Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Why Hugo Chavez is My Number One Hero
This article appears in the current edition of Because People Matter, a Sacramento area progressive newspaper.
by Dan Bacher
Hugo Chavez, the feisty leftist president of Venezuela, delivered one of the most electrifying speeches ever given to the United Nations when he called G.W. Bush “the devil” before the General Assembly on September 20.
The great speech, combined with Chavez’s previous history of making fun of Bush and Condoleeza Rice in his speeches and his commitment to serving the poor of Venezuela and the world, makes Chavez my number one hero in the world during a time when heroes are hard to find.
“Yesterday the devil came here,” said Chavez. “Right here,” crossing himself. “And it smells of sulphur still today.”
Chavez accused Bush of “talking as if he owned the world” and said “we could call a psychiatrist to analyze yesterday’s statement made by the president of the United States,” referring to Bush’s speech before the U.N. the day before.
In contrast with his ridiculing of Bush, Chavez openly praised Noam Chomsky, whom he described as “one of the most prestigious and American and world intellectuals.” He urged everybody to read Chomsky’s latest book “Hegemony or Survival: the Imperialist Strategy of the United States,” as he held a copy of the book and waved it in front of the General Assembly.
“As Chomsky says here, clearly and in depth, the American empire is doing all it can to consolidate it s system of domination. And we cannot allow them to do that. We cannot allow world dictatorship to be consolidated.”
As a result of Chavez's recommendation, the book rocketed on the bestseller lists nationwide, becoming the number one paperback on amazon.com!
In Chavez’s fiery address, he cited not only Chomsky on U.S. imperialism but Aristotle on the nature of democracy. Chavez blasted the U.S. for harboring a terrorist, Luis Posada Carrilles, responsible for the bombing of a Cubana Airlines plane in 1976.
He also castigated the U.S. and Israel for their aggression in the Middle East. “This is imperialist, fascist and genocidal, the empire and Israel firing on the people of Palestine and Lebanon,” he stated,
Chavez outlined his four-point plan for making the United Nations more democratic and effective, including:
• Expansion of the Security Council.
• Development of “effective methods to address and resolve world conflicts, transparent decisions.”
• Immediate suppression of the “anti-democratic mechanism” known as the veto of the Security Council.
• Strengthening the role and the power of the secretary general of the United Nations.
The members of the Assembly applauded wildly throughout the speech, particularly when Chavez described Bush as “el diablo.”
As he wrapped up his speech, Chavez exhorted the Assembly, “We want ideas to save our planet from the imperialist threat. And hopefully in this very century, in not too long a time, we will see this new era, and for our children and our grandchildren a world of peace based on the fundamental principles of the United Nations, but a renewed United Nations.”
He quipped, “And maybe we have to change location. Maybe we have to put the United Nations somewhere else; maybe a city of the south. We've proposed Venezuela."
On the following day during a visit to a Harlem church accompanied by actor Danny Glover, Chavez further made fun of Bush, calling him an “alcoholic” and a “sick man.” In previous speeches, Chavez has called Bush "the king of vacations" and "mister danger."
Unfortunately, while the Bush administration declined to comment on Chavez’s speech, two House Democrats, incredulously, castigated Chavez for comparing Bush to “the devil” and defended Bush. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called Chavez an “everyday thug.” Congressman Charlie Rangel, a persistent critic of the Bush administration, while praising the government of Venezuela for providing heating oil to low-income people in the United States, also chastised Chavez for his comments about Bush.
“It should be clear to all heads of government that criticism of Bush Administration policies, either domestic or foreign, does not entitle them to attack the President personally,” said Rangel. “George Bush is the President of the United States and represents the entire country. Any demeaning public attack against him is viewed by Republicans and Democrats, and all Americans, as an attack on all of us.”
I absolutely disagree with Pelosi and Rangel and consider Chavez’s address to be one of the most humorous, riveting and refreshing speeches by a political leader that I’ve ever heard or read. Chavez is describing Bush as how most of the world sees him – and Pelosi and Rangel somehow believe that criticism of Bush should be an exclusive right of U.S. residents and political leaders.
This is incongruous when you consider how the Bush administration and the Republicans have continuously attacked Chavez for being a “dictator” and despot” when, unlike Bush, he was elected democratically by a majority of the Venezuelan people in open and fair elections, in contrast to the stolen U.S. elections of 2000 and 2004 in the U.S.
Not only has the Bush regime constantly personally attacked Chavez, but Bush and the Republicans also engineered a coup attempt in Venezuela in 2002 to oust the democratically elected Chavez. However, because of massive outpouring of support for Chavez in the streets, the coup failed. Since that time, the U.S. government has funded the “opposition” in Venezuela in an attempt to bring the Chavez government down.
After what the Bush regime has done to Chavez and the people of Venezuela, Chavez is entitled to call Bush “the devil,” “a sick man," "mister danger," or whatever insulting term he feels like. Unlike Rangel and Pelosi, I don’t see Chavez’s ridiculing of Bush, the worst president in U.S. history and a war criminal, as an attack on “all Americans.” Bush is NOT my president – and I applaud Hugo Chavez for exposing Bush and his henchmen for the evil folks that they are!
Hugo Chavez, the feisty leftist president of Venezuela, delivered one of the most electrifying speeches ever given to the United Nations when he called G.W. Bush “the devil” before the General Assembly on September 20.
The great speech, combined with Chavez’s previous history of making fun of Bush and Condoleeza Rice in his speeches and his commitment to serving the poor of Venezuela and the world, makes Chavez my number one hero in the world during a time when heroes are hard to find.
“Yesterday the devil came here,” said Chavez. “Right here,” crossing himself. “And it smells of sulphur still today.”
Chavez accused Bush of “talking as if he owned the world” and said “we could call a psychiatrist to analyze yesterday’s statement made by the president of the United States,” referring to Bush’s speech before the U.N. the day before.
In contrast with his ridiculing of Bush, Chavez openly praised Noam Chomsky, whom he described as “one of the most prestigious and American and world intellectuals.” He urged everybody to read Chomsky’s latest book “Hegemony or Survival: the Imperialist Strategy of the United States,” as he held a copy of the book and waved it in front of the General Assembly.
“As Chomsky says here, clearly and in depth, the American empire is doing all it can to consolidate it s system of domination. And we cannot allow them to do that. We cannot allow world dictatorship to be consolidated.”
As a result of Chavez's recommendation, the book rocketed on the bestseller lists nationwide, becoming the number one paperback on amazon.com!
In Chavez’s fiery address, he cited not only Chomsky on U.S. imperialism but Aristotle on the nature of democracy. Chavez blasted the U.S. for harboring a terrorist, Luis Posada Carrilles, responsible for the bombing of a Cubana Airlines plane in 1976.
He also castigated the U.S. and Israel for their aggression in the Middle East. “This is imperialist, fascist and genocidal, the empire and Israel firing on the people of Palestine and Lebanon,” he stated,
Chavez outlined his four-point plan for making the United Nations more democratic and effective, including:
• Expansion of the Security Council.
• Development of “effective methods to address and resolve world conflicts, transparent decisions.”
• Immediate suppression of the “anti-democratic mechanism” known as the veto of the Security Council.
• Strengthening the role and the power of the secretary general of the United Nations.
The members of the Assembly applauded wildly throughout the speech, particularly when Chavez described Bush as “el diablo.”
As he wrapped up his speech, Chavez exhorted the Assembly, “We want ideas to save our planet from the imperialist threat. And hopefully in this very century, in not too long a time, we will see this new era, and for our children and our grandchildren a world of peace based on the fundamental principles of the United Nations, but a renewed United Nations.”
He quipped, “And maybe we have to change location. Maybe we have to put the United Nations somewhere else; maybe a city of the south. We've proposed Venezuela."
On the following day during a visit to a Harlem church accompanied by actor Danny Glover, Chavez further made fun of Bush, calling him an “alcoholic” and a “sick man.” In previous speeches, Chavez has called Bush "the king of vacations" and "mister danger."
Unfortunately, while the Bush administration declined to comment on Chavez’s speech, two House Democrats, incredulously, castigated Chavez for comparing Bush to “the devil” and defended Bush. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called Chavez an “everyday thug.” Congressman Charlie Rangel, a persistent critic of the Bush administration, while praising the government of Venezuela for providing heating oil to low-income people in the United States, also chastised Chavez for his comments about Bush.
“It should be clear to all heads of government that criticism of Bush Administration policies, either domestic or foreign, does not entitle them to attack the President personally,” said Rangel. “George Bush is the President of the United States and represents the entire country. Any demeaning public attack against him is viewed by Republicans and Democrats, and all Americans, as an attack on all of us.”
I absolutely disagree with Pelosi and Rangel and consider Chavez’s address to be one of the most humorous, riveting and refreshing speeches by a political leader that I’ve ever heard or read. Chavez is describing Bush as how most of the world sees him – and Pelosi and Rangel somehow believe that criticism of Bush should be an exclusive right of U.S. residents and political leaders.
This is incongruous when you consider how the Bush administration and the Republicans have continuously attacked Chavez for being a “dictator” and despot” when, unlike Bush, he was elected democratically by a majority of the Venezuelan people in open and fair elections, in contrast to the stolen U.S. elections of 2000 and 2004 in the U.S.
Not only has the Bush regime constantly personally attacked Chavez, but Bush and the Republicans also engineered a coup attempt in Venezuela in 2002 to oust the democratically elected Chavez. However, because of massive outpouring of support for Chavez in the streets, the coup failed. Since that time, the U.S. government has funded the “opposition” in Venezuela in an attempt to bring the Chavez government down.
After what the Bush regime has done to Chavez and the people of Venezuela, Chavez is entitled to call Bush “the devil,” “a sick man," "mister danger," or whatever insulting term he feels like. Unlike Rangel and Pelosi, I don’t see Chavez’s ridiculing of Bush, the worst president in U.S. history and a war criminal, as an attack on “all Americans.” Bush is NOT my president – and I applaud Hugo Chavez for exposing Bush and his henchmen for the evil folks that they are!
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
I heard a portion of Chave'z speech after having heard about the "devil" remark. His speech was so much more than these two words. Latin America, were you listening? Go find a link and hear/read it again if you haven't already.
History will have a lot to say about Bush the younger and Chavez both. In both cases, actions are speaking louder than words...GO Chavez, I support you...Latin America: Come Together, your strength is in your Gente!
History will have a lot to say about Bush the younger and Chavez both. In both cases, actions are speaking louder than words...GO Chavez, I support you...Latin America: Come Together, your strength is in your Gente!
Dan,
Your article is very well stated and beautiful. The politicians in this country speak as if they are always just trying to muster power. They seem to have forgotten the idea of speaking the truth. Thank you for your honest reporting.
Ron Cernokus
Hey, I'm all for a kinder gentler USA. After living abroad for quite a few years, I've seen world opinion of Americans and American foreign policy from all sides. However, to list Hugo Chavez as some sort of guiding light for a new world is ridiculous. we are still talking about a man who jails political opponents. A man who refuses to renew broadcasting rights to television and radio stations that dare speak out against his rule.
Also to state that the US directed the 2002 coup is pure ignorance. This is a man who won election based on ancient "bread and circus" campaigning. The 2002 coup was a reaction by an educated populace. I was there when it occured. The streets of Caracas, especially the Miraflores area were awash with jubilent celebrations.
Of all the viable political heroes out there....you chose wrong my friend.
Also to state that the US directed the 2002 coup is pure ignorance. This is a man who won election based on ancient "bread and circus" campaigning. The 2002 coup was a reaction by an educated populace. I was there when it occured. The streets of Caracas, especially the Miraflores area were awash with jubilent celebrations.
Of all the viable political heroes out there....you chose wrong my friend.
If you are a citizen of the US, Bush IS indeed your president, whether you like it or not. Your taxes support him and his policies. The more you insist that he isn't, the more distracted you get from the fact that you can influence elections. Just an observation...
Viva Chavez
Viva Chavez
It’s truly amazing that people outside Venezuela have such a positive attitude of Hugo Chavez. I think that there hatred of Gorge Bush, and ergo any one who apposes him as being “a good guy” is the reason, let’s step back and look at the facts for a moment
1.(Chavez has brought free healthcare to the poor) Public hospitals treated everyone for free for 20 years in Venezuela before Chavez, and were very good, then the Chavez government gutted them to set-up clinics, run by Cuban quack doctors.
2.(Economic Growth has reduced poverty under Chavez) 50% of manufacturing jobs have disappeared as 8.000 companies have closed, or moved out of the country. The government admitted that poverty increased under Chavez, then Chavez dictated that a new formula be used to sex-up the figures.
3.( Eradication of Illiteracy under Chavez) Venezuela had one of the highest literacy rates in the world above 92% Before Chavez, and a percentage of university educated rate of 15% of the population.
4.(Unemployment under Chavez 9%) if you work for more than four hours a week the government counts you as employed, if you sell apples on the street the Chavez government counts you as employed, the real rate of unemployment under Chavez is 25% with oil at over $50, a barrel, under the previous government unemployment was 12% with oil at $10, a barrel.
5.(Under Chavez the country is safer and more just) The murder rate has tripled under Chavez to 90,000 over the last 8 years over 10.000 a year.
So to all you Bush haters don’t let you hatred of bush give a free pass to a tropical dictator!
1.(Chavez has brought free healthcare to the poor) Public hospitals treated everyone for free for 20 years in Venezuela before Chavez, and were very good, then the Chavez government gutted them to set-up clinics, run by Cuban quack doctors.
2.(Economic Growth has reduced poverty under Chavez) 50% of manufacturing jobs have disappeared as 8.000 companies have closed, or moved out of the country. The government admitted that poverty increased under Chavez, then Chavez dictated that a new formula be used to sex-up the figures.
3.( Eradication of Illiteracy under Chavez) Venezuela had one of the highest literacy rates in the world above 92% Before Chavez, and a percentage of university educated rate of 15% of the population.
4.(Unemployment under Chavez 9%) if you work for more than four hours a week the government counts you as employed, if you sell apples on the street the Chavez government counts you as employed, the real rate of unemployment under Chavez is 25% with oil at over $50, a barrel, under the previous government unemployment was 12% with oil at $10, a barrel.
5.(Under Chavez the country is safer and more just) The murder rate has tripled under Chavez to 90,000 over the last 8 years over 10.000 a year.
So to all you Bush haters don’t let you hatred of bush give a free pass to a tropical dictator!
There is a great deal of differences between GW Bush's current form of US imperialism and the recent popular successes of Hugo Chavez in Venezuala. We need to look at class differences between the US and Venezuala before expecting Chavez to restore economic equality overnight. Yes, Venezuala remains a 'third world" country with large numbers of people in poverty ruled by the small group of wealthy elite while the US remains the world's largest (taxpayer subsidized) military/nuclear weapons superpower, leader of the G8 nations..
Economic inequality in the U.S. worsened under the GW Bush regime (military spending on Iraq occupation, tax breaks to corporations, funding slashed for education, health, etc..), while decreased under Chavez (nationalization of petroleum, union/labor/farmer support, landless peasant reforms, redistribution of wealth, etc..) and the differences are felt withing the nation over time. For the time being a unhoused person in the US may remain more well nourished than the 'housed' peasants in the slums of Caracas, since the US surplus of food provides for plenty of dumpster diving, food commodities, soup kitchens, Food Not Bombs, etc.. However, even with all that food surplus many housed and unhoused people in the U.S. still go to bed hungry and malnourished many nights of the year. The policies of the GW Bush regime have not improved this situation of mass hunger in the U.S., it has in fact gotten worse. The problems of poverty and hunger in Venezuala are being recognized for what they are by Chavez, not relabeled as "experiencing food insecurity" as the Bush regime unemotionally states. The goal is to provide lower income people in both the U.S. and Venezuala with adequate means to obtain nourishment through local, organic food, preferably grown in community shared gardens, caught in rivers, raised with love and free range, etc...
Then there's the US invasion and occupation of Iraq, the deceitfully devious intellects of GW Bush regime's Rove, Rumsfeld, Rice, etc.. hatching plots of WMDs long after Rumsfeld sold Saddam the weapons as special envoy under Reagan..
For those interested in free speech, as is FTW's investigative journalist Mike Ruppert, the political climate of Venezuala feels a whole lot safer than the GW Bush regime's "Patriot Act" policy of warrentless wiretaps, home invasions and other covert ops against political dissidents..
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/
Looking towrds Mexico there is a clear difference between Obrador (People's President) and Calderon (GW Bush's Lapdog President) with regards to the response from GW bush and WTO/NAFTA corporations. The biotech (Monsanto) and lumber corporations (IP) that supported Plan Puebla Panama are most pleased with the Calderon "victory" as that spells out globalization friendly government opening the door to the natural resources of the Lacondon rainforest..
It is precisely that politicians like Calderon (aka Fox Jr.) and Oaxaca's Ulises Ruiz that leads to popular uprisings from grassroots indigenous groups like APPO..
"1) What is the APPO?
On June 17, 2006 some 365 social (grassroots) organizations, local governments run by grassroots organizations, teachers from the "Section 22" of the National Teachers Union, all 16 of Oaxaca's indigenous peoples, and citizens from all walks of life joined together to form APPO (Popular Alliance of the Peoples of Oaxaca).
2) Why was APPO formed?
For decades, the people of Oaxaca have struggled against the looting of their natural resources and biodiversity by large companies. For example, the Plan Puebla Panama, a government sponsored scheme to build large infrastructure projects for the benefit of multinational companies, seeks to separate indigenous people from their ancestral and communally-held lands to make way for dams, major toll highways, "multimodal" shipping corridors, etc. Struggles to stop the pillaging of land and resources have led to the creation of hundreds of mobilized grassroots organizations throughout the state."
read on @;
http://www.laneta.apc.org/ciepac/boletines/chiapas_en.php?id=524
The reason that Venezuala isn't experiencing the civil unrest problems of Oaxaca, MX is that Chavez listens to the concerns of indigenous peoples and actually makes attempts to work with them, instead of catering to corporations like Calderon/Ruiz/etc..
Anarchists and other free-thinkers will naturally also be struggling with any government, regardless of their ideologies or actions. We also need to recognize and distinguish a genuine anarchist critic of Chavez's policies and not the usual US corporate media villification of Chavez to please the GW Bush regime. To critique Chavez in Venezuala may be riskier than critiquing Bush in the US of Apathy since there are many US sponsored agents (SOA, CIA, etc..) of capitalism present in Venezuala to forment dissent, as was the case in Haiti that led to the second coup against Aristide.
Yes there is plenty of evidence of US involvement in the 2002 coup against Chavez and also the election fraud in Mexico that led to Calderon's so called victory over populist candidate Obrador (Mexico's TRUE President, IMO!!)..
This article outlines the patterns of CIA led coups against populist leaders like Allende, Aristide, Chavez and so on down the alphabet..
"And the CIA was also involved in overthrowing democratically elected leader Salvador Allende in Chile, only to replace him with a ruthless right-wing dictator - General August Pinochet, whose abysmal human rights record is well-known.
Therefore, it would not be a surprise should the CIA be involved in yet another overthrow of democracy, showing the hypocrisy of American government administrations who use the words "freedom" and "democracy" as a justification to take military actions on some countries, but then frequently destroy "freedom" and "democracy" in other countries.
"William Blum, author of "Killing Hope," summed this up in a recent column. Blum believes that the CIA was involved in this overthrow. He states his reasoning in the following few sentences: "Same way we know that the sun will rise tomorrow morning. That's what it's [the CIA] always done and there's no reason to think that tomorrow morning will be any different."
Blum cites a Washington Post report from Venezuela on April 13 that states: "Members of the country's diverse opposition had been visiting the U.S. Embassy here in recent weeks, hoping to enlist U.S. help in toppling Chavez. The visitors included active and retired members of the military, media leaders and opposition politicians."
Judging by reasons of previous CIA orchestrated coups in South America, Chavez may have broken nearly every rule the CIA demands South American leaders follow unless they want to seek the wrath of their northern neighbor. These rules, all broken by Chavez, include supplying oil to Cuba at discount rates; meeting with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, along with Saddam Hussein; not allowing the U.S. to use Venezuelan airspace for its "War on Drugs"; accusing the Bush Administration of "fighting terrorism with terrorism" by its assault on Afghanistan, saying that deaths due to U.S. bombardment had "no justification, just as the attacks in New York did not, either."
All of these reasons would have been enough for the CIA to approve of Chavez's removal, despite the fact that he was democratically elected. To add to it all, as Forbes magazine writes, "Venezuela is the only OPEC member in the western hemisphere, exporting nearly 1.3 million barrels per day of crude oil and 250,000 barrels per day of refined products to the U.S., accounting for 13% of imports to the world's largest oil consumer."
The desire to have a puppet in Venezuela must have been high in the CIA and the Bush Administration. Unfortunately the world will have to wait many years until the truth finally comes out in declassified internal U.S. government documents."
"
read on @;
http://www.counterpunch.org/reilly0415.html
Economic inequality in the U.S. worsened under the GW Bush regime (military spending on Iraq occupation, tax breaks to corporations, funding slashed for education, health, etc..), while decreased under Chavez (nationalization of petroleum, union/labor/farmer support, landless peasant reforms, redistribution of wealth, etc..) and the differences are felt withing the nation over time. For the time being a unhoused person in the US may remain more well nourished than the 'housed' peasants in the slums of Caracas, since the US surplus of food provides for plenty of dumpster diving, food commodities, soup kitchens, Food Not Bombs, etc.. However, even with all that food surplus many housed and unhoused people in the U.S. still go to bed hungry and malnourished many nights of the year. The policies of the GW Bush regime have not improved this situation of mass hunger in the U.S., it has in fact gotten worse. The problems of poverty and hunger in Venezuala are being recognized for what they are by Chavez, not relabeled as "experiencing food insecurity" as the Bush regime unemotionally states. The goal is to provide lower income people in both the U.S. and Venezuala with adequate means to obtain nourishment through local, organic food, preferably grown in community shared gardens, caught in rivers, raised with love and free range, etc...
Then there's the US invasion and occupation of Iraq, the deceitfully devious intellects of GW Bush regime's Rove, Rumsfeld, Rice, etc.. hatching plots of WMDs long after Rumsfeld sold Saddam the weapons as special envoy under Reagan..
For those interested in free speech, as is FTW's investigative journalist Mike Ruppert, the political climate of Venezuala feels a whole lot safer than the GW Bush regime's "Patriot Act" policy of warrentless wiretaps, home invasions and other covert ops against political dissidents..
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/
Looking towrds Mexico there is a clear difference between Obrador (People's President) and Calderon (GW Bush's Lapdog President) with regards to the response from GW bush and WTO/NAFTA corporations. The biotech (Monsanto) and lumber corporations (IP) that supported Plan Puebla Panama are most pleased with the Calderon "victory" as that spells out globalization friendly government opening the door to the natural resources of the Lacondon rainforest..
It is precisely that politicians like Calderon (aka Fox Jr.) and Oaxaca's Ulises Ruiz that leads to popular uprisings from grassroots indigenous groups like APPO..
"1) What is the APPO?
On June 17, 2006 some 365 social (grassroots) organizations, local governments run by grassroots organizations, teachers from the "Section 22" of the National Teachers Union, all 16 of Oaxaca's indigenous peoples, and citizens from all walks of life joined together to form APPO (Popular Alliance of the Peoples of Oaxaca).
2) Why was APPO formed?
For decades, the people of Oaxaca have struggled against the looting of their natural resources and biodiversity by large companies. For example, the Plan Puebla Panama, a government sponsored scheme to build large infrastructure projects for the benefit of multinational companies, seeks to separate indigenous people from their ancestral and communally-held lands to make way for dams, major toll highways, "multimodal" shipping corridors, etc. Struggles to stop the pillaging of land and resources have led to the creation of hundreds of mobilized grassroots organizations throughout the state."
read on @;
http://www.laneta.apc.org/ciepac/boletines/chiapas_en.php?id=524
The reason that Venezuala isn't experiencing the civil unrest problems of Oaxaca, MX is that Chavez listens to the concerns of indigenous peoples and actually makes attempts to work with them, instead of catering to corporations like Calderon/Ruiz/etc..
Anarchists and other free-thinkers will naturally also be struggling with any government, regardless of their ideologies or actions. We also need to recognize and distinguish a genuine anarchist critic of Chavez's policies and not the usual US corporate media villification of Chavez to please the GW Bush regime. To critique Chavez in Venezuala may be riskier than critiquing Bush in the US of Apathy since there are many US sponsored agents (SOA, CIA, etc..) of capitalism present in Venezuala to forment dissent, as was the case in Haiti that led to the second coup against Aristide.
Yes there is plenty of evidence of US involvement in the 2002 coup against Chavez and also the election fraud in Mexico that led to Calderon's so called victory over populist candidate Obrador (Mexico's TRUE President, IMO!!)..
This article outlines the patterns of CIA led coups against populist leaders like Allende, Aristide, Chavez and so on down the alphabet..
"And the CIA was also involved in overthrowing democratically elected leader Salvador Allende in Chile, only to replace him with a ruthless right-wing dictator - General August Pinochet, whose abysmal human rights record is well-known.
Therefore, it would not be a surprise should the CIA be involved in yet another overthrow of democracy, showing the hypocrisy of American government administrations who use the words "freedom" and "democracy" as a justification to take military actions on some countries, but then frequently destroy "freedom" and "democracy" in other countries.
"William Blum, author of "Killing Hope," summed this up in a recent column. Blum believes that the CIA was involved in this overthrow. He states his reasoning in the following few sentences: "Same way we know that the sun will rise tomorrow morning. That's what it's [the CIA] always done and there's no reason to think that tomorrow morning will be any different."
Blum cites a Washington Post report from Venezuela on April 13 that states: "Members of the country's diverse opposition had been visiting the U.S. Embassy here in recent weeks, hoping to enlist U.S. help in toppling Chavez. The visitors included active and retired members of the military, media leaders and opposition politicians."
Judging by reasons of previous CIA orchestrated coups in South America, Chavez may have broken nearly every rule the CIA demands South American leaders follow unless they want to seek the wrath of their northern neighbor. These rules, all broken by Chavez, include supplying oil to Cuba at discount rates; meeting with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, along with Saddam Hussein; not allowing the U.S. to use Venezuelan airspace for its "War on Drugs"; accusing the Bush Administration of "fighting terrorism with terrorism" by its assault on Afghanistan, saying that deaths due to U.S. bombardment had "no justification, just as the attacks in New York did not, either."
All of these reasons would have been enough for the CIA to approve of Chavez's removal, despite the fact that he was democratically elected. To add to it all, as Forbes magazine writes, "Venezuela is the only OPEC member in the western hemisphere, exporting nearly 1.3 million barrels per day of crude oil and 250,000 barrels per day of refined products to the U.S., accounting for 13% of imports to the world's largest oil consumer."
The desire to have a puppet in Venezuela must have been high in the CIA and the Bush Administration. Unfortunately the world will have to wait many years until the truth finally comes out in declassified internal U.S. government documents."
"
read on @;
http://www.counterpunch.org/reilly0415.html
Cesar Chavez fought for the people in lower socio-economic levels. Hugo Chavez is just doing the same thing in his fight against imperialism. Cesar did great things, and in time, once the imperial leader of the US is gone, Hugo Chavez will be seen as great fighter for all the people.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$155.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network