Comments on: On “Shutting Up Venezuela’s Chavez”

By: HR

HR — Tue, 04 Dec 2007 04:13:22 +0000

Looks like the piece got the right-wingnuts into their usual tizzy, defending the corporate interest they hold so dear. As, usual, they miss the point. The changes proposed by Chavez were subject to democratic approval, a vote by the people. More than you can say for the legislated tyranny that has been imposed here for the last 30 years, particularly since the Bushies were selected into power by the “supreme” court.

By: Max Shields

Max Shields — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 19:09:00 +0000

So, what’s the real issue here? Hasn’t the US governement pretty much declared half the world’s leaders enemies?

And what do these demonized leaders have in common? They weren’t democratically elected? They support US military intervention into Iraq and Afganistan (and elsewhere)? They have supported US rendition? they have opened their doors to US corporate globalization? Neoliberal free trade? Plundered their country to keep the US economy and global markets humming along and their personal cofers full? No. No. No. No. No. No.

They have nationalized their resources - mostly, but not only, in the form of OIL.

So, Cohen and his ilk should “shut up”. Theirs is not the cause of free press or democracy, it is the megaphone for American Imperialism.

Furthermore - what’s the 50 years or president for life NPR is spouting?
How long was Tony Blair in power? What are the term limits for the French Prime Minister? Or the German Chancillor? And the Prime Minister of Australia? NONE! And so how does this differ from Chavez’s referendum?

OIL and US Hegemony in the South!

By: Barbara

Barbara — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 18:36:58 +0000

According to Heinrich Boll, about a third of those who would otherwise have cast votes in the referendum that elected Hitler were incapacitated at the time by illness: many establishments, including schools and some govt. offices, were closed due to the no. of people unable to function normally.

Also: if the United States has a dictator, surely, whomever it is, it is certainly not the present resident of its executive suites.

By: heike

heike — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 15:39:18 +0000

Michael: you have identified many of the non-sequiturs of this black propaganda (my own view, publshed elsewhere in DV, is that the DGI had a heavy hand in this). Also, if there really were an operation such as this, it would have been treated at a much higher level than “confidenciel.” And this article also deserves the title of “hack” job. What does keeping Chavez “president” until 2050 have to do with “socialism?” Riggins is using the CP version of socialism to refer to Cuba, which has not yet attained “communism,” so is therefore “socialist.” Most non-communists in this country understand socialism in very different terms.

By: gerald spezio

gerald spezio — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:42:01 +0000

Sometimes you can’t tell a hack from a hack when you live in a culture where everything is hacked.

Watch your brain.

By: Michael Pugliese

Michael Pugliese — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:41:43 +0000

http://phoenixwoman.wordpress.com/2007/11/30/is-operacion-tenazas-disinformation-from-the-venezuelan-government/
Is “Operacion Tenazas” disinformation from the Venezuelan government?

Posted by Charles on November 30, 2007

DemocracyNow! carried a segment with James Petras on the Operacion Tenazas story described below. Petras has not supplied any additional substantiation for the memo at the heart of this either on DemocracyNow! or in his Counterpunch article.

Charley points us toward a post by Larry Johnson discounting the report. Larry says:

State Department officers do not write memos to Hayden. Particularly mid-level Foreign Service Officers. A CIA officer under diplomatic cover sends his communications to headquarters via an encoded message. We call these messages cables, harkening back to the days of telegraphs and telegrams.

This, in my judgment, is the work–very clumsy work at that–of the Venezuelan intelligence service eager to build on the truth that the United States has sought to oust Chavez.

This is probably correct. There are a number of things about the memo that raise questions, such as:

1. How would it have been intercepted?
2. Why would it have been routed from a field officer directly to the head of the CIA?
3. Why is there only one name on the distribution list?
4. Why did the Venezuelan government not supply a photocopy of the original in English?
5. There’s phrasing that seems odd, such as “a group called Red Flag, long a sworn enemy of our interests in the country.” or “We have reaped the greatest successes in the spheres of propaganda and psychological operations, to the point that in the last weeks, we have imposed our agenda and dominated the publicity scene.” Cables tend to be dry and operationally oriented (See, for example this from Operation Condor).
6. There is extraordinary discussion of individual personalities and a numbered bank account, details that would be unusual for communication to one of the top figures in government.

So, there’s plenty of reason to be skeptical about it. Unlike Larry Johnson, however, I don’t see any objections that are dispositive. It’s not unknown for very senior USG officials to be the point man on coups. Henry Kissinger on Operation Condor comes to mind. Nor is it impossible for that function to be outside of the Department of State. Rice is no Kissinger. My guess is that this has a 20% chance of being for real, and an 80% chance of being a fake… though perhaps one generated by the USG itself. The one thing that’s not at issue is that the tactics ascribed by the intercept to the USG have been used for real in the past.

Lee Sustar, a left voice, makes it clear that there is by no means unanimity within Chavez’s party on the reforms (see here). That’s important to understanding this. Venezuela is really divided into five camps: people who want socialism, people who would have a violent coup than permit socialism, people who realize that there has to be some way to stop the opposition from getting its way through violence and sabotage but are skeptical about the proposed reforms, people who are alarmed by the proposed reforms even though they acknowledge that Venezuela has race and class problems, and people who are totally confused by it all.

Choices! Choices! I guess things really are easier as long as Bush is the dictator.

This entry was posted on November 30, 2007 at 8:24 pm and is filed under Venezuela. . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

By: Richard

Richard — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:30:59 +0000

That was one of the most ignorant retorts to an article I have ever seen. Chavez is destroying Venezuela. I have friends from Venezuela that used to go visit regularly, but now they fear for their safety when they return. They say that things have deteriorated so much that they are trying to convince their family to come to America before things go too much farther. I think the only reason Chavez got 49% of the people to vote for his referendum is because he gives away so much to the poor. In the short term, it seems really great for those people, but when the economy collapses and there is nothing more to give away, they won’t be so supportive. However, (if the referendum had passed) by that point they won’t have the right to speak out against the problems with the government. Everyone just has to hope that Chavez’s replacement (assuming that he doesn’t force himself into an indefinite position of power) is able to reverse the damage that he has done.

By: Michael Pugliese

Michael Pugliese — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 14:07:38 +0000

If Riggins had been in Stalin’s USSR he’d be raving that the Kulaks with two cows were causing the milk shortage those counter-revolutionary Trotskyite Social Fascists, ‘ya know!

By: Eric Cavalli

Eric Cavalli — Mon, 03 Dec 2007 12:43:36 +0000

Your contention that their exists a vibrant opposition press is a little bit of a stretch. Especially since Chavez refused to renew broadcast licensing for stations critical of him. This has not created an atmosphere where journalists feel free. Also the assertion that shortages are due to criminals intent on derailing reform is ridiculous. Producers will sell when they can make money, even if they don’t like their President. Most people are pragmatic. The fact is that Venezuela imports most of their food. With inflation running 20% in conjunction with price controls it is not surprising that their are shortages. I’m sure many other socialist regimes have experienced that it is hard to defy the laws of economics for very long. Chavez has done many good things for the poor in his country. He could do much more if he chose not to give away Venezuela’s natural resources to prop up Cubas failed socialist state. People sometimes forget that Hitler was also voted into office under democratic rule. It is a mistake to whitewash the movements of Chavez as simply someone who is trying to help the poor and he is being unfairly maligned by the evil empire. Venezuela is still a democracy. Thankfully Chavez and his 69 reforms were defeated.