Hugo Chavez's brother talks of armed struggle

[Zorro]

Source: AP

One of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's brothers said Sunday that backers of the hospitalized leftist leader should not rule out armed struggle in the future, though they prefer to maintain power at the ballot box.

Adan Chavez's statement came as speculation mounted about the health of the president, who has been convalescing at an undisclosed location in Cuba after reportedly undergoing emergency surgery 16 days ago.

Chavez's older brother said Venezuela's ruling party wants to retain power by defeating foes in elections. But he told government supporters that they should be ready to take up arms if necessary.

"As authentic revolutionaries, we cannot forget other forms of fighting," he said during a prayer meeting for the health of his 56-year-old brother in the leader's home state of Barinas.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110627/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_venezuela_chavez_21

[Enrique]

1. I wonder, when American politicians talk like that

does it make the news in Venezuela?

[Judi Lynn]

7. Yeah, at least two right-wing women, the loon in Arizona, and Bachman said the same crap in 2010.

Not to mention the Teabagger fools who swaggered around at Democratic campaign stops with their weaponry strapped to their haunches, trying to scare Democrats spitless.

Thanks for mentioning it.

[joshcryer]

9. Do you have links for those quotes?

"It would be inexcusable to limit ourselves to only the electoral and not see other forms of struggle, including the armed struggle."

Pretty powerful statement.

[Doctor_J]

37. Here's one

"I hope that's not where we're going, but you know if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out." - Sharon Angle

I know you'd rather be ruled by right-wing authoritarians like angle than by a socialist like Hugo, but don't lie about the threats made by the nuts here.

[joshcryer]

50. See post #46.

[Zorro]

10. Are you comparing Chavistas to teabaggers?

Sounds like it.

[joshcryer]

21. Ouch.

[HubertHeaver]

26. And Virginia Foxx, U.S. House of Representatives, North Carolina.

[sweetloukillbot]

54. It was a Nevada loon - not an AZ loon...

We've got all manor of racist, xenophobic loons, but none of our politicians (to my knowledge) have advocated armed rebellion.
We do have an official firearm though, just in case.

[joshcryer]

60. They'd be wise not to, that'd be treason.

They imply it all the time but they never openly state it.

There have been people arrested in modern times (past year or three) over sedition, we do take it seriously as do all countries (though we have a much higher bar than, say, Cuba does for sedition, two witnesses, evidence of conspiracy, etc).

[EFerrari]

8. It could be worse. He could start his own beer label.

[Zorro]

11. Has a sibling of a sitting US president ever made similar statements?

[EFerrari]

13. Don't worry, Zorro, we won't let him hurt you.

[Zorro]

15. Has a sibling of a sitting US president ever made similar statements?

[EFerrari]

16. I don't keep track of presidential brothers as assiduously as you do.

Maybe you could research this crucial issue and report back to us.

[EFerrari]

17. Jebby to the NRA in 2002: "The sound of our guns is the sound of freedom"

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/04/27/1051381853028.htmlJe

[joshcryer]

19. Nothing anywhere near "It would be inexcusable to limit ourselves to only the electoral."

[Doctor_J]

40. Try this one then

"I hope that's not where we're going, but you know if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies and saying my goodness what can we do to turn this country around? I'll tell you the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out." - Sharon Angle

Link:http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/republicanquotes/a/Sharron-Angle-Quotes.htm

[joshcryer]

46. Yep, she lost the election over that nonsense.

:hi:

[Ter]

51. He said sibling

Angle wasn't a President's brother.

[Zorro]

20. Sorry your page was not found ...

Got a link that works?

[joshcryer]

23. Google the quote. It was to the... guess... NRA.

I interpreted no anti-democratic sentiment in that quote. Still waiting for one that suggests that so I can be outraged.

[Zorro]

28. Weird justification

Chavistas can make veiled threats against their political opposition because teabaggers and Republicants are assholes.

[EFerrari]

31. Weird generalization, from one statement by one individual to Chavistas.

[Zorro]

43. You talking about Jeb?

[EFerrari]

29. That would be the only one. You might try to search the article name:

President's brother gives gun owners shot in the arm

April 28 2003

The Governor of Florida, Jeb Bush, has thanked the National Rifle Association for helping elect his brother President of the United States in 2000.

snip


"Were it not for your active involvement, it's safe to say my brother would not be President of the United States," the younger Bush said on Saturday.

The Governor said he and his brother supported the NRA contention that the Second Amendment to the Constitution, which cites "the right to bear arms", was an individual right with few restrictions.

"The sound of our guns is the sound of freedom," said Mr Bush, to thunderous applause.

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/04/27/1051381853028.html

I tried loading the cached version but it won't load for me.

[hughee99]

49. Holy shit! That's exact same thing as saying

a party will continue to follow the democratic process so long as the vote goes their way, then it's armed revolution. EXACTLY the same thing... okay kind of the same thing... okay, can you grab some straws for me while you're at it.

[EFerrari]

52. What Jebby says short circuits the democratic process altogether.

He didn't say he'd fight to save his revolution. He said, guns are freedom.

[joshcryer]

53. I'm not going to defend Jeb here but that's downright silly.

Guns may or may not represent freedom depending on the context. In the event of Chavez's family making sure that no electoral process is respected, they would likely not represent freedom, for example.

[Bacchus39]

76. indeed, but her comparison of Chavistas to the tea party isn't too far fetched

tea party isn't as radical though.

[EFerrari]

87. Rght, because Chavistas are violent racists who want to kill off our social safety net

oh, wait ---

[Bacchus39]

88. so you are qualifying your comparison then??

you brought up the tea baggers and Jebby.

[EFerrari]

89. Um, no, I didn't.

[hughee99]

97. Do you think suggesting that the "having guns" means

that his party will take control of the government if they fail to gain that control at the ballot box? I didn't get that at all from this statement. As I was suggesting, you are REALLY stretching it to try to equate the two.

[EFerrari]

107. Oh, I'm not equating the two. I'm saying Jebby's is much worse.

Just to be absolutely clear. :)

[Bacchus39]

111. do you agree with Adan Chavez that armed struggle may be necessary to combat "enemies"?

"...It would be inexcusable to limit ourselves to only the electoral and not see other forms of struggle, including the armed struggle."

or do you agree with Jeb Bush that guns are the sound of freedom??


or both??

[hughee99]

122. Perhaps we're just reading it different, but in my opinion

Equating guns to freedom is a VERY far cry from suggesting that what you can't win at the ballot box, you'll take through force. What Adan said (if it's accurate) is worse, and it's not even close, and all the spin in the world won't put a shine on that turd. All other things being the same, I'm far more comfortable living in a country where people are willing to take up arms to protect their freedoms than in a country where a political party is willing to take up arms to remain in power.

[HubertHeaver]

18. Yes. Jebby made a statement about San Francisco. Followed

with "did I just say that out loud?"  (guffaws)


http://www.sptimes.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/APState.woa/wa/story?id=FL_Bush_San_Francisco

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x215875

Edit to add links

[joshcryer]

25. Not just a "sibling of a sitting US president" but also a high party leader and governor.

No doubt some congress members or even mayors have said some stupid ass shit, we're talking about someone high up who's got the ear of the President himself.

[sabrina 1]

109. Except he didn't say it. That AP lied, big surprise.

Check post #56 for a translation of what he actually said.

[ChangoLoa]

114. He did say it.

His exact words were: "sería imperdonable limitarse tan solo a lo electoral y no ver los otros métodos de lucha, incluso la lucha armada"

“It would be inexcusable to limit ourselves to only the electoral and not see other forms of struggle, including the armed struggle"

He's quoting Che Guevara but he's referring to the situation in Venezuela.

[joshcryer]

137. That's utterly false, and when you posted that it was made clear that that was false.

He did quote Che's armed struggle comment, in direct context of "other ways of struggle." It was reported correctly by the AP. The poster in question did selective quoting and left out the bit where he quotes Che.

[sabrina 1]

105. Well a father of one and grandfather of another sitting

president negotiated with the Nazis. I'm sure that's okay though, because it's only bad of a Progressive leader of a Latin American country sneezes the wrong way.

So transparent. The Global Corps will never get over the fact that Chavez has helped that region of the world get out from under their brutal control of their countries and their resources.

Which is why he is so popular, everywhere, except amongst the western right. Which is a good thing, imo. Adds to his creditentials to be hated by the far right.

Why do YOU hate him, btw, YOU are here, so I assume you are a Democrat? That makes no sense.

[Zorro]

139. ...so popular, everywhere...? HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

You're obviously and/or deliberately ill-informed, unless by "everywhere" you mean Cuba, NIcaragua, Iran, and North Korea.

Making observations with misty eyes through rose-colored glasses isn't very credible.

Latin American polls consistently show Hugo's popularity throughout the region to be a lot lower than you repeatedly assert. There's plenty of data on the Latinobarometro site.

Why do you feel compelled to consistently defend a self-declared adversary of the United States? Do you think the Democratic position is to support US adversaries?

[bitchkitty]

127. No. But Bill Clinton's mama's chiropractor is DEAD!!!!!!!!1111111

[Citizen Worker]

22. The oligarchs who run this country make their statements behind closed doors and in the form of

massive campaign contributions.

[joshcryer]

24. It's a wash. We have massive paid for propaganda campigns. Chavez is on TV twice a day, mandatory.

Thus the worry about his failing to appear. He's a daily staple in Venezuela. Mandated by law. Look up "Venezuela chains."

[Zorro]

30. Who's picking up the slack in his absence?

Or are they showing "The Best of Hugo" reruns?

[joshcryer]

32. Not sure. I doubt they'd leave the TV go weeks without Big Brother mouthing off about his latest...

...Emmanuel Goldstein.

When he returns, I bet the first thing he'll do is tout western media rumors of his health condition as false propaganda, etc.

[Doctor_J]

34. Actually nearly all of the Venezuelan TV and radio stations are right-wing

anti-Chavez propaganda. It's pretty much like the US in that regard.

[joshcryer]

39. Venezuelan TV is pro-Chavez, if you're not, you lose your license.

The newspapers are anti-Chavez.

That does not justify Chavez using "chains" intended for emergencies as a method to spout daily propaganda. If Bush was on every day two times a day here I doubt you would've backed it.

[Doctor_J]

42. Are you kidding?

You are...you must be. Bush was on 1000 radio stations every day for 8 years. There was absolutely no opposition. Seriesly, you need to STOP reading the the Murdoch Journal and listening to hate radio all day. It's making you into a teabagger

[joshcryer]

45. By law?

You are talking about extremely niche channels that have a few million viewers at most. Please excuse me if you have a problem with me thinking there's a difference between a bunch of hate mongering channels and cable network talking heads and mandatory over the air TV intrusion, daily.

Have you even seen one of Chavez's chains?

[JackRiddler]

86. Why are you recyclng the same old lies?

You mean, if your TV network particpates in a CIA-backed plot to violently overthrow the Venezuelan govt ... then five years later, when your license runs out, it won't be renewed. Because that's all that happened to RCTV. It worked with oligarchs in an attempt to overthrow the elected government, and yet was allowed to continue broadcasting for another five years.

If NBC had done the same against Bush, their executives would have been in Guantanamo the next morning.

[joshcryer]

92. Actually, that's bullshit. RCTV lost their license. Venevisión and Televen still have theirs.

RCTV refused to take a pro-Chavez line. Venevisión and Televen spew pro-Chavez propaganda daily. Yes RCTV was right wing. But guess who held the coupsters for a live TV conference (the generals announcing Chavez's resignation? Venevisión not RCTV.

So Venevisión got forgiven but RCTV did not. The reason being is that RCTV dared to show the protesters during one of Chavez's highly corrupt big-brother style chains. He purposefully put the chain out because he didn't want the population to know he was being protested by hundreds of thousands of people. RCTV decided to, good or for bad, split the screen and show that Chavez was lying as he spewed his lies about what was going on.

I seem to know more about the events as they happened than you do, it appears. They cut RCTVs license because they refused to tow the party line, it's a fact.

[JackRiddler]

101. You're doubling down on the bullshit. RCTV was instrumental in supporting the coup...

Here's where I wrote about it in 2007:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x730502

RCTV star reporter Napoleon Bravo directly conspired with the coup leaders.

I won't be insulting and claim you don't know as much as I do. I'm sure you're as well informed as I am, otherwise you would not be able to defend the falsehoods with such relative sophistication. Nevertheless, falsehoods they remain.

Too bad about RCTV's licence. It lapsed and was not renewed under the law, not by decree.

As you point out, other anti-Chavez broadcasters who also supported the Bush-backed coup are still on the air! That is incredible. The majority of Venezuelan corporate media is anti-Chavez. Under the Bolivarian government, low-frequency radio and local media have come under the control of communities. There is greater media freedom now, not just with the pro-oligarch media who supported the coup and propagate the oligarchs' lies that the freely elected president is a "dictator."

[joshcryer]

132. Venevisión was just as complicit, Venevisión changed their programming. That is a fact.

[sabrina 1]

106. Actually you have demonstrated how little you know with this

comment.

What would happen to a radio station in any democracy that participated in an attempted coup of a democratically elected president? They are lucky it was Venezuela and not the US eg, where they would probably have received the death penalty for treason.

Odd that you say you support the people of the ME having control over their own countries, yet you do not support it in Latin America. I think you are new to the history of Latin America. Chavez is part of Latin America's version of the Arab Spring. He, and several of the other relatively new leaders of that region of the world. Together they have managed to take their countries back from the far right oligarchs that kept them suppressed for so long, and that supported dictators who tortured and murdered anyone who opposed them.

[ChangoLoa]

110. Why hasn't there been a trial then?

If someone conspired with the coupsters, he should be formally accused, isn't it?

But nothing. Not even an investigation to understand what happened with the media and why tens of people got killed in the streets by snipers.

[sabrina 1]

113. There have been trials. Like I said, people need to learn

something about issues they choose to take a side on.

[Bacchus39]

116. when were these trials? feel free to provide evidence n/t

s

[sabrina 1]

118. Of course!

VENEZUELA: Coup plotters convicted

Wednesday, October 27, 2004 - 10:00
Stuart Munckton

On October 15, news website Venezuela Analysis <http://venezuelaanalysis.org> reported that eight local politicians and business people from Tachira state had been found guilty of rebellion for their role in the April 2002 military coup that briefly overthrew the elected government of President Hugo Chavez.

All were convicted of rebellion — three of "direct co-operation" and five with being accomplices. They were sentenced to between three and six years' imprisonment. They were found to have illegally detained and attempted to depose the pro-Chavez governor of Tachira state.

These are the first to be convicted in connection with the US-backed coup that established the head of the Chamber of Commerce as president for 48 hours, before an insurrection of rank-and-file soldiers, lower officers and the poor majority restored Chavez. The Supreme Court previously refused to indict the military officers who led the coup, claiming what had existed was merely a "vacuum of power".

The Chavez Government was very lenient on them. Here all would have received the death penalty which I am opposed to.

The question was about 'trials and investigations'. A very democratic process and fair trials. The far right anti-Chavez opposition however, murdered the prosecutor who was doing his job of issuing arrest warrents.

It's always going to be a fight in Latin America to keep the Western backed far right from once again destabilizing that region of the world.

[ChangoLoa]

119. BS. There hasn't been a single trial about the MEDIA COMPLICITY.

You're changing the subject. We all know some politicians who led the coup were convicted, starting with Carmona... obviously!

But, as I said, NOTHING about the MEDIA




...and, btw, NOTHING about the SNIPERS who killed tens of demonstrators neither.

[sabrina 1]

120. The comment I responded to asked if there had been any

investigations, any trials, in response to a statement about the coup. I provided the information that apparently the commenter did not have.

So, you're admitting that Chavez is far more tolerant of the press than, eg, the US would be under the same circumstances? Not only did he not prosecute them (which I'm sure you would be screaming about) he did not shut them down as they were still funcioning, still spewing their rightwing hatred for five years after the coup.

Kind of blows the argument about him not supporting a free press. I think he should have prosecuted them the same way the Nazi propagandists were prosecuted. But he's way more tolerant than I am, I guess.

[ChangoLoa]

121. Read this sub-thread again instead of childishly deflecting the argument

We're all talking about the media here: YOU, Bacchus, JackRiddler and I.

The funny thing is that you actually said: "people need to learn something about issues they choose to take a side on"
And let me assure you that I agree. We ALL need to learn. Concerning Venezuela, the country where I live and teach, I need to learn everyday.

But I also believe you have never watched the media you're talking about, am I right?


Now, have another try if you like: show us that you actually have a point and please tell us why hasn't there been a single trial if there was a huge media conspiracy as you were told by the Venezuelan government funded media you quote.

If someone in the media conspired with the coupsters, he should be formally accused, don't you think?

Maybe you think that Chavez doesn't even bother those CIA infiltrated TV-conspirators who threaten our democracy and start a killing in our streets... because he's stupidly "tolerant"? :eyes:

[sabrina 1]

125. There is a lawsuit against the private media

that participated in giving false information to the public which it is hoped will lead to proceedings against those responsible. I'm sure, as would be the case here, that criminally prosecuting any media outlet would be extremely difficult without clear evidence of collusion with the coup plotters.

However, apparently there has been some admission lately airc, by a media insider that they were involved 'every step of the way'. So, a lawsuit such as the one filed after the conviction of the police who were involved, could provide more information.

There was also an amnesty given to some of those involved in the coup. I am aware that there is a victims organization keeping the issue of prosecuting all those involved, including the media, alive. It seems they make their demands known to the AG who appears to be willing to listen.

The efforts to bring about justice for those who were victims of the coup plotters is ongoing. I have friends in Venezuela, btw, who were not originally Chavez supporters, but who now support him. They are very familiar with the media there and do not share your views. However, it IS a democracy so different views are to be expected, just like here. We too have a 'left' and a 'right' 'news media', if you can call it that.

[ChangoLoa]

129. Look, I'm merely pointing out that the victimization of Chavez is outdated

...at the national level. Internationally speaking, it's a different debate.

We could argue that both dimensions are related and I'd probably agree with that. But remember we're talking about media. And 95% of the people in Venezuela only watch/listen to local media.

Traditionally, there were two main commercial channels or corporations in Venezuela. One of them, RCTV, is off air since 2007.

The other, Venevision, has openly accepted to stop talking about politics. They've called their evening news program "The Impartial" and their billionaire boss, G. Cisneros, is in cordial terms with Chavez. He assists to the reunions and to the long speeches. He applauds.

The last big private channel, Televen, has kept the political programing, but shared it between chavista and opposition. For example, you see a weekly show by the former defense and foreign relations minister who was also the Vice-President, J. V. Rangel.

There's only one anti-Chavez TV left : news channel Globovision. It's a terrible, biased channel. They exaggerate everything all the time. Hard line opposition identifies with them and believes their distorted versions. But it's a small channel just as hardliners in the opposition are a small group. Its ratings are far behind Venevision and Televen.

And then we have Chavez TV, which is... you can get a glimpse of it in post #68

[Judi Lynn]

130. We were informed, even in our corporate media, RCTV still broadcasts cable shows,

and internationally, just like the networks US Americans watch daily here.

Gustavo Cisneros is a close family friend, and "fishing buddy" of former U.S. President, George H. W. Bush, has been for many years.

Here's a photo of him with the son, _{George W. Bush,} must click as it won't copy:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/gustavoacisneros/5386211097/

http://dev.out.com.nyud.net:8090/images/0/FEA_Cisneros3.jpg

Family Ties: (from left) Uncle Gustavo Cisneros, Dominican Republic
President Hipolito Mejia, and former U.S. President George H.W. Bush
in February 2003

(click) http://www.dominicantoday.com.nyud.net:8090/dr/local/2009/2/19/31139/Dominican-President-Bush-senior-lunch-in-Gustavo-Cisneros-villa


Dominican President, Bush senior lunch in Gustavo Cisneros’ villa

http://www.soberania.org.nyud.net:8090/Images/Cisneros_422g.jpg

[joshcryer]

134. A broadcast license is a lot different from a cable license.

[ChangoLoa]

138. Not in Venezuela

Not even in the cable since january 2010. You can see it in most Latin American countries except Venezuela. It's possible to get it by subscription through the internet though.

You should always go beyond what your corporate media says:)

[joshcryer]

133. I absolutely support it in Latin American countries! Nothing I have said suggests otherwise.

Only those with dishonest portrayals of the events would say so. Chavez revoked one license out of several, all of whom were complicit in the coup against him, because they didn't change their programming. You have provided no facts to counter this. All you've provided are smears and illogical leaps.

[ChangoLoa]

68. Not at all. 5 out of 10 national TV stations in Venezuela are State owned and fanatically pro-Chavez

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sistema_Nacional_de_Medios_P%C3%BAblicos_de_Venezuela

Despite the money the governments puts in them, those channels don't manage to get a proportionate part of the audience, though.

Gotta wonder why


Actually, how would you know? Have you ever watched Venezuelan TV? Do you speak Spanish?

[JackRiddler]

123. Hmm, one more and that would represent the Venezuelan electorate.

[ChangoLoa]

124. So State owned = Party owned

That would be the credo of some hardliners indeed. I don't think it's yours though.

A small problem with your calculation: there's one sports channel and one other simply cultural. So, politically speaking, we should make it 5/8 pro-Chavez. Better than you would expect.

Remember post #24 said : " nearly all of the Venezuelan TV and radio stations are right-wing anti-Chavez propaganda"

[JackRiddler]

126. Thanks for a reasonable response.

No, I don't think state owned should be party owned.

[Judi Lynn]

69. Here's something helpful:

Media Misperceptions
Venezuela: The Spin vs. The Truth

~snip~
Spin: Chávez is clamping down on freedom of the press.

The Truth: Venezuela continues to have strong opposition broadcast and print media, as any casual visitor to Venezuela can plainly see. The supposed deterioration of freedom of the press under the Chávez government is a favorite theme of U.S. media coverage of Venezuela, and it is regarding this topic that the gap between reality and media claims is usually at its widest. Anyone who travels to Venezuela will easily find numerous front-page criticisms and broadcast denunciations of the Chávez government that go well beyond the sort of attacks on Obama that appear in the U.S. press. Yet that Chávez is attempting to “eliminate independent media”<1> by “muzzling the press”<2> are favorite themes for U.S. editorial pages, with news articles chiming in that “Chavez’s administration is moving to tighten its grip over Venezuela’s media industry.”<3> U.S. media coverage has often also distorted the facts regarding the Venezuelan government’s conflicts with opposition media outlets, some of which have openly supported undemocratic and extra-constitutional means to undermine or even overthrow the government.

Claims that Chávez is an enemy of press freedom reached a peak in 2007 when the Venezuelan government chose not to renew the broadcast license of opposition TV station RCTV. U.S. media and commentators claimed that RCTV was being “censored”<4> and “shut down”<5>, but in reality, RCTV continued to broadcast via cable and Internet with large audience numbers, and maintaining its anti-Chávez line. While opponents of the government criticized the decision to allow RCTV’s license to expire, it is important to note that a TV station that had done even some of the things that RCTV had done would never obtain a broadcast license in the United States or any European democracy. Most importantly – as was admitted in news articles on the controversy,<6> RCTV openly supported the 2002 coup against Chávez by encouraging people to participate in opposition protests, by reporting the false information that Chávez had resigned,<7> and then, when Chávez returned to power, by airing Disney cartoons rather than report this news.<8> RCTV head Marcel Granier met with coup president Pedro Carmona during the coup, as Carmona enlisted the media’s help in attempting to ensure the coup’s success.<9> RCTV also actively promoted the oil strike (2002-2003) that attempted to topple the government, and other, legal political and electoral campaigns.

Even some observers who harshly criticized the government’s decision on RCTV admitted that the issue was much more complicated, and that RCTV was not automatically entitled to its license. “Broadcasting companies in any country in the world, especially in democratic countries, are not entitled to renewal of their licenses,” José Miguel Vivanco of Human Rights Watch explained. “The lack of renewal of the contract, per se, is not a free speech issue. Just per se.”<10>

In the years since the RCTV decision, instead of correcting its hyperbolic claims of Venezuelan censorship, U.S. media outlets have continued the theme. The new focus is on broadcaster Globovisión, routinely described as “Venezuela’s only remaining opposition TV television station on the open airwaves.”<11> This characterization is simply false, as numerous local TV stations in Venezuela have an opposition political line (and national broadcasters such as Televen continue to run programs with a strong opposition slant). The great majority of Venezuelan media continues to be privately owned, and the opposition dominates the newspaper industry as well. As Human Rights Watch – a frequent critic of freedom of the press in Venezuela – noted in a 2008 report, “the balance of forces in the print media has not changed significantly”, with the majority of Venezuelan newspapers continuing to be privately-owned and two of the three top newspapers maintaining an opposition political line (the third is neutral).<12>
U.S. press reports also frequently describe a shift among some opposition media, such as TV station Venevisión, towards being less critical of the government.<13> While U.S. media often suggests that this could be out of fear of “censorship,” Venezuela-analyst Greg Wilpert offers another theory: “I think some of the TV stations have slightly moderated not because of intimidation, but because they were losing audience share. Over half of the population is supportive of Chávez. They’ve reduced the number of anti-Chávez programs that they used to have. But those that continue to exist are just as anti-Chávez as they were before.”<14>

http://southoftheborderdoc.com/spin-vs-the-truth/

[ChangoLoa]

71. So what's the point? RCTV was closed... precisely.

"..and national broadcasters such as Televen continue to run programs with a strong opposition slant"

Yeah right, but they also have a show by Chavez's former vice-president, defense and foreign affairs minister... and PSUV's top dog, J. V. Rangel. Guess who was the first guest of "Jose Vicente Hoy" when he retired from the vice-presidency.... El Comandante himself :)

Right wing anti-Chavez TV say you?

[joshcryer]

93. RCTV did the split screen thing (I think Venevisión did, too). Venevisión *met with the coupsters.*

And RCTV loses their license? Fact is that RCTV refused to change their programming. Venevisión and Televen had no problem doing so. Anyone who believes the "myths" posted by Lynn are not following the facts as they really happened. Pure propaganda.

[JackRiddler]

So I guess what you're saying is that Venevision should have also lost their license?

Nice defense of the pro-oligarch corporate media.

[joshcryer]

135. Yes, for consistency, Venevisión should've lost the license. But it's owned by a *billionire*...

...whose happy to tow Chavez's party line. It shows 1) that the "RCTV are CIA-style coupsters and you must get rid of them" argument is utterly false and bullshit because if they were going after CIA-style coup attempters they would've got rid of at least three stations. And 2) it shows that Chavez is willing to be paid off by a billionaire.

[Zorro]

44. And until he returns to Caracas

Venezuela will continue to be presided over from Havana.

How fitting.

[Citizen Worker]

36. No, not a wash actually. We have "massive paid for propaganda campaigns" and between campaign

seasons we have a mere six mega corporations that control nearly everything we see, hear and read. Thus, I would argue, that it is far worse here than in Venezuela. The Sunday news talk shows for example, had eleven guests slated to appear, seven of which are republicans.

[Doctor_J]

38. shhh...don't tell them that

Hugo winning elections in Venezuela...evil. Limpballs and Fox running US...fair. Repeat the Hate Radio/teabag mantra until you believe it

[joshcryer]

41. Hugo is down in polls from his all time highs, he loses 10 points a year or something like that.

He's practically tied for 2012. If he comes back and his health is even remotely in question he won't win in 2012.

[joshcryer]

136. BTW, the entire thread above is to detract from the fact that Chavez is on TV twice a day.

Ranting about whatever the days Emmanuel Goldstein is. Basically Venezuela's Two Minutes Hate. Only Chavez can't keep his mouth shut for only two minutes, unfortunately.

[Doctor_J]

35. And they own every last outlet of mass media

[Doctor_J]

33. No, but sitting US legislators have

[Archae]

2. Translation:

"If we lose elections, we'll shoot those who won."

[The Big Vetolski]

3. Chavez has never lost an election. And all of them have been free. nt

[joshcryer]

5. He did lead a failed coup before that, though.

So he and his compatriots are not opposed to violence to meet their ends, clearly.

[Bacchus39]

12. he lost the 2007 referendum but simply held another one a year later n/t

s

[sabrina 1]

108. Do you have something to back that up with?

It sounds like pure hyperbole. Chavez has won every election in some of the cleanest elections anywhere, according to President Carter and other election monitors. Or is Carter now evil among progressives in this country? :eyes:

[joshcryer]

4. The Trotskyites would defend this barbarism.

Chavez built up his paramilitary forces for this very eventuality.

The best outcome for Venezuela is to oust Chavez through the ballot box, his death could spell trouble if his family is really throwing these ideas out there.

[sabrina 1]

112. Excelpt it was not said. Does it bother you at all

that there has been an actual translation, not the fake AP translation, of what he said while you continue to spread the false report?

See post #56 for the actual words of Chavez' brother.

The millions spent by the West to discredit Chavez with lies and distortions will only work when people refuse to do their own research. Especially since this campaign has been verified in Wikileaks revelations, not that we needed that.

Those words were not spoken so I'm sure you will retract your own comments spreading them throughout this thread.

[ChangoLoa]

117. It was said with those exact words. Post #56 is a mistake. nt

[47of74]

6. The worshippers of Saint Hugo will be showing up in 5...4...3...2...

[RKP5637]

14. Prayer and arms, sounds familiar. n/t

[MellowDem]

27. Brother of a President for life...

why does that sound so familiar?

[hughee99]

47. "We believe in the democratic process...

as long as the votes turn out in our favor."

[eridani]

48. The ballot has done far more for the left in Latin America over the last 20 years

Armed struggle should be about defending electoral gains.

[cstanleytech]

55. First I dont care for chavez to much especially since he pushed for

the law to be changed so he could serve more terms but that aside its entirely possible that what his brother said is being taken out of context.

[rabs]

56. Adán Chávez: did NOT utter the word "armed."

It is the AP reporter who inserted "armed struggle" into the story.

Here is the exact quote;

"Nuestro proceso bolivariano se inició en esta etapa bicentenaria por la vía electoral y queremos seguir por allí, por una vía pacífica que permita efectivamente construir el socialismo bolivariano, pero conscientes de los peligros que nos acechan, seguros de que el enemigo no descansa. No podemos olvidar otros métodos de lucha”, añadió el también gobernador barinés.

My translation:

"Our bolivarian process began in this bicentenary period through the electoral route and we want to continue to follow it, by a peaceful route that will effectively permit (us) to build bolivarian socialism, but aware of the dangers that threaten us, certain that the enemy does not rest. We cannot forget other methods of struggle," added the governor of Barinas (state).


-----------------

So there it is, the AP spinning "armed" struggle when Adán Chávez did not use that word.

(edit typo)

[cstanleytech]

57. Hey yell at the AP not me.

I didnt even claim he said that and in fact my post was in defense for him.

[rabs]

58. Not yelling at you

Was just confirming your observation that his remarks may have been taken out of context.

Okay?

[Bacchus39]

75. yes, he did say armed struggle. you have to continue reading past the 4th paragraph

http://www.eluniversal.com/2011/06/27/adan-chavez-llama-al-psuv-a-no-olvidar-la-lucha-armada.shtml

Citando al Ché Guevara, el Mandatario regional manifestó: "sería imperdonable limitarse tan solo a lo electoral y no ver los otros métodos de lucha, incluso la lucha armada para obtener el poder, que es el instrumento indispensable para aplicar y desarrollar el programa revolucionario".

[cstanleytech]

80. K

[joshcryer]

59. That's the *written* essay. Do you have a link to video where he *said* that verbatim?

You are quoting what he wrote for publication, not what he said.

The fact that the refers to Che in both the http://www.aporrea.org/ideologia/a125714.html">written article and the AP article it's clear to me that they are distinct instances. And either way the written article implies the same thing, but what the AP reported may be what he said. Unless you can provide evidence that he didn't verbally deviate from the text, then I will chose to believe the AP over some forum goer trying to misrepresent the facts.

I think I'm likely on your ignore but others here do not have me ignored and they'd be wise to heed this distinction.

[Judi Lynn]

61. Good lord almighty. That's quite a spin Cristopher Toothaker gave that story, isn't it?

AP's so good at that.

And look how much fun a few people have had with that whopper, too.

Delighted to learn you found the actual quote, rabs. This makes my day, no doubt about it.

THANK EEEEEYOUUUUUUU. :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Oh, ha ha ha. :hi: Figures.

[joshcryer]

62. Do you have evidence the written article is what was spoken verbatim?

The AP reports that he said differently. The written article implies the same logic, in fact, given the need to "control the militant parts of the party."

[snooper2]

99. And post 75 shows why you shouldn't believe everything you read on the intertubes

even though it is what you "want" to believe is true

[Judi Lynn]

63. There's something I forgot to add:

Touchdown!

http://archive.profootballtalk.com.nyud.net:8090/SBXX.jpg

Kaboomie.

[joshcryer]

65. Maybe you should watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vInckBn5_o

Celebrating too soon, I suspect.

[Bacchus39]

74. after further review (meaning continue reading the article)

Quoting Latin American revolutionary icon Ernesto "Che" Guevara, the president's brother added: "It would be inexcusable to limit ourselves to only the electoral and not see other forms of struggle, including the armed struggle."

Citando al Ché Guevara, el Mandatario regional manifestó: "sería imperdonable limitarse tan solo a lo electoral y no ver los otros métodos de lucha, incluso la lucha armada para obtener el poder, que es el instrumento indispensable para aplicar y desarrollar el programa revolucionario".

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110627/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_venezuela_chavez_21

http://www.eluniversal.com/2011/06/27/adan-chavez-llama-al-psuv-a-no-olvidar-la-lucha-armada.shtml

[joshcryer]

64. I found the video, you are outright wrong. I see what you were trying to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vInckBn5_o

The AP article does not say he said "armed struggle," they quote him quoting Che talking about armed struggle, therefore the article is correct.

[Bacchus39]

73. yes, he did

Citando al Ché Guevara, el Mandatario regional manifestó: "sería imperdonable limitarse tan solo a lo electoral y no ver los otros métodos de lucha, incluso la lucha armada para obtener el poder, que es el instrumento indispensable para aplicar y desarrollar el programa revolucionario".

http://www.eluniversal.com/2011/06/27/adan-chavez-llama-al-psuv-a-no-olvidar-la-lucha-armada.shtml

[CJvR]

79. Well other routes...

...than the peaceful one - that would be the violent one. Would it not?
Now if the Chavez goverment had had a sterling democratic record a remark likt this would hardly be worth any attention. But the Chavez regime do not have such a record. How much democracy remains in Venezuela will be tested once Chavez loses an election.

[cstanleytech]

81. Thats even assuming that said election in the future is not rigged

which is a problem we have here as well.

[CJvR]

83. Well...

...obviously they are rigged. But as Amadjihadii showed in Iran it is possible to lose even a rigged election.

[EFerrari]

95. You have no idea what you're talking about.

Venezuela's elections are monitored and audited. Unlike your own.

[joshcryer]

96. It's easy to pass audits and monitors when you forbid candidates from being on the rolls...

...over trumped up false corruption charges.

[CJvR]

100. Not to mention...

...redrawing districts to deliver the determined outcome.

[CJvR]

102. I assure you...

...the Swedish elections are quite fair, although a bit boring.

[joshcryer]

91. If you count Katherine-Harris style removing candidates from being voted on thing, yeah.

Completely rigged.

I didn't weep last week or so when the guy who helped rig those election died.

[EFerrari]

94. Innuendo and smear, that's pretty much what you have.

Pathetic.

[ChangoLoa]

115. He DID use that exact word

“It would be inexcusable to limit ourselves to only the electoral and not see other forms of struggle, including the armed struggle"


I think your source voluntarily excluded that part. May I ask what is your source?

[SkyDaddy7]

66. Sounds like Chavez might be...

on his way out or already gone.

[Judi Lynn]

67. Here are the last 4 paragraphs from the Miami Herald's Sunday offering on this material:

~snip~

“A search for a successor to Chávez would significantly scramble the country’s politics,” Shifter said. “A fierce power struggle within Chavismo would almost certainly ensue.”

Infighting also would likely break out within Venezuela’s loosely knit opposition, which plans to hold a primary to pick a presidential candidate for next year’s election.

“The opposition would also be thrown off balance,” Shifter said. “Their single-minded focus on Chávez has kept them more united in recent years.”

The president, a former paratroop commander, led an unsuccessful attempt to overthrow an earlier government in 1992. But he has repeatedly beaten his adversaries in elections since taking office in 1999 and he has long insisted that he is an authentic democrat who rules out violence as a means of holding onto power.

Despite numerous domestic problems ranging from soaring inflation to widespread crime, Chávez remains Venezuela’s most popular politician and he has vowed to win re-election next year.

Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/06/26/2286078_p2/chavezs-brother-talks-of-armed.html#ixzz1QTFcsIbP

[ChangoLoa]

70. Maybe the PSUV paramilitaries will finally become useful

[Judi Lynn]

72. Would they mow down protesters in the street like Carlos Andres Perez' military? (Graphic images.)

http://www.aporrea.org.nyud.net:8090/imagenes/2008/02/caracazo3.jpg http://3.bp.blogspot.com.nyud.net:8090/_0F6YqUcqueU/SaYeRJySrMI/AAAAAAAAAFs/qOvu6W6uo4w/s400/Caracazo-2.gif

http://2.bp.blogspot.com.nyud.net:8090/_0XgI2fqHXjw/TRm9QE5q_BI/AAAAAAAABMw/DL_U4E0pl_0/s320/Caracazo.jpg http://farm5.static.flickr.com.nyud.net:8090/4055/4385529544_0d43ea0fe7.jpg

http://beta.pimba.com.nyud.net:8090/content/eventos/d961e9f236177d65d21100592edb0769.jpg

[spanza]

77. Maybe they would. So what's your point?

If Perez did it, Chavez can do it again?

[Judi Lynn]

78. For DU'ers who haven't taken time to read about Chavez' coup,

from Wikipedia, the massacre, El Caracazo, ordered by Carlos Andres Perez:

Caracazo

~snip~
Measures taken by Pérez included privatizing state companies, tax reform, reducing customs duties, and diminishing the role of the state in the economy. He also took measures to decentralize and modernize the Venezuelan political system by instituting the direct election of state governors (previously appointed by the President). But the most controversial part of this economic package was the elimination of the gas subsidies, which had long maintained domestic petrol prices far beneath their international levels (and indeed beneath the production costs of gasoline). Upon the elimination of the subsidy, petrol prices rose by as much 100%, and subsequently, the costs of public transportation rose by 30%.

Protests and rioting
The protests and rioting began in Guarenas (a town in Miranda State, some 30 km east of Caracas) on the morning of 27 February 1989,<3> due to a steep increase in transportation costs to Caracas. They quickly spread to the capital and other towns across the country. By the afternoon, there were disturbances in almost all districts of Caracas, with shops shut and public transport not running. In the days that followed there was widespread international media coverage of the looting and destruction.

Overwhelmed by the looting, the government declared a state of emergency, put the city under martial law and restored order albeit with the use of force. Some people used firearms for self-defence, to attack other civilians and/or to attack the military, but the number of dead soldiers and police came nowhere near the number of civilian deaths. The repression was particularly harsh in the cerros — the poor neighbourhoods of the capital. The initial official pronouncements said 276 people had died.<3> Many estimates put the number above 2000.<4>

On 28 February President Carlos Andrés Pérez suspended a number of articles of the Constitution, including Article 60 (right to individual liberty and security); Article 62 (inviolability of the home); Article 66 (freedom of expression); Article 71 (right to gather publicly and privately) and Article 115 (right to peaceful protest).<4> These rights were only completely restored on 22 March, and in the interim, there was no official decree or resolution defining how government authority would be exercised in the absence of these constitutional rights.<4>

More:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caracazo

~ ~ ~Wikipedia, again:

1992 Venezuelan coup d'état attempts

~snip~
Coup unfolds
After an extended period of popular dissatisfaction and economic decline under the neoliberal administration of Carlos Andrés Pérez,<1> Chávez made extensive preparations for a military-civilian coup d'état.<3> Initially planned for December, Chávez delayed the MBR-200 coup until the early twilight hours of 4 February 1992. On that date, five army units under Chávez's command barreled into urban Caracas with the mission of assaulting and overwhelming key military and communications installations throughout the city, including the Miraflores presidential palace, the defense ministry, La Carlota military airport, and the Military Museum. Chávez's ultimate goal was to intercept and take custody of Pérez before he returned to Miraflores from an overseas trip.

Chávez held the loyalty of some 10% of Venezuela's military forces;<4> still, numerous betrayals, defections, errors, and other unforeseen circumstances soon left Chávez and a small group of other rebels completely cut off in the Historical Museum, without any means of conveying orders to their network of spies and collaborators spread throughout Venezuela.<5> Worse, Chávez's allies were unable to broadcast their prerecorded tapes on the national airwaves in which Chávez planned to issue a general call for a mass civilian uprising against Pérez. As the coup unfolded, Pérez eluded capture, and fourteen soldiers were killed, and 50 soldiers and some 80 civilians injured, in the ensuing violence.<6> Nevertheless, rebel forces in other parts of Venezuela made swift advances and were ultimately able to take control of such large cities as Valencia, Maracaibo, and Maracay with the help of spontaneous civilian aid. Chávez's forces, however, had failed to take Caracas as he remained inside the Military Museum.<7>

Chávez soon gave himself up to the government. He was then allowed to appear on national television to call for all remaining rebel detachments in Venezuela to cease hostilities. When he did so, Chávez famously quipped on national television that he had only failed "por ahora"—"for now".<8>

"Comrades: unfortunately, for the moment, the objectives that we had set for ourselves have not been achieved in the capital. That's to say that those of us here in Caracas have not been able to seize power. Where you are, you have performed well, but now is the time for a rethink; new possibilities will arise again, and the country will be able to move definitively towards a better future."<8>

Chávez was immediately catapulted into the national spotlight, with many poor Venezuelans seeing him as a figure who had stood up against government corruption and kleptocracy.<8><9> Afterwards, Chávez was sent to Yare prison; meanwhile, Pérez, the coup's intended target, was impeached a year later.

More:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Venezuelan_coup_d'%C3%A9tat_attempts

[fascisthunter]

104. notice how this post is ignored

THIS is why debating with these folks is a lost cause. It's obvious their objective is to make this man look as bad as possible.

[bitchkitty]

128. They can't really find much to make him look bad.

They have twist things out of context and when that fails, they'll outright lie. It's disgusting, really. True haters of freedom.

[Judi Lynn]

131. It's an education watching them throw themselves on this topic day after day.

I used to see the same kind of obsession at the old CNN US/Cuba relations message board, heavily infested by Miami Cuban gusano "exile" loonytunes. Same foaming-at-the-mouth, make-up-your-own-facts, complete dismissal of the truth, and raging hatred crappola we are free to see transferred from Cuba to Hugo Chavez, and also were privileged to see directed at President Zelaya, with enough left over to extend to Rafael Correa, and occasionally to Evo Morales.

So unexpected seeing this from "Democrats," isn't it? Hmmm.

[fascisthunter]

140. Yes it is...

and I question whether they really are democrats if they are, our tent needs to shrink.

[sufrommich]

82. In other words "we respect the will of the people,as long as

they vote the way we want them to".

[UTUSN]

84. What, only 11 Recs when finally a hugh truth is unmasked?!1 n/t

[UTUSN]

90. I see that a thread with 2000+ views only has 11 Recs. Could it be *propaganda*?!1 n/t

[chrisa]

85. As someone who dislikes Chavez and thinks he does not care in the least bit about freedom,

I also hate stories about Chavez that suddenly say, "someone said this!" that give off a hit-piece vibe, or suddenly invent quotes that Chavez supposedly said.

[bemildred]

98. "All options are on the table!" nt

[fascisthunter]

103. another dur hit piece...

pathetic as usual. Purveyors of "dur" should realize they are making people very suspicious here. Too many times, too mnay lies...