Got an opinion of the Venezuela government? Better not tweet it...

[Dreamer Tatum]

Yay, freedom!



Hugo Chavez seems to like Twitter as a mouthpiece for power. Since joining the service last April, he's sent 522 messages, sometimes dozens a day, all apparently from his BlackBerry.

But he's not such a fan of uncensored microblogging from the masses. Last week two Venezuelans, a 35-year old woman and a 41-year old man, were charged with making statements on Twitter critical of Venezuela's banking system and face up to 11 years in prison, according to Reporters Without Borders. Fifteen more Internet users may face similar charges in the coming days.

The two defendants are accused of violating a 2001 law prohibiting spreading false rumors about or attempting to destabilize the nation's banks, a loaded topic in the midst of wider financial troubles in the country. “Ladies and Gentlemen, don’t say you weren’t warned... Pull out today... I’m telling you, there are just a few days left," Luis Acosta Oxford wrote late last month, for instance.

But the threat of a decade of imprisonment for 140 characters of investment advice goes beyond any financial fears, says Lucie Morillon, head of the Internet desk at Reporters Without Borders (RSF). "We see this arrest and the fact that these individuals face 11 years in jail as not just an unfortunate incident, but a way to intimidate other users who would use Twitter as a platform to criticize the government and its decisions"


_________


Chavez apologists assail the messenger in 3...2...1...

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

1. Can we "tweet" popcorn?

:popcorn:

[leftstreet]

2. Chavez never loved DU to begin with!

:cry:

:popcorn:

[Dreamer Tatum]

3. DU would be illegal in Venezuela nt

[leftstreet]

4. LOL You've never been to South America, have you

:rofl:

[Dreamer Tatum]

5. I've been a few times, on Non Sequitur Airlines. I see you've flown recently. nt

[EFerrari]

68. "DU would be illegal in Venezuela".

Duzy.

[HughMoran]

157. lol

[Robb]

6. I'd like to see a Venn diagram

...of those who despise Chavez and those who despise Twitter. :D

[Wilms]

7. And it ain't as if these guys don't have an agenda.

:eyes:

-on edit-

RSF sounds so benign. Until you DIG.

Do you know Otto...?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporters_Without_Borders#Otto_Reich

[Dreamer Tatum]

8. What's Reporters Without Borders' agenda, then?

Are you saying the story is false, or are you pouting that it came to light?

[Wilms]

10. Check my edit.

See?

[Dreamer Tatum]

12. I see you're not debating the veracity of the story. Do YOU see? nt

[Wilms]

13. I'm sure they were busted for yelling fire in a theater.

And I'm aware of the agenda of Forbes and RSF and Otto.

[Dreamer Tatum]

14. So two people tweeting can take down a mighty paragon of socialism?

:rofl:

Yeah, better throw away the key.

[Wilms]

15. What do you make of Otto and his ties to the School of the Americas? n/t

[Dreamer Tatum]

24. Did Otto do the tweeting? If not, who gives a shit? nt

[EFerrari]

28. You have to admire the right's infrastructure.

They have people willing to tweet false rumors, a right wing fake rights group to object and a right wing magazine to "report" it in!

[Dreamer Tatum]

30. I admire Chavez' infrastructure more.

He has people like you to LOL away any semblance of rights and individual freedoms.

[EFerrari]

34. And I'm still waiting for that bloodbath you promised me three years ago.

:hi:

[EstimatedProphet]

61. Not to nitpick, but they do have exactly that in the US

In fact, that's the right's MO.

[EFerrari]

63. Yessir! And if you look long and hard enough

the same agents attack Obama in exactly the same way.

That's why I'm always a little baffled when the right wing junk against leaders in other countries gets immediate cred when the same douchebags are attacked when they pull that stuff on our president.

[EstimatedProphet]

69. Agreed.

[Dr.Phool]

16. Wasn't dear old Otto hanging around Honduras during the coup?

He has a habit of turning up in strange places.

I wonder if he's in Costa Rica right now.

[Wilms]

18. He may well be.

With the left leanings of LA of late, he must have quite a full plate.

[EFerrari]

22. You know, that's an interesting thought.

He was in Honduras when he wasn't lying his ass off before Congress.

[Catherina]

9. Good for Venezuelan Law. I applaud this. n/t

[blondeatlast]

11. Wow, if that law applied in the US DU would be toast and we'd all be doing time.

I've fallen for many things that turned out to be just "false rumors" here.

[Catherina]

19. I know of no one on DU who spreads false rumors to destabilize our nation's banks

Some things aren't funny, like yelling fire in a theater because you want people to think the place is unsafe. There are laws in this country too. Try causing panic by saying you have a bomb in your bag when you check in at a US airport and see what happens to you.

The SEC has strict, enforced, laws that state that spreading false rumors for gain is a crime. Many countries have laws to prosecute people who spread false rumors that damage the public good. This is no different.

These little witter rumors the US and its allies are using to destablize places like Iran and Venezuela aren't fooling anyone.

[EFerrari]

23. Exactly.

[dionysus]

33. people post bullshit rumours designed to destabalize the administration all day here.

:shrug:

[Cerridwen]

82. And when they got out of hand, the admin of DU had to deal with the SS.

Were you here during that time? Skinner put up a big post about it and everything; they even got a lawyer.

[dionysus]

103. i've been here since 2001, but amazingly i don't recall that!

[Cerridwen]

111. October, 2006

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2487403&mesg_id=2487403">We think you should be aware that the Secret Service contacted us today.

[Name removed]

169. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jdp349]

49. People post stupid shit here all fucking day

Let's analyze " yelling fire in a theater because you want people to think the place is unsafe". What you have to prove here is intent. You see if I yell fire in a movie theater because I'm convinced I see smoke or something indicative of a fire yelling fire might not be such a bad idea. At the time of the action if my intent was to warn of what I believed to of a fire then I have done no wrong. You have to prove my malicious intent to prosecute me.

Now back to my subject line, all sorts of ridiculous hyperbole and insane ideas barely grounded in reality are posted here all day long. I have no doubt that the vast majority of people that post such things are 100% convinced of that what they are saying is the truth in their minds.

It is not a crime to be wrong and it is not a crime to be ignorant and make arguments and claims due to this ignorance. More so it is not a crime to be stubborn and refuse to change your mind no matter how much evidence is presented contrary to your argument.

You must prove that the defendant KNOWINGLY disseminated false information with malicious intent which is rather difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

[EFerrari]

57. And that's what a trial is for, right?

It's not a crime to be stubborn or ignorant but it may well be a crime to conspire to start a run on a bank with a few of your right wing co-conspirators in order to destabilize the economy.

[jdp349]

89. It depends on whether they a case or not

If they actually have a compelling case then yes, but the article makes no mention of that. Otherwise they are just illegitimately harassing people through legal channels to get them to shut the fuck up.

According to the article

" “After initiating proceedings against the news and opinion website Noticiero Digital for alleged disinformation, the authorities are now targeting ordinary Internet users whose only crime is to express views on Twitter,” Reporters Without Borders said."

There was no mention of a widespread right wing conspiracy at in the article provided. Unless you have compelling reason to believe that Reporters Without Borders is on this too I'd suspect that this is Chavez's government expanding its reach and solidifying its regime by taking control of the nations media outlets through questionable means to destroy the possibility of the emergence of any opposition movement.

[EFerrari]

94. You might want to at least skim this thread.

Forbes will not give you all the available information because they have consistently sides against not only the Chavez government but against democracy in Venezuela.

[jdp349]

110. That's why I read the article from Reporters without Borders too

http://en.rsf.org/venezuela-twitter-users-facing-11-year-jail-12-07-2010,37927.html

"Former Vice-President José Vicente Rangel yesterday accused some Twitter users in Venezuela of spending all their time spreading rumours. Speaking on television on 13 March, President Chávez said: “The Internet cannot be a completely free space where anything is said and anything is done. No, each country must impose its own rules.”

A proposed organic law on telecommunications, information technology and postal services that has been submitted to parliament provides for the blocking of websites and the creation of a single point of entry for all Internet traffic, which would facilitate control and surveillance."

Again this just seems like these people have stupidly let themselves become pawns in what reasonably appears part of Chavez's strategy to control the flow of information within Venezuela, what ends he is pursuing with this strategy is a matter of speculation and ultimately I don't know. In general I make it a rule to be suspicious of any power grab.

[EFerrari]

171. Reporters Without Borders is not a neutral organization of journalists.

It's more like a right wing front group who purposely took a name that calls to mind Doctors Without Borders.

[jdp349]

174. ah a somewhat unexpected twist indeed

it would appear you are right. They've apparently even taken funds from a reasonably well known CIA front group.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7274

[Hassin Bin Sober]

108. Our own Constitution forbids the questioning "validity of the public debt of the United States"

Fourteenth Amendment

4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

[LTX]

122. Oh for crying out loud:

Section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment isn't a curb on free speech or a prohibition against citizens commenting on, questioning, or generally griping about U.S. debt. Its purpose was to prohibit payment of any debt owed to the defunct Confederate States of America, and to ban any payment to former slaveholders as compensation for loss of slaves. It never has been, and cannot be, invoked as the basis for jailing someone who makes a comment about the liquidity of government debt instruments or banks.

[EFerrari]

131. Making a comment is not the same as incitement. For crying out loud, ditto, etc.

[LTX]

136. Huh?

Are you suggesting that section 4 of the 14th amendment actually does create criminal penalties against citizens for saying the U.S. debt is invalid (whether by comment or screaming rant)? Please, point to some precedent for that belief. And what in the living hell was "inciting" about the tweet at issue in the o/p? The same thing is said ad nauseum in the U.S. on a regular basis by the conservative opinion-sphere, and right here on DU as well.

[EFerrari]

148. Why don't you knock yourself out and look up "incitement"?

[Hosnon]

79. Always remember that someone, somewhere, has to decide what qualifies as such a statement.

That is where the danger is.

[Common Sense Party]

132. Look in the Economics forum. You'll find plenty of false prophets of doom.

[girl gone mad]

156. No one in the economics forum has ever said..

"you have only days to get all off your money out of x-bank because it's completely broke."

Even in the midst of the insolvency crisis, when this statement could have easily applied to at least 2 major banks, I never saw such a post.

Try again.

[sabrina 1]

150. This is just the 'anti-Oil Producing Country that won't give us their

OIL' post of the week. What's strange is how a few progressives are so willing to join in the preparation for yet more of Reagan policies in South America. You'd almost think that the Democratic Party had been invaded by Reaganites!

[EFerrari]

20. There's stuff we can't post here without putting Skinner

in legal jeopardy, isn't there? Threats and stuff?

The reich wing in Ven has used rumor to try to destabilize the country, with the collaboration of the media. Forbes, for example, as a mouthpiece for our owners, has been pretty constant in their attempts to tear Chavez down. Once they accused him of stealing an oil rig, lol, when Ven was in negotiations with some petro vultures and their headline was "can Chavez steal his way to success". That was one of my favorites. :)

[cali]

137. lol. beth. your authoratarian slip is hanging out all over the place.

[sabrina 1]

151. Really, I thought our Authoritarian attempt to unseat a democratically

elected president of an oil producing country was something most progressives were not on board for. But that was then, when we had a Republican President in office.

Chavez, no matter how much the rightwing in this country can't take it, is more popular with the people of his own country than our president is here. He is the choice of the people there. The obsession with that oil producing country is remarkable.

And while we are on our moral high horse, how come we are allies with people like Uribe in Colombia or Karimov in Uzbekistan? No criticism of those two U.S. allies? I keep waiting for the weekly posts about boiling people in oil, or genocide of their own people. Makes a mockery of the pretend outrage at Chavez that we never see such posts here. Speaking of authoritarianism.

[dionysus]

17. jesus christ... how unsurprising. do you wish obama supporters could be locked up for DU posts?

[blondeatlast]

21. What that poster fails to realize is that if the law applied under the Obama administration,

she'd be subject to the same fate as the tweeters.

[Dreamer Tatum]

25. It would take no effort at all to recover hundreds, if not thousands

of "we are SO fucked" posts on DU relating to the US dollar and our financial system.

Under the Bush AND Obama Admins.

And we're as free as birds. Say that in VENEZUELA, however, IN 140 FRICKIN CHARACTERS OR LESS, and you get
JAILED.

That's the point.

[girl gone mad]

158. But this isn't about broad criticism. It was a specific attempt to start a run on a bank.

The same act would be illegal here, too, under most circumstances.

Just one recent example:

SEC Charges Wall Street Short-Seller With Spreading False Rumors

Washington, D.C., April 24, 2008 - The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged Paul S. Berliner, a Wall Street trader formerly associated with Schottenfeld Group LLC, with securities fraud and market manipulation for intentionally spreading false rumors about The Blackstone Group's acquisition of Alliance Data Systems (ADS) while selling ADS short.
Additional Materials

The SEC alleges that five months ago, Berliner disseminated the false rumor through instant messages to numerous individuals, including traders at brokerage firms and hedge funds. The false rumor also was picked up by the media.

"Today's action makes clear that the Commission will act swiftly and decisively against those who would seek to profit by disseminating false information to the marketplace," said Linda Chatman Thomsen, Director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement.

"The story disseminated by Mr. Berliner was a figment of his imagination," said Scott W. Friestad, Associate Director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement. "Conduct like this is particularly insidious because it harms investors by distorting the information they use to make investment decisions."

The SEC's complaint alleges that on Nov. 29, 2007 - approximately six months after Blackstone entered into a definitive acquisition agreement for ADS at $81.75 per share - Berliner fabricated and disseminated a rumor that the acquisition was being renegotiated at $70 per share because of purported troubles in the company's consumer banking division, and the ADS Board was meeting to discuss the revised proposal. The complaint further alleges that around the same time Berliner began disseminating the false rumor to the marketplace, he started selling short ADS securities.

[Catherina]

31. Utterly ridiculous hyperbole. n/t

[dionysus]

32. it's delicious, isn't it?

:D

[EFerrari]

77. It wouldn't hurt for you to go to Forbes and see them attacking Obama

every which way, the same way they attack Chavez. Innuendo, half truth, smear.

:think:

What Obama's Mideast Trip Says About The U.S.

snip

Obama's administration is still in its early days. And America is built on a bedrock of sound ideas and decent national character, which may yet carry the day. But I keep thinking of the clear and admirable American identity summed up in Ronald Reagan's demand during the Cold War: "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall." The Obama version would more likely be: "Let's talk about this wall." I wish I could say that as he wades into the Middle East, that fills me with hope. It does not.

http://www.forbes.com/2009/06/03/barack-obama-egypt-outreach-opinions-columnists-muslim-world.html

[EFerrari]

38. Your comparison is inside out. nt

[Cleita]

26. Every time I see anti-Chavez articles on the

MSM, which we often pick up on DU, I discover that only half the truth has been presented and the other half, the unpublished half, gives you the reason Chavez and the Venezuelan government have acted as they have. I have to assume that it is the same in this case. Chavez has the same forces in his country that are trying to undermine him at every turn just like the Republicans are trying to do in this country to Obama. Since our government's foreign policy, particularly in South America, is framed to favor American interests abroad, it is in their interest to back the elitists in those countries who profit from American policy, in particular the global oil interests who want a finger in Venezuela's pie. The Chavez government makes it very hard for them to do this. So they get their lackeys hitting him with everything they can. Try reading other sources besides right wing economical hit pieces on journals like Forbes to get the WHOLE story. Many South American newspaper articles can be translated. You might find the WHOLE story enlightening.

[Dreamer Tatum]

29. Oh bullshit. We are talking about TWEETING here.

That's the whole point. You can't take down a financial system via Twitter. All you can do is express your opinion, which is apparently illegal in Venezuela if Chavez doesn't like what you tweet.

[Cleita]

39. Like I said if you want to get to the bottom of it, find

out what really happened. I, myself, am tired of debunking all the hit pieces on Chavez and Venezuela that find their way onto DU. The last one, published by the Washington Post was pure yellow, biased journalism at it's best told only half the story of why Chavez had acted as he did. I had to go to Latin American newspapers to get the WHOLE story. If Chavez is doing this, you can be sure his real target is some organization that is trying to undermine his government, and in his case it could result in bloody revolution a concept that North Americans don't get until it happens in their face, which is why he sometimes cracks down hard. I'll betcha you will find out that not every twitter is his problem nor does he care.

[Dreamer Tatum]

50. Again, a few TWEETS are a danger to a socialist paradise like Venezuela? nt

[Cleita]

52. See my post #51. n/t

[Bonobo]

144. The thing is YOUR agenda is so transparent.

When you use a phrase like "socialist paradise" sarcastically in a passive aggressive manner, it greatly weakens your credibility.

[LTX]

167. Enjoying the fruits of free speech at home,

while applauding its truncation in the socialist paradise.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8743460

I wonder what kind of attention an internet chat like this would get in the land of milk and honey?

[LTX]

35. So, um, what is the "whole story"?

What additional and undisclosed facts from other sources make that tweet reasonably punishable by 11 years in jail?

[Cleita]

41. I'm tired of doing everyone's research. Go find out

whom he's targeting and which political, oil funded organization is behind it. I think you will find it enlightening. Also, those same organizations are planting articles in mainstream journals like Forbes for people to read and believe every word. It's time for every American to start questioning every word they hear or read. Look at where propaganda is taking us? This country is beginning to remind me of third world countries I visited after WWII including Venezuela. This is where those global organizations want to take us back to and return Venezuela to that status. Wake up and smell the oil, something that shouldn't be hard these days if you visit the Gulf.

[EFerrari]

37. It's an industry. There are countless reports and now two movies

about this topic.

I myself want to make an illustrated coffee table book out of them. Wouldn't that be fun, Cleita?

[Cleita]

42. It would be, but I think a book even with pictures

would be too hard for some to get it.

[EFerrari]

44. We'd need an editor who could write a good subtitle like

"Best of the Chavez Hit Pieces that Never Happened".

I have a minor in folklore. Maybe it could be done like a collection of urban legends.

Btw, the fake story about the earthquake machine went viral and yesterday I saw that REASON magazine ran with it! That was sort of awesome in its own way.

[leveymg]

45. The structure of social and religious belief systems is hardwired - read Rene Girard

on that. Therefore, the priestly and leadership castes always employ the same memes -- memetic desire (the urge to merge with the victim's identity) and sacrificial instinct (the dubbing ritual of touching the sacrificial lamb as it's being led out of the temple to ritual sacrifice or exile) -- as a means of exerting and channeling social dominance. You see these memes over and over again in buildup to wars and genocide.

In practical effect, this is why Fascism coopts the populist rhetoric of socialism as it seeks to destroys it. The envy that Wall Street, Right-wing pols, and much of the MSM have for Chavez's brand of Bolivarian Populism is palpable. In the same way, there was a love-hate thing going on between Castro and some in the CIA.

[EFerrari]

46. Wars, genocide and qualifying exams.

[leveymg]

47. If you can do the job, you're already qualified in my book.

No LSATs or Bar Exam required to be a caudillo. Credentials are manifestations of Bourgeois insecurity.

[EFerrari]

48. When I worked with my mom, she used to tell me

"these gringos need some paper -- what can we give them". We're not as bad as the Germans or even the Swiss but we're right up there. :)

[leveymg]

58. When Gawd Almighty returns, some petty official will demand to see a green card

before She can start work.

We are naked without our papers.

[leveymg]

27. There are two schools of thought about on-line dissent:

1) It's an effective device for surveillance that makes it easy for governments to monitor and identify potential security threats by sophisticated monitoring, surveillance, political profiling, and relationship mapping systems. That's the approach that's applied by the U.S. and most larger countries, and one of the reasons political blogging is widely tolerated.

2)Blogging is an ineffective device for political organization. It's overall effect is to dissipate real radical opposition activities by useless intra-movement proclamations and in-fighting. Rather than making revolution, activists are blogging. That's a second reason on-line dissent is tolerated and encouraged.

It seems to me, suppression of on-line dissent is counter-productive. Venezuela could learn a thing or two from the FBI, CIA and NSA.

[NashVegas]

36. Why Don't You Tweet "Death to Obama" And See How Fast the Secret Service

Gets to your door?

[Ignis]

112. +1, this is pretty well covered by "yelling fire in a crowded theatre" exceptions.

Free speech isn't absolute in the US, anymore than it is in Venezuela. :shrug:

[tiny elvis]

40. commercial news will warp your mind

[Starbucks Anarchist]

43. No, it was just a "mistranslation."

:sarcasm:

[Cleita]

51. And now for the truth.

The Twitterers were arrested for breaking the law, a law already in existence from 2001, before anyone twittered anything, about spreading lies about the banks. The lawbreakers, Luis Acosta and Carmen Nares, were apprehended by the police after sending tweets that the bank was going to fail. In other words they were trying to start a run on that bank. In an developing economy as fragile as Venezuela, it's understandable.

http://noticias.terra.es/2010/mundo/0709/actualidad/la-policia-venezolana-detiene-a-twitteros-por-difundir-falsedades-sobre-la-banca.aspx

Sorry it's in Spanish, but the above is the gist of what happened. Now we Americans may disagree with a law that criminalizes lies against institutions that could upend a stable economy and stable government but it's not our country and they are doing what works for them. The thing to remember is that the laws are passed by their parliament and Chavez is an elected President, not a dictator.

[Dreamer Tatum]

53. And what precisely qualifies THIS as "the truth," other than it's another viewpoint?

It's the usual strategy of the Chavez sycophant: cry conspiracy until you find a story you like.

[Cleita]

56. Let's deconstruct your Forbes article.

It's pure yellow journalism at it's best. First it says Chavez loves to tweet but other people who tweet get arrested for expressing an opinion. They weren't expressing an opinion. They broke the law. They and others were trying to start a bank run by spreading untrue rumors which your article admits is breaking a law passed in 2001. Chavez had nothing to do with the arrests but weighed in after the fact about breaking laws with electronic media, but the article paints him like he was at the bottom of it. We have laws too that limit our freedom of speech. Ask Cindy Sheehan sometimes about her arrests.

[Dreamer Tatum]

84. Deconstruction? That's a polemic. Not surprised that you can't see the difference. nt.

[EFerrari]

85. So, you can't address Cleita's analysis?

[Dreamer Tatum]

86. It's not analysis. I see no "deconstruction" of any text.

And in any case, you are valiantly defending arresting people BASED ON TWEETS.

That's just stupid.

[EFerrari]

91. That's what I thought. n/t

[Cerridwen]

75. So, you agree that there can be more than one "viewpoint"?

Please see post #62 for an additional viewpoint.

[EFerrari]

55. Interesting. And in 2000, the legislature only had a small majority

so that means this law had to have bi-partisan support to pass.

Thanks, Cleita.

[Hosnon]

81. That's the biggest load of crap I've read all day.

First of all, prove it's a lie (burden is on the state).

Second of all, who seriously thinks a tweet can cause a run on the entire banking system?

[Cleita]

88. That's what a trial will be about...proving it's a lie.

The police chief who arrested them has not only the tweets but hard disks and cell phones that point to a conspiracy to cause a run on the banks. Also, there are fifteen others or a gang who are under suspicion. Too bad I'm too lazy to translate, post and link all the info I dug up mostly because it's a waste of time and energy. A week from now someone will post another misleading article on Venezuela and/or Chavez and it's like nothing had ever been disproved previously. So enjoy basking in ignorance. The same thing has already happened in this country and it's why we are in the fix we are in today, lies and more lies about everything that causes people to adore idiots like Sarah Palin and hang tea bags from their heads.

[Hosnon]

93. Good luck proving that they didn't think the banking system was in trouble when they tweeted.

This law is most likely being used more for political suppression than protecting the banking system (from tweets...)

[Cleita]

95. That's a huge leap of opinion considering the law

was passed by their parliament in 2001 back when the majority party were the conservatives.

[Hosnon]

97. The reason it was passed does not dictate how it is executed.

And considering the fact that tweeting didn't exist at the time of passage, any suspect implementation against tweets is on shaky ground.

[Cleita]

99. Don't let that big stretch of logic boomerang on you. n/t

[Hosnon]

101. Come again? nt.

[U4ikLefty]

152. Yes, but Cell Phones & the Internet existed in 2001.

The ability to communicate en masse (and very quickly) was already in place by 2001.

[EFerrari]

96. That's what every oligarchic felon has claimed

when the government intervened in their crimes. Wha! I'm being politically suppressed! Wha! Forget I don't pay my taxes, rip off working people, try to overturn an election, wha! I'm a political victim!

Yeah, right.

[Hosnon]

98. So political suppression doesn't exist?

Interesting.

[EFerrari]

100. It's only political suppression if you are a right wing perp. Got it?

[Hosnon]

102. Riiight.

:eyes:

[EFerrari]

105. You seem to know very little about Latin America.

When their right wing perps get popped, they scurry up to Washington where they are greeted with open arms by the Republicans. And between them, they do brisk business.

[Hosnon]

107. That has no bearing on whether political suppression exists. nt.

[EFerrari]

130. Oh, of course it does. Because that's what they all claim when they get here.

[Hosnon]

168. I guess I'm not following you. Your argument so far appears to be that because a few, many, or most

unjustifiably cry "political suppression" against the Venezuelan government to cover their crimes that anyone who cries "political suppression" against the Venezuelan government is doing so unjustifiably to cover their crimes.

[EFerrari]

170. Not exactly but I've yet to see anyone but one of these wingers caught

with their hand in the till or their hirelings claim political suppression.

[Warren Stupidity]

153. "First of all, prove it's a lie (burden is on the state)."

They've been arrested, not convicted, and in countries who's legal system descends from the Napoleonic Code, 'burden on the state' and 'presumption of innocence' are not as foundational as they are in our legal system.

[Hosnon]

164. Not sure where you're going here.

I never suggested that a criminal case must be proven by the state before an arrest can be made - the system would grind to a halt.

And can you back up your claim about legal systems based on the Napoleonic Code? Article 9 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen states: "As all persons are held innocent until they shall have been declared guilty, if arrest shall be deemed indispensable, all harshness not essential to the securing of the prisoner's person shall be severely repressed by law."

But that notwithstanding, there are a few legal principles that are prerequisites to a just legal system (in my opinion) (e.g., burden on the state, presumption of innocence, due process).

[Catherina]

90. Thanks. The law about that is very clear in Venezuela Law 448

Art. 448. Any natural or juridical person who spreads fake news or uses other fraudulent methods capable of causing distortions to the national bank system which affect the economic conditions of the country,will be punished with prison, from 9 to 11 years.

[Hosnon]

104. Good lord is that verbatim? What awful drafting.

At a minimum, "intentionally or with reckless disregard" should precede "spreads".

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EFerrari]

59. When you can't argue the issue, the next best thing is to call other posters names.

[Nye Bevan]

64. People jailed for 11 years for twittering? The issue practically argues itself. (nt)

[EFerrari]

66. Right, just like Obama is coming for your guns does.

These people were arrested for breaking the law. No one has thrown them in jail for eleven years.

[Cleita]

70. For one thing, they haven't been sentenced or even

put on trial yet. The law on the books calls for a maximum of 11 years for spreading lies about banks, not for twittering. A judge or jury will determine what is a just sentence. What I'm reading in the Spanish language newspapers is that they probably won't even go to jail but will get a stiff warning and some other type punishment about doing it again. They will be held as examples to other law breakers, not to try something like undermining the economical system again.

[Cerridwen]

72. You would be correct if that were, in fact the issue. The issue

may be something totally different, however. Please see post #62. There may be more to this story than was reported in the OP.

[MyNameGoesHere]

78. Who has been jailed?

Once again you are stating facts that are not true. They are awaiting trial just like in the good old USA. THEY ARE ON PRETRIAL RELEASE.

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/07/12/2079174/venezuelan-prosecutors-2-spread.html

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[EFerrari]

106. I've asked the mods if calling other posters "Chavez monkeys"

is against the new rules

You'd think it would be.

But, we'll have to see.

[Dreamer Tatum]

109. Ah yes, the old, "I'm telling" gambit. nt

[EFerrari]

128. No, I'm just curious. If it's okay to do what you're doing

I might want to do that, too. :)

[Warren Stupidity]

154. Seriously, this is how you debate?

What is wrong with you?

[Name removed]

113. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

116. You guys sure know how to sway people to your side of the argument.

[Bacchus39]

117. no need to sway, if you can't see the problem with someone being imprisoned for tweeting

then there is probably no convincing you.

[Forkboy]

120. Well, carry on and let us know how it works out for you.

:rofl:

[Bacchus39]

124. its somewhat amusing, but not for the two who were arrested for tweeting

I imagine.

Not sure why some governments are so threatened by the internet.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

166. Actually, they were arrested because their tweets were a means of communication in

a criminal conspiracy.

I'm fascinated (but not surprised) that some of the usual Chavez bashers are defending people involved in a criminal conspiracy.

[dionysus]

121. Chavez fans are poopyheads with cooties! (i kid, i kid)

it's funny, the chavez wars are just like the obama wars with the "hero worship" and hyperbolic comparisons. the "haters" become the "cheerleaders" and vice versa.

Obama Wars;
"that bastards to the right of reagan!"

Chavez Wars;
"he's an evil dictator!"

[Hassin Bin Sober]

118. What about people in the US jailed for sending emails? Ever heard of a pump and dump prosecution?

http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201804792


Not to mention the 14th amendment to the US Constitution forbids "questioning the validity of" US debt.

[LTX]

135. Um, those email cases were electronic mail fraud cases.

The thieves defrauded investors out of 20 million bucks. Not even remotely similar to jailing someone for a tweet about the liquidity of government debt. And no, section 4 of the 14th amendment is not a curb on citizens, it was a targeted curb on government. It has nothing whatsoever to do with a citizen's right to say whatever he damn well pleases about whether the U.S. is solvent or whether U.S. debt is valid. In case you hadn't noticed (and I have trouble believing that you actually haven't noticed), the entire conservative opinion-sphere from Beck to Krauthamer to Will to Limbaugh has been writing, not tweets, but lengthy opinion pieces about what a catastrophic condition the U.S. treasury is in.

[Warren Stupidity]

155. Um, the case can be made that this is electronic fraud.

If the intent was in fact to cause a bank failure, how is that not fraud?

[Cleita]

60. Nobody is a bot except the oil company propagandized

bots who try to spread disinformation about Venezuela and other countries in South America. I for one am trying to present the WHOLE truth as I am able to discern from my knowledge of Spanish and South America and the Monroe Doctrine influenced American policy as it is in and about South America, and what I can get through Google. The Chavez hit pieces are usually wrong. That's all.

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MyNameGoesHere]

76. But they haven't been sentenced to death

they are on pre-trial release, and will have a day in court. Wow sounds like the fucking USA to me. But I suppose the Anti-Chavezistas (what kind of word is that?) bots prefer to have people believe that these 2 are busting rocks in the salt mines and will never be heard from again.


The two were detained Thursday in southeastern Ciudad Bolivar. They were ordered to appear in court every 15 days and barred from posting similar online messages, the statement said. It said they could receive from nine to 11 years in prison if convicted.



Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2010/07/12/2079174/venezuelan-prosecutors-2-spread.html#ixzz0taqUriD6

[Catherina]

92. You support the right wing destabilizing economies? Things are becoming clearer now. n/t

[Cerridwen]

62. "Venezuela nabs 2 for trying to 'Twitter' a run on banks"

Venezuela nabs 2 for trying to 'Twitter' a run on banks

CARACAS – Police said Thursday that two people were under arrest for allegedly trying to destabilize Venezuela's banking sector by putting out rumors on Twitter.

The suspects, a man and a woman, could face up to 11 years in jail under the terms of a 2001 law punishing the dissemination of false information or the use of any other fraudulent means to disrupt normal banking practices.

The couple in custody "were using the social networking site Twitter to disseminate false rumors with the purpose of destabilizing the national banking system... and trigger a run on banks," said scientific and technical police chief Wilmer Flores.

Police seized from the suspects a cellular phone that included "the first message" sent on Twitter, as well as two external hard drives and other portable memory devices. However, police did not divulge the exact content of the tweets. link

Venezuela shuts down Twitter rumours

Venezuelan police said on Thursday they arrested two people for spreading false rumors on the micro-blogging site Twitter aimed at destabilizing the Latin American country's banking system.

While Venezuela's big banks are generally seen as structurally sound, a number of takeovers of small failing banks since last year triggered rumors of impending disaster in the sector, worrying savers.

''Anybody who spreads malicious rumors by any means, emails, SMS messages on cellphones, Twitter, Facebook ... or any other means of communication is committing a crime and should answer for it before the competent authorities,'' Wilmer Flores Trosel, head of the CICPC national investigative police unit, said in a statement.

<snip edit for more pertinent info>

Both suspects were picked up in the eastern city of Ciudad Bolivar, CICPC said, following a four-month investigation into the posting of false information about the nation's financial system on Twitter ''with the aim of creating runs on banks.'' link

see <snip> for edit

[Cleita]

65. Yes. That's what happened.

Thanks for posting the additional links. They discredit that Forbes link, written by someone who is a techy and doesn't have much knowledge about Venezuela.

[EFerrari]

67. This is what Forbes always does to stories about Venezuela.

I'm glad you two still have the moral energy to do the spade work because I sure don't. The same result over and over and over was crushingly boring months and months ago.

[Cerridwen]

71. The part that is the most frustrating for me is that those who

question almost any article about one of "our guys" or someone of whom they approve, but will swallow whole anything put out about someone with whom they don't agree or who they don't like.

[EFerrari]

73. We were talking about this, precisely, upthread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8739148&mesg_id=8740435

[Cleita]

80. No surprise since Steve Forbes is a big honcho at

The Heritage Foundation. I thought it was against DU rules to post RW propaganda as factual information.

[EFerrari]

83. Sometimes right wing propaganda is okay.

:shrug:

[LTX]

161. And then there's this analysis --

http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2010/07/12/venezuela-two-people-arrested-for-tweeting-about-banking-rumors/

"It remains unclear how two users with so little influence could be responsible of affecting the economic conditions of the country."

[Name removed]

114. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

119. You agree with the RW media's take on Chavez, but not on Obama.

Why?

[dionysus]

123. actually, i think both sides are exaggerating. Chavez is alright. i think over the years the power

has gone to his head a little bit. he's certainly not a dictator.

to tell you the truth reading this thread is entertaining as hell.

[EFerrari]

127. You have that inside out, too. The same right wing media that attacks Obama

attacks Chavez.

It's not ironic, it's the right wing doing their thing globally.

[dionysus]

133. you're talking about the RW press. I'm laughing at the fact that many people

who deride obama supports here as "cheerleaders", actually cheerlead the hell out of Chavez.

i don't think the guy is all that bad myself, but it's funny when the people saying "Tiger Beat Obama" have their Tiger Beat Chavez thing going on.

[EFerrari]

146. I don't like name calling of any kind.

It's stupid and lazy and it sounds like freepers.

[Bacchus39]

115. unbelievable!! facing 11 years in a Venezuelan prison for a tweet n/t

s

[Hassin Bin Sober]

125. Plenty of people in The US have been convicted for email pump and dump schemes.

I suppose it's only a matter of time before they use Twitter.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=201804792

[Bacchus39]

126. no evidence of that in this case. the Pump and dumpers use email as their means of mass marketing

to attract clients. they actively invest in the companies they want to build up.

no evidence of that in the Venezuelan case. What was it just two years ago the banking system almost collapsed?? would you have rather that be kept under wraps??

[Hassin Bin Sober]

129. Pump and dump doesn't "attract clients"

Perhaps you are thinking of a boiler room scam.

The goal here is to get people to invest in a security you hold a position in. Or to sell a security you hold a short position in - That would be closer to the alleged Venezuela scheme. The benefit here would be political if it was, in fact, a politically motivated act to disrupt the nation's banking system.

Either way, it isn't unheard of for people to be convicted of using new age communication systems such as email, bulletin boards or in this case Twitter, to manipulate stocks or, in this case, debt instruments.

[Doctor_J]

134. Ah, yes. quoting Forbes for anti-Hugo propaganda

Pretty soon, this story will be on Sludge too!!111!!1! Then Fox "News"!!!1!1!ones!! Then it will really be true!!!11!1!

[LTX]

138. So your contenton Is that the entire story is factually untrue?

Just a pure fabrication? No tweets, no criminal charges, and every justification by the Chavez apologists on this thread (like the stuff about "tweeting insolvency in a crowded country") is just unnecessary groveling?

[Doctor_J]

140. Entirely? Probably not.

If someone had tweeted, "I am going to kill Hugo", the headline would be the same, and Forbes would still be a right-wing, anti-democratic rag with the worst interests of the people in mind.

Bizarre that "Dems" would believe anything that comes from Forbes, Big Media, Sludge, Hate Radio, or the NRA. But they do.

[LTX]

142. But of course,

nobody tweeted "I Am going to kill Hugo." And I find it exceedingly strange that you view the opinion actually expressed as equivalent to a death threat. But since you do, I have to assume that you also find an 11 year jail sentence for the "tweeting perp" perfectly acceptable, and would happily acquiesce to a similar draconian curb on your own freedom of speech. My countrymen never cease to amaze.

[EFerrari]

147. Maybe you'd be less amazed if you sought to track shared reality

a little more closely.

No one has been sentenced to anything yet.

[LTX]

162. And "that's what a trial is for," right?

The arrests and charges, hey, nobody is going to be intimidated into silence by that. You have a very curious concept of free speech.

[EFerrari]

172. You're confusing crime with speech. nt

[LTX]

173. And you're condoning the criminalization of speech.

You may want to read this analysis of the situation:

http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2010/07/12/venez... /

"It remains unclear how two users with so little influence could be responsible of affecting the economic conditions of the country."

Looks like a handy hook is being used to preemptively chill the use of twitter. Wouldn't want another situation like the Iran.

[TexasObserver]

139. Chavez proves over and over he's a despot.

Like all petty tyrants, he can't stand anyone criticizing him.

[Nye Bevan]

141. Testing Testing

Just wondering if the new feature where you can't post again in a thread if you had a post deleted is up and running yet. I don't get many of my posts deleted so this is my first opportunity to try....

[Lydia Leftcoast]

143. The message must be controlled--

North Americans MUST believe that Chavez is the worst dictator ever, while the murders of journalists and activists in Colombia are OK because "Colombia is our ally in the War on Drugs."

I wonder if the anti-Chavez shills would be so relentless if Venezuela weren't an oil producer.

Anyway, I've seen this movie before. Maybe some of the Chavez-bashers are too young to remember the fake uproar about anti-Semitism in Nicaragua. Years later, we learned that it was all fiction planted by Otto whats-his-name.

[Bonobo]

145. Sometimes age is a good thing, ne.

When you've seen the same shows replayed over and over, you can just sniff out the bullshit.

[EFerrari]

160. Otto Reich tried to do that to Chavez, too. Iirc, in 2007ish

there was a break in at a temple and it was immediately intimated that the government had done it to terrorize the Jewish community. Of course, it turned out to be someone else, a former employee. But for days, Chavez was demonized. The Heritage Foundation and its outlets were all over it.

[BlueCheese]

149. I'm kind of surprised.

I would have thought our side of the spectrum would be a little more forceful in defending civil liberties. I can't believe anyone could face jail time for tweeting. If that isn't a hallmark of authoritarianism, what is?

[girl gone mad]

159. That's a mischaracterization of the charges.

In Venezuela, it's a crime to spread false rumors with the intent to cause a bank run. Similar laws are enforced in most financially developed countries. 2 were arrested in Hong Kong last year for the same crime.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/hong-kong-regulator-rejects-rumors-that-sparked-run-on-local-bank

While there is no specific Federal law on bank run rumor-mongering, several states do have criminal statutes on the books, and the SEC would likely get involved if the bank was publicly traded. A person spreading false rumors could also be subject to civil penalties.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

165. You could face jail time for tweeting if it was part of a criminal conspiracy,

which this was. Nice try.

[WinkyDink]

163. I don't live in Venezuela. But were I poor, I'd like a champion.