July 2009

Venezuelan Ambassador and Staff Withdrawn from Colombia
Posted: Friday, July 31, 2009

By Tamara Pearson
July 30, 2009

On Tuesday night Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez ordered the withdrawal of the Venezuelan ambassador and diplomatic staff from Colombia, following US military build up in Colombia and Colombia's accusations that Venezuela had supplied the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) with weapons.

"We're going to freeze relations with Colombia," Chavez said.

Chavez also said the government would examine Venezuela's economic relations with Colombia and the possibility of substituting imports from Colombia with those from other countries. "If the Colombian government thinks we're dependent on its imports, it's mistaken," he said.

He warned that if Colombia continued verbally attacking Venezuela, "We will end our relations, in every respect." That could include expropriating Colombian companies on Venezuelan territory, he said.

In response to Chavez's pronouncements, Jose Insulza, general secretary of the Organisation of America States (OAS) called on the two countries not to retaliate economically, and offered the services of the organisation to facilitate dialogue.

The Colombian government, in a press release yesterday, reiterated its accusation that Venezuela was "supplying" weapons to the FARC, a Colombian guerrilla organization. Colombian Vice President Francisco Santos said on Monday that weapons seized from a FARC camp last year were purchased by Venezuela in the 1980s.

The accusations followed comments by Venezuelan Foreign Relations Minister Nicolas Maduro last week that the recent expansion of US access to Colombian military bases will strengthen troops, technology and weaponry that could be used against the Latin American region and especially Venezuela.

On Tuesday, Chavez also said that Venezuela had recently captured nine Colombian drug trafficking leaders. "Imagine if one of these drug traffickers had obtained a gun here in Venezuela that said 'A. Uribe'. Then I come out, the president of Venezuela, without investigating anything, and I say that president Uribe is giving weapons to drug traffickers... how irresponsible!"

Chavez said a lot of the weapons the FARC use are manufactured in Russia, Israel, and the United States. "Colombia might have to complain to the United States as well!" said the president.

Education Minister Hector Navarro also commented sarcastically yesterday, "The ultra-right is so creative that surely there'd be some of them saying that the weapons sent to Cuba by the [Venezuelan] government of Wolfgang Larrazabal in 1958 to support the Cuban guerrilla struggle were sent by President Chavez."

Source: Venezuelanalysis.com

Hillary and Obama Nix Change in Honduras
Posted: Monday, July 27, 2009

¤ Obama: More Polished Than the Last Puppet
Okay, so the United States of America has had a new puppet regime for six months now. I was never so much into giving Obama a “chance” and I think it’s way past time to call Obama and his supporters out, like we called Bush and his supporters out. Our Presidents are merely puppets for the Robber Class and Obama is no exception. I am observing very little “change” in actual policy, or even rhetoric from an Obama regime. Granted, his style and delivery are more polished than the last puppet, but especially in foreign policy, little has changed.

¤ Obama administration bars torture investigators from Guantánamo Bay

¤ Post-Race Scholar Yells Racism
Now that Henry Louis Gates’ Jr. has gotten a tiny taste of what “the underclass” undergo each day, do you think that he will go easier on them? Lighten up on the tough love lectures? Even during his encounter with the police, he was given some slack. If a black man in an inner city neighborhood had hesitated to identify himself, or given the police some lip, the police would have called SWAT. When Oscar Grant, an apprentice butcher, talked back to a BART policeman in Oakland, he was shot!

¤ Whiteous Indignation

¤ Hillary and Obama Nix Change in Honduras

¤ Swine Flu Panic

¤ "A Damned Murder Inc."
Some time in early or mid-1949 a CIA officer named Bill (his surname is blacked out in the file, which was surfaced by John Kelly in the early 1990s) asked an outside contractor for input on how to kill people. Requirements included the appearance of an accidental or purely fortuitous terminal experience suffered by the Agency’s victim.

¤ Surreal Honduras

¤ Screening the Politics Out of the Iraq War

¤ U.S. Labor in Crisis
¤ Union Workers Forced to Accept Massive Cuts
¤ Obama's Slow (and Familiar) Dance With Cuba
¤ Which is Worse? Germs in Our Food or the Antibiotics That Kill Them?

¤ Hypocrisy and the Honduran Coup

¤ 21st Century Coups d'Etat
The consolidation of power through brute force represents a serious step backward for the region. How is it possible that a coup d'etat could take place and survive in the 21st century? This is the question that the international community faces after the coup d'etat that Honduras suffered on June 28.

¤ Chavez: US seeks to legitimize Honduran coup
The Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has accused the United States of seeking to drag on the power confusion in Honduras while the coup leaders win themselves recognition. On Saturday, Chavez said that Washington was after extending the indeterminate state of affairs until the interim government won the upcoming election thus legitimizing its rule, Reuters reported.

¤ Obama and Clinton Nix Change in Honduras

¤ Climate Change to Force 75 Million Pacific Islanders From Their Homes

¤ What Would Asia Do Without America?

¤ Gaza stands as a hologram of Israeli destructiveness

¤ US outrage over “rigged” elections does not extend to Kyrgyzstan
The brazen rigging of an election, the repression of the opposition and the use of police violence and live ammunition against demonstrators has been met with silence and indifference on the part of the Obama administration and the US media. These events were taking place Thursday not in Iran, but rather in the landlocked Central Asian state of Kyrgyzstan.

¤ Facing the American World We Created

¤ US Escalates War Plans In Latin America
On June 29 US President Barack Obama hosted his Colombian counterpart Alvaro Uribe at the White House and weeks later it was announced that the Pentagon plans to deploy troops to five air and naval bases in Colombia, the largest recipient of American military assistance in Latin America and the third largest in the world, having received over $5 billion from the Pentagon since the launching of Plan Colombia nine years ago. Six months before the Obama-Uribe meeting outgoing US President George W. Bush bestowed the US's highest civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom, on Uribe as well as on former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and former Australian Prime Minister John Howard.

¤ Operation in Afghanistan is Rooted in Israel

¤ Iran Has Not "Re-Started" Its Nuclear Weapons Program

¤ Hillary Clinton: Iran's pursuit of nukes 'futile'

¤ The Real Unemployment Rate Hits a 68-Year High

¤ The big lie of Afghanistan

¤ Yes, You Can!

¤ Political theater raises an unwanted question
¤ The Washington Post Endorses Abu Ghraib Scapegoating for Torture

Chávez Bashing
Posted: Thursday, July 23, 2009

By Anthony DiMaggio
July 22, 2009 - zmag.org

Chávez bashing has long been a moral fixture of deliberation among U.S. elites. The most recent examples appear in the July 21st editions of the New York Times and Washington Post, which document allegations that Chávez is responsible for the rise in crime in Venezuela and the destablilization of Colombia. Of major concern for the Washington Post is a recently released report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) that outlines supposed "corruption at high levels of President Hugo Chávez's government and state aid to Colombia's drug-trafficking guerillas [which] have made Venezuela a major launching pad for cocaine bound for the United States and Europe." Attention is directed to Colombia's Marxist FARC guerillas, estimated by the Post to control 60 percent of the Colombian cocaine trade. Republican Senator Richard Lugar is afforded space in the Post to demonize Venezuela for "becoming a narco-state, heavily dependent on and beholden to the international trade in illegal drugs."

Not to be outdone, the Times' July 21st story implicates Chávez in the growing abduction of citizens living in the city of Barinas, located in western Venezuela. Barinas suffers from abduction rates over 3.5 times higher than the rest of the country, and the city is currently governed by Chávez's brother Adán Chávez. The Times cites no evidence of the Chávez family's complicity in Barinas kidnappings, but this hasn't stopped the paper from constructing generic links between "armed gangs [that] thrive off the disarray [in Barinas] while Mr. Chávez's family tightens its grip on the state." Readers won't find even the pretense of objectivity in such incendiary rhetoric.

Searching for actual evidence of a connection between Chávez and the kidnappings is not a part of the Times' game plan. They'd rather muddy public discourse with vague polemics directed at the Chávez regime. In fact the Times concedes that Chávez's main involvement in Barinas centers not on harming the poor (who have increasingly suffered under the kidnappings), but on efforts to improve the lot of the masses via the implementation of land reform and the use of oil funds for welfare programs.

Attacks on Chávez also accompanied Venezuela's 2009 referendum, which repealed the country's 12-year presidential term limit. The Times editorialized in the run-up to the referendum that Chávez was a "standard issue autocrat - hoarding power, stifling dissent, and spending the nation's oil wealth on political support." Such attacks, ironically, are followed by admissions that Chávez's support derives from the social welfare programs he implements, which benefit the overwhelming majority of poor Venezuelans. His support for the masses is written off without discussion as inconsequential, however, as the Times paternalistically and calls on Venezuelans who "believe in their democracy" to "vote no" on ending term limits.

A number of points are worth reflecting upon when assessing the attacks on Chávez. Regarding the Colombia issue, literally no context is provided in Times and Post reporting on the instrumental role the U.S. has played in creating the drug crisis. No attention is directed to the fact that U.S. leaders have spent billions of dollars training and supplying right-wing, anti-FARC paramilitary groups in Colombia (which are allied with the Colombian government), and are heavily involved in the cocaine trade themselves. Additionally, there is no discussion of the ambiguity surrounding Chávez's supposed incitement of the Colombian-Venezuelan conflict. Much ambiguity does exist, nonetheless, on this question. Human Rights Watch, although it has been extremely critical of Chávez (perhaps justifiably so), is unable to uncover any convincing evidence that Chávez is supporting FARC guerillas. We should also remember that it was Chávez himself who publicly railed against the FARC, stating that the age of "guerilla warfare is history." He has supported a return to peace negotiations between the FARC and Colombian government, and pushed the FARC to end their terrorist practice of abducting civilians and government officials as hostages.

On the issue of Chávez's "dictatorial" politics, the U.S. media's coverage resembles more propaganda than reality. U.S. papers have an awfully difficult time explaining how a dictator can be democratically elected four times in the last ten years - in 1998, 2000, 2004, and 2006, particularly in contests certified as transparent and legitimate by international elections monitors. The Times is also at a loss to explain the results of the 2009 referendum, which in repealing presidential term limits, was certified as fair and democratic by international observers.

The most obvious explanation for the Times' attacks on Chávez is that the paper is contemptuous of Venezuelan democracy. Chávez has long enjoyed strong democratic support from the majority of Venezuelans, while provoking the outrage of American politicians who see Venezuela as fertile, but unutilized ground for corporate investment. Let's consider the evidence: 1. Chávez has been repeatedly re-elected by margins that George W. Bush could have never dreamed of attaining. 2. A Gallup International poll from 2007 reaffirms the democratic legitimacy of Venezuelan politics in a number of ways. 53 percent of Venezuelans generally feel that their country is "governed by the will of the people" under Chávez. Additionally, 67 percent feel that elections in Venezuela are conducted in a "fair" as opposed to "unfair" manner. Furthermore, as my analysis of the 2007 Gallup poll shows, poor and unemployed Venezuelans (the poor making up the majority of the public) are statistically more likely to believe that the country is governed by majority will and that the country's elections are free, democratic, and fair. This stands in great contrast to Venezuela's wealthy and employed who are more likely to reject these claims.

One would not get the impression from U.S. media coverage that it is U.S., rather than Venezuelan officials who are viewed with suspicion in Venezuela. A 2007 poll by the BBC revealed that most Latin Americans who were surveyed viewed the U.S. unfavorably and opposed the former Bush administration's foreign policy activities. Majorities in Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Mexico felt that the U.S. influence in the world was "mainly negative," while between 65-92 percent opposed the U.S. handling of the war in Iraq. Assessments of individual political leaders found that Chávez enjoyed high levels of support from Venezuelans, while former President Bush enjoyed low levels of support throughout not only Venezuela, but the entire region.

Chávez's popularity, as American journalists begrudgingly admit, is based upon his willingness to put the needs of Venezuela's poor masses ahead of those of business elites. This does not mean that he's a saint or that political repression should not be a serious concern for those living throughout the hemisphere. No political leader deserves a blank check to consolidate political power. But what seems to escape U.S. leaders is that Venezuelan democracy assigns the task of holding leaders accountable to the people of Venezuela, rather than to "enlightened" U.S. elites.

Chávez's "Bolivarian Revolution" is indeed wildly popular in amongst Venezuelans. He is succeeding in promoting a plethora of social welfare programs paid for by the country's oil export revenues. Chávez is spearheading efforts to promote gender equality, government sponsored health care, universal higher education, increased state pension funding, land redistribution, and an expansion of public housing, amongst other programs. Chávez's welfare revolution is significantly improving the lives of the citizenry. A 50 percent increase in social welfare spending from 1999-2005 (in the first 6 years of Chávez's presidency) was accompanied by decreases in infant mortality, an increase in school enrollment an increase in individual disposable income, and a decrease in poverty. From 1997-2005, the national poverty rate fell from 56 to 38 percent of the population. By 2005, an estimated 50 percent of the Venezuelan people enjoyed government health care, while the same number also enjoyed government food subsidies. The Bolivarian Revolution, one should remember, also took place under fairly stable economic growth, ranging from 6-18 percent of GDP a year from 2004-2008. This trend stands on its head the assumptions of U.S. reporters that socialist policies are a major obstacle to economic stability and prosperity.

No one in the U.S. should be surprised that the Venezuelan people support Chávez because of his welfare policies. This basic fact, however, is concealed in Times editorials that frame Chávez as a "Latin American strongman" who "exercise[s] near-total political and military control of his country" through the perversion of elections and the nationalization of natural resources. Media distortions of Latin American politics are of course nothing new. The Times and Post have always looked at Latin America through neoliberal, capitalist eyes, and coverage of Venezuela deviates little from this pattern.

Anthony DiMaggio teaches Global and American Politics at Illinois State University. He is the author of Mass Media, Mass Propaganda: Examining American News in the "War on Terror (2008) and When Media Goes to War (forthcoming February 2010). He can be reached at: adimagg@ilstu.edu

Source: zmag.org

Venezuela: US Criticisms of Venezuelan Drug Policies Hypocritical
Posted: Thursday, July 23, 2009

By Tamara Pearson
July 22nd 2009 – Venezuelanalysis.com

The Venezuelan government said the report published on Monday by the US Government Accountability Office (GAO), which argues that Venezuela tolerates drug trafficking, is a political tool, and in refutation it cited statistics by the United Nations which show Venezuela to be amongst the highest drug confiscators.

The Venezuelan National Assembly voted to reject the report by GAO, which criticised Venezuela's lack of cooperation with the US over drug trafficking.

Also, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in a press statement, said the report and other similar studies conducted by the United States, are "political blackmailing tools that lack scientific objectivity and methodological seriousness, whose aim is to promote the interventionist intentions of Washington towards the rest of the world."

"The implementation of the National Anti-drugs Plan 2009-2013 has... generated the conceptual basis ... for the nationalisation of the merciless struggle against drug trafficking in a country like Venezuela, located between Colombia and the United States, the principle producers and consumers," the press release continued.

The Anti-drugs Plan includes "Planting Values for Life", a community based prevention plan. The National Anti-drug Network has also been set up, where communities choose their anti-drug representatives. 14 state governments and 181 mayoralties have signed agreements towards this.

"The GAO would make better use of its money...concentrating its efforts on dismantling the internal networks of corruption that make [the US] a paradise for drug smugglers and the mafia who get rich from the business of death in the face of the incompetence and indifference of the authorities," the statement concluded.

The minister for justice and internal affairs, Tarek El Aissami, speaking to the National Assembly, said the US discourse was "hypocritical" and stressed that in the United States over 50 million people use non-medicinal drugs and that the country consumes 31% of marihuana and 41% of cocaine produced globally.

El Aissami quoted an article by sociologist James Petras, and explained that the US economic system depends on the drug industry and that it would suffer a greater collapse than the current economic crisis, if drug trafficking no longer existed.

"What double stands for the United States to issue opinions against Venezuela about the anti-drug struggle," El Aissami said.

He said that while the US's level of drug confiscation has decreased since the 1990s, Venezuela has increased its levels of confiscation since 2006, according to a report published by the United Nations on 26 June.

Nestor Reverol, head of the National Anti-drugs Office also told the National Assembly about the UN reports. He said that between 2006-2009, Venezuela has been ranked among the top confiscators of cocaine, and that this year's report recognises the Venezuelan government's implementation of acceptable drug policies.

According to Reverol, the Venezuelan government has confiscated 464 tonnes of drugs over the last decade, including 30 tonnes of drugs and 19 drug laboratories so far this year.

Venezuela cut off anti-drug collaboration with the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) in 2005, after finding evidence that DEA was spying.

U.S. officials meet with key anti-Chavez leaders
Posted: Wednesday, July 22, 2009

The State Department confirmed Wednesday that U.S. officials met with key Venezuelan opposition leaders this week in Washington. Deputy Spokesman Robert Wood said that representatives from the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor and the U.S. Mission to the Organization of American States, led by Deputy Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs Christopher McMullen, met with Caracas Mayor Antonio Ledezma and Govs. Pablo Pérez of Zulia and Cesar Pérez Vivas of Táchira on Tuesday.
Full Article : thehill.com

Three Musketeers in D.C.:
Did Insulza support or reject Venezuelan opposition trip?

Killing “Everything That Moves”
Posted: Monday, July 20, 2009

¤ Honduras Coup 2009

¤ This politicisation of swine flu is bad for our health
What swine flu has come to signify, however, is a different story. From newspaper headlines earlier this year like ‘Killer pig flu threat to the UK’ to more recent ones such as ‘Health chief warns of new killer virus’, the narrative of swine flu in the UK has sounded a consistently ominous tone, with each swine flu-related fatality seemingly providing yet further proof of the catastrophe to come.

¤ CIA claims of cancelled campaign are hogwash
CIA director Leon Panetta just told Congress he cancelled a secret operation to assassinate al-Qaida leaders. The CIA campaign, authorized in 2001, had not yet become operational, claimed Panetta.
I respect Panetta, but his claim is humbug. The U.S. has been trying to kill al-Qaida personnel (real and imagined) since the Clinton administration. These efforts continue under President Barack Obama. Claims by Congress it was never informed are hogwash.

¤ Mumbai attack suspect 'confesses'
¤ Nicaragua's unfinished revolution

¤ Killing “Everything That Moves”
LIKE THE ghost of Hamlet’s father, the evil spirit of the Gaza War refuses to leave us in peace. This week it came back to disturb the tranquility of the chiefs of the state and the army. “Breaking the Silence”, a group of courageous former combat soldiers, published a report comprising the testimonies of 30 Gaza War fighters. A hard-hitting report about actions that may be considered war crimes. The generals went automatically into denial mode. Why don’t the soldiers disclose their identity, they asked innocently. Why do they obscure their faces in the video testimonies? Why do they hide their names and units?

¤ 14 Afghan civilians killed in bomb blast, mistaken shooting

¤ Russia set to build up its naval facilities in Syria
¤ Israel defies US on settlements
¤ How US Bingo Dollars are Funding Israeli Settlements

¤ The Insatiable American Thirst for Blood
The Anti-War Movement in America, Canada, and Britain has virtually become a non-entity. This was not unpredictable because the diverse groups which make up the so-called Anti-War Movement have neither the resources, nor the leadership, nor any solid ideological foundation beyond the apparent loathing for war. The invasion of Afghanistan by the United States took place at a time of high fever (September 11, 2001 attacks) and no one thought much of the long-term agenda of Americans at the time of Afghan invasion.

¤ Honduras and the Big Stick
Liberals who have idealized Obama don’t want to believe that their President is capable of bullish behavior towards Latin America. It was Bush, they say, who epitomized arrogant U.S.-style imperialism and not the new resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Recent events in Central America however force us to look at the Obama administration in a sobering new light. While it’s unclear whether Obama had advance warning of an imminent military coup d’etat in Honduras the White House has not emerged from the Zelaya affair unsullied.

¤ Threatening Iran
When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, Japan did not spend years preparing her public case and demonstrating her deployment of forces for the attack. Japan did not make a world issue out of her view that the US was denying Japan her role in the Pacific by hindering Japan’s access to raw materials and energy. Similarly, when Hitler attacked Russia, he did not preface his invasion with endless threats and a public case that blamed the war on England.

¤ Obama's Policy on China and Iran

¤ Clinton Outlines Continuation of Bush Policies Under Obama at CFR
In a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) on Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton outlined the Obama administration’s foreign policy, which has been widely touted as a sharp break from that of his predecessor’s. Judging from commentary in the media, Obama has ushered in a new age of diplomacy and international engagement. Clinton herself suggested as much. But setting aside the platitudes that comprised most of Clinton’s speech and looking closely at her remarks that actually spoke meaningfully towards U.S. policy under the Obama, a different picture emerges, one not of a change of course from Bush but rather of near perfect continuity between the two administrations.

¤ India rebuffs US carbon demands
¤ South Africa tests AIDS vaccine
¤ Obama's Africa Speech: Lies, Hypocrisy, and a Prescription for Continued African Dependence
¤ Obama’s War Signals

¤ A crazy world?
"The Israeli foreign ministry hired legions of commentators to scour the Internet and produce blogs and comment-back to make Israel look good and Palestinians bad."

¤ The Foreign Ministry presents: talkbackers in the service of the State
¤ Cronkite and Vietnam

¤ The high cost of cheap food
¤ Just one more nail in our coffin of believability

Chiquita in Latin America
Posted: Friday, July 17, 2009

¤ Honduras Coup 2009

¤ Who's in Charge of US Foreign Policy?
he current stand-off in Honduras, in which the coup government headed by Roberto Micheletti is refusing to allow the return of elected president Manuel Zelaya, is raising questions about who is in charge of US foreign policy for the hemisphere.

¤ Manhunt in Iraq: Israel Trains U.S. Assassination Squads

¤ "Watch What We Do, Not What We Say"
"Watch what we do, not what we say,” was the famous advice Nixon’s first Attorney General, John Mitchell, gave the press at the onset of the Nixon presidency in 1969. It’s a handy piece of advice in the Age of Obama too, as we roll towards the end of his first six months in office. There’s the added difficulty that Obama likes to say two different things in the same speech, usually prefaced by his trade-mark “Let me be clear.”

¤ Chiquita in Latin America
When the Honduran military overthrew the democratically elected government of Manuel Zelaya two weeks ago there might have been a sigh of relief in the corporate board rooms of Chiquita banana. Earlier this year the Cincinnati-based fruit company joined Dole in criticizing the government in Tegucigalpa which had raised the minimum wage by 60%. Chiquita complained that the new regulations would cut into company profits, requiring the firm to spend more on costs than in Costa Rica: 20 cents more to produce a crate of pineapple and ten cents more to produce a crate of bananas to be exact. In all, Chiquita fretted that it would lose millions under Zelaya’s labor reforms since the company produced around 8 million crates of pineapple and 22 million crates of bananas per year.

¤ Whither Pakistan?
¤ The Booze Strip in Indian Country
¤ Were 3,000 Afghans Murdered As U.S. Troops Stood By?

¤ Obama’s war
With Obama approaching the end of his sixth month in the White House, there is growing evidence that his administration is in only the first stages of what is shaping up to be a major and sustained escalation of the US war in Afghanistan. Elected in large part because of the hostility of American working people to the militarist policies of the Bush administration, Obama and the Pentagon are waging an intensified and brutal counter-insurgency campaign that has the potential of dwarfing the carnage in Iraq and dragging on for another decade.

¤ Afghanistan Villages Threatened By US Military Over Kidnapped Soldier
¤ US opposed to Zelaya's Honduras return attempt
¤ Suicide bombers kill 8 at Jakarta Marriott, Ritz
¤ US Income Inequality Continues to Grow

¤ There's Nothing Left to Recover
There is no economy left to recover. The US manufacturing economy was lost to offshoring and free trade ideology. It was replaced by a mythical “New Economy.” The “New Economy” was based on services. Its artificial life was fed by the Federal Reserve’s artificially low interest rates, which produced a real estate bubble, and by “free market” financial deregulation, which unleashed financial gangsters to new heights of debt leverage and fraudulent financial products.

¤ Iranian Planes and the Hidden Toll of Economic Sanctions
¤ Iranian Penetration, Oh My!

¤ Clinton urges Iran to negotiate on nuclear program
¤ Clinton warns Iran: U.S. will protect its friends
¤ Israeli soldiers reveal the brutal truth of Gaza attack

¤ Off the Deep End: Reflections on Private Clubs, Public Prejudice and Racism 2.0
On the one hand, racism is so deeply embedded in the history and structure of the United States, that it shouldn't be particularly surprising when a story emerges, indicating that indeed, that racism has bubbled to the surface yet again. But on the other hand, sometimes a story finds its way into the public realm, which is of such a profoundly disturbing nature, that you can't help but do a double-take: the kind of story that makes you go, huh? What the hell did I just read? Like for sure you must have seen that headline wrong. Like you must have been teleported back in time fifty years or more, to a period when folks didn't even feel the need to pretend they were racially enlightened.

¤ Race-Colored Glasses: Seeing What’s There
¤ Frank Lombard, Duke Univ. Official, Charged In Child Sex Case
¤ The Iraq War is Far from Over
¤ Depression Christmas Shopping
¤ Bernie Madoff Was Only a Petty Crook Compared with Uncle Sam

¤ Government Creates Human Suffering

¤ The owner of a Missouri dealership is giving away free AK-47s with the purchase of any truck.

¤ Into the Inferno: Hollow Language and Hollow Democracies
¤ Everything That Happens in Afghanistan Is Based on Lies or Illusions

¤ Blood and Oil in Central Asia
n the past month, two seemingly unrelated events have turned Central Asia into a potential flashpoint: an aggressively expanding North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and a nascent strategic alliance between Russia and China. At stake is nothing less than who holds the future high ground in the competition for the world's energy resources.

¤ Will Iraq Be a Global Gas Pump?
Has it all come to this? The wars and invasions, the death and destruction, the exile and torture, the resistance and collapse? In a world of shrinking energy reserves, is Iraq finally fated to become what it was going to be anyway, even before the chaos and catastrophe set in: a giant gas pump for an energy-starved planet? Will it all end not with a bang, but with a gusher? The latest oil news out of that country offers at least a hint of Iraq's fate.

¤ July Equals Deadliest Month of Afghan War
¤ Israeli Navy in Suez Canal Prepares for Potential Attack on Iran
¤ The US Assassinates People All The Time!
¤ Of Dick Cheney, Assassinations And A Flash Of Deja Vu

¤ Death squads and US democracy
The revelation that the CIA initiated a covert program, apparently involving assassinations, and kept it secret from the US Congress on the orders of Vice President Dick Cheney marks a deepening of the crisis in the American state apparatus and an indication of the degeneration of democratic processes within the US. Last April, under the pressure of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, the Democratic administration of President Barack Obama was compelled to make public a series of previously classified memos issued by the Bush Justice Department which authorized acts of torture in chilling detail.

¤ Our Wartime Propaganda
¤ Matt Taibbi Probes Role of Investment Giant in US Financial Meltdown

¤ Nine Reasons the Economy is Not Getting Better
We are now looking at unemployment numbers that undermine any confidence that we might be nearing the bottom of the recession. The appropriate metaphor is not the green shoots of new growth. A better image is to look at the true total of jobless people as a prudent navigator looks at an iceberg.

¤ A desperate attempt at reassurance
Fareed Zakaria, editor of Newsweek International, has written an essay entitled “The Capitalist Manifesto: Greed is Good (To a point)”, which is intended to express relief that the panic engendered by the global financial crisis is easing, and to offer reassurances that, for all its faults, capitalism is still “the most productive economic engine we have yet invented.” The problem with this claim that all is, again, for the best in the best of all possible worlds, is that far from the crisis having ended, it is only just beginning to unfold.

U.S Budget deficit tops $1 trillion
Posted: Monday, July 13, 2009

¤ Honduras Coup 2009

¤ US Press Falsely Claims Honduran Plurality for Coup
Did a CID-Gallup poll last week indicate that a plurality of Hondurans support the military coup against democratically elected President Zelaya? Yes, according to the Washington Post [July 9], the Wall Street Journal [July 10], the Christian Science Monitor [July 11], and Reuters [July 9], which all reported that the poll showed 41% in favor of the coup, with only 28% opposed. But in fact the poll showed that 46% - a plurality - were *opposed* to the coup, according to the New York Times[July 10], the Associated Press [July 11] - and the president of CID-Gallup, in an interview with Voice of America on July 9.

¤ The Coup in Honduras: A Teachable Moment for Obama?
Then, the ex-Honduran Ambassador to the U.S., Norman Garcia Paz, stood up and calmly gave his spin on the ongoing crisis in his country. A key question was put to him by a reporter from “La Prensa Grafica.” He wanted to know if it was true, or not, that the removal of President Zelaya by the Army, at gun point, and his forceful transfer to Costa Rica, was “outside the law?” Mr. Paz answered: “Probably, we could have done it a different way...What is done is in the past. We have to move forward.” [1]

¤ A US / Iraq Conflict on Iran

¤ Private Clubs, Public Prejudice and Racism 2.0
On the one hand, racism is so deeply embedded in the history and structure of the United States, that it shouldn't be particularly surprising when a story emerges, indicating that indeed, said racism has bubbled to the surface yet again. But on the other hand, sometimes a story finds its way into the public realm, which is of such a profoundly disturbing nature, that you can't help but do a double-take: the kind of story that makes you go, huh? What the hell did I just read? Like for sure you must have seen that headline wrong.

¤ Spring in the Time of Obama

¤ Defending the Indefensible Settlements

¤ Toxins Take a Toll on Troops

¤ Alternative News?
¤ Myth America 10 Greatest Myths of the Robber Class and the Case for Revolution

¤ Lawmaker won’t deny secret CIA program was ‘Cheney assassination ring’

¤ THE CIA ASSASSINATION PROGRAM.
Siobhan Gorman reports in the Wall Street Journal that the CIA program recently disclosed to Congress by Leon Panetta was designed to target high-level Al Qaeda leaders for assassination--something the CIA has been explicitly barred from doing since the Ford administration. It's worth noting however, that the CIA has attemped assassinations in the past--most infamously numerous attempts to kill Fidel Castro, at the behest of John F. Kennedy and Robert Kennedy, who played a prominent role in intelligence affairs in his brother's administration.

¤ Stop The Presses! The CIA Lied
¤ Cheney Is Linked to Concealment of C.I.A. Project

¤ News, Propaganda or Disinformation? You Decide

¤ The Israel Project’s Secret Hasbara Handbook Exposed

¤ The More Things "Change"...
¤ Cats Do Control Humans, Study Finds

¤ U.S Budget deficit tops $1 trillion for first time
The federal deficit has topped $1 trillion for the first time ever and could grow to nearly $2 trillion by this fall, intensifying fears about higher interest rates, inflation and the strength of the dollar.
The deficit has been widened by the huge sum the government has spent to ease the recession, combined with a sharp decline in tax revenues. The cost of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan also is a major factor.

¤ Is Israel guilty of piracy?
When the Israeli navy seized a small humanitarian boat flying under the Greek flag on Tuesday, 30 June, did the commandos commit acts of piracy when they forced the crew and 21 passengers -- including a former US Congresswoman and Nobel Laureate -- to port in Israel? May Israeli officials be prosecuted, and if so where?

¤ US trapped in 'bitter war'?
¤ UK opens Iraq detainee death probe

¤ 13 doctors demand inquest into Dr David Kelly's death
The death of Government scientist David Kelly returned to haunt Labour today as a group of doctors announced that they were mounting a legal challenge to overturn the finding of suicide. Dr Kelly's body was found six years ago this week in woods close to his Oxfordshire home, shortly after he was exposed as the source of a BBC news report questioning the grounds for war in Iraq.

¤ 70 insurgents killed in military offensive in S Afghanistan

Latin America Asks: Are the Gorillas Back?
Posted: Saturday, July 11, 2009

¤ Honduras Military Coup - Day 14

¤ Obama's Biden Problem
Despite our high expectations, Vice President Joe Biden’s first months in office were disappointing. This, remember, is the man who opened the more recent of his two futile runs for the presidency by saying of Obama that he was "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man."
Yes, that Joe Biden. The one who hollered at wheel-bound Missouri State Sen. Chuck Graham, to "stand up." The one who plagiarized a speech by Neil Kinnock. In other words a man who has flung himself into one rhetorical pratfall after another with the unswerving momentum of a blind rhino.

¤ Latin America Asks: Are the Gorillas Back?
The June 28th coup d'etat in Honduras that toppled leftist president Mel Zelaya sends us back to the bad old days of the "gorillas" - generals and strongmen who overthrew each other with reckless abandon and the tacit complicity of Washington.
Perched on a hillside in the Mexican outback, we would tune in to these "golpes de estado", as they are termed in Latin America, on our Zenith Transoceanic short wave.

¤ C Street Band

¤ Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Good Neighbor
In the wake of the Honduras coup, speculation about whether or not the U.S. was masterminding the plot is running wild. Brushing off denials of involvement and claims that U.S. officials had tried to dissuade the plotters from plans to overthrow President Manuel Zelaya, progressive writers have almost unanimously accused the Obama administration of complicity in the coup. Respected analysts like Jeremy Scahill, George Ciccariello-Maher and Alexander Cockburn argue that the U.S. must have been involved at some level, with Scahill arguing the U.S. “could have prevented the coup with a simple phone call.”

¤ California Dreamin'
¤ Caution: Men at Work, Robbing Banks

¤ The US' attempted color revolution in Iran
¤ British scientists grow sperm in laboratory
¤ 2 suspected US missile attacks kill 45 in Pakistan
¤ Musharraf’s London house raises eyebrows
¤ US politician urges Iran 'sabotage'
¤ Obama admin: No grounds to probe Afghan war crimes
¤ Tamil death toll ‘is 1,400 a week’ at Manik Farm camp in Sri Lanka
¤ Michael Jackson - a man trapped behind a mask

¤ Ghana: Bolgatanga Not Enthused About Obama's Visit
¤ Obama Says Economic Stimulus Plan Worked as Intended

¤ Escalation Scam: Troops in Afghanistan
The president has set a limit on the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan. For now. That's how escalation works. Ceilings become floors. Gradually.
A few times since last fall, the Obama team has floated rising numbers for how many additional U.S. soldiers will be sent to Afghanistan. Now, deployment of 21,000 more is a done deal, with a new total cap of 68,000 U.S. troops in that country. But "escalation" isn't mere jargon. And it doesn't just refer to what's happening outside the United States.

¤ Mourn on the 4th of July
¤ Helping Iran Target Iranians
¤ The Organic Monopoly and the Myth of "Natural" Foods
¤ Report: Bush admin. skirted probe of mass Afghan slayings
Obama administration sees no legal basis for investigation

¤ Who Represents Black America Toward Palestine, Israel and the Middle East?
It's almost an unfair question. Barack Obama's many apologists have explained their lips off telling us how he could not run and cannot govern as president of Black Americans, or the president of Americans neck-deep in consumer debt, or the president of Americans who want an everybody in-nobody out health care system. To get elected and to govern, they wisely assure us, Barack Obama has chosen to be and must be the "president of everybody," if by everybody you mean private health insurers, Wall Street banksters, Pentagon contractors and greedy chambers of commerce everywhere. The president is a grown man, and he gets to make those choices.

¤ The Tragedy of the Left's Discourse on Iran
The electoral coup and the subsequent uprising and suppression of the revolting voters in Iran have prompted all sorts of analyses in Western media from both the Right and the Left. The Right, mostly inspired by the neo-con ideology and reactionary perspectives, dreams of the re-creation of the Shah's Iran, looks for pro-American/pro-Israeli allies among the disgruntled Iranian public, and seeks an Eastern European type velvet revolution. As there is very little substance to these analyses, they are hardly worth much critical review; and one cannot expect them to try to understand the complexities of Iranian politics and society.

¤ The West's Afghan War and drive into The Caspian Basin
"The current main front in this global campaign is Afghanistan, NATO's first ground war and the US's longest war since Vietnam. A war that will be eight years old this October and that is escalating daily with no end in sight."

¤ Quagmire Exchange

¤ "Green revolution" fizzles out in Iran
Despite US President Barack Obama’s claims of non-involvement in Iran’s affairs, few people believe that the US was an innocent bystander in the recent riots in Tehran. The US not only has a long history of interfering in Iran’s internal affairs, these intensified during former President George Bush’s era. The one-week riots following the June 12 presidential elections were neither spontaneous, nor without outside instigation whether all the participants were aware of this fact or not. One of Obama’s staffers at the White House intervened with Twitter to keep the service functioning when it is daytime in Tehran so that people there could send messages to organize rallies.

¤ Why Obama doesn't say a word about Deaths in China?

¤ VP Biden: 'We Misread the Economy' and Other Lies
¤ A Real Warning on the Danger of Government
¤ Why Can't Obama See His Wars Are Unwinnable?
¤ Truck bomb kills at least 13 kids in Afghanistan

¤ Honduran Coup: Damning Indictment of Capitalism
Since he’s spending his summer vacation at our home, I recently washed my 11-year-old grandson’s dirty clothes. As I later folded them, small tags told me they were manufactured in the Philippines, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Guatemala, and Honduras. Not one item bore a “Made in USA” label, which is very sad, considering that the unionized needle trades were once a bastion of our country’s labor movement, and that finding attire produced overseas was a rarity just a few decades ago.

¤ Forget the Headlines: Iraqi Freedom Deferred
As US combat troops redeployed to the outskirts of Iraqi cities on June 30, well-staged celebrations commenced. The pro-US Iraqi government declared “independence day” as police vehicles roamed the streets of war-weary Iraq in an unpersuasive show of national rejoicing. US mainstream media joined the chorus, as if commemorating the end of an era.

¤ Chosen Words

¤ India: Make Hunger History
The path to hell, they say, is paved with good intentions. The way to feed the hungry and impoverished in India — the world’s largest population of hungry and malnourished — also seems to be driven by good intentions. My only worry is that the proposed National Food Security Act should not push the hungry even more deeply into a virtual hell.

Venezuela Discusses Limits to Media Ownership
Posted: Friday, July 10, 2009

Venezuelan National Assembly Discusses Limits to Concentration of Media Ownership

By James Suggett
July 10th 2009 - Venezuelanalysis.com

In a presentation before the National Assembly on Thursday, Venezuelan Public Works and Housing Minister Diosdado Cabello proposed reforms to the Telecommunications Law that would limit the concentration of private radio and television ownership and bring more cable providers under the jurisdiction of the National Telecommunications Commission (CONATEL) and the Law on Social Responsibility in Radio and Television.

"You can be certain that we will democratize the radio-electric spectrum and bring an end to large media estates in radio and television," said Cabello, comparing Venezuela's media magnates to Venezuela's elite class of large landowners.

According to Cabello, 27 families control more than 32% of the radio and television waves, with as many as 48 stations grouped under a single owner.

The long-time friend and ally of President Hugo Chávez proposed a limit of three stations for any private owner, and a limit of one half hour per day of uniform broadcasting on those three stations. Such a rule would favor Venezuela's small-scale independent producers, said the minister.

He also specified that broadcasting concessions are not inheritable property, so concession holders should not be allowed to pass on their broadcasting rights to family or colleagues in the event of their death.

With regard to cable television, Cabello proposed an administrative provision that would define any company whose programming is 70% produced in Venezuela as Venezuelan. This would require the company to register with CONATEL and abide by the Law on Social Responsibility in Radio and Television. Many cable stations have registered as international companies even though they are actually Venezuelan, to avoid government regulation, said Cabello.

"They'll all be in the same sack, that is to say, they'll all be national audiovisual producers if 70% of their production is considered to be Venezuelan," said Cabello, whose proposals will be open for public discussion for a month before the National Assembly proceeds toward a vote.

The minister presented statistics on the breakdown of radio ownership in Venezuela. Of the country's FM stations, 472 are privately owned, while 243 are local community-based operations and 79 are public. And, private owners control 184 AM stations, while the state controls 26 AM stations, according to the minister. In television, more than 60% of broadcasting concessions (65 stations) are in private hands, while just under 35% (37) are community-based and six are controlled by the national government. He did not specify the geographic range of the different signals.

To increase the state's share of the media, Cabello said the state will take over the 154 FM stations and 86 AM stations that did not register and pay fees to CONATEL by the July 2nd deadline, as requested by CONATEL a month earlier. "That which is not up to date with CONATEL will not have its concession renewed and the state will recuperate new radio spaces where the people are able to access information," said Cabello.

This measure has provoked opposition from Venezuela's Chamber of Radio Broadcasters, which called it "a direct attack against freedom of expression." In an official statement, the Chamber said the measure announced by Cabello "lacks basis" because all its members had "fulfilled all the procedures required by CONATEL since the year 2000."

Cabello responded that he would not negotiate with the Chamber, but he would be willing to negotiate with community-based and state-owned radio stations, and that a similar proposal for television stations is in the works.

The minister's proposals come amidst a media climate in which news outlets are highly politicized and openly engaged in a "media war" either for or against the administration of President Chávez. The private media has broadcast threats to assassinate the president and participated a coup d'etat against Chavez in 2002.

Recently, CONATEL has received complaints that some cable companies interfered with the signals of the Caracas-based Latin American news network Telesur and the Venezuelan state channel VTV during the coup d'etat in Honduras.

In addition, CONATEL opened an investigation earlier this week into a series of advertisements broadcast on several prominent private radio and television stations. The ads assert that the state plans to confiscate private property and young and adolescent children for indoctrination, and feature false quotes from fictitious laws and politicians. CONATEL's press release accuses the sponsor of the ads, a right-wing think tank near Caracas called CEDICE, of inciting violence and public disorder.

Chavez transferred the administration of CONATEL from the Ministry of Communications and Information to the Cabello's Public Works and Housing Ministry earlier this year with the intention of driving forward media reforms. Cabello is the former vice president of Venezuela and the former governor of Miranda state.

Source: Venezuelanalysis.com

Honduras coup is just the tip of the iceberg
Posted: Monday, July 6, 2009

¤ John Pilger on Honduras, Iran, Gaza, the Corporate Media, Obama's Wars and Resisting the American Empire
I don't believe anything as changed. If it is one to change in the middle east as other parts of the world, I think one of the really significant and building areas of discussion- and data has been building for the last few years—is just the kind of information we get through the so- called mainstream. We have many alternative sources of information now, not least of all your own program. though I wouldn't call that alternative. But for most people, the primary source of their information is the mainstream. It is mainly television. Even the internet for all its subversiveness has still a very large component of the mainstream.

¤ Military Coup in Honduras Day by Day

¤ Honduran Coup Tries to Halt Advance of Latin America's Left
The coup against Manuel Zelaya of Honduras represents a last ditch effort by Honduras’ entrenched economic and political interests to stave off the advance of the new left governments that have taken hold in Latin America over the past decade. As Zelaya proclaimed after being forcibly dumped in Costa Rica: “This is a vicious plot planned by elites. The elites only want to keep the country isolated and in extreme poverty.”

¤ Honduras coup is just the tip of the iceberg, who is next?

¤ Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez accuses US of backing Honduras coup leaders

¤ A Few Facts About the Honduran Military Coup
1. There’s very little truth to anything you’ve read about the coup in American newspapers.
2. President Manuel Zelaya is no radical. He approved a big minimum wage increase, which was desperately needed in a country where so many workers are poor, but he otherwise has been a very cautious, ineffectual reformer. The intensity of the reaction against him by the Honduran elite — as seen in the coup — reflects the feuadal mentality of the traditional economic and political leadership, not Zelaya’s politics.
3. Zelaya was not seeking to stay in power by unconstitutional means; even if his political reforms had succeeded, he would have been out of power within the year. The only side guilty of unconstitutional action is the coup plotters.

¤ No Press Freedom in Post-Coup Honduras

¤ Honduran Coup: Target Left?
The coup against Manuel Zelaya of Honduras represents a last ditch effort by Honduras’ entrenched economic and political interests to stave off the advance of the new left governments that have taken hold in Latin America over the past decade. As Zelaya proclaimed after being forcibly dumped in Costa Rica: “This is a vicious plot planned by elites. The elites only want to keep the country isolated and in extreme poverty.”

¤ Same Old Globalizers and Torture School Grads
What political and social forces are at the heart of Sunday’s coup in Honduras? Let’s start by looking at the role of Roberto Micheletti, the man Hugo Chávez loves to hate. The former head of the National Congress, Micheletti declared himself Honduras’ new President on Sunday. He replaces President Manuel Zelaya, a politician who had been moving towards more politically and economically progressive positions in recent years. A member of Zelaya’s own Liberal Party, Micheletti studied business administration in the United States and worked as the CEO of Honduras’ state telecommunications company Hondutel in the late 1990s. While he was CEO of the firm Micheletti sought to privatize the firm.

¤ Defense Secretary, Architect of U.S. Involvement in Vietnam Robert McNamara Dies
¤ Hungarian lawmakers reject Holocaust denial law
¤ Cynthia McKinney: I’m in jail in Israel
¤ UN's Richard Falk: IDF seizure of Gaza-bound ship is 'criminal'
¤ US remains silent over McKinney arrest by Israel

¤ No Comment on Kidnapping of McKinney

¤ Another Israeli Violation of International Norms

¤ Report: Israel Plans to Deport Cynthia McKinney
Israel plans to deport former U.S. lawmaker and Green Party presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney and 20 other human rights activists who were aboard a relief boat seized by an Israeli naval ship Tuesday after it refused to stay away from an Israeli blockade of Gaza.Authorities took the activists to Ben Gurion International Airport in Tel Aviv where they await deportation, according to a news report in Israel.

¤ Obama not fully informed on Russia: Putin spokesman

¤ The US' attempted color revolution in Iran
As the head of Freedom House, a CIA-interlocked think-tank that promotes free markets, free enterprise and free trade, Peter Ackerman has been at the forefront of efforts to topple foreign governments that place more emphasis on promoting the welfare of their citizens (and often their own bourgeoisie) than providing export and investment opportunities to US corporations, banks, and investors.

¤ No Evidence Iran Seeks Nuclear Arms: New IAEA Head

¤ The media war on Iran

¤ Much Ado About Nothing?
What is there about the Iranian election of June 12 that has led to it being one of the leading stories in media around the world every day since? Elections whose results are seriously challenged have taken place in most countries at one time or another in recent decades. Countless Americans believe that the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004 were stolen by the Republicans, and not just inside the voting machines and in the counting process, but prior to the actual voting as well with numerous Republican Party dirty tricks designed to keep poor and black voters off voting lists or away from polling stations

¤ Helen Thomas: Not Even Nixon Tried to Control the Media Like Obama
Following a testy exchange during Wednesday’s briefing with White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, veteran White House correspondent Helen Thomas told CNSNews.com that not even Richard Nixon tried to control the press the way President Obama is trying to control the press.
“Nixon didn’t try to do that,” Thomas said. “They couldn’t control (the media). They didn’t try.

¤ Obama Takes Bush’s Plutocratic-Socialism to the Next Level

¤ POLITICS: U.S. Uses False Taliban Aid Charge to Pressure Iran

¤ Conspiracy fever: As rumours swell that the government staged 7/7, victims' relatives call for a proper inquiry

¤ The Crooks Get Cash While the Poor Get Screwed

¤ Intelligence and Meglomania

¤ America is NOT #1. Try 114th.

The Venezuelan Coup Revisited: Silencing the Evidence
Posted: Thursday, July 2, 2009

By Gregory Wilpert - NACLA
July 02, 2009 - venezuelanalysis.com

Book Review

The Silence and the Scorpion: The Coup Against Chávez and the Making of Modern Venezuela by Brian A. Nelson, Nation Books, 2009, 355 pp., $26.95 (hardcover)

Whatever one's opinion of Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez, one thing is certain: The coup attempt against him on April 11, 2002, together with the tumultuous events leading up to it, were a pivotal moment in the country's recent history. Unsurprisingly, in the context of deep political polarization in Venezuela at the time, accounts of how the coup took place often constitute partisan positions, as political opponents wage battles to define the truth of what happened.

All sides agree that a massacre took place on April 11 in El Silencio (the Silence), a historic district in the heart of downtown Caracas. Sometime between 2:30 and 3:20 p.m., gunmen began firing on opposition demonstrators as they marched on the Miraflores presidential palace to demand Chávez's resignation (there is some dispute about exactly when the first shots were fired). Nineteen people were killed, including seven opposition demonstrators, seven Chavista counter-demonstrators, and five bystanders, together with about 60 wounded. By that evening, Chávez would be out of office, only to return 47 hours later after the implosion of the provisional government.

There are two principal narratives, Chavista and opposition, of how this extraordinary series of events took place. The first, most widely accepted version has it that Chávez was arrested by opposition-allied military officers on the pretense that he ordered the attack on the demonstrators; the coup plotters then proceeded to dismantle all state institutions in order to establish a dictatorship. But as the population and loyal military officers realized what was happening, they overthrew the coup plotters and returned Chávez to office.

The second version, told by the hardcore opposition, holds that there was no coup as such. In this telling, Chávez really did order the Venezuelan military, as well as Chavista paramilitary thugs, to shoot the demonstrators. When Chávez's generals, refusing to obey, confronted the president, he resigned, admitting defeat. The military and civil society then handed the presidency to businessman Pedro Carmona, but the "transition" was short-lived because Carmona was betrayed by officers who at first supported him because they were angry at being excluded from the new government. This in turn provided Chávez an opening to return to power with the help of loyalists within the military.

Given these very different accounts, and the very different implications they have for making sense of contemporary Venezuela, any effort to provide a thorough, balanced investigation of the coup and the events surrounding it should be welcomed. This is especially the case for those of us in the United States, where the media have long portrayed Chávez as a dictator and a threat to U.S. interests. Moreover, clarifying exactly how the coup attempt happened, as well as the violence that precipitated it, is important because assessing who was responsible for it-Chávez, the opposition, or some combination of the two-has important consequences for evaluating the Chávez presidency as a whole.

Until recently there have been only three in-depth written accounts of the coup in English-a chapter in Bart Jones's Chávez biography (¡Hugo!, Steerforth Press, 2007), an article by the blogger Francisco Toro ("The Untold Story of Venezuela's 2002 April Crisis," available at CaracasChronicles.com), and an article by myself for the website Venezuelanalysis.com ("The 47-Hour Coup That Changed Everything"). Now a book-length treatment is available: Brian Nelson's The Silence and the Scorpion, an account six years in the making that promises an investigation based on information "from every available source."

Unfortunately, the best that can be said about the book is that it is very readable, providing wonderfully detailed firsthand accounts of the coup. Nelson weaves together a series of short chapters, each based on interviews with one of his 19 sources-four opposition marchers, three pro-Chávez demonstrators, three journalists, four politicians, and five military generals-all of whom witnessed the events of April 11, 12, and 13 from various angles as participants. Three of these sources, however, provide the bulk of the narrative: generals Efraín Vásquez Velasco and Manuel Rosendo, and former finance minister Francisco Usón. Not only are all three vehemently anti-Chávez, but two of them, Rosendo and Vásquez Velasco, the supreme commander of the armed forces and the head of the army at the time, respectively, were instrumental to the coup's initial success. If they had not rejected Chávez as commander in chief on April 11, the president would likely never have been forced out of office.

The book fails to clarify what actually happened largely because, while uncritically relying on these sources, Nelson ignores evidence that contradicts their testimony. Moreover, he leaves it unclear as to whether the book is meant as an objective description or merely a narrative version of his informants' interviews. One is tempted to think the latter, since he never corrects their outright falsehoods, such as Vásquez Velasco's claim that Chávez "had always dreamed of a socialist Venezuela," when in fact Chávez did not begin talking about socialism until 2005. Nelson also accepts barely credible claims that Chávez supports Colombia's FARC guerrillas, a belief that contributed to Vásquez Velasco's disenchantment with Chávez.

Nelson biases his readers from the start by presenting the story of the coup through his opposition sources' eyes, blurring his own omniscient narrator's voice with theirs (the chapters based on Chavista sources, though not hostile, are generally perfunctory). By following his three main sources' lead, Nelson endorses a third, less prominent version of the coup story: that of the moderate opposition, which splits the difference between the two above-described narratives. According to this version, Chávez was behind the violence and deserved to be thrown out; Nelson, following his source Usón, likens Chávez to the fabled scorpion who lashes out violently, even to his own detriment, because violence is his nature.

But, according to Nelson, Carmona was little better, betraying his moderate allies in the military and the oil workers' union as he went about abolishing the country's democratic institutions and rescinding the constitution. This is what makes Nelson's version "moderate": It denounces both Chávez and Carmona as totalitarians. But most of the blame for the events of April 11 rests on Chávez's shoulders, according to Nelson.

The question of how to apportion responsibility in this case is perhaps the most important issue touched on in the book. Any serious attempt to do so must answer a series of interrelated questions, while considering all the evidence and adequately interrogating sources' biases: Were the military generals who refused to obey Chávez justified in doing so? To what extent, if any, was Chávez responsible for the violence leading up to the coup? And was there a premeditated conspiracy to overthrow Chávez?

Were Rosendo and Vásquez Velasco justified in rebelling against Chávez? When Chávez realized the opposition march was definitely heading for the presidential palace, where he and his administration were at the time, he ordered Rosendo to implement Plan Ávila, which would have mobilized the military into the streets of Caracas. Exactly what Plan Ávila is supposed to do lies at the core of the dispute over whether the generals' rebellion was justified. Rosendo refused to implement the operation on the grounds that, as a military plan to retake the streets during some kind of violent disruption, it would lead to bloodshed, since the army is not trained for crowd control. Following Rosendo, Nelson repeatedly describes Plan Ávila as the same plan initiated during the caracazo of 1989, when the Venezuelan military killed between 500 and 2,000 rioting and protesting poor people in the wake of an IMF-imposed structural adjustment program.

But according to General Jorge García Carneiro, a Chávez loyalist, and others in the military, Plan Ávila had been changed since 1989 and was intended only to protect vital government buildings-in this case Miraflores, which Chávez believed opposition demonstrators meant to storm by force. Nelson doesn't mention this debate and describes Plan Ávila as Chávez's "nuclear option," leaving it at that.

Furthermore, Rosendo's rationale for refusing to implement Plan Ávila is presented with no discussion. But if Rosendo honestly believed the operation would lead to civilian deaths, why did he not make this point during a meeting with Chávez, his cabinet, and the top military commanders on April 7, when he told the president that he would readily implement Plan Ávila? This is discussed in Jones's ¡Hugo! and was told to Jones by three independently interviewed witnesses who attended that meeting. Nelson does not mention Jones's finding, even though he cites his book on other issues.

Skeptics of Chávez's stated reason for activating Plan Ávila, protecting Miraflores, argue that he should have instead called in more National Guard troops. After all, Venezuela's National Guard is trained and equipped for crowd control, while the army is not. This is true, except that most of the National Guard on April 11 was under the command of rebellious officers who had earlier refused to execute Chávez's order to block the opposition march from reaching the palace. In the end, Chávez could rely on only a small handful of National Guard troops, who stopped the opposition's advance on two of the three streets leading to Miraflores. This is also left out of Nelson's account.

Next, was Chávez responsible for the dead and wounded on April 11? Yes, according to the opposition, because after failing to persuade his generals to implement Plan Ávila, he encouraged armed members of the Bolivarian Circles, grassroots Chavista organizations, to shoot opposition demonstrators. This claim relies on a single piece of questionable evidence: the testimony of Rosendo's personal assistant, who says he overheard Defense Minister José Vicente Rangel tell Caracas mayor Freddy Bernal to order Bolivarian Circle members to arm themselves with rocks and sticks to scare opposition demonstrators. Although Rangel vehemently denied having ever told Bernal such a thing, even if he did, this is not the same as giving an order to shoot opposition demonstrators.

Then there is the by now iconic video footage of Chávez supporters on the Puente Llaguno overpass firing handguns in the direction of the opposition march. At the time, this footage, aired repeatedly for weeks by the private Venezuelan media, was the most damning evidence of a Chavista conspiracy to murder opposition demonstrators. According to opposition sympathizers and to Nelson, these shooters were likely responsible for most of the casualties, both among the opposition and Chavistas.

Chávez supporters routinely counter-argue that the footage failed to show who they were shooting at: not demonstrators, but metropolitan police officers who were also shooting. Moreover, the opposition demonstration was by that time at least 1,650 feet away and thus out of the effective range of the Chavista shooters' handguns.

Nelson rebuts this, arguing that even if the shooters were aiming for the police, they might still have killed opposition demonstrators, since handguns can have enough force to kill or injure someone at 2,640 feet, even though their effective range is about 825 to 990 feet. While this might be true, if unlikely, Nelson again leaves out crucial information, this time from Claves de una masacre, a video investigation by Ángel Palacios that is widely available online.

The documentary provides strong, credible evidence that the Llaguno shooters did not begin shooting until a full 43 minutes after the last opposition demonstrator was shot (the film uses time markers to establish this, including public speeches and close-ups of demonstrators' wristwatches). This is why they were later exonerated after spending a year in prison-they were acting in self-defense against the metropolitan police, who started shooting at them first, as amateur video included in the documentary clearly shows.

Who, then, shot the demonstrators? While several opposition deaths appear to have been caused by people firing from street level, many of the victims, according to both opposition and Chavista witnesses, were shot by snipers located in the surrounding buildings, although this remains an unresolved question. But Nelson almost completely dismisses the notion of snipers, preferring his theory that the Llaguno shooters were primarily responsible. Once again, he ignores important evidence.

Footage in Claves de una masacre and taped police radio communications seem to suggest that plainclothes metropolitan police were sniping on the opposition demonstration, and even their own uniformed compatriots at street level, from a building called La Nacional. In the footage, uniformed police in the midst of the demonstration can clearly be seen taking cover from unknown shooters who appear to be firing from inside La Nacional. While this building belonged to the pro-Chávez inner-Caracas municipality, the radio recordings, which were presented in the trial against the heads of the metropolitan police force, indicate that police had infiltrated it. In the recording, police chief Henry Vivas says, "Our officers are infiltrated in this building; we have personnel infiltrated in that building." Then another police officer responds, "It seems there is a group of officers in La Nacional, in civilian [clothing]. Be very careful so that there is no confusion among ourselves." Shortly thereafter an agitated police officer at street level exclaims, "They are shooting at us! Do not shoot! Do not shoot!" (The recording is available at radiomundial.com.)

Not mentioning any of this, Nelson suggests that if there were snipers, they must have been placed by Chávez, not by the opposition. Why? Because the scorpion-like Chávez supposedly wanted bloodshed so that he could blame the opposition for it, thereby discrediting his opponents. But this is speculation. Since we ultimately do not know who the shooters in the surrounding buildings were, it seems to all boil down to guessing who was more likely to have attacked their own supporters: Chávez or the opposition coup plotters. Nelson concludes that it was likely Chávez.

This brings us to our final question: Was there a premeditated opposition plot to overthrow Chávez? And if there was such a plot-as many opposition leaders admitted, on camera, on April 12-who really would have had more to gain from the deaths in national and international public opinion? I, for one, find it much more plausible that extremist elements in the opposition believed that killing demonstrators would be necessary to justify the coup. This theory, of a premeditated opposition plan to murder Venezuelans, gains credibility if, once again, we take into account evidence that Nelson ignores. First, there is the suggestive fact that the top opposition march leaders-Guaicaipuro Lameda, Carlos Molina, Pedro Carmona, and Carlos Ortega-all left the march just minutes before the shooting began. Then, more compellingly, there is the testimony of former CNN en Español reporter Otto Neustaldt.

On April 10, the day before the opposition march, a friend of Neustaldt's asked him to videotape a pronouncement of top military officers against the president, mentioning then that they expected opposition marchers to die. The following day, at about 2 p.m., Neustaldt made the video recording, which included Vice Admiral Héctor Ramírez Pérez reading a statement in which he said that six demonstrators had already been killed. But the first death did not happen until 2:30 or even 3:20 (depending on whose investigation you believe). Even if Neustaldt got the timing wrong and some demonstrators had already been killed, it was not until much later that six people were dead. In an interview at CaracasChronicles.com, Nelson says he did not mention Neustaldt's testimony (which was videotaped) because he was unable to personally interview him.

Nelson's theories on the coup aside, we should note the many other flawed claims he makes about Chávez in the course of his narrative-for example, that Chávez maintains dictatorial control over the Venezuelan legislature and judiciary; that he aids and collaborates with Colombian guerrillas; that he provided Boliviarian Circles with paramilitary training; that he plans to "Cubanize" Venezuela; that he allied with Saddam Hussein; that his economic policies have been disastrous; the list goes on. Suffice it to say that Nelson's handling of these allegations is no less problematic than his treatment of the coup, but I do not have space here to adequately deal with them. Let me conclude with a final comment on a crucial point: the role of Venezuela's private opposition media in the coup.

Nelson mentions some of the media's activities, such as calling on people to join the march on Miraflores; refusing to broadcast the counter-demonstrations in Chávez's favor; and, in the case of one network, Venevisión, hosting a meeting of the coup's key players. But Nelson minimizes their near total involvement.

For example, Attorney General Isaías Rodríguez had to trick the TV stations into broadcasting a press conference in which he planned to denounce what was happening as a coup. Telling them that he would only announce his resignation, Rodríguez managed to get on air but was cut off as soon as he said "coup." TV commentator Napoleón Bravo did his part for the coup when he read what he claimed to be Chávez's resignation letter, which in reality Chávez had never signed. And the near continuous broadcasting of the Llaguno footage, with the unsupported claim that the shooters were firing on opposition demonstrators, was perhaps the most important piece of media falsification to justify the coup to Venezuelans and to international public opinion.

These and other examples of media complicity are crucial for understanding the events of the coup and why Chávez insisted on countering their campaign by forcing all TV stations to broadcast his public messages. Nelson, though, portrays this as yet another example of Chávez's authoritarianism.

In the end, it is a shame that a progressive publisher like Nation Books would publish such a one-sided account of the coup against Chávez and thereby contribute to the already overwhelming media meme that Chávez and his supporters are violent brutes who deserve to be ousted from power, no matter what.

Gregory Wilpert is the author of Changing Venezuela by Taking Power: The History and Policies of the Chávez Government (Verso, 2007). He is a member of NACLA's editorial committee.

Source: venezuelanalysis.com

Democracy Derailed in Honduras
Posted: Thursday, July 2, 2009

¤ Military Coup in Honduras

¤ Why President Zelaya's Actions in Honduras Were Legal and Constitutional

¤ Honduras: a Coup With No Future
Since coming to power in 2006 President Zelaya has gradually moved to the left, and at the time of the coup was taking steps to address Honduras ’ gross levels of inequality. Predictably, these moves earned him the enmity of much of Congress, whose ties to the country’s traditional elites run deep. Zelaya also angered the these elites by pursuing a leftist foreign policy, joining the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA), an alterative regional trade group composed of nine left-leaning Latin American and Caribbean countries. The arrival of Cuban doctors to provide healthcare to the poorest sectors of Honduran society, was met with particular hostility by Zelaya’s opponents.

¤ Democracy Derailed in Honduras

¤ The Significance Of Washington's Coup Attempt In Honduras
There should be no doubts about the U.S.’ decisive role behind the now-crumbling military coup in Honduras. As commander and chief of the U.S. armed forces, the blame for this intervention lies solely on President Obama. The White House, however, would like you to believe that they “attempted to convince the Honduran military not to intervene.”

Rubbish.

When it comes to the Honduran military, the U.S. government needn’t ask permission for anything. The decades long relationship between the two institutions is one of dependence — Honduras’ military has long been financed and trained by the U.S.

¤ Obama's Real Message to Latin America?
Whatever goodwill existed last week however could now be undone by turbulent political events in Honduras. Following the military coup d’etat there on Sunday, Chávez accused the U.S. of helping to orchestrate the overthrow of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya. “Behind these soldiers are the Honduran bourgeois, the rich who converted Honduras into a Banana Republic, into a political and military base for North American imperialism,” Chávez thundered.

¤ From Bolivia to Honduras
Even in the best of times a coup in Honduras wouldn’t get much coverage in the U.S. since most North Americans couldn’t find the country on a map and, moreover, would have no reason to do so. Nevertheless, those in the U.S. who have been alert to the changes in Latin America over the past decade and almost everyone south of the border know that the coup d’etat (or “golpe de estado”) against President Manuel Zelaya has profound implications for the region and, in fact, all of Latin America.

¤ Weapons: Our #1 Export?

¤ Iran and Washington's Hidden Hand

¤ Troop Movements Are not a 'Withdrawal'

¤ Demonising Iran Conveniently Hides Uncomfortable Truths for the West

¤ Obama gets an F on handling Ahmadinejad's re-election

¤ The Secret History of the American Empire AUDIO

¤ Banks Own The US Government
¤ Banks own the US government
¤ Plight of Palestinians getting worse, UN warns

¤ US remains silent over McKinney arrest by Israel
Nearly a day after the detention of former US lawmaker Cynthia McKinney by Israeli forces, Washington has yet to make a reaction.
Israeli Navy detained former US congresswoman and Nobel Prize laureate Cynthia McKinney and twenty other human rights activists on board a relief boat outside Israel's territorial waters on Tuesday as they were heading to Gaza on a humanitarian mission.

¤ We are NOT the “Story”, It’s Not Just Our 21 Kidnapped Passengers
¤ GM and Ford suspend Russian plants

¤ $2,000 for a Dead Afghan Child, $100,000 for Any American Who Died Killing it.
¤ True or False: U.S. Economic Stats Lie
¤ Ahmadinejad calls election a defeat for Iran's foes
¤ Iconic photo of Iranian protester is faked: reveals Italy's most conservative mainstream paper
¤ Beware the Dreaded Iranian Curse
¤ Abstract Quality Journalism for War

¤ Israeli doctors colluding in torture: ...while world's medical ethics chief turns blind eye
Israel’s watchdog body on medical ethics has failed to investigate evidence that doctors working in detention facilities are turning a blind eye to cases of torture, according to Israeli human rights groups.
The Israeli Medical Association (IMA) has ignored repeated requests to examine such evidence, the rights groups say, even though it has been presented with examples of Israeli doctors who have broken their legal and ethical duty towards Palestinians in their care.

¤ Sorry, Mr. Bush - I never imagined Obama would be worse than you
On major issues and a lot of minor ones, Obama is the same as or worse than Bush. But Bush had an opposition to contend with. Obama has a compliant Democratic Congress. Lulled to somnolent apathy by Obama's charming manners, mastery of English (and yes, the color of his skin), leftist activists and journalists have been reduced to quiet disappointment, mild grumbling and unaccountable patience.

¤ Obama follows precedent, undermining Iran with engagement
¤ No Place to Hide: Torture, Psychologists, and the APA
¤ CIA Crucified Captive in Abu Ghraib Prison
¤ A Matter of Trust - Mexico's July 5 Legislative Elections
¤ Iraq: torture and Abuses under Puppet Government
¤ Lean Cuisine: Counting Calories On the Checkpoint Diet
¤ Why Iraq is Now the Most Corrupt Country on the Planet

Previous Page | Trinicenter Home

Homepage | U.S. Crusade | News Sources | Zimbabwe Special | Venezuela
Back to Top