavez!!
:D

Down with Chavez!!
READ IT AND WEEP!

...Mr Chávez was first elected in 1998 (and again, for a six-year term, in 2000 under a new constitution). Under his rule, real incomes have fallen to 1950s levels; unemployment stands, officially, at 16%. The economy is growing strongly right now, thanks to high oil prices, but this follows a severe recession: the country has yet to recover the output lost in a two-month general strike in 2002-03. Despite the oil-price surge, the government is deeply in the red.

Venezuela has the largest oil deposits outside the Middle East. From the 1950s, oil revenues propelled a backward agricultural society into jangling modernity, convincing most Venezuelans they were heirs to limitless wealth. Oil brought political stability and some social progress—until the ratio of petrodollars to people turned against the country in the 1980s. Mr Chávez has diverted the extra cash from the current high oil price into social programmes that even supporters acknowledge amount to a “parallel state”. Money is spent not according to the country's development needs, but to keep him in power.

It has taken the opposition nearly two years to force a vote on kicking out Mr Chávez. Before that, it tried less democratic tactics. In April 2002, after a march on the presidential palace ended with 21 dead, the president was briefly ousted by the army. But within 48 hours he was back. Eight months later came the general strike, which also failed to shift him. Both episodes left the regime stronger. After the coup, Mr Chávez purged the armed forces; during the strike, which he later admitted he had deliberately provoked, he took direct control of the state oil firm.

That the two sides have since edged towards a vote to settle their differences owes much to outside pressure—specifically, the mediation of the Organisation of American States and the Carter Centre (of Jimmy Carter, a former American president). For the referendum, observers from these two bodies have agreed to stringent restrictions imposed by the electoral council, including a ban on talking to the press. But their eventual verdict on the fairness of the process will be the litmus test for foreign governments.

Should the result be close and disputed, Venezuela risks the large-scale bloodshed it has so far avoided. Both sides have their armed extremists—and the army itself is divided. If the opposition wins, Mr Chávez is unlikely to go quietly. He says that he would stand in a subsequent election. He might win again: the opposition would have just 30 days to choose and promote its candidate. He has tightened his grip on other branches of government. He has pushed through a law that expands the Supreme Court from 20 to 32 justices, and is packing the court with allies.

...

http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3093539

Sigh :(

...and is packing the court with alliesIs he Republican or something?

Is he Republican or something?
Yeah, after all we even managed to pack Ruth Bader-Ginsberg, and Stephen Breyer during the Clinton years. And don't forget ultra-conservative David Souter during Bush Sr.

Last summer, I had the oppurtunity to visit Venezuela, and the state under Chavez was in total ruin. Anti Chavez graffitti lined the walls and buildings, anti-Chavez rallies were held at the national square nearly every day, and the country seemed bent on ousting the leader that had not held up a single promise.

The reason Chavez was elected in the first place was his campaign. He went to the jungles in south Venezuela to the illiterate tribes who had never voted before, made it easily accessable for them to vote, and covered their villages and towns in pro-Chavez propaganda. In the cities and along the coast, a firm despisal of Chavez was instated, yet the Amazonian Chavez supports out numbered them, and Chavez took office.

He began corrupting the system, destroying the economy and betraying those who he had gained support from. The size of the barios has nearly doubled under Chavez (and that is the most humbling experience, to stand at the foot of a mountain and see it covered to the top with barios) and everyone in them (which would be the poor, by the way) hates him too. The only thing Chavez has done is increase the amount of poor in his country and ruined the economy. He has made it so, while he lives in wealth and riches, his nation could not possibly reach his level, which is a bold hypocricy for a man who "was born in a bario and rose through the ranks."

It is a sickening thing to be among Chavez's Venezuela, and I sincerely hope that those of you who support Chavez understand just how his "magnificant reign of Democracy" has affected Venezuela.

Pero Aunque vueles en lo alto, como aguilla, y tu nido este puesto, de asi te arrojare; Afirma El Señor

...and everyone in them (which would be the poor, by the way) hates him too.Let me get this straigh...you saying The Poor in Venezuela hates Chavez?

Yes, the majority of poor people who voted for Chavez twice hate his guts lol

make that 3 hes won the referendum

Let me get this straigh...you saying The Poor in Venezuela hates Chavez?Kingford...how long did you spent in The Poor Neigborhoods again?

BTW if there was Jaguars and BMWs around...that was NOT the barrios...

make that 3 hes won the referendum

http://www.mommyportal.com/images/party_hat.jpg

http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/0816/venezuela.htmlyay why do we in the EU agree with him then

Found name of coup programm CHAVEZ: INSIDE THE COUP
http://www.deckert-distribution.com/films/deckert_176.htm

make that 3 hes won the referendum
Assuming the vote(s) were fair.

Assuming the vote(s) were fair.

we really don't have reason to believe otherwise as the elections were being monitored by other nations. Why is it so hard to believe that Chavez has popular support? The majority of the country is poor and the poor all love Chavez.

Question of the day: Why do Conservatives hate to see populist leaders with the best interest of the lowerclass at heart?

we really don't have reason to believe otherwise as the elections were being monitored by other nations. Why is it so hard to believe that Chavez has popular support? The majority of the country is poor and the poor all love Chavez.

Question of the day: Why do Conservatives hate to see populist leaders with the best interest of the lowerclass at heart?
We don't. Chavez isn't a populist leader with the best interest of the lower classes at heart. He squanders the oil money and destroys the economy. That helps the poor alright.

Kingford...how long did you spent in The Poor Neigborhoods again?

BTW if there was Jaguars and BMWs around...that was NOT the barrios...

I spent a month total in Venezuela, two weeks in Caracas, two weeks in Guarenas, and one week in a camp in the jungle. Not once did I see a Jaguar or BMW, the newest car I saw was a Fiat in a rather upscale neighborhood. For all but a few nights I was in homestays, where I got to talk with the citizens, and I conversed with them at the mall and the church I was helping at, and there was a largely Anti-Chavez lean.

That's not to say that I would be influenced by these opinions. It was more what I saw that influenced me.