Red Pepper again.

It looks like pepper is going to become a nice source of material for this blog. His ranting are so amazing that I am only going to talk about one more of them today so I can pace out my postings a little better.

The link in question: http://redpepper.blogs.com/venezuela/2007/06/legislators_pre.html

I'm not going to quote pepper on this pot to keep it simple and I realize whoever reads it can just click on the link and understand what I'm talking about.

Well on his post, Pepper never you questioned how this two National Assembly Chavistas had recordings of a private telephone conversation. Let's not get into what the conversation was about yet, but let's focus for a moment in the proven fact that the Venezuelan Government is actively recording and monitoring conversations of their opponents. I can't find what to say about your disregard for this direct attack to democracy and freedom. Let me repeat, these people had their private conversation, between husband and wife, RECORDED.

But, lets skip this for the sake of argument. Lets assume this is completely legal and normal so we can focus in what they are taking about. The conversation between Marquina and his wife is a conversation that is very similar to a conversation I've had with several friends and family. I'm I a conspirator too? Well, according to you, Desiree, Calixto and Chavez, I am a fascist, golpist, terrorist extremist sent by Bush, Washington and the CIA.

But was this conversation stating that the students are zombies controlled by Washington and opposition politicians, or...maybe, just like my conversation, Marquina & his wife were stating the point that this spontaneous protest by the student body needed to be kept a civil protests with no ties to the politicians so that the government couldn't discredit them the way they are discrediting them because of their supposed tie with the politicians?

Yes, we could go on and on about the politicians acting as if they are not involved but are involved by acting that they are not involved etc etc etc. Now, in the conversation, do you really see any hard evidence of the involvement of the politicians in the protests? I certainly can't, all I see is evidence of the unlawful invasion of privacy by the Venezuelan government as well as two people sharing my same sentiment of the importance of keeping these protests away from politics so that the Chavez government and people like you, can't discredit them as a new coup attempt.

I think Chavez loves to invent this coup so then he can claim they fail so he can feel better about his failed attempts on 1992.

Red Pepper is very very very very stupid.

The link in question:

http://redpepper.blogs.com/venezuela/2007/05/the_truth_about.html

Let's do this point by point:
1. Is the Venezuelan government shutting down the RCTV Station?

Contrary to some reports, the RCTV station is not being closed down. Rather, the Venezuelan government has chosen not to renew RCTV’s licence to broadcast via Venezuela’s Channel Two when this expires on 27 May. RCTV will continue to be able to operate freely in Venezuela on the public airwaves on cable and on satellite, as will the many TV and radio stations that RCTV owner Empresas 1BC runs across Venezuela." So is not a closing but a not renewal of a license. Not really Red Pepper because when you seize their broadcasting equipment, leaving them unable to broadcast, well, I think you pretty much shut it down since they won't be able to transmit by cable or public airwa....what? Didn't you understand that by not renewing their license they can't transmit on the public airwaves?
http://ivorytowerz.blogspot.com/2007/06/hugo-chavez-v-media-next-round.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070527/wl_nm/venezuela_rctv_dc_4

2. "Why has the government decided not to renew RCTV’s licence?As with other democracies, Venezuelan law allows the government the right to grant broadcast licences, renew them or let them expire. The government has made the decision not to renew because of RCTV’s violation of numerous laws – most notably the active support it gave to a military coup in April 2002 to overthrow the democratically-elected Chávez government." This is the most debatable point of your post, actually is the only debatable one since the first one is pretty much very unfunded and I think I proved you wrong already. So, lots of people say RCTV actively participated in the coup mainly, because the Chavez government said that RCTV actively participated on the coup. Now, have you seen proof of RCTV involvement on the" coup? Did you ever asked yourself why, if they participated in the coup, their owner were never tried? If they had participated on the coup, the owners that is, is it ok to leave thousands out of work just to punish the people that were supposedly involved? Can you answer this questions? I don't think so.

Oh, and by the way, on your RCTV involvement on the coup: "In April 2002, a violent military coup temporarily overthrew the democratically-elected government of President Hugo Chávez. At least 13 people were killed and in the 48 hours that the coup plotters held power there was violent repression against those protesting for Chávez’s return and many were shot at by the police. The coup plotters overturned key components of Venezuela’s democratic constitution - closing down the elected National Assembly, the Supreme Court and other state institutions. ", you are using the same words posted all over pro Chavez blog. If you don't believe me, just look at the other posts I have here.Now the best part of yours is that you failed to indicate RCTV's involvement on the coup, way to go.

Entrevista a ministra rara

A parody of the government excuses: We are fascists sent by the US government. We are terrorists. We are unable of thinking.

Taken from The Devil's Excrement Blog

We love this blog more and more.

Here are some awesome things posted in there:

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/2007/06/01.html#a3511

The best part: "· 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.

But on top of that:

· Actors do not suffer, they are trained to cry
· If violence is exercised on the part of pro-Chavez forces (including the use of weapons) it is not violence, it is part of the defense of the pretty fatherland.
· When someone in the opposition calls for a demonstration, he is a conspirator. But if, from the heights of power, you convoke your supporters to instill fear, it is the pretty fatherland that is being protected.
· The image of the attempt on John Paul II’s life is an invitation to kill Chavez.
· And last, it was not a shutdown, it was the end of the concession. How many times am I going to say it!"

Yeah...almost all the post.


Yes, that is the police preventing students from leaving their University. I love all the freedom this picture shows.



And finally, Chavez's idea of free speech: A 24/7 Cadena.

State of Democracy in Venezuela: The Media

Just a couple of links:

http://infovenezuela.org/cap4_en_1.htm
http://infovenezuela.org/cap4_en_2.htm
http://infovenezuela.org/cap4_en_3.htm

How to bring down a Dictator

Have the young people, the future, the students fight for their rights.



It worked before. Hopefully, it'll work again.

FAIR. Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting

Hell yeah, we found some people that are completely for freedom of speech. Not only that, they are against media biasing. I can't believe I am so lucky to...wait, oh, they are actually justifying RCTV's closing. Who would've thought that "FAIR, the national media watch group, has been offering well-documented criticism of media bias and censorship since 1986" would actually applaud censorship?

Could it be that they forgot their own motto, mission statement or whatever they want to call their bullshit "criticism of media bias and censorship since 1986" claim? To answer this we will remit to their article posted here: http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=3107

Now, the article itself is written pretty well and it cites different source. It offers a good comparison between both sides which is hard to come around these days when dealing with Venezuelan news. All that is fine and it goes with their line of thought about them being the media police of the world, or at least trying to be I don't know. Now, the problem comes right at the end when they decide to conclude, with a quote from Patrick McElwee of the U.S.-based group Just Foreign Policy where he states: "The RCTV case is not about censorship of political opinion. It is about the government, through a flawed process, declining to renew a broadcast license to a company that would not get a license in other democracies, including the United States. In fact, it is frankly amazing that this company has been allowed to broadcast for 5 years after the coup, and that the Chávez government waited until its license expired to end its use of the public airwaves." Actually (damn it, how could I miss this) their stupid title:
"Coup Co-Conspirators as Free-Speech Martyrs
Distorting the Venezuelan media story"
implies their position about what's happening in Venezuela right now.

Of course, the documentary comes in as their first source of information. I am still trying to understand how this documentary became the ultimate source for all the pro-Chavez people out there. Did anyone thought about fact checking for a second? I am going to repost both videos here just so this people can watch the documentary again and then see the analysis that was made of it pointing the lies it says.



The Documentary


The analysis of the lies in it made by Wolfgang Schalk



Now, to really prove my point, I am going to say that the documentary is true as well as the analysis. Basically, they are two different points of views, completely biased to either side of the argument. So with that, I am taking the liberty of canceling both of them as evidence of the question, is it ok to shut down a tv station? Cause yes, that is the question we are discussing here.

Moving on: " On April 11, 2002, the day of the coup, when military and civilian opposition leaders held press conferences calling for Chávez's ouster, RCTV hosted top coup plotter Carlos Ortega, who rallied demonstrators to the march on the presidential palace. On the same day, after the anti-democratic overthrow appeared to have succeeded, another coup leader, Vice-Admiral Victor Ramírez Pérez, told a Venevisión reporter (4/11/02): "We had a deadly weapon: the media. And now that I have the opportunity, let me congratulate you." So here, they are saying that RCTV, by transmitting a message of top coup plotter Carlos Ortega, are becoming terrorist and coup plotters themselves. An interesting thing is that they fail to point out to people around the world who Carlos Ortega is or was. Well, he was no other than the leader of the labor? workers? association (Presidente de la Confederacion de Trabajadores de Venezuela, CTV). Let me attempt the translation, President of the Workers Confederation of Venezuela. Now, to me this is kind of important cause it identifies Ortega as something more than just a coup plotter; he represented Venezuelan workers.

The next interesting thing on this paragraph is the quote from Vice-Admiral Victor Ramirez Perez: "We had a deadly weapon: the media. And now that I have the opportunity, let me congratulate you." I guess they are trying to make a point with the connection of the quote, being transmitted by the media...or some sort of weird thing that I just don't get. Seriously, a Vice-Admiral says they have a weapon, sorry, a deadly weapon: THE MEDIA, and this people signal him, actually not him, but THE MEDIA, as the baddest, meanest coup plotter in the world? I can't even keep going on this paragraph because is hard for me to make sense about what they are trying to point out. Maybe is just me, I might be really dumb or something, who knows?

The next paragraph most important quote comes from Jackson Diehl's colleague at the Washington Post: "RCTV, like three other major private television stations, encouraged the protests," resulting in the coup, "and, once Chávez was ousted, cheered his removal."" I was under the impression that freedom of speech basically gave you the freedom to express yourself. Under that premise, I am under the impression that a privately owned media, has the right to express themselves....you know what, not themselves, but the collective sentiment of their major audience, which in this case was no other than the ousting of Chavez from power. One thing though, I need to make clear, people were protesting because is their right. They were protesting because Chavez had fired people from PDVSA (the state owned oil company in Venezuela) because they were not in the line of thinking of his revolution. This, and lots of bad politics form Chavez, caused the people to take the streets three days before the coup and the world became witness of the biggest protest and concentration of people that had ever taken place in Venezuela.

http://www.urru.org/11A/Fotos.htm (Look at the pictures (1) (2) etc on the fourth link from top to bottom).

As for the coup, yes, it happened. The opposition leaders made horrible mistakes and most of it's sectors didn't like the dissolution of powers and other unconstitutional decisions that were made, but I can't still see the Media's involvement in the whole thing so lets keep going.

"Were a similar event to happen in the U.S., and TV journalists and executives were caught conspiring with coup plotters, it’s doubtful they would stay out of jail, let alone be allowed to continue to run television stations, as they have in Venezuela." This is one of the best lines this article offers. You know, it implies that Chavez was nice to the media, he didn't prosecute them, he didn't jail them, basically, he forgave them. Seriously FAIR people, what's up with fact checking? actually, what's up with common sense? Let's take a look at time here.

April 11, 2002; we have a coup involving the media.
May 27, 2007; we close one of the station that participated in the coup.

So based on the point you guys made above, either Chavez is a saint, or there's something up. If the media and it's owners where involved in the coup, why weren't they tried, put in jail, etc? Why were the officers that publicly called for the stepping down of Chavez tried, and put free (which is a good thing by the way and every person on the military should follow in their steps). Why, even after Luis Tascon (Senator or Congressman, or whatever he is, for the Officialism) called for the "interpelacion" (might translate to judgment...trial maybe) of media owners, this never took place? Why does Chavez decides five years later, that he is going to shut down a tv station, leaving a lot of people out of work, people that just worked on the Tv station. People like janitors, diner cooks, cameraman, boom operators etc, that have been doing their job. Why do this when all he had to do was try the media owners? And really, if the TV station had to been shut down because the law said so (more on the license later), why is it that now we get stuck with a TV station, completely biased in favor of the government, who is not covering any of the vents that are taking place on the streets? Actually, why, you the god of fairness in media, seem to have no problem with this fact, or the fact that no goverment tv station gives serious coverage to any of the opposition events, specially when they are kids being shot at, arrested and the like?

http://www.youtube.com/elobservadorenlinea
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=175779&id=705311608&l=6a357

Try to look for any of those images or photos on any media in Venezuela. What's that? you can't find any...or some of them barely...if you look and look. Do you know why? Well, for one, government TV stations, news papers, radio etc are not reporting anything about it. From time to time they call the protest as small, insignificant and violent. Now the first two are just stupid, just look at the pictures and videos, but the third one is not. The protests are indeed violent thanks to the police, military and Chavez's foes attacking kids (age average of the protests is 15.5).

Next paragraph: " When Chávez returned to power the commercial stations refused to cover the news, airing instead entertainment programs—in RCTV's case, the American film Pretty Woman." RCTV station was being attacked by Chavez foes, look at the second video posted here, towards the end. How can you expect them to cover something if they were being attacked? Seriously people...what's up with fact checking? This paragraph also has this quote from former NPR editor John Dinges: "What RCTV did simply can't be justified under any stretch of journalistic principles…. When a television channel simply fails to report, simply goes off the air during a period of national crisis, not because they're forced to, but simply because they don't agree with what's happening, you've lost your ability to defend what you do on journalistic principles." Wow, this people just amaze me more and more as I read. So, I think we established that RCTV, and the other stations, were being attacked so that sort of prevent them from reporting. Maybe, they could've just gone out and fight the crowd and die doing their job, like some journalists in Venezuela have done. But you see, when you fail to report what's happening because you...let me read, oh...wait, during a period of national crisis...not because you are forced to but because you don't agree....holly fucking crap, so I guess the Chavez media not covering the protest that I've shown on the links above does not apply to this claim? Really, what the fuck is wrong with you people?

My god...I had to stop after that last paragraph. The irony of it was just insane.

Following paragrpah: " The Venezuelan government is basing its denial of license on RCTV's involvement in the 2002 coup, not on the station's criticisms of or political opposition to the government. Many American pundits and some human rights spokespersons have confused the issue by claiming the action is based merely on political differences, failing to note that Venezuela's media, including its commercial broadcasters, are still among the most vigorously dissident on the planet." So...I am now one of the most dissident people on the planet...right on! This people call anyone against the government: "The Most Dissident in the Planet." It even sounds like a movie...wow, I'm proud of being part of the most dissident people in the planet. ok, seriously...how many TV stations are left...that are dissident? 3? Venevision, Televen and Globovision? Well, Televen has been Chavista for quite sometime, and Venevision, after it's owner Gustavo Cisneros, had a meeting with Chavez has been very non "most dissident people in the planet." So that leave Globovision, which Chavez already threaten to close. I guess their "failure to note our dissident media" is not a failure after all since we only have a nationally broadcasted TV station that actually is not seen that well on some parts of the country.

But all right, the license had expired and it didn't get renewed because of the alleged RCTV involvement in the coup and there was no political reason behind it. Sounds legit, the media owners were not tried because...who knows..so then when the license expires Chavez decides not to renew it. Fair enough, for the sake of continuing the argument...let's say it's fair enough..license expire...no renewal because of coup, absolutely no political reason.

So now, McElwee is talking about Venezuelan law, and the licensing system etc. So technically, the license expires and that's it. But shouldn't the governing media authority (CONATEL) be the one calling for the none renewal? Why is Chavez the one that decides to not renew it? Why when RCTV tried to appeal this (I don't think the right term is appeal) it was negated since their appeal named Chavez and Chavez had nothing to do with this and they should've directed their thing to CONATEL? And again, why leave thousands out of a job instead of trying the real people involved?

Finally, we are back at the conclusion: "The RCTV case is not about censorship of political opinion. It is about the government, through a flawed process, declining to renew a broadcast license to a company that would not get a license in other democracies, including the United States. In fact, it is frankly amazing that this company has been allowed to broadcast for 5 years after the coup, and that the Chávez government waited until its license expired to end its use of the public airwaves." I am not going to say anything else about the article and I will let people judge for themselves.

I am going to end this post by asking FAIR people a couple of questions: How can people defending freedom of speech and fairness, applaud the shutting of a TV station? Maybe, I I'm misinterpreting and you don't applaud in any way this shutting down. Maybe, you are just trying to be "FAIR" and present both sides of the argument. But if that was really the case, why do you end...and actually start in your title, by defending Chavez decision? If you are trying to be air, why do you omit relevant pieces of information like the non coverage of the protest by the Chavez Media? How can you be ruling for censorship, cause seriously people, a non-renewal of a license...based on an alleged coup participation, five years ago; participation based on the fact that they reported the protests and displayed anti Chavez comments? Are you that blind or stupid? Are you that fool that you don't see the irony that exhumes from your article?

Actually, I'll end this with a promise I made to my sister in law. She asked me to invite all of you people that support Chavez to experience these protests with her. She asked me to describe the feeling of panic and fear when being attacked in the middle of a protest by the same people that are supposed to protect you as well as armed people in motorcycles, how are defending their revolution called for by their leader, Hugo Chavez. She asked me to describe you the feeling of inhaling tear gas and running blindly for your life. She asked me this things after barely calming down right after this events took place. But I have to tell her, that I can't fulfill my promise because I have no words to describe these situations to you. My hands shake just at the thought that someone that I care deeply about, risked her life for what she believes in and people, like you assholes in stupid FAIR crap, are justifying Chavez's wrongdoing. To you, in her name, in the name of all the people being attacked, I say FUCK YOU. Women like my Rabbit, and like the one in the picture below:



have more balls and integrity than what you can ever dream of having.

Ps: that is a tear gas bomb she's kicking.

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

Really? Shit I wasn't aware of that. You see since I was just watching one of Chavez's everlasting non stop "Cadenas" (I should put a glossary of Venezuelan terms so I don't have to keep explaining this stuff....ok Cadena means when Chavez decides that all TV and radio stations are going to broadcast whatever stupidity he wants to blur out).

The reason we are talking about the not televised "Cadena" happy revolution is because all the bloggers / journalists out there that somehow defend the closure of RCTV, are using the same exact source to defend their claims. And what source is that? Well, the documentary made by two Irish women about the events of April 2002: "The Revolution will not be Televised."

Seriously, if you read them all, they all say the exact same crap, almost with the exact same words. There are some that even state that they are using the film as our friend Bobo Piper or our friend Ourman. Others, are more careful to disclose their source, and just blatantly repeat what's said on the film like the case of Bart

If you read their posts, you will see that they all talk about the Media Coup, about people on the streets supporting Chavez. About Andrecito resigning because he belt betrayed because of the Media blackout and all sort of bullshit. I guess it makes great journalism to report about what you see on a documentary that was completely twisted and taken out of context. Great fact checking to all of you...specially the journalists.

So here, I present you the Documentary in Question:



As well as the analysis of the lies in it made by Wolfgang Schalk

News Hounds Part II

Let's just start a new post.

Dear people at News Hounds, the reason you are not seeing any of this is because no media in Venezuela can give coverage to it or else, you can face closing since you are, by transmitting events that are happening, inviting people to commit crimes. Yes, that is right. If you report events that the government doesn't want you to report, then you can get penalized. Sounds very freedom of speech and actually very "right of information" that in a democracy me and my fellow Venezuelans should enjoy. But, since you are a media people, and you need to see it in order to believe it, here are some links that might help you understand whats happeneing and why you are not seeing any more coverage:

1. http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=rctv
2. http://youtube.com/watch?v=FKFRidQSYgk
   

Ok, for the video I will translate and explain some key points. At the beginning Chavez condemns Globovision because they were inciting people to kill Chavez. Now the images in question, http://www.globovision.com/news.php?nid=57034&clave=a%3A1%3A%7Bi%3A0%3Bs%3A12%3A%22william+lara%22%3B%7D
http://www.abn.info.ve/go_news5.php?articulo=93364&lee=4
(This second link comes straight from the Bolivarian News Agency, or Chavez News Agency) are of the failed attempt to assassinate Pope John Paul II, which where accompanied by a song by Ruben Blades, if I'm not mistaken, in which he says something like: Don't loose faith, this doesn't end here. Now this piece was part of a longer (I think 5 or more minutes) piece that showed a sequence of important images transmitted by RCTV, being the failed Pope assassination one of these images. Now, I can't say much about the choice of music, but Chavez comparing himself to the Pope? Stating that this image called people to kill him? Oh you've got to be kidding me. Seriously...Chavez comparing himself to the Pope?? Please.

So we keep going in the video he alerts Globovision in National Chain (when the President uses all the media to transmit whatever he wants to say for the time he wishes) that he is going to apply the "minimum" basically close them.

Then, at around one minute he calls the people to be alert and he says the if they need to create a new April 13th, he will command it. So basically, if we need to go an attack the media, pillage stores etc...well he will command it.

1:23 minutes, we, the opposition, are called the adversaries like we are in the middle of a war, and then he keeps calling the people to be alert and defend their revolution.

At about two minutes he calls for the Chief of Communication, vice President, CONATEL, to monitor the media closely, because the media is calling to kill, disobey authority etc. Not sure what media...oh he meant Globovision who was the only one transmitting what it could of the protests being held. After we see Globovision statements and some people in one of the protests.

So, RCTV gets closed because they called people to protest on 2002, yet Chavez is doing the same, in "Cadena" and this is ok? Seriously, shouldn't the law apply equally to everybody, including the president? I guess not when you are a Dictator.

Anyway people at News Hounds, next time you want to criticize your Fox News station, try to be more careful as to what arguments you use, because applauding the closing of a Tv station to justify your attacks against Fox, doesn't say much about you belief in freedom of speech. Next time you claim that they are only 4 people marching and that there are no shots etc, I don't know, see if you can communicate with people in Venezuela like I did, cause you see, I was born and lived most part of my life in Venezuela and I have friends and family still there who, are not sure what's going on since there are is no media reporting, but they've heard and seen shots fired, they've been gassed and have seen people getting arrested for no reason. So to you people at News Hounds, in the name of all the people protesting for their right of freedom of speech, that you so blatantly dismiss, I say Fuck You.

News Hounds Part I

Their link: http://www.newshounds.us/2007/05/30/big_story_exaggerating_venezuelan_unrest.php

Ok, this people are against the biased reporting of Fox news. These people claim in their site that: "Appalled by our results, we, who would not meet in person until months later, banded together in cyberspace in concern and outrage over the failure of American media, and Fox News in particular, to relate the news properly. Rather than serve as the public's eyes and ears, Fox and other media conglomerates have become echo chambers for the rich and powerful with whom they have become all too cozy. This blog is an attempt to counter that alarming condition. We believe that a viable democracy depends upon viable media. We invite you to join us in our efforts here and elsewhere to make a difference in the future of our country."

So they seemed pretty much in favor with freedom of speech. I wonder what would Al Gore think if he saw something like their post in which, taking as a source an article on the L.A. Times by reporter Bart Jones who lived eight years in Venezuela and can give great detail and justify the closing of a media.
But after Chavez was elected president in 1998, RCTV shifted to another endeavor: ousting a democratically elected leader from office.
Reading the article in question we find this:

1. "But the case of RCTV — like most things involving Chavez — has been caught up in a web of misinformation." Yes Bart and Newshound people, misinformation like the one you are giving, thank you very much.
2. "But after Chavez was elected president in 1998, RCTV shifted to another endeavor: ousting a democratically elected leader from office." Seems like RCTV was against Chavez from the begining and that Chavez didn't win the elecation thank to the coverage of all the media plus the support of all the economic and social "estratos" (somebody please translate) of Venezuela.
3. "For two days before the putsch, RCTV preempted regular programming and ran wall-to-wall coverage of a general strike aimed at ousting Chavez." Yeah Bart, they where covering the events, you know, like people being shot and those sort of things.
4. "After military rebels overthrew Chavez and he disappeared from public view for two days, RCTV's biased coverage edged fully into sedition." Do you mean after Chavez resigned, asked to be taken to Cuba and was taken to Fuerte Tiuna while they decided if he was going to be granted safe passage to Cuba or was going to be tried in Venezuela?
5. "Thousands of Chavez supporters took to the streets to demand his return, but none of that appeared on RCTV or other television stations." I don't know about thousands, but I do know that some went to the TV stations to attack them, which they broadcast asking for help, btw, this wasn't on the 12 after Chavez resigend, this was on the 13 after Chavez came back to power.
6. "RCTV News Director Andres Izarra later testified at National Assembly hearings on the coup attempt that he received an order from superiors at the station: "Zero pro-Chavez, nothing related to Chavez or his supporters." Andres, who was later appointed Chief of Information and then Director or President of State managed TV Station Telesur. And the Zero pro- Chavez? It meant the sackings that were taking place.
7. "Would a network that aided and abetted a coup against the government be allowed to operate in the United States? The U.S. government probably would have shut down RCTV within five minutes after a failed coup attempt." Exactly, why did this closure come after five years of the coup. If the closing is indeed because of their participation, where is the trial? Why did Chavez order it himself and not CONATEL (the organism in charge of communications, sort of like the FCC).
8. "Radio, TV and newspapers remain uncensored, unfettered and unthreatened by the government. Most Venezuelan media are still controlled by the old oligarchy and are staunchly anti-Chavez." This one has got to be the best one. You see Bart, and Newshounds, In Venezuela we have a law of social responsability we call the "Spring Law" or "Ley Resorte" (not sure why they call it that really). Anyways, this law basically prohibits the Media of openly criticizing the government. Yes, there are progams in which people give their opinion and actually criticize the government...wait a minute I am contradicting myself...oh, that's right, you can criticize but lightly. You see Brat, you can get penalized with 72 hours of closure for showing images of the failed attempt to kill the Pope. http://www.globovision.com/news.php?nid=57028 (Link in spanish). As fot the unthreatened part, well: http://freerctv.com/ I have to say that my favorite part is when he shows the picture of Ravell (President of Globovision, one of the main TV stations in Venezuela) and tell his followers they need to identify the enemies of the revolution.

Now, I have only talked about Brat's article but my post started becuase I found him on News hounds, actually, I saw the article previously and was getting ready to write when I found it again on News Hounds. But you see, the thing that pissed me more about News Hounds was this one: "we see four women smiling, chanting, and banging on kitchen pots - and uniformed officers firing (tear gas and rubber bullets, we're told) into a crowd." Oh my.

Our Man In Granada

Second: Our Man In Granada.

His Link: http://ourman.typepad.com/omig/2007/05/the_revolution_.html

Distance from Venezuela: 1,235.42 miles or 1,988.22 Km approximately.

Has visited Venezuela: unknown.

Sources: "The revolution will not be televised" Documentary.

Well, it's kind of sad that I have to attack this blogger since most of his posts (at least the ones I saw) are kind of cool. But sadly for him, he decided to praise Chavez while living in Granada, Nicaragua.

This post doesn't say much except the emotion that he felt after watching the documentary: "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" to defend Chavez closing of RCTV (Venezuelas oldest TV station).

All right people, here's the thing. I don't know if your mothers, or fathers, or a friend or someone in your live ever told you that you can't believe everything that you see on TV, and well, on a Documentary, specially if such tv program or documentary is of political or religious nature. Why you ask? Well because unless it is done by a robot or a computer it will be biased on the beliefs of their creators. For those of you who don't know (or where really lazy and didn't click or read the link above) this documentary was created by two Irish filmmakers Kim Bartley
Donnacha O'Briain, who were at the country making a documentary about his Highness, Hugo Chavez. Now, if somebody was in another country making a documentary about it's leader, wouldn't that make you believe they support such leader? To me, it sounds like if you are committed to a project, specially such an artistic project as a documentary, you must love what you are doing, and I don't think that if you dislike Chavez, or just don't care about him, you would be doing a documentary.

Now, for the sake of argument, let's say this girls were completely unbiased and honest, here 's a great link with the errors, or honest mistakes, found in the documentary: http://www.11abril.com/index/especiales/chavezthefilm.asp#mentiras.

So after looking at the documentary and then looking at all the problems it had, I don't understand how someone, who I guess has not lived in Venezuela, can praise and even say that he would love to march for Chavez.

That just gave me an idea. I should create a reality TV show called "The Toughest Marcher" (yeah the name is kind of lame but bare with me since it is a work in process). In this show I would get lame asses like Ourman or my friend Bob and I will place them on the street with nothing more than a flag, some noisemakers and a pan. They will need to complete a course of...I don't know a couple of miles while they are attacked by: tear gas, rubber bullets, stones, molotovs and snipers. If they reach their destiny they'll become the Toughest Marcher (damn that name is really lame, but who cares, you get my point). So, after the game I would interview the participants, in this case Ourman, and ask him how nice the march was after being attacked for using your right to protest, cause you see Ourman, we were marching for what we believed at the time. As a matter of fact, students, from 13 to 20...25, not sure, are currently marching for what they believe in. It might not be something you care about, hell, they might even be wrong or blinded by the media, but the truth is, they are there cause they think in their heart that what they are doing matters (and it does immensely...thanks to all of you). And I don't know if you've seen the images, but we are getting gassed, shot at, attacked etc by police and Chavez foes.

So to end this post I say to you Ourman, Fuck you. The next time you want to "want to be, not only on the "winning" side, but also witness wrongs being righted before my eyes" remember that when you are going up against an oppressive government, you will get gassed, shot at, attacked, and you might die in the process. So again, in the name of all the venezuelans that have perished while protesting pacifically, that have been hurt while marching for what they believed, I give you a big FUCK YOU.

Bob Piper

Our first asshole: Bob Piper.

his link http://www.bobpiper.co.uk/2007/05/chavez_media_move_justified.php

Distance from Venezuela: 4,273.83 miles or 6,878.06 Km approximately.

Has visited Venezuela: 0 times.

Sources: "The revolution will not be televised" Documentary, and The CIA....yes...The CIA.

So our friend Bob is saying that the closing of RCTV, Venezuela's oldest TV network, is justified because, and I quote: "RCTV has used its access to the public airwaves to repeatedly call for the overthrow of the democratically elected government of President Hugo Chávez." I wonder how many times has Bob watched RCTV, although from his claim, it seems he has watch it "repeatedly" and was lucky to watch it specifically when RCTV was calling to overthrow Chavez.
Now, I don't know if Bob got the same signal I got, but I remember those days, all TV stations, except for the government ones, were displaying lots of Anti Chavez Propaganda, as a matter of fact, my favorite one: Chavez talking about being poor and how good it is, etc, and then we see the price tags for his shirt, $300 or something; suit, $500; watch, $1,000 and the pen was the most expensive one at around $2,500...priceless. Anyway, I don't recall RCTV actively saying to people: "Go and overthrow Chavez," or anything in the like. I do remember however, RCTV reporting the incidents and people chanting and shouting that they wanted Chavez out. Now, I am under the impression that under free speech, I, as a citizen, can say whatever I want, even if it implies I want to get rid of Chavez and then the Media should be there for me to express myself. Bob seems to differ.

Bob continues in his claims saying: "RCTV exhorted the public to take to the streets and overthrow the government and also colluded with the coup by deliberately misrepresenting what was taking place, and then conducting a news blackout. Its production manager, Andrés Izarra, who opposed the coup, immediately resigned so as not to become an accomplice." As I stated before, I don't remember RCTV calling people to overthrow the government, although, I have to give it to Bob they encourage people to protest, which in democracy it's a right, or so I think. Let's analyze this piece by piece: First, RCTV deliberately misinterpreted what was going on. I guess when they divided the screen on the middle of a Chavez "Cadena" (for those of you who don't know what Cadena means, it stands for chain and it's the term used when Chavez forces every media to transmit whatever he wants to say) while people approaching "The Casona" (The Government House) were being shot at by Chavez' foes. Maybe RCTV misinterpreted the words of Lucas Rincon http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Venezuelan_coup_d'%C3%A9tat_attempt#Coup
stating that Chavez had resigned. So really Bob, what did they misinterpreted? Was it the part of a pacific march of millions being shot by adepts to the government? Was it Chavez resignation? Please do tell us.

Moving on, we have our friend Andrés Izarra who resigned from RCTV after these events took place claming that he couldn't stand for the Media blackout that had happened. (Media blackout? did he mean Chavez Cadena in the middle of people being shot?). Now, I don't know if you are aware of this Bob, but Andrecito was then named as the Minister (don't know if "Ministro" translates to Minister but it means the person in charge) of Information and also Director of Telesur (a government tv channel). Now, was he really resigning because of a media blackout, or was he just making a career move?

/ Links in Spanish /
http://www.talcualdigital.com/Especiales/Protagonistas_izara.asp

Sorry that the link above is in spanish but there are three important parts on it:

1. Marcel Granier's Statment “cero chavismo en pantalla” (No chavismo on the screen).
2. Carlos Ocariz says: "En esos días las cosas sucedieron de una manera rápida y confusa, pero también Andrés falló. Se dejó llevar por las emociones cuando le prohibieron difundir los saqueos. En cambio, no denunció las agresiones y la intolerancia de los chavistas a los periodistas y los canales." Which I translate to: On those days things happened in a very fast and confussing way, but Andres falied too. He let his emotions take over when he was forbidden to transmit the sacking that was taken place. In exchange, he didn't denounce the aggressions and intolerance by chavistas towards the newspapers and TV Stations.
3. Marcelino Bisbal, (Media Investigator) on the appointment of Andrecito as Information Minister (If someone knows the correct word please tell me, thanks), “Uno esperaría que el Gobierno fijara una política de comunicación en función del Estado, pero es más un ministerio de contrapropaganda política que otra cosa”. Translates to: You would expect that the government would have a politic of comunication in the conutry's favor, but this is more a "Ministerio" of counter-propaganda than anything else.

So Bob, who cares if Andres resigned? He knew what he had to do in order to move up on his career, hell, he went from Production Manager to being the Chief on Information (Chief, can Ministro translate to Chief?).

But seriously Bob, I don't expect you to change your views or to say something coherent really, since it's more than clear that you idolatrize Chavez and his socialism of the 21st century (which I'm not sure what it means but it seams to be: let's make everyone poor, that way we are all equal).

So Bob, to end this post, I give you a link to a video demonstrating Chavez own use of the Media, and based on your reasons to support the closing of a TV station, shouldn't Chavez be closed down too? I'll let you be the judge.

http://www.freerctv.com/

And by the way Bobo, I will call you Bobo from now own since to me it seems that it suits you better. So anyway Bobo, you can kiss my big brown Venezuelan Ass and go Fuck yourself and your stupid socialist claims with a rusty telephone pole. The next time you decide to support Chavez, just take a moment to think about all the people that have died thanks to his oppressive government and his marvelous politics, and I'm not talking only about people shot at protest, no Bobo, I'm talking about people dying in hospitals because there are no resources, and this include children.

We love people praising Chavez around the world

Yes we love them. We love how they praise the Caudillo. How they claim they would march for him, die for him or such. How they claim that Venezuela is in it's best stage. That Chavez has done nothing but good to it's people.

We love this people specially for the fact that they do not live or have lived in Venezuela first hand, yet they are experts in the matter.

To all of you, we salute you, and we promise to disproof your claims one by one, piece by piece. That's right, we where just being Ironic, yet you should've known by the title of our blog.

Chavez and his government are full of crap, but you, yes you who defend him while living in the joy of your non oppressive, totalitarian ruling (for the most part). to all of you we extend the invitation to come and live, not visit for a couple of weeks, but live, get a job and try to subsist in the wonderful Venezuelan economy.