NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/12/01/chavez.venezuela.election.ap/index.html


Chavez backs possible vote to close private TV stations
Story Highlights
•Tensions rise between Hugo Chavez and private media before Sunday's vote
•Chavez often has clashed with Venezuela's private TV and radio networks
•The Venezuelan leader warns he may refuse to renew some broadcast licenses

CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) -- Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez backed the possibility of holding a national referendum, if he's re-elected, on whether to shut down private television stations that he has accused of subversive activities.

Chavez's comments late Thursday came amid rising tensions between the government and the country's largely opposition-aligned private media ahead of Sunday's vote.

Chavez was asked in a televised interview if he would consider asking the nation whether the government should block certain channels from renewing their broadcast licenses next year. (Watch Chavez land a nod as Time magazine's Person of the YearVideo)

"That is perfectly possible," Chavez said. "It's perfectly possible that the country gives its opinion, including for how long."

Chavez also said he regretted not having shut down the country's major private broadcasters right after a short-lived 2002 coup against him, citing four in particular: Globovision, Venevision, RCTV and Televen.

Chavez has clashed with the country's private television and radio networks, which are often highly critical of his government and have favored the opposition in recent years.

During the coup, several TV channels chose to broadcast cartoons and movies instead of his return to power by loyalists in the military amid a popular uprising.

Many media outlets also supported a devastating 2003 strike that failed to unseat Chavez.

In the run-up to Sunday's vote, Chavez has warned that he may refuse to renew their licenses, accusing them of fomenting conspiracies against his government, and also said he's ready to shut down any that try to disrupt the election.

On Thursday, he threatened immediately to shut down any outlet that defies electoral rules prohibiting exit polls and other unofficial counts from being reported until after the National Electoral Council issues its preliminary bulletin.

"You can be sure that they will be closed for breaching the law," he said.

Just a day earlier, a top lawmaker from Chavez's ruling party told government supporters to take over private TV stations on Election Day if they report that opposition challenger, Manuel Rosales, is in the lead ahead of official results, alleging the channel may use rigged exit polls to mislead the public.

"When they start to do that, we must take over the TV channels ... a peaceful takeover as we have always done at the doors of these TV stations," Iris Varela said.

Asked about the possibility that closing private TV stations likely would provoke an international backlash, the Venezuelan leader said that was what held his hand earlier but declared the days of a "permissive Chavez" were over.

"I don't care what the world says. I care about what happens in Venezuela," he said. "The world can say, 'Oh, dear!' but this is my country; I'm responsible."

Local media executives -- joined by the United States and the Miami-based Inter American Press Association -- argue that Chavez has sought to limit freedom of expression since taking office in 1999.

His government has passed a law restricting violence and sexual content over the airwaves, but critics call it a "gag law" that is deliberately vague so that the government can punish media outlets that oppose the administration.

Chavez has denied taking excessive measures, arguing that he is not trying to stifle criticism but rather clamp down on those allegedly using journalistic activities as a front for illegal efforts to topple his government.

Chavez was speaking in a joint interview with two state-backed and two private TV stations in the final hours before the end of campaigning.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

people still watch TV? (well apart from the BBC)

It's okay because it's only fascism when conservatives do it.

It's okay because it's only fascism when conservatives do it.

So far he has done nothing other than float the possibility of having a referendum on the issue.

So far he has done nothing other than float the possibility of having a referendum on the issue.

Well, and assassinate some political opponents... minor, really.

This is what the people of Venezuela get for electing this guy. That is of course if he didn't rig the election. I wonder if Florida voted?

So far he has done nothing other than float the possibility of having a referendum on the issue.

That "floating" creates the sense of auto censorship that he is looking for. Chávez is no moron, he knows exactly how the media work.

And those news are pretty old, I can't believe they are creating such a fuss for that.

And the law is pretty vague, yes.

This is what the people of Venezuela get for electing this guy. That is of course if he didn't rig the election. I wonder if Florida voted?

He didn't rig the elections. Venezuelans in Florida voted 97 per cent for Rosales, the Chávez adversary, although noone was expecting otherwise.

And yes, Chávez won fairly.

Well, and assassinate some political opponents... minor, really.

Proof of that accusation?

Proof of that accusation?

I think he overreacted to the fact that several opposing leaders are in jail or being prosecuted. There are no proofs of him ordering the assasination of noone, although his followers have indeed killed several people "on his behalf".

I think he overreacted to the fact that several opposing leaders are in jail or being prosecuted. There are no proofs of him ordering the assasination of noone, although his followers have indeed killed several people "on his behalf".

Not that we in the West would ever think of killing anyone over Politics...
*hides Iraq in a box marked "fragile"*

Not that we in the West would ever think of killing anyone over Politics...
*hides Iraq in a box marked "fragile"*

Venezuela is in the west hemisphere, lad.

Yes, right there to the south of Florida and New York.

Venezuela is in the west hemisphere, lad.

Yes, right there to the south of Florida and New York.
To the right of the Caucasus maybe???????

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasus

To the right of the Caucasus maybe???????

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasus

What are you smoking?

And why aren't you sharing?

If an American President were to "float" this idea, the American populace would storm the streets, proclaim him a fascist and demand that the House look into beginning impeachment proceedings.

Eventually chavez will stuff the economy up (meglomaniacs always do) and this whole thing will end in an Idi Aminesque fashion.

Venezuela is in the west hemisphere, lad.

there’s a western hemisphere now?

there’s a western hemisphere now?

Everything west of the prime meridian.

there’s a western hemisphere now?

Didn't do well in your geography classes, did you?

I don't care; if the Venezuelan people don't like it, do they get to complain? No! Because they voted for fucking Chavez!

I don't care; if the Venezuelan people don't like it, do they get to complain? No! Because they voted for fucking Chavez!


The article, that is quoted in its entirety in the OP, clearly states that Chavez would back a referendum on this issue. If the Venezuelan people don't like it, they will simply not vote for it.

The article, that is quoted in its entirety in the OP, clearly states that Chavez would back a referendum on this issue. If the Venezuelan people don't like it, they will simply not vote for it.

Yeah, and Chavez is going to respect that referendum, isn't he? :rolleyes:

Yeah, and Chavez is going to respect that referendum, isn't he? :rolleyes:

He has respected all referendums so far.

Hmm, that's a dangerous idea to be floating around. I hope they do the sensible thing and vote to keep private media. It is not a good thing to rule without criticism. Chavez should rethink suggesting such things if he doesn't want to be written off as some wannabe-dictator. I know he says he doesn't care about international opinion, but neither did "the Devil," and look where that got him! =P

And how many people on this forum think that Chavez is great and would NEVER do anything wrong... LOL

Well, and assassinate some political opponents... minor, really.


What political opponents has he had assasinated and when?

I think he overreacted to the fact that several opposing leaders are in jail or being prosecuted. There are no proofs of him ordering the assasination of noone, although his followers have indeed killed several people "on his behalf".


So he didn't then. Just getting in the spin doctoring....

Who do you think planted the car bomb that killed the prosecutor investigating the 2002 coup against Chavez, btw?

And how many people on this forum think that Chavez is great and would NEVER do anything wrong... LOL

There's a lot who treat him like he's a patron saint of the left.

If an American President were to "float" this idea, the American populace would storm the streets, proclaim him a fascist and demand that the House look into beginning impeachment proceedings.

No, thats what they would have done 20+ years ago. Today, they would probably just whine a little and have a few entertaining media spectacles. The seed has already been planted deep enough, if it has yet to bloom, then nothing short of disbanding congress will do it.

If an American President were to "float" this idea, the American populace would storm the streets, proclaim him a fascist and demand that the House look into beginning impeachment proceedings.

ah, but the USians aren't just coming out of an explicitly feudal system.

I don't care; if the Venezuelan people don't like it, do they get to complain? No! Because they voted for fucking Chavez!

Well, not all did, really. The thinking ones, it seems.

So he didn't then. Just getting in the spin doctoring....

Who do you think planted the car bomb that killed the prosecutor investigating the 2002 coup against Chavez, btw?

Oh, Danilo Anderson? I place my bet on his former boss, the General Prosecutor Isaías Rodríguez, as he seems to be quite placing obstacles in the investigation. Taking into account that the Chávez administration is in charge of every power available here, I cannot see how things go so awry regarding that particular case, unless there are some officcials involved from the inside. He was investigating several cases, not just the April 11th of 2002, where he pointed he was going to discover people of the MVR (Chávez's party) as collaborators with the opposition, and even under payment of the CIA. I guess someone inside the goverment, or the military, silenced him to avoid being snitched with the boss. Sadly, he looked one of the few honest men working around. For your grief, the opposition didn't, and don't, have the weapons or the resources to back such a thing. I bet it was either the prosecutor, or some military general trying to cover his American contacts.

I think I have already cleared that said day, April 11th, it was more a vacuum of power than a coup, noting that he resigned before the military tried to seize power and put some clown in power, thing that was rejected by most opposers the same day. He was not overthrow, he left, and some opportunistic right-wing group took the chance to grab power.

The two main witnesses brought by the General Prosecutor were ex presidiary clowns that lied blatantly and told some rubbish about a cardinal, a journalist and a business man planning the murder in Panama, but after even surface investigations proved to be just mirage, they dissapeared from view.

...
Taking into account that the Chávez administration is in charge of every power available here, I cannot see how things go so awry regarding that particular case, unless there are some officcials involved from the inside. He was investigating several cases, not just the April 11th of 2002, where he pointed he was going to discover people of the MVR (Chávez's party) as collaborators with the opposition, and even under payment of the CIA.

So the Chavez government would have no wish to have collaborators
with the opposition possibly in the pay of the CIA brought to justice?
But apparently would be too stupid to follow up on this having the same
hints, rumours and ideas that you quite easily have.
Maybe its a language thing but a lot of what you say and the
positions you adopt require many people to behave in ways that are
entirely in contradiction with what would be to their benefit.


I guess someone inside the goverment, or the military, silenced him to avoid being snitched with the boss. Sadly, he looked one of the few honest men working around. For your grief, the opposition didn't, and don't, have the weapons or the resources to back such a thing. I bet it was either the prosecutor, or some military general trying to cover his American contacts.


I think you are perhaps understimating the resources available to the opposition
what with support from US democracy promoting organistions such as
National Endowment of Democracy and its sub-foundations,
the International Republican Institute,
the Center for International Private Enterprise,
the AFL-CIO’s Solidarity Center
and USAID's office of transition initiatives.




I think I have already cleared that said day, April 11th, it was more a vacuum of power than a coup, noting that he resigned before the military tried to seize power and put some clown in power, thing that was rejected by most opposers the same day. He was not overthrow, he left, and some opportunistic right-wing group took the chance to grab power.


You do keep saying this and you may really want to believe it,
but you must realise that a resignation in the circumstances
is not credible, ever. Even if he made a video at the time saying
I am hereby resigning, its value would be exactly zero
A democratically elected president who resigns does so in the
full light of day in government buildings to the government or
parliament or assembly and on camera, he gives his reasons
personally and directly to the government and the people.

Nothing at all even if actually said or done under military coercion
can carry any weight or validity.
So lets not even pretend to have discussion about whether he resigned
or not. There was no resignation because there could be no acceptable
resignation in those circumstances and in the manner in which it
is supposed to have occured.



The two main witnesses brought by the General Prosecutor were ex presidiary clowns that lied blatantly and told some rubbish about a cardinal, a journalist and a business man planning the murder in Panama, but after even surface investigations proved to be just mirage, they dissapeared from view.


A columbian paramilitary is of course not the most wonderful
of witnesses and the Columbian Intelligence Services have cast
considerable doubt on his credibility.

I understand the people who actually carried out the killing have been
convicted and are you saying that with insufficient evidence the supposed
plotters have not been, and if so are you saying that is a bad thing?

I am having a headache trying to read your posts...

But well, let's again argue point by point.

A high goverment official collaborating with the CIA wouldn't like to get his cover exposed. So, he pays to get that disturbing prosecutor killed. that was what I meant.

Benefit of a goverment official working for the CIA? Money

Benefit of killing the prosecutor?, avoiding being discovered by his revolutionary friends.

I have worked for the opposition, and didn't receive any support from any US organization, in personnel, or funds, or material or anything. I know pretty well that the opposition is disbanded and don't have any power at all, because I have been with them from the inside. I think you have a conspiracy theory quite embedded in your head over there. You overstimate the power of the opposition. every parlamentary seat is controlled by Chávez party. Every court is under charge of a Chávez supporting judge. The General Prosecutor, and every other power is controlled by his own party, and also the higher ranks of the army. Where is the power of the opposition then?

Well, if his Defense Minister, that was his closest supporter, came out and say he resigned, people were prone to believe him. Also, forced resigns are acceptable if they avoid a bloodshed, who was what most people was interested in, even his own party. Didn't you know that same Hugo Chávez conducted a coup before his presidential campaign who first tried to assasinate a president and then force him to resign? Didn't you know that Chávez is the only military officer here in Venezuela who has conducted an effective coup in the last 20 years?

A columbian paramilitary convicted several times by fraud and perjury. And yes, I am saying that said people weren't plotters and the goverment was trying to frame them because they were from sectors clasically aligned against the goverment's policies.

I am having a headache trying to read your posts...

But well, let's again argue point by point.

A high goverment official collaborating with the CIA wouldn't like to get his cover exposed. So, he pays to get that disturbing prosecutor killed. that was what I meant.

Benefit of a goverment official working for the CIA? Money

Benefit of killing the prosecutor?, avoiding being discovered by his revolutionary friends.

I understood that that was what you meant.
The point however was the government would have no benefit
for not following up on it very strongly if there was any chance of
what you suggest being true. Government officials in the pay of
the country that is the greatest threat to Chavez and his government.


I have worked for the opposition, and didn't receive any support from any US organization, in personnel, or funds, or material or anything. I know pretty well that the opposition is disbanded and don't have any power at all, because I have been with them from the inside. I think you have a conspiracy theory quite embedded in your head over there. You overstimate the power of the opposition. every parlamentary seat is controlled by Chávez party. Every court is under charge of a Chávez supporting judge. The General Prosecutor, and every other power is controlled by his own party, and also the higher ranks of the army. Where is the power of the opposition then?

Every parliamentary seat is controlled by Chavez supporters
(116 out of 167 belonging to his own party)
because they were elected
and as you know
none of the seats went to any of the 5 main opposition parties because
they boycotted the election.
Knowing the would not win, they thought they could do better not running
at all and then claiming the elections were not valid. But nothing stopped
them running and the fact that they have no representation in the Assembly
is because they did not run.

It is a matter of public record that the US funded organisations
I listed are active in Venezuela, they are well funded and they they
are not there giving money to Chavez or his supporters.
Please do not expect me to be entirely dense.



Well, if his Defense Minister, that was his closest supporter, came out and say he resigned, people were prone to believe him. Also, forced resigns are acceptable if they avoid a bloodshed, who was what most people was interested in, even his own party.

I said we shouldn't argue whether he did resign or not because
whatever might be said under coercion would not be taken seriously
by anyone, anyhow. No valid resignation could have taken place
unless it was to the assembly or at the very least to his people
directly without coercion.

Plus as you know, Chavez has said that he negotiated a resignation
to avoid bloodshed and only on condition that the succession would be
in accordance with the constitution and only to avoid bloodshed.

But he could have said he would paint himself pink and green and have
sing old glory, naked and it would have no validity in the circumstances
he was in.

Didn't you know that same Hugo Chávez conducted a coup before his presidential campaign who first tried to assasinate a president and then force him to resign? Didn't you know that Chávez is the only military officer here in Venezuela who has conducted an effective coup in the last 20 years?

He performed a rather ineffective coup 1992
- given that he was imprisoned for the next 2 years because of it.
The coup attempt coming after the Caracazo riots in 1989
where the death toll is anywhere between the official 276 up to the 2000
claimed by some NGO's, thousands more were injured.
A slightly more deadly event than the supposed cause of the 2002 coup.


A columbian paramilitary convicted several times by fraud and perjury. And yes, I am saying that said people weren't plotters and the goverment was trying to frame them because they were from sectors clasically aligned against the goverment's policies.

So a justice system that works and does not convict people
when insufficient evidence is there is somehow proof that
the things are bad ??

Despite Chavez controlling everything?
His courts fail to convict his enemies?
Quite a power mad controller he is, he's just so darn subtle.

I understood that that was what you meant.
The point however was the government would have no benefit
for not following up on it very strongly if there was any chance of
what you suggest being true. Government officials in the pay of
the country that is the greatest threat to Chavez and his government.

Goverments are sometimes not efficient enough. And given that the guy who did it perhaps holds an important place in the current administration, he can boycott the investigations. You missed entirely my point, I suggest you to review it.


Every parliamentary seat is controlled by Chavez supporters
(116 out of 167 belonging to his own party)
because they were elected
and as you know
none of the seats went to any of the 5 main opposition parties because
they boycotted the election.
Knowing the would not win, they thought they could do better not running
at all and then claiming the elections were not valid. But nothing stopped
them running and the fact that they have no representation in the Assembly
is because they did not run.

I didn't deny that, every part of it is true. However, the Chávez administration still holds every power in the country, which was my point with that, point that you also seem to be missing.

It is a matter of public record that the US funded organisations
I listed are active in Venezuela, they are well funded and they they
are not there giving money to Chavez or his supporters.
Please do not expect me to be entirely dense.

If they are active in Venezuela, at least they are subtle, because I haven't seen evidence of their actions. Again, my point there was to say that the opposition here does not hold any instance of power, and again you seem to have missed that.

He performed a rather ineffective coup 1992
- given that he was imprisoned for the next 2 years because of it.
The coup attempt coming after the Caracazo riots in 1989
where the death toll is anywhere between the official 276 up to the 2000
claimed by some NGO's, thousands more were injured.
A slightly more deadly event than the supposed cause of the 2002 coup.

The point is that Chávez already attempted to force a president to resign by force by his own hand. I cannot the relationship between that fact and the riots of 1989, who weren't organized as a military coup to seize power. Tangent argument?

So a justice system that works and does not convict people
when insufficient evidence is there is somehow proof that
the things are bad ??

Despite Chavez controlling everything?
His courts fail to convict his enemies?
Quite a power mad controller he is, he's just so darn subtle.

International pressure, placing cardinals in jail is not well seen overseas, specially in allied countries like Brazil, or Argentina.

Also, a good work for the press uncovering everything said "witness" told.

I understood that that was what you meant.
The point however was the government would have no benefit
for not following up on it very strongly if there was any chance of
what you suggest being true. Government officials in the pay of
the country that is the greatest threat to Chavez and his government.

*snipped for sanity's sake*

Your random line
breaks are driving me
nuts.

Your random line
breaks are driving me
nuts.

Main reason
of my head
ache. I think he likes
too much haiku
poetry.

Lack of proper punctuation marks
all along his posts seem
to be helping too
but at least he is
argumenting properly without
resourcing to the typical
denial showed by others
in this kind of discussions.

Goverments are sometimes not efficient enough. And given that the guy who did it perhaps holds an important place in the current administration, he can boycott the investigations. You missed entirely my point, I suggest you to review it.

Governments are often not efficient, the possibility that amongst their number
are paid agents of decidely unfriendly foreign powers tends to prompt them into action regardless.



I didn't deny that, every part of it is true. However, the Chávez administration still holds every power in the country, which was my point with that, point that you also seem to be missing.


I am not missing it, you are stating it as if it is meaningful.
The government is in power, that is not abnormal.
That the principle opposition have no seats is abnormal so it needs to
be told in context, the context being they boycotted an election they
were going to do badly in, as an attempt to claim a lack of legitimacy.



If they are active in Venezuela, at least they are subtle, because I haven't seen evidence of their actions. Again, my point there was to say that the opposition here does not hold any instance of power, and again you seem to have missed that.

NED has its own prior history in destabilising countris, eg Nicaragua
Their budgets are high and being American they are unlikely to be subtle.
Even your favoured party, although out of power is in a democratic country
they have the same power any opposition parties have, in that they could
potentially win the next election, if the electorate want what they have to offer.



The point is that Chávez already attempted to force a president to resign by force by his own hand. I cannot the relationship between that fact and the riots of 1989, who weren't organized as a military coup to seize power. Tangent argument?


1989 riots protesting government corruption,
the government used the military to kill hundreds and
injure thousands. One disgusted military officer who did not take part in it
gathered his supporters and arranged a coup which failed.
Perhaps if they had used snipers you would have found it easier to support
the other side.


International pressure, placing cardinals in jail is not well seen overseas, specially in allied countries like Brazil, or Argentina.
Also, a good work for the press uncovering everything said "witness" told.

I see.

If an American President were to "float" this idea, the American populace would storm the streets, proclaim him a fascist and demand that the House look into beginning impeachment proceedings.

What's this? The morals of the USA differ from those of other cultures? The bastards! Burn them! BUUUUUUURRRRRRNNNNN THEM!

Well, and assassinate some political opponents... minor, really.

...which political opponents would those be?

This is what the people of Venezuela get for electing this guy. That is of course if he didn't rig the election. I wonder if Florida voted?

multiple independant foreign institutions have said that the election was *not* rigged.

If an American President were to "float" this idea, the American populace would storm the streets, proclaim him a fascist and demand that the House look into beginning impeachment proceedings.

actually, I suspect the american populace would drive to wal-mart, pick up some chips and soda, fill up their cars with some venuzuelan gasoline, and then drive home and masturbate. if the private stations still played "the simpsons" and "heroes" and had less annoying advertising then I doubt they would care. we've shown ourselves to be a fat, happy, and complacent populace for a long time now.

And how many people on this forum think that Chavez is great and would NEVER do anything wrong... LOL

he's probably a megolomaniac and if he hasn't already, he will probably get out of control. however, he is my alter-ego. when I run countries in video games I run them like a ruthless dictator...same way I enjoyed reading machiavelli, and I always play as a theif/assassin in RPGs...his public policy decisions make the human rights activist in me go "NOOOOOOOOOOOO!" but the deftness with which he has neutralized his political enemies and the efficiency his reforms (whatever their motivation) have brought to the govenrment impress me as a strategist and a manipulative person in general. I definately admire the man, though if he were the president of the US I'd be protesting him constantly. then again, the US government hasn't shown any lack of corruption or malevolence over its history. if native american genocides and guantonimo bay are what representative democracy means, I'm not sure I care if he's un-democratic. the kids in the inner city neighborhood I went to school in don't go any less hungry, read any better, or watch any fewer loved ones die of poverty induced violence or drug addiction because his majesty George the second was elected, and has to deal with congress. roman infrastructure did not get any less efficient with the death of the republic nor did the lives of the poor majority get any worse - in some situations they got better. political freedom is ethically neutral. and the reports of chavez's rural health and education programs I've heard were made by neutral outsiders. he is agressive, yes, but I really don't see any moral difference between what he's doing and the system of government I live under myself.