check out the Chavez Crap swicki at eurekster.com

Saturday, June 9, 2007

Estudiantes del Centro del País, UC=UCV=UPEL=UBA.

Just another video showing how the National Guard has been blocking students that are trying to get the the concentrations in a clear attack to their right of free transit.

Marcha de Estudiantes Carabobeños a Caracas

Students chanting: "I came becuase I wanted to, I didn't get paid to come." (In reference to Chavez supporters who are paid to attend his protests) This was after they where stopped by the National Guard when they where trying to reach Caracas from Carabobo (a city about two hours or less from the Capital) to join the student protests.

The cause for the blockade was an alleged crash which drivers going to opposite way never saw.

What ever happen to the right of free transit?

Democracy you say? Where? I can't really see it.

Friday, June 8, 2007

What is wrong with Peter?

Well, he enjoys the freedoms of the free capitalistic world that he rejects and he embraces the Castro-Chavez-Communist regime but won't live in Venezuela or Cuba, oh no, not him.

The Link: http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/~mclaren/blog/?p=102

One thing to note is that peter doesn't allow comments and I am unable to place a trackback on blogger which makes the discussion a little difficult but hey, he's a communist-leaving-in-the-freedom-of-capitalist-usa supporting the closing of a TV station after all, what else could we expect?

"The CIA is clearly trying to manipulate the global media." It just never fails to amaze me how Chavez stupid paranoia gets spread amongst his followers. The CIA...THE FREAKING CIA is controlling the "GLOBAL" media. I guess Peter, as does Chavez, has undeniable prove of the CIA's involvement. I am going to wait sitting down just in case it takes them a little long to produce such evidence.

Peter uses the same exact argument that people living in the US, that support Chavez...Ok I am just going to stop for a second here. To all you Chavez supporters on the US that think he's great and your government is bad I tell remind you of this: You live in a free country, you are free to go live in Venezuela any time you want. As a matter of fact we should change the Immigration bill to allow US citizens to trade their citizenship with venezuelan citizens, that way, venezuelans tired of Chavez can go live in the Empire and usa-freedom-enjoying-Chavez-supporters can go and experience his marvelousness first hand, right there where the action is. I am sure the lines of venezuelans willing to trade will be enourmous.

Bach to the post, Peter starts by arguing that if a USA Tv station had participated in a coup, that RCTV backed up, allegedly participates and all those arguments. Peter even goes into more detail, explaining exactly what needs to happen: "If there was a successful military coup in the United States and a particular TV station applauded the overthrow of the president (and the dissolving of Congress and the Supreme Court, as well as the suspension of the Constitution), and if then the coup was reversed by other military forces accompanied by mass demonstrations, and the same TV station did not report any of this while it was happening to avoid giving support to the counter-coup, and instead kept reporting that the president had voluntarily resigned … how long would it be before the US government, back in power, shut down the station, arrested its executives, charging them under half a dozen terrorist laws, and throwing them into shackles and orange jumpsuits never to be seen again? How long? Five minutes? The Venezuelan government waited five years." Peter, don't you realize you are basically pointing out that the Chavez government closed the station as a way of retaliation or vengeance? Should I help you see this more clearly? I will try.

Peter defends Chavez actions based on the "fact" that if a USA government was overthrown, the same overthrown government would "...shut down the station, arrested its executives, charging them under half a dozen terrorist laws, and throwing them into shackles and orange jumpsuits never to be seen again..." in less than five minutes. Notice that is not the US government, but the government that was overthrown that after a serious of unfortunate events, got back into power. But let's keep moving, under this argument, Peter is saying that good old Chavez didn't close them immediately but waited five years till the end of their license. If this were true, then what happened with due process? I mean, if this station really participated, why weren't it's owners tried? (I am getting tired of pointing this out). Why did Venevision got it's license (channel 4 with also allegedly participated on the coup) renewed when it's license was up at the same time as RCTV? You see Peter, if you are saying that Chavez didn't try this media owners but waited till their license was up to stick it to them, well...that sounds like vengeance to me. And really, if RCTV didn't get their license renewed, because they participated in the coup, aren't they entitle to a fair trial? I mean, there is no law in Venezuela stating that a TV station has to go to trial to see if they get their license renewed, although they can appeal a decision not to renew it which magically, RCTV didn't get.

Moving along in your post I have a simple answer for your question: Can anyone name a single daily newspaper in the United States that is unequivocally opposed to US foreign policy?

Answer: Rolling Stone Magazine. Just read this edition (June 07) piece about Giuliani and lat piece about the Republican candidates, as a matter of fact, just read any edition of the last 7 years of Bush and you will see how this magazine completely opposes any action of th GOP.

Some more links:

There's more links and more stories published on Rolling Stone floating around but I'll let you do your work and research them. I think the links above, even thought don't prove that the whole editorial line of Rolling Stone is completely anti-Bush, it proves that they do run articles that completely oppose Bush's Administration. My god, the last one even calls congress people thieves and perverts.

So Rolling Stone seems pretty opposition to me, even though nobody calls that, not even the President or the Congressmen (past congressman since they are not longer at Congress). You see Peter, Chavez is the one that loves labels, and as you, everything that is not in his way of thinking is simply anti-patriotic and funded by the Empire.

And by the way, you need to define your concept of mass, because when you say: "makes education more widely available to the masses of poor people,..." I believe you mean to the masses of poor people that are willing to wear the government red t-shirt uniform and chant at every government funded protest or charade. Because you see Peter, in Venezuela, if you are not with the government, you are a traitor, a pawn of the Empire. You are a burgess capitalist bastard that is out to destroy the revolution.

Enjoy your freedom in the US.

Thursday, June 7, 2007

I am just going to link to this one.

It is just that good


This is the Chavez Democracy. Now I dare anybody that supports him abroad to say they want to live in a country under this type of ruling.

A thought for the post below

As posted on The Devil's Excrement.

"· An opposition student is not necessarily a student.
· If he is a student, he is being manipulated, has no convictions
· If they have convictions, they are the ones of the Empire that thru the CIA, buys consciences.
· If the CIA has bought them, it is to use them as meat for the slaughterhouse (A terrible statement when it is made by the owner of the slaughterhouse.) and the irresponsible parents.
· They are numerically insignificant, only the tricks of the mediatic manipulation make them appear as a crowd.

On the other hand

· The pro-Chavez student is a conscientious and critical being.
· He marches because of his convictions. Nothing is behind him.
· He can reach the Miraflores Presidential Palace because he is part of the “people”
· There are always millions of them.
· Their parents do well in letting them march, they are young and should have a conscience, not go lazing around like the other ones. "

The best defense: Name Calling

When you can't argue sometimes the best defense is to try to discredit your opponent by showing their mistakes, airing out the skeletons in their closets, digging up some dirt or you can just do what Chavez does and basically name everyone who opposes him a pawn of the Empire.

The Link: http://globovision.com/news.php?nid=57699 (In spanish, there's still no link in english)
this one is not the story per say but it will help some readers understand.

As it turns out, a group of students ask for permission to speak at the National Assembly, which was given. Is just beautiful that this students were given the opportunity to speak up before the people that were elected to represent all of us. The Chavistas have made lot of emphasis in this as a proof of Venezuela's freedom speech. But let's not be fool, one good action just doesn't erase all the bad ones.

Even though this students asked for the right to speak before the Assembly, they were told they would debate against Chavista students. The students accepted and went into the Assembly to express their feelings. The first student said, (I'm just going to quote some pieces I found on this article, also in spanish: http://www.eluniversal.com/2007/06/07/pol_ava_grupo-de-universitar_07A881173.shtml)

"We are not socialist we are social beings, we are not "neoliberalistas" we are "libres" (free)...please do not criminalize our protests....we the young are only armed with conscience, solidarity, optimism and humbleness...we are responding to the threat this closure of RCTV means against freedom of expression...we are convinced all Venezuelans should be treated equally (see the post below for a better look at this)."

Basically all he said was, we want to live free. We want to be respected. We are not of this political current or this other, we are Venezuelan citizens that deserve to be treated equally without distinction of color, race or "uniform," at this point the students took of a red shirt (red is the government color and you can see everybody dressed in red on the government financed protests), to display the white shirts they were wearing underneath as a symbol of peace and emphasizing this treated equally without regards of uniform.

Next, a Chavista student spoke up saying: "The flag colors are yellow, blue and red (apparently she was a little upset about the displayed the students before here had put on with the shirts and all)...there couldn't be any more freedom of speech than the one we are currently living on...today we have this participatory democracy in which we all can debate (students on the assembly is actually pretty good)... I want to invite these students (opposition students) to go to an assembly in a barrio to experience it's power, that's real democracy...Universities show us another reality, a reality that slaps us in the face sine universities are not for the service of the people...I ask for respect for that Venezuelan majority that wants a new democracy model...I criticize actresses that are protesting in favor of RCTV, since RCTV commercialized with their bodies...private education doesn't educate for freedom and life but for exploitation and death...please explain me the difference between freedom of expression and freedom of "enterprise?"...because Marcel Granier has freedom of enterprise to create his business RCTV and another thing is the right of the people to express themselves on their media...I want to call on all students to define side, are we on the side of the people who's blood has been spilled or are we on the side of the North American empire...is treason against our own ideal to side for the burgess and the imperialists.

This girl brought some nice arguments and some things to ponder. But I can't go on without pointing out the difference in the tone of both speeches. The first one was about pieces, no mention of sides, war, blood (except when referring to the student that had been brutalized by police). The speech asks for respect and for the right to be treated equally. On the second one, the tone changes and towards the end we are bombarded with all this siding and this weird idea that I, as a free Venezuelan can choose to follow the imperialist, capitalism way because I would be incurring on treason??? So if I decide to work and really push myself to be better, and I get rewarded because of this effort, and I buy things and enjoy the fruits of this efforts I am suddenly a traitor? One other thing we need to point is that Chavistas are always trying to show their good things like this good things are going to hide the bad one, but they failed to confront the true issue. Barrio assemblies are awesome. This debate on the National Assembly is awesome. But that doesn't give Chavez the right to close down a TV station, seriously people, it just doesn't.

So I have digressed quite a bit from my original thought but here it goes. As it turns out, after the students spoke and left the assembly they were mocked, not only by the Chavistas students which one could expect, but by the assembly people specifically, Cilia Flores. And to top it all, Chavez himself called this students pawns of the American Government. He said that this students had a written guide which one of his adepts was able to obtain after a ninja-like counter-attack-combat-super-anti-CIA/MI6-Jack-Bauer-has-nothing-on-this-student kind of move of grabbing the paper left by them after they spoke. He criticized the students for using a paper as a guide for their speech. Yes, he criticized them for using notes to give a speech and assured the world this notes were drafted by the evil imperialist hand. A side note here, Chavez believes anyone who uses a note to make a speech is not worthy since he never uses them...which would explain why he talks, and talks, and talks and is always talking without making absolutely any sense (Just try to watch any of his Cadenas or the Alo Presidente and you will desperately beg him to bring some notes the next time).

If you can't say anything good about your opponent, look for the bad. If you can't say anything bad either, all you need to do is apply a little bit of the Chavez remedy: Call them Imperialist Fascist, pawns of the empire, anti government traitors or any thing that involves high treason and love for capitalism, then wash, rinse & repeat.

Democracy? What? Where?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't people living in a democracy be treated equally? Specially by government institutions?

I stole this picture

from the blog: http://unidosporvenezuela.blogspot.com/ (sorry about the abuse but I couldn't find a way to comment on this specific picture on your blog and I needed to say something about it).

For the ones that can't read spanish, is basically a Job ad looking for individuals with certain qualifications in which we see underlined one that states (attempted translation): "Formation in the concepts of socialism identified with the National Government's revolutionary process." In simpler terms, if you are not with Chavez, don't bother applying.

Democracy? certainly not in Venezuela.

The lack of arguments

Bart Jones seems to be the omnipotent know it all which all chavistas quote in order to defend Chavez decision to close down RCTV.

I just stumble across another blog citing Jones's words although I must say this is one of the worst since it doesn't do anything other than repeat Bart's words

The Link: http://elemming2.blogspot.com/2007/06/hugo-chavez-versus-far-right-tv.html

All his argument is based that if an American station would've participated in a coup, the station would've been shut down and it's owners would've been thrown to jail. I am going to start sounding as repetitive as Chavez supporters but really, they don't give me much to work with. I am going to explain this person, once more, why Chavez move is direct abuse of power, is not justified by any means and is just a political movement he needs for his revolution.

Gary, let's start by saying that you are right when you say that if something like that, participating on a coup, should be punished. We can definitely agree on that. But I have a problem understanding why this TV station owners were never tried for their involvement in such coup. I also have a problem understanding why only one of the stations got closed down and not the other three. Actually, let's talk about Venevision (channel 4) who's license was also up for renewal and who had the same exact level of participation as RCTV (channel 2 that got closed down) but got it's license renewed with no problem (other than the fact that it didn't get it for 20 years as the law stipulates but for 5, when Chavez will be up for reelection again). Could it be that Venevision's owner had a private meeting with Chavez and after it the station suddenly stopped it's opposition tone and Chavez stopped calling it an imperialist, conspiratorial network? Shouldn't all stations that participated be measured under the same rule? And shouldn't this measure have a due process with a trial, and a judge...or maybe, just maybe, shouldn't this not renewal of the license come from the organization (CONATEL, think of th FCC) in charge of this sort of things?

Really Gary, you need to understand that when you call yourself a Liberal, you are implying that you think for yourself, and quoting some other person's work, without even trying to make a point doesn't say much about your capabilities to analyze a problem or situation.

I'm just going to stop this post right here cause if Gary, or someone else, wishes to see more evidence about how this decision is a completely anti democratic decision by nothing more than a ruthless totalitarian thug, they can read all the posts I have in this site as well as thousands of posts found on the links I have in this blog that explain with detail this issue.

Before I go, I am going to say that I wish to find a blog that can truly make a point when defending this closing station by Chavez issue. Really people, you need to do better than quoting Bart if you want to really be taken seriously.

Wednesday, June 6, 2007

vamos pa la calle (Let's go to the streets)

The video below caught my attention when they show the text: "No a la violacion de la autonomia Universitaria" which translates to: No to the violation if the University's autonomy, more or less.

The video is simple. It shows a montage of pictures of the student protests that are happening in Venezuela in rejection of the closure of the tv station RCTV. But that quote brought up an interesting point I was already dwelling about in my free time: If this protests lead to nowhere, is the Government going to go after the Universities?

We already have Chavez on tape stating that crisis are a necessary evil and that sometimes, one must generate such crisis in order to achieve a greater good. Now, when he said this, he was referring to the events of April 11, that resulted in the failed coup to which he now victimizes himself on any chance he gets. To make my point a little clearer, Chavez basically said that he was responsible for setting in motion the events that gave him power to prosecute every major opposition person or institution like for instance: RCTV, which, according to the government, didn't get it's license renewed because of their participation on the coup. He basically said that they threw the bait, and we caught it.

Fine, so they got us that time and it sucks till today. But couldn't the government be doing the same thing in order to have a "legitimate" reason to attack the universities, which is the only institution that Chavez has been unable to control since he control all the other institutions in Venezuela...well except the CTV (Confederacion de trabajoders de Venezuela, I translated in an earlier post to something like Workers Association of Venezuela), who he couldn't control but instead ended up creating it's counterpart completely adept to his government the "Union National de Trabajadores, UNT" (National Workers Union).

If Chavez was able to close a TV station because of their alleged participation on a coup, and now they are assuring that this protests are being generated by university owners, how long will we need to wait to have our first private University either closed or expropriated on the grounds of their alleged participation in the mega-ultra-super-usa backed-cia controlled-alien-conspiracy against Chavez?

Is the Chavez Government really playing us for fools...again?


Sunday, June 3, 2007

The Chrsitian Science Monitor

Bart Jones article appears once more. Now, it made it's appearance on The Christian Science Monitor which is a publication by the First Church of Christ, Science.

The link: http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0604/p09s01-coop.html?page=1

Is interesting that if you google Bart Jones + RCTV, there are several sites running his piece. One of the most interesting is FAIR: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=22&media_view_id=8882, which already has it's own piece on the matter.

Now, more interesting is that all this sites are either a newspaper or some sort of portal for free speech, freedom of press or the like. The most interesting thing is that by running this article, they are siding with Bart and applauding the closure of a TV station based on the claims of it's participation on a failed coup.

Well, freedom of speech give you that right. But applauding the closure of freedom of speech in a pro freedom of speech site it's a but ironic.

I already talked about Bart's article here: http://chavezcrap.blogspot.com/2007/05/news-hounds-part-i.html

so I'm not doing it again. What did do is find this link: http://www.steerforth.com/books/display.pperl?isbn=9781586421359
. Yes, Bart wrote a biography about Chavez called Hugo!. Notice the exclamation point in the title exalting Hugo's name. Seems to me someone loves Chavez quite a bit...am I wrong?

So it's clear that Bart is a little biased with Chavez, and actually, I don't think there is nothing wrong with that. He's entitled to have his own opinion and it's ridiculous to claim that a journalist can be completely fair when reporting a matter that somehow appeals to them. Yes people, I am defending Bart's right to say good things about Chavez and to say that it's ok for him to close down a TV station. Now, that doesn't make him right and it doesn't mean I'm ok with it either. All I'm saying is that he has the right to think and write however he wishes. With that said, to Bart and all his followers I ask: If Bart has the right to report the news as he sees them, didn't RCTV had the same right? Weren't they in the right to say: "We don't like Chavez." Isn't freedom of speech about saying what you like or don't like?

Some may argue RCTV is an institution, a TV station while Bart is just one person. RCTV is one of the major TV channels in Venezuela while Bart is just a simple writer. RCTV should report what it's audience wanted, not what its directors wanted; Bart, well he can do whatever he wants since he is a free human being enjoying all the goods that come with it. All this arguments are completley valid arguments except maybe for one: "RCTV should've reported what it's audience wanted. This one comes from the statement that RCTV participated on the coup by transmitting anti Chavez protests and encouraging people to go protest..Hmmm, so if the people watching RCTV were the ones that were protesting, or the ones that wanted to know about the protests, wasn't RCTV reporting what it's audience wanted? Doesn't VTV, and now TVES reported all day yesterday Chavez support gathering because that is what it's audience wanted? (Important to note here is that VTV and TVES are supposedly public stations that should be of the use of the whole public and not the people sided with the government while RCTV is a private owned station that can transmit what they want as long as it is within the rules).

More and more, as I keep writing this posts, I come to the conclusion that Chavez supporters are just defending this closure repeating the same argument over and over. And argument that is as false as it is empty and without logic. Their argument, Chavez didn't close a station, he just didn't renew it's license because they participated on a coup, leaves lots of holes that they don't seem to care, seem to omit or plain simple seem to report in order to make their case.

We can keep going on and on, and I will keep my work of finding this posts and rebuking them here. The truth is Chavez is a tyrant governing with totalitarian power who has divided my country and who has not done any good for his people (yes, some people have seen some improvement, specially the new oligarchy of government officials). But when on a democracy you fail to govern for all your people, well the a government by the people for the people base of a democracy is lost and you become a fascist. Oh my, see this Chavez supporters who love calling the opposition fascist? When you people with your leader just govern for yourselves and call the opposition, how has the right of not thinking like you and even not like you, the enemies of your revolution. Go with statements like they will not come back or they will not pass, you become fascists. Here's a definition for you:

1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control fascism and brutality -- J. W. Aldridge>

Taken from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary: http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?sourceid=Mozilla-search&va=fascist

It's important to note the Fascism militants denominated themselves "Black Shirts." Chavistas changed the color to red and we all know how there protests or gatherings look: Red, Red...Red...Rojo Rojito.

Fausta's blog

Fausta's blog

"· An opposition student is not necessarily a student.
· If he is a student, he is being manipulated, has no convictions
· If they have convictions, they are the ones of the Empire that thru the CIA, buys consciences.
· If the CIA has bought them, it is to use them as meat for the slaughterhouse (A terrible statement when it is made by the owner of the slaughterhouse.) and the irresponsible parents.
· They are numerically insignificant, only the tricks of the mediatic manipulation make them appear as a crowd.

On the other hand

· The pro-Chavez student is a conscientious and critical being.
· He marches because of his convictions. Nothing is behind him.
· He can reach the Miraflores Presidential Palace because he is part of the “people”
· There are always millions of them.
· Their parents do well in letting them march, they are young and should have a conscience, not go lazing around like the other ones."

All their argument is based on calling us thugs, imperialist etc. So, ok, we are imperalists thugs, Chavez is still a tyrant paranoid dictator and nothing will change that fact. So what are they going to argue now?