Venezuela’s Electoral Authorities Condemn Attempts to Discredit Them

[Say_What]

*Opposition* up to its old tricks. LOL

<clips>

Caracas, Venezuela. Jan 21, 2004 (Venezuelanalysis.com).- The president of National Electoral Council (CNE), Francisco Carrasquero, expressed concerns this Wednesday for what he calls "the unleashing of an unjustified campaign, without legitimate reasons, against the electoral referee". According to Carrasquero, that view is shared by the rest of the Electoral Council board members, and they consider it "extremely dangerous, as whatever decision the Council may make , must be respected by all parties."

Venezuela’s National Electoral Council is currently counting and verifying the authenticity of signatures collected both by supporters of President Chavez’s government and by opponents, to request recall referenda on opposition lawmakers, and on President Chavez, respectively.

"Members of some political sectors come to the CNE to misrepresent the truth, to lie, to spread falsehoods about the signature verification process we are doing, and we cannot tolerate it, because it creates cracks and injures on the credibility and the majesty of the institution. Politicians defend their party interests; we defend the rights of all Venezuelans," said Carrasquero.

Right-wing opposition party Primero Justicia (Justice First) has publicly criticized the CNE as being too slow to verify and count the signatures. Primero Justicia Secretary General Jose Luis Mejia, said that there were two CNEs; one working "as fast as a rabbit" on gubernatorial elections, and another one "slow as a turtle" working on the recall referendum against President Chavez.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1175

[Say_What]

1. The Chavez Government's Economic Policies

Great background facts on what Chavez inherited.

<clips>

Despite attempts by the Venezuelan opposition and the US business press to paint the Chavez government as the cause of Venezuela's economic problems, the economic crisis in Venezuela, and indeed throughout the poor countries, is more widespread, deeper, and longer-running than anything that can be attributed to a single regime. A quick look at the economies of Venezuela's neighbours - Colombia, or Brazil - shows that Venezuela has no monopoly on problems like poverty, inflation, unemployment, and social problems like violent crime.

Gregory Wilpert recently published an assessment of the Chavez government's fight against poverty (1). He argues that Chavez, on coming to power in 1999, inherited an economy that was undergoing a long-term trend towards increasing poverty, misery, and inequality. He argues, further, that Venezuela under Chavez has managed to achieve some success in fighting poverty through redistributive policies like rural and urban land reform, micro-credit lending, public education, food distribution, and health clinics.

In its anti-poverty fight, Chavez's economic team has had to grapple with a very difficult problem: what can a poor country manage to do in a neoliberal context? The poor countries are often saddled with large external debts the form of loans and interest payments made possible by lending institutions like the IMF. If they want to develop and reduce unemployment, speed economic improvement and reduce their indebtedness, they need capital and investment. These dynamics force governments into a 'race to the bottom', as they lower labor, health, and environmental standards (the very things 'development' is supposed to bring) in order to meet the conditions of investors and lenders. Whether these are private, or institutional like the International Monetary Fund, investors and creditors exact a terrible price from people in exchange for their investments, the benefits of which somehow elude the population. But trying to live outside of the global economy and 'delink' (2) from it, particularly when a vindictive global power applies sanctions, blockades, and terrorist attacks (as partially 'delinked' Cuba has faced), is even harder.

Having learned from Venezuela's past experience, Chavez's government has tried various ways to deal with this problem. None of them are long-term solutions, but they are policies thought out to try to help the economy survive the class- based conflict and sabotage the country has faced.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1092

[Zuni]

2. what is with all the Chavez worship here?

The guy is a unstable, egotistical maniac who is no good

[Judi Lynn]

3. Maybe you would like to share some actual proof of your charges.

Hugo Chavez was elected in a landslide election and is a legitimately elected leader of Venezuela.

If you have any proof he's unsound, be sure to provide some links to your sources.

On edit:

What causes you to think Democrats should join with you and the right-wing coup plotters in Venezuela in dispising a liberal politician?

[GringoTex]

9. Chavez is a joke

Nobody's claiming he wasn't legitmately elected. But the guy's a bumbling, corrupt incompetent clown. It's a damn shame a bunch of unknowing gringos north of the border have tried to claim him as a progressive hero. I thought a 50 year Cold War would have taught us all that the enemy of our enemy is not necessarily our friend.

[9215]

11. If Chavez is a joke, what is Bush?

Please cite some examples of Chavez's "bumbling" and "corruption".

[pescao]

4. he´s neither unstable,

egotistical or a maniac. you´re getting confused cos bush* is busily destablising venezuela. seriously, do some research next time instead of parroting fox news´ talking points...

[Say_What]

6. A great interview with Father Roy Bourgeois of SOA Watch

that you may have seen on another thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=323808#324592

I noticed a few days ago in a thread you mentioned he was in the audience--are you back in VZ?

Peace!!

[pescao]

10. back for a bit

just a holiday, but the plan is to make the move ASAP. but that´s what we said over a year ago...

here are some pix of mr C on sunday - alo presidente!





more at http://www.thenewagenda.org/alo

[Say_What]

5. Sounds just like Bush buddy Cisneros's Caracas media

Got facts to support that RW Bush*t?? Keeerist, turn Faux Noooz, OFF.

[LostInTheMaise]

15. He is a strong leftist

That appeals to many here. As to if far leftism is a good thing that is not very clear.

[AP]

18. There used to be more people who felt as you do.

But the facts piled up and they all left with their tails between their legs.

[LostInTheMaise]

26. Wrong

A hardline against anti-chavez citizens is no better than those against him. Freedom of speech and right to protest is the right of EVERYONE not just those that support your choice of leaders.

Chavez is clamping down on any and all that don't support him...not just the coup types. That is not a good sign.

A leader must allow ALL peaceful protests. Right?

[Solon]

28. Peaceful protest is one thing

actively trying to overthrow a democratically elected leader is quite another.

[LostInTheMaise]

30. I agree but...

"We will not allow disobedience..." is a big red flag to me and I would fight to the death to stop it. Tell me...if Bush said "We will not allow disobedience..." would you defend him like you do Chavez?

BTW, even a "democratically elected leader" can be wrong.

[Solon]

31. Bush's enablers an insinuated as much...

So as a general rule no I wouldn't like it. Then again, what was meant by that, to disobey the constitution and rule of law, or simply to follow the leader lockstep? They are two different things after all, think of the Oath of Citizenship here, is it that much different?

[AP]

44. First act of anti-chavez coup plotters: tear up constitution.

The last act, when the fled: steal the money in the safe.

These people are criminals. They belong in jail. Chavez let them all go. Some dictator!

[LostInTheMaise]

55. I still can't deal with "We will not allow disobedience..."

That is a big red flag and I can't understand why people here accept it. If nothing else is sacred the right to practice disobedience should be preserved as long as it is peaceful.

Please tell me I'm not totally off base here for demanding the right to be disobedient peacefully.

[AP]

67. No matter how much you say that, it will not change the facts that

are set out below.

[LostInTheMaise]

56. More information please or a link

I was not aware that peaceful protesters belong in jail. Is there a link to the protesters that belong in jail for peaceful protests?

[AP]

66. Coup plotters aren't even in jail! Coup opposers got bullets in brainpans

and are dead.

See the movie, The Revolution Will Not Be Televised. That's my link.

[Zhade]

48. Proof that high post counts do not necessarily equal knowledge.

Do you actually know anything about Chavez besides what FAUX News and BSGOP have told you?

[LostInTheMaise]

57. Exactly. I'm looking for links too

The link that shows where peaceful protesters are not allowed to proclaim their concerns against Chavez peacefully. I really want to believe that Chavez is allowing protesters to air their concerns otherwise I can't support his goals.

[Say_What]

7. Italian business exec. says now obvious that Chavez would win referendum

<clips>

Italian business executive says now obvious that Chavez Frias would win any revocatory referendum hands down

Italian business executive Giulio Santusuoso has told Venezolana de Television (VTV) 'En Confianza' program that, as he sees it, the nation's economy is making a strong recovery after the debilitating 2-months opposition labor stoppage, December-January 2003 which cost the nation more than US$7.5 billion in lost revenues.

Santusuoso says that an increase in the number of jobs on offer in the classified advertising columns of some nati0nal newspapers shows that the Venezuelan economy is recovering. He says that one of the most important themes in world economics is employment although he would rather see the term eliminated since within the space of several years each one of us will be seen as independent entrepreneurs.

As regards the political scene in Venezuela, Santusuoso says that it is now obvious that President Hugo Chavez Frias would win any eventual revocatory referendum against him ... "it a simple matter of numbers although the opinion polls are fighting shy of publishing them!"

"Each time Antonio Ledezma appears on television, Chavez Frias is gaining more and more points in his favor..."

Joking aside, Santusuoso suggests that there should be a Constitutional Amendment to establish that whomsoever wants to be elected to public office should first undergo an intelligence test ... "it is really depressing to hear the declarations coming from some individuals who only spout off for political advantage without considering the idiocy of what they are actually saying ... I read some of their Op-Ed articles and I can;t help but laugh since they actually believe they are saying something with significance."

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=14610

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

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

[9215]

12. Chavez worshipper here

Well, I have trouble worshipping anybody, but if I was going to Chavez would be on the top of the list.

He kicks ass against formidable odds. I like the way he shoves the fascist Bushistas BS on terrorism back in their faces. By Bush's standard Chavez should have the right to invade Florida and seize the terrorist bastards being harbored there that tried to overthrow his government.

His presidency is more legit than Bush's, at least he was popularly elected.

[AP]

19. Same here. The Revolution Will Not Be Televised will convert anyone still

unsure about him.

[Judi Lynn]

13. It's small, but important

Just discovered the Chicago Tribune admitted a nasty "error:"

(snip) A little noticed retraction published in the Chicago Tribune on April 20 summed up the extreme prejudice of our major news organizations against the president of Venezuela:
"An editorial on Sunday mistakenly said that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez had praised Osama bin Laden. The Tribune regrets the error."


http://www.ftlcomm.com/ensign/editorials/LTE/weisbrot/weisbrot002/regimechange.html

Well, WHOOPS!

This is so typical, with propagandists pouring their bilge into our news sources.

[Judi Lynn]

14. Venezuela army chief backs Chavez

Last Updated: Tuesday, 20 January, 2004, 10:11 GMT


Venezuela army chief backs Chavez
"We will not allow disobedience... we want no more treason against the people of Venezuela," General Carneiro said as he took over as

Chavez (c) appointed Carneiro (r) to protect his presidency
The newly-appointed defence minister in Venezuela has pledged to serve President Hugo Chavez and fight any coup that threatens his leadership. (snip)

General Jorge Garcia Carneiro has warned that disobedience and treason in the country would not be tolerated.

About 100 dissident officers were dismissed after supporting a bungled coup against Mr Chavez in April 2002.

"We will not allow disobedience... we want no more treason against the people of Venezuela," General Carneiro said as he took over as defence minister in the capital, Caracas.

"I will not allow coup-plotting or terrorist military officers to attack democracy and constitutional rule ... they will face a severe and effective response," he added.
(snip/)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3412327.stm

(Here's one who won't be one of our hired traitors.)

[LostInTheMaise]

16. General Jorge Garcia Carneiro has warned that disobedience in the country

would not be tolerated.

Okay. I would like to hear a defense of this ststement and why if disobedience is bad for Chavez then why is it not bad for any leader here in America. Any takers?

[AP]

22. He's adressing would-be Pinochets within the armed services. Not citizens.

He's defending citizens from the military.

[LostInTheMaise]

17. We will not allow disobedience...

I must ask again; is disobedience really something that Chavez supporters here want squelched? Can the question not be answered?

[AP]

20. He's talking about member of the armed services like the fascists who

backed the coup.

He's saying that, just because you have guns doesn't mean you can usurp Democracy.

He's talking to would-be Pinochets.

[LostInTheMaise]

21. The statement: "We will not allow disobedience" seems pretty broad

How do you know that it was only directed to "would-be Pinochets"?

If our own selected one said: "We will not allow disobedience" would you apologize for him and say it was only directed to airline terrorists and those currently on the blacklist?

I personally believe a leader saying "We will not allow disobedience" is too broad and open to too many interpretations.

Where did you find it was directed to only the "would-be Pinochets"?

[AP]

23. I know because I read the article.

"I will not allow coup-plotting or terrorist military officers to attack democracy and constitutional rule ... they will face a severe and effective response," he added.

[LostInTheMaise]

24. I read it too

"We will not allow disobedience..." General Carneiro said as he took over as defence minister in the capital, Caracas.

I see it as a hardline aainst ANYONE that disagrees against their dictate. I don't like it and would NEVER stand for it here.

I see NO defense for it.

[Solon]

25. We shall protect ourselves from all enemies

foreign and DOMESTIC. Now does that sound like a hardline to you?

[LostInTheMaise]

27. A peaceful protester of the ruling party is not an "Enemy"

All peaceful protests MUST be allowed in any government.

Do you disagree?

[Solon]

29. Yes I do, However

But doesn't the government have a right to protect itself from those who actively are trying to overthrow it?

[LostInTheMaise]

32. Yes they do

However a statement like: "We will not allow disobedience..." is tantamount to a dictatorship. I don't support any dictatorship.

Does the bush cabal have a right to "protect itself from those who actively are trying to overthrow it"?

[Solon]

33. You seem stuck on 5 words here, why not take it in context...

and yes the Bush Administration has the right to protect itself from coup plotters. That does not mean that we have no right to critisize them or thier policies, nor to beat them in the next elections. Chavez opposition have every right to oppose him in policy and can publicize all they want, they do not have the right to end a democracy thru violence with a coup. They tried an illegal method of regime change, and not the legal method, elections. If they can convince a majority to oust Chavez, then they are happy to do it, through election, no other way.

[LostInTheMaise]

34. I am VERY stuck on those five words

"We will not allow disobedience..."

I can't accept that kind of dictatorship by ANY leader.

I am very disappointed that some people here ignore such a threat. Any and all dictatorships are bad. I have lost ALL respect for Chavez and he needs to lead by compasion and not force.

[AP]

36. Do you know they had an attempted coup supported by members

of the military. The first thing the coup leaders did was tear up the constitution. And now you're arguing that you're upset that a member of the MILITARY (the institution within government which is supposed to follow the orders of the constitutional government) shouldn't be able to restrict members of the military that way.

That argument is beyond absurd. It's an apologia for fascism.

[Judi Lynn]

37. Please provide a real link to your information Hugo Chavez is a dictator

Also, provide a decent link to a source bringing evidence he is not entitled to maintain his legally elected position as Venezuela's president.

Would you imagine there is no totally armed force protecting _{George Bush} every moment of his life?

Where have you been to be unaware that ALL protesters and demonstrators are not allowed within BLOCKS of him when he visits any location? He is massively protected. What head of state isn't?

[Solon]

39. People were claiming that he was a Dictator before the Coup...

I have yet to see evidence that he is one, or even can become one. I have strong doubts that he would use force to enforce his rule. Don't the newspapers there still slam him, almost daily? I say, step back and see what unfolds, for if he proves to be a dictator then yes I would condemn him, but it is best for all involved if the U.S. would butt out of Latin American politics all together, we create messes, we don't fix them.

[Judi Lynn]

46. Can't begin to imagine anyone who reads much would try that one,

would you? Unbelievable.

Here's a quick grab for information on Gustavos Cisneros, Venezuela's largest media owner, and friend of _{Bush the Elder:}

(snip) The most important and widely-watched television network - Venevision - is part of a media empire owned by multimillionaire Gustavo Cisneros. The Organizacion Diego Cisneros has over 70 outlets in 39 countries. These include: Univision, which accounts for 80 percent of Spanish language broadcasts in the US; Canal 13, Chilevision, DirectTV Latin America, Galavision, Playboy TV Latin America, Playboy TV International, Uniseries, Vale TV, Via Digital, AOL Latin America
(see Maurice Lemoine, Le Monde Diplomatique, Sept 2002).

In addition to its joint ventures with Playboy and US media giant
AOL, the Cisneros group also enjoy profitable partnerships with Coca Cola and Pizza Hut. Not surprisingly, Cisneros is a strong advocate of the neoliberal economic model tirelessly promoted by bodies such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.

Cisneros is also a friend of former US president - and father of the current incumbent - George Bush snr. They have reportedly enjoyed fishing and golfing trips together and Bush snr has spent holidays on Cisnero's property in Venezuela. Cisneros was a keen supporter of the privatisation of the state oil company, PDVSA. (snip)

The private media's hostility towards the government was manifest in a daily barrage of anti-government stories and positive coverage of opposition figures. In December 2001, the Venezuelan Press Bloc - an association of key media owners - joined the first 'strike' against the government.
Insults, outrageous allegations and outright calls for the overthrow of Chavez were common in print and on television. (snip)

http://www.chavezthefilm.com/html/backgrd/media.htm

[Judi Lynn]

47. As to DAILY attacks on him, I've seen so many my eyes glaze over

They show up daily to attack and revile him/, commenting on everything from his accent to his use of words, his mannerisms, etc.

Loathesome, unprofessional altogether.

On edit:

They'd really have their hands full if Chavez became corrupt and brutal, like their last right-wing, impeached President Carlos Andres Perez.

[0rganism]

50. FIND THE WHOLE SPEECH OR STFU

I'm sick of you getting hung up on an ellipses added by the editor.

You want to make the charge that General Jorge Garcia Carneiro was talking about civilians? Fine. Do some research, find THE ENTIRE PARAGRAPH without the ellipses, and get back to us.

[LostInTheMaise]

59. I think I'll just Shut The Fuck Up like you demand I do sir

When Chavez says to his subjects: "We will not allow disobedience..." I took issue with it. If you don't then fine, Since you have more posts than me I'll just Shut The Fuck Up like you demand and never voice my opinion aainst a dictator that says: "We will not allow disobedience...".

Your love for Chavez has blinded you to the wrongness of a leader telling his people: "We will not allow disobedience...".

If bush ever says: "We will not allow disobedience..." I hope you don't mind if I speak up or will you still tell me to "Shut The Fuck Up"?

Wake up.

[0rganism]

63. Awfully long-winded for Shutting The Fuck Up, I'd say

And factually incorrect, to boot!

> When Chavez says to his subjects: "We will not allow disobedience..."

Was that Chavez? NO! It was one of his generals! Was the general talking to "his subjects"? NO! The general was addressing members of the military.

> Your love for Chavez has blinded you to the wrongness of a leader
> telling his people: "We will not allow disobedience...".

Your hatred for Chavez has blinded you to the FACTS that
1) Chavez DIDN'T say it
2) It's perfectly legitimate for a military commander to say, "We will not allow disobedience" to his soldiers.

> If bush ever says: "We will not allow disobedience..."

Hey, guess what, bright boy, he already has.
"You're with us, or you're with the terrorists." (identifying which countries are eligible for bombing)
"There should be limits to freedom." (referring to Zack Exley's website)
Examples of comparable material abound. Yet he's mobilized a media campaign to attack Hugo Chavez for

I think YOU need to Wake Up.

[AP]

40. Chavez came into power because he started a coup from

within the military, so, presumably you accept that form of military insubordination, right? You're saying the government shouldn't punish the military for treason right? You're saying that generals in the military should retain the right to overthrow their government, right?

Chavez took out a fascist government and put in place a democratic constitutional government with power flowing down to the people.

Do you think the PEOPLE should expect that they should be giving their army weapons and a duty to uphold the contstitution and that that military should then have their right to overthrow the constitution the PEOPLE have asked them to protect?

Is that what you're arguing?

[Solon]

43. AP...are you talking to me? n/t

[AP]

45. No. I'm talking to the anti-Chavez poster.

[9215]

62. n/t

[AP]

42. Which democracies allow disobedience IN THE MILITARY????

[AP]

41. Yes, peaceful protests MUST be allowed. Why'd coup leaders

shoot the pro-Chavez, anti-coup protesters in the head?

[Jazzgirl]

38. Read the article.

n/t

Edit: That was for Lost and not you JudiLynn.

[Judi Lynn]

78. Hi, Jazzgirl. Thanks.

We're being visited!

[Zhade]

51. Is context too difficult for you to grasp, or are you willfully obtuse?

About 100 dissident officers were dismissed after supporting a bungled coup against Mr Chavez in April 2002.

"We will not allow disobedience... we want no more treason against the people of Venezuela," General Carneiro said as he took over as defence minister in the capital, Caracas.

"I will not allow coup-plotting or terrorist military officers to attack democracy and constitutional rule ... they will face a severe and effective response," he added.

It's clear to anyone with a working brain that this refers to those who plot to overthrow the democratically-elected Chavez.

Stop trying to spin it into "they won't allow any dissent, oh no, Chavez is terrible!" - it's not going to work against those of us who actually know about Chavez.

[LostInTheMaise]

60. What part of: "We will not allow disobedience..." is unclear to you?

I'm not spinning shit. Any leader that says "We will not allow disobedience..." is wrong period.

[earthman dave]

61. OK, I'll bite

What do you propose we do about this eevil commie dictator then, in your near-infinite TV-news-based wisdom?

[0rganism]

64. What part of "General Carneiro talking to the military" is unclear to you?

You're not "spinning shit", you're outright dishonest. You're taking words out of General Carneiro's mouth and putting them in Chavez's. Then, you're grabbing an audience of military personnel and stretching them out over the entire civilian population.

That isn't spinning. That's lying.

[earthman dave]

69. Do trolls give Great Old Ones indigestion?

:)

[0rganism]

77. This one certainly did

:puke:

[LostInTheMaise]

84. I am not a troll

Read below and understand that I may have been wrong about Chavez.

I really want his people to prosper and be free enough to protest. I now accept that Chavez is what his people need. Sorry for my confusion.

[0rganism]

49. That's a really SUSPICIOUS ellipses

"We will not allow disobedience..."

DISOBEDIENCE FROM WHO?

FROM THE MILITARY?

That would hardly be unusual.

I think the BBC editor took a few too many instructions from the bushistas on this one.

[Judi Lynn]

52. Yep, you're right.It's a very ODD approach to writing an article,isn't it?

When I saw it, I was actually relieved to get the news the military has offered vigorous support for their leader, after the coup plotters left, and I was lost in thought about that.

Looking back at the article, now, it's so easy to see the author definitely put a real ((((spin)))) on this. It's awkward, clumsy, and obvious, when studied.

Either he/she deliberately ((((spun)))) or he's/she's a damned bad writer!

On edit:

Don't know about you, but I've never been interested in what the disgruntled right-wing coup supporters, who are so determined to grab this elected leader out of office, actually have to say.

Our own _Bush gummint has been in there, pushing and shoving, through USAID, through NED gifts to anyone even close to this coup. Pathetic. Rotten to the core.

[0rganism]

65. Here's a link to the speech in question, en espanol, naturalmente

http://www.venezuela.gov.ve/ns/aloc/min%20defensa%2019ene04.doc

I'll be doing a bit of translation, but I think I can do it one better than the BBC's spin, which is likely taken straight from a rightwing Venezuelan propaganda source.

[AP]

68. looking forward to translation...

[0rganism]

70. OK, here it is, en las palabras verdaderas de Gen. Carneiro

An excerpt, which puts the relavent sections in context.

"Continuaré la labor del señor ministro saliente, quien en procura de garantizar la vigencia efectiva de la Constitución y la normativa vigente hizo esfuerzos en la recuperación de bienes del Estado en poder de los oficiales disidentes. Por tal razón, en mi gestión y mediante resolución ministerial, y con fundamento en la normativa vigente, anularé el uso del carnet con porte de arma a todos los militares que por desobediencia fueron dados de baja por medidas disciplinarias, y a todos aquellos que comprobadamente tuvieron participación activa en la desestabilización del país, así como elevar ante el fiscal general de la República la apertura de lo correspondiente a una averiguación penal a favor del Estado por negarse a entregar bienes de la nación en su poder, tales como vehículos, armamentos y prendas militares. Asimismo, no admitiré que militares golpistas y terroristas atenten contra la vida democrática y constitucional del país, tendrán una respuesta severa y efectiva de la Fuerza Armada Nacional.

"Sin vacilaciones ni reservas no permitiré la desobediencia, la indisciplina, la insubordinación porque éstos atentan contra la columna vertebral de la institución armada. Los desobedientes no exijan obediencia a sus subalternos, primero, porque ya no pertenecen a la institución; segundo, porque no la merecen; tercero, por no dar el ejemplo, y por último, porque atenta contra la moral militar.

"¡Ni una traición más para el pueblo de Venezuela! No queremos traición a la patria, ni en ninguna de sus instituciones del Estado ni empresas básicas de la nación."

http://www.venezuela.gov.ve/ns/aloc/min%20defensa%2019ene04.doc">Gen. Carneiro, 19 de enero de 2004, starts about 2/3 of the way through
-------
My loose translation:
"I will continue the work of the senior minister in question, in whom it is entrusted to guarantee effective oversight of the Constitution and normalization of property rights following the attempted coup by dissident officials. For that reason, in my management and by means of ministerial resolution, and with foundation in our usual order, I will annul the arms permits(?) of all military fired for reason of disobedience, and of those who were likely active in destabilizing the country, as well as bring before the prosecutor general of the Republic the opening of the penal inquiry in favor of the State to withhold goods of the nation in its power, such as military vehicles, arms, and articles(?). By the same token, I will not allow the military coup participants and terrorists to attack the democratic and constitutional life of this country, they will have a severe and effective response from the National Armed Forces.

"Without vacillation or reserve, I will not permit disobedience, indiscipline, and insubordination, as these weaken the spine of the military. The rebel (officer)s do not command obedience from subordinates, first, because they no longer belong to the (military) institution; second, because they do not deserve it; third, they are poor examples; and finally, because it's bad for military morale.

"Nevermore traitors to Venezuela! We want no treason to the mother country, neither its institutions of State nor its basic national enterprises."

I've underlined the section that Mr. Lost is so uptight about. See which you find more sinister: Gen. Carneiro's discussion of military reforms, or the BBC's ommission of all but the most easily misconstrued portion of his speech.

[LostInTheMaise]

71. I would like to comment but

I was told by a senior DU member to Shut The Fuck Up. I wish I could speak my opinion but I must follow protocol.

I have nothing against Chavez...just the dictate for the people to be obidient.

[0rganism]

72. Then you have nothing to complain about -- there is no such dictate

You can read the speech yourself.

I highly recommend it.

Especially the part I underlined, which is the single phrase that freaks you out. If you have a shred of honesty left in your being, you'll see that
1) Hugo Chavez didn't say "I will not permit disobedience" to Venezuelans;
2) Gen. Carneiro did say "I will not permit disobedience" with respect to rebels within the Venezuelan military, along with "indiscipline" and "insubordination";

and you'll go forward from there.

Or... you'll STFU, because as we all know, the word of 0rganism is the word of Cthulhu on DU.

[LostInTheMaise]

73. Hugo Chavez didn't say "I will not permit disobedience" to Venezuelans

I know that but someone in his leadership did and *that* was my only concern.

Sorry I stood up for the people of Venezuela by mistake. I'll shut up now.

[0rganism]

74. You claim you stood up for "the people of Venezuela"? What CRAP!!!!

You stood up for REBELS IN THE VENEZUELAN MILITARY.

Anyone who can read, can see this very clearly for themselves. Only your own dishonesty keeps you from acknowledging the context, which is crystal clear.

Is Gen. Carneiro's statement really so threatening to the people of Venezuela? Which military do you know of that condones disobedience, indiscipline, and/or insubordination?

[LostInTheMaise]

75. No comment

I had the citizens of Venezuela in mind when I read that quote.

The only thing crystal clear is you attemp to discredit a new DU member with your seniorty and post count. Thanks alot for the welcome and understanding.

If I am dishonest like you claim I am then stay out of seer work and keep your day job.

No newbie expressing his opinion of an anti-citizen statement should be bashed by such a senior member of DU.

[0rganism]

79. Once again, you couch a lie in the guise of a "no comment"

You may indeed have "had the citizens of Venezuela in mind when (you) read that quote."

And you posted to that effect. And MANY people here pointed out the context to you, that Gen. Carneiro was referring directly to military personnel, not civilians. And you kept on obtusely insisting that your "five words" were supposed to apply to everyone.

> you attemp to discredit a new DU member with your seniorty and post count.

NOWHERE in this thread will you find me discrediting you for your low-post-count. In fact, should you be able to find any instance of such a thing, I strongly recommend you use the "alert" link on that post to have it removed and my account put on hold if the admins agree.

At one point, due to your obstinacy in the face of the annoyingly obvious, I told you to do some research to support your position or Shut The Fuck Up. And later in the thread, I did your research for you. I maintain that I did not accuse you of being a disruptor, for your low post count or otherwise. I refuted your "position" with source material and common sense, no appeals to seniority were applied.

If you were intimidated by my "post count", that's your very own problem. You may indeed have "post envy", which can only be remedied through frequent posts of your own. And, while doing so, I can only hope you will learn how to read an article for context, discern blatant spin for yourself, and even apply yourself to find primary references when needed. You'll find that any member can add greatly to a conversation, regardless of post count.

[LostInTheMaise]

80. You are right

I have nothing to add except that all the people under Chavez are free to protest without any repercussions. Sorry for my confusion.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

81. I'm sure you're a great person and all...

So forgive me when I say that your "concern" for the Venezuelan people seems a bit condescending. Throughout the years we have witnessed what "concerned" liberals have allowed to happen to us poor dumb browns down in Latin America because you know better. I'm not referring to you personally but it is that superior attitude up north that has kept us from choosing our own leaders for decades. I'm not here to defend Chavez (he can do that all by himself) or to bad mouth him. All leaders whether Chavez, Da Silva, Castro, Kirshner, etc. deserve criticism because they're all human. But I'll tell you right now that that man is the best thing to happen to that country in a long time. I have known tons of Venezuelans throughout the years and even grew up with a few. I've met two kinds. The rich stuck up "I don't give a shit about lazy indian nig##$" all hate him. Guess where the ones from poor or working class areas stand? So me I'm not too worried about the people down there. If Chavez turns out to be a son of a bitch they'll take care of him a lot easier than we'll be able to handle the illiterate dictator we have right here at home. If I were you I'd be a lot more concerned with our home grown monster right here.

[LostInTheMaise]

82. I respect your observation

I only know what I read and I must admit it's hard at times to filter the chaff. Thanks for the insight.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

83. Hey, s#$% happens...............

[Judi Lynn]

35. A lot of DU'ers are very aware of Venezuelan history

In some cases, a speed read on the prior Venezuelan President, Carlos Andres Perez, would be helpful, in discussing "coup attempts:"

(snip) In 1989, the prevailing political calm was shattered when Venezuela experienced rioting in which more than 200 people were killed--the so-called Caracazo, in response to an economic austerity program launched by then-President Carlos Andres Perez. Subsequently in February 1992, a group of army lieutenant colonels led by future President Hugo Chavez mounted an unsuccessful coup attempt, claiming that the events of 1989 showed that the political system no longer served the interests of the people. A second, equally unsuccessful,coup attempt by other officers followed in November in 1992. A year later, Congress impeached Perez on corruption charges. Deep popular dissatisfaction with the traditional political parties, income disparities, and economic difficulties were some of the major frustrations expressed by Venezuelans following Perez's impeachment. Hugo Chavez Frias won the presidency in December 1998, after campaigning for far-reaching reform, constitutional change, and a crackdown on corruption. His programs have alienated much of the upper and upper-middle class while retaining the enthusiastic support of poorer Venezuelans. There has been no social violence, however, and Venezuela remains a democracy.
(snip/)
http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:CBH69_QGxfIJ:www.traveldocs.com/ve/govern.htm+President+Carlos+Andres+Perez+impeached+corruption+killed&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(snip) Reports from Dominican Republic say that authorities in Santo Domingo say they don't have a clue of the whereabouts of former Venezuelan President Carlos Andres Perez (CAP), wanted on an extradition warrant to face charges of corruption in Venezuela additional to his conviction a decade ago of multi-$ million corruption related to a secret government slush fund.
The news comes in the wake of the Venezuelan government's decision to suspend vital oil supplies to the Dominican Republic over its refusal to deal with ex-President Perez who has been using his luxury residence there as a base for further conspiracies against the government of his arch-enemy President Hugo Chavez Frias. It was a coup attempt by Chavez Frias in February 1992 that was the beginning of the end for CAP, who was impeached and kicked out of office the following year. He was convicted and served out a sentence under house arrest at his mansion in a southern suburb of Caracas.

CAP's decidedly anti-democratic activities in the Dominican Republic had already become an acute embarrassment for that country's President Hipolito Mejia who was faced with political problems from a pro-CAP "brotherhood" of shady Dominican politicians who had promised the Venezuelan ex-President a safe haven. Last week, President Chavez Frias recalled his Ambassador to Santo Domingo, and suspended further supplies of oil to the island until the problem is resolved.

Meanwhile, CAP has made good his escape and is reportedly enjoying the high-life in Manhattan where he maintains a luxury apartment close to New York's Central Park. Moves have already been made to have US authorities respect Venezuela's international extradition warrant but Washington appears to be dragging its heels (again!) in favor of Carlos Andres Perez to the point that Venezuela may be forced to apply "diplomatic restrictions" on oil supplies to the United States if the US Justice Department decides to "go slow" on this matter as well. (snip/...)
http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=2781&fcategory_desc=Venezuela

[Solon]

53. You know what I hate...

OK let me say that I am amazed Chavez has lasted this long, and his influence on the World Stage will grow. But I am neither a Chavez supporter due to his politics, nor am I Anti-Chavez for the same reason. The only thing I care about is that the People of Venezuala have a voice, and whether it is a Leftist or Right-winger means little, for they are allowed to make mistakes. The point is to trust the system, and if he is a bad leader, then vote him out, if not keep him. I am sick and tired of the good ole' US of fucking A, that "Bastion of Democracy and Human Rights", denying the people of these countries the right to chart their own course.

[Judi Lynn]

54. It's time to leave them alone.

Time to end the support to death squads, end the covert operations, and time to treat these people with the respect they deserve: the respect we demand for ourselves.

[bvar22]

76. Well Said,

*

[earthman dave]

58. Keerist! Are you people STILL feeding the trolls? nt