That being said CW- what is so different than the American school system or private schools in the US doing the same thing?

Also - there was NO education for the majority of Venezualen's. None at all. Now they are literate. That would be an improvement- and I would have to see the curiculum to actually say if it is some kind of brainwashing for a cult of personality thing- I doubt that article is, you know, balanced or anything.

IN fact- that entire blog appears to be complete either hyperbole or lies.

Can you oh, perhaps find a better source CW?

Off the top of my head:
- The US president doesn't threaten to throw university presidents in jail.
- The US president didn't name his brother, an ex guerilla fighter, as education minister specifically to teach the Venezuelan Path to Socialism.
- We have a republic, and public universities are enterprises of the states, not the feds.
- Our schools aren't told to teach discredited socialist economic theory, about the State's Great Five Year Plan and such.


Please source the statement "now they are literate" since Chavez. Especially since UNESCO is denying Chavez' ridiculous claims of teaching the childrens to read in a few short years.


Well, no, I can't find a better source for news on higher education than the Chronicle of Higher Education. This is not a "blog;" it is a news article. The Chronicle is an online magazine. Mike Ceaser is a freelance journalist based in Venezuela, whose articles have appeared in BBC and a whole bunch of places.

Here is an AP link from a different author, if it makes you feel better.
You are disputing the fact that Chavez has threatened to nationalize just about everything, including banks?

Hi!

When this discussion was created by Cruisingram, I didn’t want to participate (I rarely do anyways! ) or even read it but my discipline is not that great and eventually my curiosity was bigger than my decision not to read anything of it. Now I want to make some comments.

What I want to say is so long that I decided to divide my comments into at least two posts: the first one, to speak a little bit on what have been told so far in this discussion and the rest of the posts (I hope only one more) to answer at least one of the questions posed by Cruisingram.

I would like to be clear at this point: I find myself (I have been member of Americas Debate since a long time ago, even though I rarely write) in the situation of disagreeing on this issue with members I agree 99% of the time - members like Quarkhead and Cruisingram (when he is not in extremist modus ) and in agreement with members like Ted (No offence intended) who hardly write something I can agree with. This is a crazy World. I’m liberal but I’m also Venezuelan and I’m 99% sure that Chavez is nothing anyone here in Americas Debate would support if they lived in today’s Venezuela.

Whenever possible, thanks to the fact that the people behind this Bolivarian Revolution have become so reckless and fearless in relation to future consequences of their actions, I will use the best source of information that can exist: their actual words put on video either public or secretly. On the other side, since most of the information is obviously in spanish, I makea translation each time I use something in that language.

My comments:





Ok you two- You know, of course, that the Constitution you are praising, which has indeed many good things, was written and approved just in 1999? I assume you do.

Do you also know that this 1999 Constitution, which was the result of the consensus reached from discussions among various sectors of society, will stopped meaning anything if and when the Reforms to 33 articles of it, redacted by Chavez alone (and a small group selected by him), are made?

Have you made yourself the Question: Why does Chavez want to make changes again, after only 7 years of life of a Constitution he called “the best Constitution of the World”? Tell you what: The possible re-election of Chavez is nothing in comparison to the changes he wants to make through the 33 changed articles.

Of course you are aware that many if not most of the people who actually redacted the 1999 document are part of the opposition nowadays? Why do you think they “changed sides”?

For example, Dr. Hernann Escarrá, a recognized Venezuelan Constitutionalist lawyer, writer of the constitution, comes now to my mind since he is, these days, trying very hard to make people understand why it is illegal, a violation of the constitution he helped writing, the changes Chavez wants to pass in a Referendum at the end of the year:

Hermann Escarrá denunció Golpe de Estado Constitucional/ Hernann Escarrá denounced a constitutional coup d’etat:



In my opinion, he is not going to have much success.

And last but not least, are you aware that the 1999 Constitution is the most clearly violated Constitution we have ever had?

Do you know that branches of the government are not independent? (Violation to the constitution)

Do you know that Political discrimination exists? (Violation of the constitution)

Do you know that embezzlement/peculation with the nation’s money is done everyday, publicly, jeeringly? (Violation of the constitution; in fact, part of the changes that Chavez wants so badly to make in the constitution is for this situation not to be illegal anymore)

Some of what I have written I will try to defend later; the rest would be part of other debates, in my opinion.

My point here is: A Constitution, even the “best of the world” means nothing if the government which is supposed to preserve it, doesn’t do so because it is not in its interest.



Uhmm, Quarkhead, Which group do you believe have more characters who are more apt to act violently: the Pro-Chavez people – the so-called “Chavistas” or the opposition?

You should really try someday and find out how many opposition rallies have being attacked by pro-Chavez groups and compare it to how many pro-Chavez rallies have been attacked by the opposition. That would answer you the question.

I can not say that there are systematically planned attacks against people in disagreement with Chavez. There have been though, stories here and there about such things. In any case, the conditions for these theoretical "visits" to happen are given since as early as 2004/2005 and that is enough for people to live in fear that they could happen.

Would you be surprised if I tell you that with only 25 Bolivares – Venezuelan currency (approximately $0.01) you can identify who in your neighbourhood is anti-Chavez? - (I had a ebay-like Site with this offer but it is not there anymore. I guess some Photos of what this Program does will have to do!)

This Maisanta software is something you will never hear about in those "objective" Sites you visit. It is a Database with information that should definitely not be known: Name, Identity number, address, place where you go to vote and your stance in respect to Chavez, among other things; It was originally made illegally public by the Government, especifically, the legislative branch. The software can be also bought in the streets and even downloaded from the Net.

In clear text: it is not even necessary that you speak about Chavez to be in danger to be attacked; the software indicates whoever wants to know, private information of 14000000 people and their political preferences! What do you say? It is not even a question of gangs: The country is very divided, much more than yours was in relation to Bush, and there are “chavistas” who consider every “anti-chavistas” the enemy. And it is no wonder, Chavez and his people are constantly calling enemy/mercenary/oligarchs to everyone who is not with him, I'll give you some examples:

* “Chávez llama a los medios privados 'enemigos de la patria' y amenaza a Globovisión”

Translation: “Chavez called private Media “Enemies of the nation” and threatens Globovision”

* “Así lo reiteró el mandatario nacional Hugo Chávez Frías, en la edición N° 193 de su programa dominical "Aló Presidente"....... hizo retroceder en desbandada a los oligarcas, enemigos del humanismo bolivariano,”

Translation: "And so reiterated President Chavez, in his program “Alo Presidente” Number 193 …….made the oligarchs retreat disorderly, those enemies of the Bolivarian humanism”

* " Presidente Chávez calificó de "mercenarios" a médicos que laboran en el sector privado "

Translation: “President Chavez called “Mercenaries” medical personnel who work in the private sector” (Aló Presidente Nr. 297).

Not to say that there are not non-peaceful self-identified Chavista groups/gangs which are organized and which have publicly declared they would defend Chavez with whatever it takes- Groups like:

Carapaica:



Tupamaros: Group description



Some Bolivarian circles – Not every Bolivarian Circle is formed by thugs like Lina Ron; Have you heard about her?:



As I said, more than actual attacks, what makes us sick is the knowledge that violent groups could indeed begin attacking if they please and the government would not move a finger to help.

You think that I'm exagerating and that the government wouldn't allow attacks on certain citizens?

Take for example this video made 31st. May, UCV (Public University) students wanted to protest because RCTV was closed and one of those gangs, in this case a motorcycle “gang” came to intimidate them. No authority came to help – this situation happens often.

Motorcycle Gang intimidation action

And it brings me to:



Intimidations: There have been! Legal means: Check that too!

It seems you have loved “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised” and repeat many of the things they show there as fact.

There is another documentary-type film (It is actually a film made from a discussion of that documentary, made in one University in Caracas): It is called “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised - the lies - Radiografia de una mentira”.

Have you seen it? Did you know it existed? - I'll tell you why this documentary is less known internationally - The opposition just doesn't count with as much money as Chavez uses to sell and distribute his Propaganda.

If you watch this documentary, specifically at 1:12:07 you'll see how gangs of Chavistas visited RCTV's Installations: They are throwing rocks and trying to enter in the Building. It is a very nice touch to see that one of the Chavistas Majors – Bernal - mixed in the crowds. And this has not been the only attack to the Media or its personnel.

Take this for example:

Brutal aggression to RCTV journalists – five wounded – Notice the broken Camera:

In relation to this incident, during the transmission of “La Hojilla”, a VTV (State TV Station) program that incites violence in the way you seem to believe RCTV did, the attacks on those journalists you just saw were justified in the following way:



What I think is that this guy's subconcious betrayed him - He really believes that we are on war and that journalists should really expect to be attacked!. What do you think?

This program is said to be highly popular among Chavista-folks. It is being paid with our taxes! This is supposed to be a TV station with programs made for all Venezuelans which is something the private stations don’t need to have as policy, after all they are private; but I tell you this: The messages in private stations is more balanced than the one given at VTV; Chavista leaders can and still use the private Media. You don’t see this “courtesy” on the other side.

The sad thing is: Even the Journalists of VTV are attacked by people of the opposition. Violent people are of course everywherem- they should all be punished - but that is the problem when a behaviour is tolerated - There are always imitators.

On the other side, it is known that on those protests that occurred in Abril 2002 that caused Chavez to be thrown from the presidency for one day, Media personnel were specifically aimed with the result of one dead person, called Tortoza and six other that were wounded. The case was of course not investigated and my bet is that it will never be - like it seems to be the rule with our government.



I'm sorry to make you fall from the cloud you are in (not really), but what you said is really naive.

I assume you have never heard of the “Law on Social Responsibility in Radio and Television“ also known as „Ley Mordaza“ / „Gaggling Law?” existent since 2003.

Human rights watch says the following about it:









I don't know if it is unnecessary to say that so far this law is only applicable if your stance is not 100% revolutionary. After all, you don't expect a judge/lawyer/whoever-in-charge-of-applying-the-law, to get in trouble and possibly ruin his/her career if he dares to punish say "la hojilla" program, for example?

But this is not the only "legal" way Chavez exerts control on the Media. Chavez can and do stop the Media (TV/Radio) normal transmissions whenever he wants. There is something called “Cadenas” (which are supposed to be common in Latin America) that in Venezuela - under Article 192 of the Telecommunications Law - allows the government to order all electronic media, private and public the simultaneous broadcasting of free messages by the President himself, the Vice President, the ministers and other institutions including the CNE.

These “cadenas” are a very effective way employed by the government when they don’t want the Media to show something they don’t care for the population to know (like big concentrations coverings, for example – Watch minute 46:51 in “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised - the lies - Radiografia de una mentira”. You can see a “Cadena” that TV stations tried to counter, dividing the TV Screen in half: One for the “Cadena” they were forced to broadcast while the first wounded and dead were beginning to fall in april 2002).

Sometimes I think they do it just because they can – During Baseball games transmissions or the nightly soup-operas – Now you have to wonder, why would they do that? As a punishment?, Noooo! That would be kind of paranoid!

I haven’t counted how many “Cadenas” have there been since Chavez is in power, but this Venezuelan Human rights researcher, Andrés Cañizález, seemed to have done just that (don’t know how he did the counting but I consider the source as valid as those presented by Quarkhead):

Andrés Cañizález says:



And he is not even counting the "cadenas" made by the other institutions!

You also have to consider that they use these “cadenas” to promote themselves, constantly – which is one of the reasons I would have to answer NO to Cruisingram's first question in relation to fairness.

The European Union monitor's team had to say this about the “cadenas” in its last statement during the 2005 election process:







The opposite has been proved? Says who? Nobody can deny that Media and Chavez are not friends and there are very good reasons for the enmity between those two. On my parts, even though our Media has been making a poor job at making a good opposition to Chavez, I’m happy that they at least are there since I believe it is the only thing that is slowing Chavez nowadays, he cannot afford to shown the fraud he is. They don’t let him act as freely as he would want. But to state that 95% of the Media is opposition cannot be more wrong.

When you look at the sources you find that information comes from the same few recurrent sites:

Source 1: The Venezuela-Analysis site – Do the so called “facts” presented by this Site that publishes highly biased articles about Venezuela and is also administered by admirers of everything what Chavez does, count as impartial and objective?

Let’s take for example the case of administrator Chris Carlson (known with the Nick gringoinvenezuela), a well known Chavez-lover in Online Venezuelan political discussions. Here is his Blog - see if you can expect objectivity from him:

Gringo in Venezuela's Blog

Finally, You could also make something else in this Venezuela-Analysis Site, for example: search for “Tascon List” or “Maisanta software” and see what you get --> Nothing! Why would that be? Possibly because it would picture the government of their hero as the fascist-like government it is?

Source 2: The very famous documentary “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised” (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144).

This as Mrs. Pigpen thought, is a propaganda piece - very efficiently distributed around the World.

Watch it if you like, but if you want to make your mind about what’s going on in Venezuela at that time, then you also should watch the other one and make your own conclusions.

And while you are at it and you are in the mood and for your information’s sake, watch this small independent documentary, which I consider very good since it shows nicely how the lines between good and bad are blurred and not so easy to identify. It deals with the taking of private lands that has been happening in Venezuela since the government begun making a policy out of ignoring the law. It is as I said an independent work, the work of only two people I think with low economical resources; In any case, I think it is worth watching it.

Video: Law of the Land (English subtitles)

The rest of the sources: aporrea, rebelion, rethinkvenezuela and coha were either born with the revolution (the first two – it would like reading fox and believing you are getting 100% facts) or are as impartial as the first site – read the articles published there – the English ones anyway, and tell me if you recognize a pattern!)

I wanted to explain why the 95% quote is a misleading number but I reached the number of Quotes allowed. That would be another post in another day

Posting is really hard work!. Sorry for any grammatical Horrors!. Is there not a correction tool?

Greetings

giftzahn

You lay out a very good case for an anti-Chavista stance Giftzahn- thanks for educating us more on this suject!

As you may have guessed from the sarcasm in my first post- the "who knew" angle- I have a great deal of skepticism for anyone that draws too much power to themselves, as being self serving- to me, one of the most universal proofs of this is one thing- can the movement live without the main leader? Would this movement go forward just as strongly without Chavez- is it truly a movement of the majority of Venezuelans, or is it a "cult of personality" based on one man's consolidation of power?

Well, one true indicator is when the leader starts into a morality crusade- as reported below:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/10/...s.ap/index.html

That is another element of the dictator, not the reform minded movement.

Also- Hugo Chavez held up Noam Chomsky's book, as a model for a free democracy- and promptly ignored all the most important elements- namely- the need for freedoms in a constitution that CAN'T be abridged by a demagogue OR the tyranny of the majority.

I had hopes that maybe Chavez did his homework, and wanted to really leave a lasting legacy of a non-corporate kleptocracy with some enduring elements of freedom, both from goverment AND from mega-corps.

It is spiraling already into a cult of personality.

Hi again!

First let me put a link I forgot to give: The Hojilla Video.

Secondly: Thanks Cruisingram – but that was not everything I had to say by far; I think you will know a lot more when I’m done. If I can.

Thirdly, I was just thinking that maybe speaking in this debate about aspects other than Venezuela’s elections processes fairness is not that wrong. After all, Elections processes are affected by many factors, including the general environment the people who vote lives in the whole time not just the month when an election is made. Am I making sense?

Anyways, I’ll finish now what I couldn’t yesterday – I wanted to go a little bit into the 95% Opposition Media figure:

When you analyze the piece, you begin noticing misleading information; let’s see:

COHA:



This is taken on this debate as Fact, but from the TV Stations named:

CMT doesn’t exist; it is now known as Tele-Sur; which is as you may know a private project of Hugo Chavez --- Definitely not opposition Media. Tele-Sur, or better said the government of Venezuela, bought CMT sometime around 2006.

From Wiki:



Notice that the COHA article was written in January 2007, which would mean that CMT was no more at that time!.

Venevision is not known since long ago as an opposition Channel. It had suspended opinion programs like “24 Horas” conducted by Napoleon Bravo and “la Silla Caliente”, conducted by Oscar Yanez, both popular Journalists who used to make critics to Chavez and his Government. Notice that one of those, Napoleon Bravo, was a Chavez’s supporter during the presidential process of 1999 - another desertor of the long list of desertors of this revolution. Neither Bravo nor Yanez were fired but instead were offered jobs in “Venevision Intercontinental”. Yanez was at the time, Information Vice-president of the Station, but was removed of the post at the same time that his program was cancelled.

There is also the matter of the telephone conversation, made anonymously public, between Jesus Romero Anselmi, VTV President and Carlos Bardasano, President of Venevision International in relation to some Agreement reached between the two Channels. (This conversation happened after Chavez re-election in December 2006):

Telephone Conversation - Audio:



Jewels of the revolution I would say.

So there you have; This maybe explains why Venevision hasn’t received the same treatment that RCTV received and also why it was the only TV Station that didn’t publicly protest against the actions against RCTV- You see: the excuses given to close RCTV can be exactly applied to Venevision.

That why comments like this:



annoys me a lot because of its naivety.

For the rest, Globovision can only be freely watched in Caracas and Carabobo; If you want to watch it anywhere else, you have to pay cable (DirectTV).

Televen, in the same way Venevision did, cancelled after the Referendum 2004 all the opinion programs of critics against the government made by people like Marta Colomina and Cesar Miguel Rondón, who is in my opinion, hardly a die-hard anti-Chavista type. In any case, Televen is so small that it cannot risk a fight with the government.

As for the small other TV channels - they have no weight; People watch the big ones.

That would leave us with:

• RCTV (National), Globovision (National, Free in only two states) – Opposition
• Venevision (National), VTV (National) and TeleSur (National) – Pro-Chavez
• Televen (National) – Let’s say it is neutral

All of them using mostly open frequencies, exception: Globovision.

To that you have to add: VIVE and AN-TV (National Assembly) – also Pro Chavez. Also free.

In total: 5 Pro-Chavez TV Stations, Two opposition TV Stations and one possibly neutral TV Station - Televen.

On the other side, Venezuelans are more kind of TV-watchers than Radio/Newspapers-readers (I read that somewhere and don't find it now) so that would mean Chavez is not in such a bad position, don't you think?

Ah! but RCTV cannot be watched by everybody anymore! They are back but only for people with cable (2/5 of the population - according to one article I read),; instead we have now TVES, which is of course, owned by the government but paid by us, with our taxes; Recounting:

6 Pro-Chavez TV Stations, 1 Opposition Channel which cannot be watched freely everywhere and one neutral.

Another small point: Tves, the new station created by the government is transmitting nationally because the oh! so independent Judicial Branch, decided to confiscate RCTV’s equipments, WITHOUT having paid for them AS the constitution states! (another Constitution violation, but nobody cares!)

AIR exige devolución de señal a RCTV / AIR demands devolution of Frequency to RCTV



I don’t want to get much into the discussion on RCTV, BUT things like:





Are often repeated and are not true. There have not been any process against RTCV in the Venezuelan courts: As in the US, our laws state that everybody is innocent until proven guilty in the courts. Try and find me an official source giving the actual decision of a Venezuelan court in Venezuela.

Which court has decided that RCTV supported a coup?
Which court found out that RCTV refused to pay fines?? – Never even heard about this one!
Which court stated that RCTV refused to “cooperate with tax laws”?

I tell you, before you even try to look for the answer: It was the only court that decides who’s guilty or not nowadays in Venezuela: Judge Hugo Chavez, very possibly in his courtroom - “Aló Presidente”

Do you have a video of the transmissions when RCTV supposedly called for the assassination of Chavez?……I have seen none. Telling people to go out and protest (a constitutional right) is not calling for an assassination.

Accept the reality: It was from the beginning a political decision. RCTV was shot down because it was simply the most watched and because it certainly was and IS very anti-Chavez.

A very inconvenient TV station that showed its audiences the things Chavez’s government was not doing anything about; Things like security in the streets, services efficiency and complaints of all those people who are supposed to be the ones Chavez is doing something for the first time in the history of democracy in Venezuela: The poor. The very poor who at the end were the ones watching RCTV. The middle and higher classes have all cable which is much nicer than watching national TV.



This situation was actually funny!. Do You know why they tried to stop RCTV’s cable broadcast?

The thing was like this: RCTV came back on cable – now as an international channel - and two things happened:

• First: subscription to Cable services incremented.
• Second: RCTV did something the government was not expecting: It didn’t feel forced to transmit those hateful “cadenas” the government is so fond of.

It was actually big entertainment. You see, RCTV supported his decision in the fact that it was in the same position TeleSur – the government project - is: they are now both international!. Indeed, TeleSur doesn’t have to transmit the “cadenas” – since it would be a sure way to show people abroad how abusive and megalomaniac Chavez is. The government has from the beginning shot himself on the foot with this political decision. The decision had backfired in different ways. They wanted to silence RCTV but now it was back and it didn’t want to be forced to broadcast the abusive “cadenas”. HA!.

The answer from the people in the government was quick (they were very angry! Hahahhahah): They wanted RCTV to act differently than TeleSur – RCTV MUST broadcast the “cadenas”, if it didn’t, it would have to be shut down from cable as well (Doesn’t it sound to you as “persecution” against one Channel?). When It was clear that it would be forcing RCTV to do something that neither TeleSur nor any other International Channel was forced to do, they followed another strategy: They declared that every channel on cable should transmit the “cadenas”. Things were becoming bizarre. Imagine Channels like Sony TV stopping their programming in Venezuela, because Chavez wanted to broadcast a message. Technicians declared that it was possible to do that. what would you know?.

Anyways, they gave an Ultimatum to the cable companies that were offering RCTV International Channel: They should retire that channel from their programming or else….

My theory is the following: I think they found out that after all it was not that easy (technologically I mean) to make every channel on Cable transmit the “cadenas”. It was also not a clever move – an image problem, as I already said – And after all, those Channels could simply stopped transmitting in Venezuela. And the people using cable, are mostly using it to escape from the very polarized open national TV stations. The courts decided to stop the dispute before it could get out of control. It was not in the interest of the government. They could only lose.



This is wrong on many levels. “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised - the lies - Radiografia de una mentira” deals with this “manipulation”.

Witnesses saw snipers attacking “Chavista” demonstrators? Yeah right!. These were crazy times, between 18 and 20 people died and I don’t want to count how many of them were “Chavistas” and opposition. They were Venezuelan citizens. Period! While they were being shot and the Media were transmitting the images, the government decided to broadcast a “cadena”. When this move didn’t function since TV stations decided to divide the screen in two halves: one for the “cadena”, the other for the “protests”, the response was to shoot down the TV Stations doing this.

What witnesses did notice at the time was that reporters and cameramen were specifically aimed at – one dead (Tortoza), six wounded. People who were working to inform and were easy to identify. Call me crazy, but I see a pattern here. Who was trying to stop people to see what was happening?





This is one interesting aspect. With the passing of time, people on the left/liberal (in Europe and maybe in the US) who were blinded to the truths of Chavez, are beginning to see.

People like the famous judge Baltazar Garzón, in Spain


Varios altos cargos venezolanos insultan gravemente a Garzón por criticar el cierre de RCTV / Various high ranking government members gravely insult judge Garzón for having critizied RCTV Closure

Garzón was called Clown, Mercenary, Bush follower, etc. in short, the same old routine they're always using.

or Pelosi in the US. They already recognize Chavez for what he is. There are many more and I have no time and no memory to cite them all. The answer of the government to these people is always the same: Imperialists, paid by the CIA, blah, blah. They were welcome till they said something negative of our local god and/or his Revolution.

There is a saying in Venezuela that possibly exist in the US too:

“Dime con quien andas y te dire quien eres” – “Tell me who are your friends and I tell you who you are”

These is a list of Chavez favourite presidents and friends:

Obviously his Mentor: Fidel Castro.
Former dictator Sadam Hussein
President of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe
Belarus President, Alexander Lukashenko
Iran President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Do you see a pattern here?

There is also his admiration for Carlos, “el Chacal”, currently imprisoned in France. He actually wanted France to free him. There is also a famous letter he wrote to Carlos – Maybe there is still some information in Internet.

Call me crazy again but I see a pattern here as well. The thing is, with the passing of times it is very hard for Chavez to have normal diplomatic relations with normal democratic leaders of the World. Why would that be?



Chavez handles Venezuela nowadays as his Hacienda. He decides what to do with the money we have. He asks no one. For now, it is illegal to do so – Not asking – but many of the changes he wants to make in the constitution is to solve that small detail. Can you consider for a moment that what you read is paid with that money? – It is a lot of money, you know? Oil Money on times when Oil prices are the highest in decades. Think about it!.

• 100% illiteracy –free? – Propaganda many people believe around the world – A lie.
• Better access to health care? You have to get sick in Venezuela and see how good it is – definitely misleading
• Less poor people?
• Less corruption? Haha! At the moment it seems we are making our best effort to get to the bottom of the corruption list! In Latin America only Haiti beats us. The other one is a African country. GREAT!
• Less poor people? (Population below poverty line: 37.9% (end 2005 est.)) – Where does this information come from? – The Venezuelan government. Do you really expect them to say something else? – See the illiteracy Myth. One thing is common to people who visit Venezuela nowadays: Everything look worn out, dirty, disordered…..poor; poorer than before. Caracas, the capital was once upon a time a proud city – a modernity symbol for other cities in Latin America – This is no the case anymore. These days Caracas is against at the bottom in the rankings of Latin America cities!.

All this can be easily verified on the Net.

The government encounters problems with its Propaganda when there are external institution- not controlled by the them - that actually have enough information to contradict the “facts” given by the government – like in the case of the oil production we currently have: The government says we produce something like 3 million barrels and OPEC says we produce 1 and half million (or something like this) less than we are saying.

I know I haven't shown much to back up what I said, but I'm supposedly working right now. I'll try to do better answering Crusingram first Question.

Greetings

Wow that was two tremendous posts giftzhan. I have learned a great deal from reading your posts and links contained in them. I am quite interested in seeing Quarkhead's response to them.

A question for you: Do you believe some of the reason for the showing of strong support for Chavez is coming from strong arm tactics to support or face the consequences?

Also since nobody ever posted this in this or the other Chavez thread: Chavez threatens to take over private schools

Sleeper: I don't really understand your question. What do you mean with the last part of it? the strong arm tactics thing?

In relation to RCTV, I wanted to show you a sub-titled video where Chavez gives his reasons to stop the TV station at the same time that he threats on case there were protests against the measure (he called this measure a plan made by RCTV to destabilize the government). Video here

I want to give it a try to Question number 1:

Have the elections and recall referendums been free and fair?

Something went wrong in Venezuela in December 2004, Recall Referendum against Hugo Chavez. Whatever you may think, believe it or not, it is in this election process that people stopped trusting (maybe a better word would be believing) in the Organism that organizes elections in Venezuela. The CNE, it is called.

And I’m not only talking about the supposedly 40% of the population who opposes Chavez; I’m including here a big percent of those who are Pro-Chavez. The effect in both groups is the same: Many don’t feel like making the effort and go to vote. The reasons why this happens are different:

Many in the opposition don’t want to go to vote because they believe the CNE will count their votes as votes for Chavez ? Ergo: They don’t go.

In the case of the pro-Chavez folks, an unpleasant surprise for the government: many people don’t feel now the need to go: Why would they? the result is already clear, they say. Why would they bother waking up early, make a queue and stand in the sun, etc., etc., etc. if it is the common belief that the CNE is rigging somehow elections?

Granted! Nobody has proved convincingly how it was done, if it was actually the case.

And I’m NOT talking about Universities studies that prove or disprove the existence of the fraud; after all, for each study where no fraud could be detected, there are also others studies from other universities – including one from the Harvard University, which have done that:

• Analysis Venezuelan presidential Recall Referendum 2004 - Relationship between official results and signatures requesting it in computerized centers.
• Comprobación de la hipótesis de Delfino y Salas - Comprobation of Delfino and Salas Hypothese (Spanish)
• La Ley de Newcomb-Benford y sus aplicaciones al Referendum - The Newcomb-Benford law and his applications to the Referendum (Spanish)
• Detecting Attempted Election Theft - Vote Counts, Voting (Not related to Venezuela,
  but explains how the Newcomb-Benford is used)
• Informe ejecutivo - En busca del cisne negro - Executive Report - In search of the Black Swan

I put the studies there just for information’s sake; I only wanted you to know they exist; I don’t expect you to read them, even if you could, since some are
in Spanish! It doesn’t matter anyway! Academic Studies are not enough to make ordinary people believe, they don’t understand what those Studies say, one way or the other.

To prove a fraud, people needed to see the members of the CNE making the fraud. Counting the votes to favour Chavez; they need to catch the CNE “with their hands in the cookie jar”.

The opposition couldn’t do that – no hands on the cookie jar. That’s the truth. Given this, for us ordinary citizens, it became a matter of belief: people
don’t know for sure if there was a fraud but many, many have chosen to believe there was. Even worse, the CNE didn’t do enough to convince us there was no
trick. This situation was obvious enough for the Carter Center to put in their recommendations:

“The first task will be to restore confidence in the electoral process for those citizens who are uncertain or who came to distrust the electoral process“

Nevertheless, the problem had to be solved for the international community. That’s the reasons for sending monitors to countries in the first place.

A simple answer to Cruisingram’s question could be that since different international Monitors have declared the elections to be so, then for all practical reasons they have been fair and free, at least for the international community.

But is this true? Are those international monitors’ statements good enough to make those Elections and Referendums really free and really fair? I think not.

After all, how long stay International monitors in a country where they make their jobs?

Mostly, they stay only the month of the election. After that, they go and make their statements in their countries. During that month, they can observe how the different parties involved in the process behave. At Election Day, they can see how the voting process goes: Is it peaceful? Do the reception centers open on time?

They can even sometimes see to some degree, how votes are counted (if they are allowed to do so). They see if the government and the Media behave properly.

There are actually many things they do during that election month.

But what about the months previous to the election’s month and what happens to the months after that?

What happens in past months influences the Election Day and what happens after, influences the next election process.

I see it this way: the fairness and freedom of an election process depend strongly on the environment where voters live, the vibes they feel!

Do voters have unnecessary and untypical stress in relation to the act of voting?
Do they trust/believe in the process?
Are they forced or do they vote because they want?

Part of it, could be picked up by diligent monitors teams, I guess. But not all; I don’t think so.

Ok. In my opinion, for elections to be free and fair (in Venezuela), some conditions have to be present:

1. Vote should be secret. (In our country, a constitutional right)
2. Vote should not be forced or induced – It should be the voter’s decision.
3. Candidates should have the same air time to promote themselves and in general legally acquired funds for the campaign.
4. CNE – The government institution that prepares the elections, control the candidates, count the votes and present the results should be independent and
   autonomous from the rest of the branches as well as impartial for obvious reasons. (It is in the constitution)
5. Judicial branch should also be independent, impartial and ready to receive any legal complaints that could arise during the election process. (In our laws)

Since these conditions are not present in Venezuela, my answer to this Question is a big NO! IMO, There is no such a thing as a fair Venezuelan election. That’s one of the main reasons why we have a democracy crisis in the Country.

It is like the old saying: Quantity does not mean Quality.

But before I expand on what I have to support my opinion, I think a little education about Venezuela’s government composition is necessary to establish a framework to describe the situation we live in:

The government of Venezuela is divided into 5 powers which should be, in theory, independent and autonomous. The branches are:

1. The executive, conformed by:

• The president: Hugo Chavez
• The executive vice-president: Jorge Rodriguez and
• The Cabinet: There are currently 24 ministries

2. The Legislative: 167 congressmen and women.

3. The Judicial: conformed by 32 magistrates with 1 president and 7 vice-presidents. Current president: Luisa Estella Morales Lamuño

4. The National electoral council (CNE): conformed by 5 people which should be impartial (again in theory and in my opinion impossible, at least in Venezuela); As far as I know, in recent years, it has been tried to have 2 pro-government, 2 pro-opposition and one neutral members but with no success. This Organism organizes elections, counts votes and gives results at the end of the processes.

Finally we have our newest branch:

5. Citizen’s power – also called the “Moral Power” which is formed by:

• The people’s Ombudsman – He/she should defend us against injustices of the system.
• The general Comptroller – He/she should control how the public money is being used. Ha! This is really a bad joke!
• The general Prosecutor – He/she should guarantee that constitutional rights, etc. are respected.

The Members of branches 3,4 and 5 are selected by the legislative.

That’s Venezuela’s government for you. The branches like in the US, are supposed to exert the “checks and balances” in the country; you know: Basic stuff for any functioning democracy.

At this point, I tell you: in my opinion these “Checks and balances” don’t exist and I hope I can show you why I believe so. People are put in the branches if and only if they act as revolutionary, Yes-saying robots. At the moment anybody begins to show traces of independent thinking, they are goners or are named deserters/enemies of the revolution and are “asked to leave silently”.

But hey! Don’t believe me!, let’s see some examples; the first one I call it:

The “PODEMOS” (Translated: We Can) Case:

This is one of the political parties currently supporting Chavez – in fact one of the most supportive; Some of its members recently presented the motion in the national assembly to discuss some of the changes Chavez wanted to make in the constitution, the so-called “Reforma Constitucional”. After all, this revolution is known internationally as a democracy of “PARTICIPATION”. It surely could not be unreasonable if some people (congressmen, no less!) want to discuss some of the changed articles, which in their opinion, give too much power to the president and were being accepted (by the National Assembly) way too fast.

Podemos se enfrenta en la AN por derecho de la gente a elegir / Podemos defends the right for the people to choose in the National Assembly

“Acto seguido, Ricardo Gutiérrez, de Podemos, ejerció el derecho de palabra. Recordó que la Carta Magna es un pacto social y que en los siglos pasados en Venezuela el caudillismo "hizo de las constituciones trajes a la medida para justificar su permanencia en el poder".”

Translation: "It continued with the intervention of Ricardo Gutiérrez, PODEMOS member. He reminded (the Assembly) that the Constitutution is a social pact and that in past centuries the “Caudillo-phenomenum” in Venezuela “made of Constitutions “made-to-measure suits” to justify their staying in power”

The rest of the Assembly responded in the following way:

1. “A Gutiérrez le respondió, en principio, Darío Vivas, para quien el "equilibrio" de Podemos "suena a oportunismo". "Los revolucionarios levantamos las dos manos para apoyar la propuesta del Presidente", bramó Vivas.”

Translation: “The first to answer Gutierrez was Dario Vivas, who considered that PODEMOS’s balance ”sounded like oportunism”. We revolutionary people raise both hands to support the proposal of the president”, shouted Vivas”

2."La presidenta de la asamblea nacional, Cilia Flores, irrumpió en el debate para aportar que "el planteamiento de Podemos coincide con el de Acción Democrática, no hace falta que ellos estén aquí".

Translation: The president of the National Assembly, Cilia Flores (This is really a witch!), interrupted the debate to contribute (with this democratic pearl):

3.“PODEMOS’s concerns are the same as those of “Accion Democratica” (opposition political party), There is no use for us here (in the assembly) for them to stay”.

PODEMOS general secretary, Ismael García (bulkheaded communist, by the way), made the following reflexion:

"El atropello hace que la dinámica de la política vaya tomando otra orientación". El secretario general de Podemos denunció que existen contradicciones entre los principios fundamentales de la Carta Magna y el proyecto de Miraflores. Nuevamente rechazó que el Presidente se reserve el derecho a seleccionar a las autoridades de las instituciones que surgirán del reordenamiento territorial e indicó que "estamos defendiendo el derecho de la gente a votar. ¿Cuál es el temor a elegirse?".

Translation: “Injustices make politics dynamic to take another orientation – PODEMOS general secretary denounced that there are contradictions between the Constitution fundamental principles and the President project (Reform). Again he rejected the notion that the president gets as only person, the right to select the different institutions authorities which will be emerged from the territorial re-arrengement (My addition: Another of the new powers Chavez wants to have) and indicated: We are defending the right of the people to vote. What is the fear?”

Finally, Chavez on the PODEMOS issue:

Chávez asks allies to reflect

He added, "if any of you has shame, this is the right time. You have time to join us sincerily and build the revolution. Stop talking nonsense, saying you are revolutionary." "I am calling upon the grassroots of this party (Podemos) to avoid manipulation by their pseudo-revolutionary leaders, who have actually become counter-revolutionary."

Since then, Chavez has been insulting (jeeringly) and disqualifying this PODEMOS party and at the same time inviting its members (those who haven’t critized him) to leave the treasonous party and join his brand new PSUV party (This Party is another long story).

And what about the case of Vicente Díaz, current member of the CNE:

He recently introduced requested an investigation against Hugo Chavez for violating the constitution (articles 67 and 145) in relation to the equilibrium of electoral propaganda being shown, since the president uses his program “Alo Presidente” to promote his PSUV new party and his changes to the constitution:

Vicente Díaz entrega solicitud para investigar a Hugo Chávez / Vicente Díaz delivers a request to investigate Hugo Chávez

“En la exposición de motivos de la solicitud de investigación se destacan como causales de sanción las actuaciones de Chávez en los programas 278, 282, 283, 285, 286 y 296 de ¡Aló, Presidente! Díaz recordó que el programa dominical del Primer Mandatario Nacional al ser financiado con recursos del Estado venezolano no puede emplearse para favorecer a parcialidad política alguna.”

Translation: “In the exposition of motives of the investigation request, stick out as causes of penalty Chavez appereances in programs 278,282,283,285,286 and 296 of “Aló Presidente”. Diaz reminded that the sunday program cannot be used to favor any political side”

Here the answer of the comunication and information minister, William Lara:

Díaz comete censura en grado de frustración contra Presidente Chávez / Díaz commits censorship due to frustration against President Chavez

"Vicente Díaz comete censura en grado de frustración contra Chávez de modo reincidente, y para su mayor despecho se va a quedar con las ganas de silenciar al Presidente porque el ejercicio pleno de los deberes y derechos de jefe del Estado seguirá siendo una dimensión distintiva en el quehacer cotidiano de Hugo Chávez”

“Vicente Diaz commits relapsingly, censorship due to frustration against Chavez but for his great exacerbation, he will be disappointed in relation to his desire to silence the president since the full exercise of the rights and duties of the Head of State will keep having a distinctive dimension in the daily functions of Hugo Chavez”

As I said, there are no “Checks and balances”. This minister doesn’t even wait for the investigation to proceed. He disqualifies this member of one of the other branches. Not that I’m expecting any investigations at all!

Do you know that game where there are some chairs in a circle and a group of people walk around them while some music plays and suddenly when it stops, they need to get a seat to go on playing the game?

You can imagine the positions in each of the five branches of government as those chairs to be occupied, the players are mostly the same people who interchange themselves to occupy the seats. They all have something in common, a characteristic that the government is trying hard to export outside the government branches: They are “rojo, rojito” (Translation: red, pretty pretty red), which means that your leader is Chavez. Nobody else.

Don’t believe me? Let’s see some examples of these positions changes along the 5 branches; these are examples that happened in those turbulent months of the 2004 Referendum:

Let’s begin with the CNE which has the job to prepare elections without having preferences for any of the sides; In 2004, of the five members three were “oficialistas (pro-Chavez)”:

• Francisco Carrasquero (CNE president)
• Jorge Rodriguez
• Oscar Battaglini

Of the other two, one was opposition, Timoteo Zambrano and one neutral, Tibisay Lucena.

My first example is:

Example 1: Francisco Carrasquero - He went from president of the CNE to one of the presidents in the judicial branch (There are 7)

It went like this:

Francisco Carrasquero, who was believed to be neutral and was actually chosen to be CNE president for this reason:

Humo blanco para árbitro electoral/ White smoke for electoral arbritage

"El Tribunal Supremo de Justicia, además de nombrar de modo provisorio a los miembros del Consejo, designó para presidirlo a Francisco Carrasquero, reconocido por la mayoría de los sectores como un jurista de equilibrio político en un país polarizado."

Translation: "The supreme court of Justice, besides naming provisionally the members of the CNE, designated Francisco Carrasquero as its president, recognized for the majority of the sectors as a jurist with political equilibrium in a polarized country."

after having many problems due to his not so neutral behaviour and without finishing his job at the CNE, was chosen as one of the 7 presidents in the judicial branch.

He was chosen as part of a lot of 17 new magistrates carefully picked by the national assembly (legislative branch) because of their “oficialista” orientation.

Indeed, congressman Pedro Carreño (an idiot), president of the postulation committee in the national assembly at the time, said in relation to the people being considered for the posts in the judicial branch:

Chavismo designa hoy 49 nuevos magistrados /Chavismo designates today 49 new Magistrates

“No nos vamos a meter autogoles, no hay nadie en la lista vinculado a la oposición (El Nacional - Lunes 13 de Diciembre de 2004)”,

Translation: “We are not going to score autogoals; there is nobody on the list who is pro-opposition (Monday 13. Dec. 2004)”. (He is using Soccer/Football jargon)

Remember what Quarkhead wrote?


Do you know why most judges at the time were ousted? It was not because of acts of corruption. It was because of one decision they made: they decided that what happened in April 2002 was not a coup d’État but a “Vacio de Poder” – Law term, don’t ask me what it is - now whatever you may think about what happened at that time, it was the decision reached by the maximum court of the country, it had to be respected – but no! The government didn’t like the decision ? everybody has to go.

Was that Evidence enough for you, Quarkhead? The public words of the Chavista Congressman who was the person in charge to choose who was going to be elected or not to work in the branch that decides who’s legally right or not? Are there any doubts that this was done exactly to get an executive-dependant branch?

If there were still any doubts about the new way the judicial branch had to work - Here is a declaration of the new president of this Branch:

On the independency of the judicial branch in Venezuela, Inter America press association:

"El magistrado elegido como nuevo presidente del Supremo Tribunal, al inaugurarse en sus funciones, despejó cualquier duda sobre la independencia de sus decisiones o sentencias, al señalar que “los medios de comunicación y periodistas deben estar al servicio de la verdad y sólo de la verdad” y que “todo juez que emita juicio en contra de los principios revolucionarios, será destituido y anulada su sentencia”."

Translation: "The new magistrate elected as the new president of the TSJ, At the inauguration act of his functions, cleared up any doubts on the independency of his decisions or sentences when he declared that 'the Communication Media and journalist should be at the service of the truth and only the truth' and that 'every judge deciding against revolutionary principles will be destituted and his/her sentence nullified'."

There seems to be less corruption? Yeah right! This is one of the most corrupt governments we have had during our whole republican life; corruption is present on all levels of government. Corruption rankings through the years demonstrate what I say: Today only Haiti is more corrupt than us in Latin America – some years ago, we could be sure that at least Haiti, Ecuador, Paraguay, Bolivia and Colombia were worse than us. Here you have a link for corruption ranking 2006

As you see this is one thing that our government do efficiently. They are working hard to get to the bottom of the Ranking.

Any ways, getting back on the subject of the CNE president: If there was any doubt about the neutrality of Carrasquero, his election as one of those magistrates, should clear the matter. At the end, thanks to this oh! so democratic election, it resulted in 26 of a total of 32 magistrates in the judicial branch being “oficialistas” against 6 possible opposition magistrates. This composition is currently in charge and will be there until 2016 (most of them) or 2012 (the rest).

Later on, the seven presidents of the judicial branch (Carrasquero included) decided who the new members of the CNE would be. New CNE president: Jorge Rodriguez. This guy is my second example:

Example: Jorge Rodriguez - He went from president of the CNE to executive Vice-president (current)

Jorge Rodriguez was in charge of the referendum where Chavez got to stay in power and became a very visible figure in the “oficialista” universe. He stayed there and prepared elections like the congress in December 2005 and the presidency in 2006. Nowadays he is the new executive vice-president or in other words Chavez’s right hand. Would that be normal in your opinion? What do you think people think when they see these things? It is hard not to suspect!

Another example would be the first executive vice-president Julian Isaías Rodríguez who is now one of the 3 in the fifth branch, the citizen power - he got to be the general Comptroller – the one who controls that the money of the nation is not used in any illegal way.

Another one would be Former president of the legislative branch, Nicolas Maduro, who now is part of the executive branch (he is now our exterior Chancellor). On a tropical note – Maduro and Cilia Flores (president of the National Assembly) are a couple.

Not that this is the only familiar relationship that there is in our loved Government! No way!;

Our Minister of Education is no other than Chavez’s older brother. This one is about to change Venezuela’s time zone!!! Incredible! Isn't it?

His argument is that in that way, children will sleep more in the morning, since they won't have to go to school so early! Of course, Nobody tells him that it would be easier to change the time when children go to school --> who would dare?

I hope you get my point. How can you expect fairness, independency, transparency , in other words: “check and balances”, when you see how Chavez’ people change posts in the government branches as they change underwears? (At least I hope they do)

As I said most of the examples, happened around the time of the 2004 referendum, the OAS and the Carter center were, if I remember correctly, the most
important international monitors at that time.

In contrast to the ways of Chavez government, international monitors tend to express themselves very diplomatically; that means (in my mind) that what you read, you have to multiply by 10 (maybe by 100).

These are excerpts from the Carter Center recommendations in relation to the Referendum in 2004:

“Nonetheless, the recall referendum process suffered from numerous irregularities throughout the entire process, most centering around the lack of transparency of the CNE in its decision-making and its ad hoc implementation of the recall referendum process“

“Such inconsistencies and irregularities contributed to low voter confidence in the electoral system and, in some sectors of the population, in the results of the referendum itself“

“The first task will be to restore confidence in the electoral process for those citizens who are uncertain or who came to distrust the electoral process“

This was of course very diplomatically written.

I don’t know how informed you are about what transpired in those days, but I tell you something: it was not easy for the monitors. They had to think very well what they said, fearing to be labelled partial to any side. These recommendations are very diplomatically formulated and besides, let get real:

What could they have said after the CNE declared that Chavez won?

Do you really expect from the monitors, in the middle of the explosive situation we were, with a population as divided as the Venezuelan society, to say the surest thing that could have begun with the violence, namely, that elections were not absolutely fair?

After all, and this is maybe speculation on my part, we are talking here about a democracy in crisis in a country that is an oil’s exporter and an important oil provider to the US, in a time where oil market were not stable at all. If you play with that hypothetical, it makes you wonder….

What I wrote are things that make me think that points 4 and 5 (with a bit of number 3), of my original conditions to have free and fair elections don't exist.

Now let’s deal with rest of the points:

1. Vote should be secret. (In our country, a constitutional right)
2. Vote should not be forced or induced – It should be the voter’s decision.
3. Candidates should have the same air time to promote themselves and in general legally acquired funds for the campaign.

Number 2 means people should be free to vote according to their political orientation, if they please – No punishments like losing jobs should happen, No political discrimination! – Once again: All this is in the constitution.

The first two points are covered in articles 63 and 89 of the current (but soon to be profoundly changed) constitution.

These articles have been systematically violated without any reactions from any of the branches – In fact, the ones making the violations are the branches themselves.

It is time to talk in detail about the Tascón list and its development: the Maisanta software.

You see: In order to make a Referendum, the law says that you have to recollect certain quantity of signatures to activate the process. The leaders of the opposition had to do that not once, not twice or thrice but four times!

The first one was to activate a consultive Referendum (signatures were not accepted by the Judicial branch due to technicalities); The second one was not accepted, this one by the CNE due to technicalities – This recollection was called “El Firmazo” (Firma is the Spanish word for signature); The third try was called “El Reafirmazo” and was made to solve whatever the CNE didn’t like. At this point the CNE invalidates almost 500000 Signatures and states doubts about 1.1 Million others; That’s the reason for the so called “Reparos”, where people were supposed to go and verify if their signature was accepted or not and if they so wanted it, to ratify it.

The Tascón List was originated between the second and the third recollections processes. You see: when Chavez noticed that there were millions of people who wanted to sign up to activate a Referendum to oust him, He got nervous and made everything in his power to avoid that to happen. What happened then, is what I call an excellent team Work: The branches worked together to avoid the Referendum.

You think I’m making this out? In order to support my case, I will be using another documentary, called “La Lista - Un pueblo bajo sospecha – The list, people under suspicion”

This documentary is unfortunately not sub-titled, so I will do my best to translate whatever I use. The documentary tells the story of how the Tascón List has been used to politically discriminate Venezuelans; from this documentary I will mostly use what Chavez and his people have publicly declared in those times.

As I said, Chavez was not happy that see so many people making long queues to give their signatures, following what the law stated: You should give your name, your identity number and your signature. Indeed, he was unhappy enough to make a not so subtle threat just after the “Firmazo” was done:

In the documentary:

10:06: (Chavez, at the graduation of people attending the alphabetization plan of the Robinson mission):

“El que firme contra Chavez, ahi quedará su nombre registrado para la historia, porque va a tener que poner su nombre y su apellido, cedula de identidad y huella digital”

Translation: “Whoever signs up against Chavez, his or her name will be registered in history, since he or she will have to put his or her first name and last name, identity card number and his fingerprint”

In fact, He was even prepared not to accept the Referendum in the case he lost it. This was made clear in November the 22nd, 2002; when he said in his Sunday program “Aló Presidente #128”:

6:44: (Chavez, Aló Presidente # 128 - November 24th 2002):

“Y en el supuesto de que hagan ese referendo y saquen 90% de los votos: Yo no voy a renunciar. Olvidenlo!”

Translation: “And supposing that they get to make the referendum (the opposition) and get 90% of the votes: I’m not going to quit! Forget it!”

But not only Chavez made public threats to scare people from giving their signatures; in these scare tactics participated all the ministries, all the public companies and institutions and even some Bolivarian circles!. This is the case of nutty Lina Ron, who I already named in other posts:

11:49: (Lina Ron)

“Yo no voy a permitir en ningún puesto de recolección, firmas contra mi comandante en jefe, contra el hombre más grande de esta patria, contra el mesias de esta tierra, contra el hombre más bueno que nunca tuvo la patria, quien lo haga: o me matan a mi o yo los mato a ellos.”

Translation: “I’m not going to allow in any signature-recollection posts the recollection of signatures against my Chief commander (Hugo Chavez); against the greatest man of this country; against the messiah of this country; against the best man this country ever had!: If anybody does it: I kill them or they kill me!”

Of course no authority did anything about it!.

In any case, despite the threats, People went to sign up, the “Reafirmazo” was done and the signatures delivered. That’s when more than a million signatures were not accepted and the “Reparos” came into life:

From the wiki article:

“In November 2003, the opposition collected a new set of signatures, with 3.6 million names produced in four days. The CNE rejected the petition, saying that only 1.9 million were valid, while 1.1 million were dubious and 460,000 completely invalid.”

It is at this point (between the “Firmazo” and the “Reafirmazo”) that Chavez ordered the CNE to deliver a copy of these 3.6 million signatures to Congressman Luis Tascón:

From the same Wiki article:

“In February 2004, on the TV program Aló Presidente 180, President Chávez announced that he had signed up a document asking the National Electoral Council (CNE) to provide copies of all the signatures of the petitioners for the referendum. [16] Luis Tascón, a representative of the ruling party in the legislature and of the Comando Maisanta, was in charge of collecting the copies of the signatures, to prove Chavez’s suspicion of fraud. [17] [18]”

You can watch a video of this announcement at Minute 12:52 of the documentary.

You can also hear how the existence of this order and the delivery of the signatures to the Congressman are previously denied by Tibisay Lucena, the neutral member of the CNE (declaration at minute 12:43 of the documentary).

The list was later on, published by Tascón in his Web Page. It was supposed to be there so that people, who alledgedly didn’t sign up, could denounce it and prove the Government beliefs that the opposition was using the signatures of people who were not interested in activating the referendum:

From the same Wiki Article:

“Tascón subsequently published on his website a database, based on the list given by the CNE, or more than 2,400,000 Venezuelans and their national identity card numbers (cédula). Tascón defended his action, saying that publication of the list of Referendum signers provided a way for those who appeared on the list, but had not signed up, to register a complaint with the CNE”.

The European Union, in his final statements after monitoring the legislative elections in 2005, said the following on this issue:

“This situation of general stalemate and of distrust in the electoral authority by the opposition was aggravated by the practice of publicly disclosing a list of citizens (the so called Lista Tascon, from the name of the National Assembly Delegate that compiled and published it) with more than 3,4 million names and personal details of the citizens that originally signed up for the Referendum. This list was compiled without violating any referendum rules, as the signature collection process was a public act with a consequent obligation to leave it open for scrutiny. Nevertheless, the CNE resolution governing the process did not pay due attention to the principle of the confidentiality of the data collected after the conclusion of the referendum Process.“

It was in any case an illegal but brilliant move that opened a very rotten can of worms: People working in the public sector (around 1500000 in 2004) were literally delivered to their fates.

Think about it: If you were on the list, you could be forced, for example:

* To retire your signature, giving as reason that the opposition took your signature without your consent:

21:54: (Some doctor at the Perez León public Hospital)

“Fuimos notificados ayer en la tarde, pidiendo que nos retractaramos ante el CNE y quitar las firmas y asi nuestros contratos progresaran“

Translation: “We were notified yesterday evening, asking us to retire our signatures at the CNE so that our working contracts would go forward“

* Or you could be forced not to go to give your signature:

10:47: (Rodny Castro, Hidrocapital – Public Waters Company – fired because he signed up)

“Los días antes del “reafirmazo” se habia amenazado al personal de Hidrocapital y se habian hecho unas reuniones para que la gente no firmara”

Translation: “Days before the “reafirmazo” threats were made against Hidrocapital personnel; meetings were made to inform people that they should not go to sign up”

10:54: (Jesus Goméz, IUTO Mariscal Sucre - fired because he signed up)

“Se escuchaba y se rumoraba mucho, que iban a haber despidos, muchos despidos, este, si la gente firmaba…lo escuchabas a veces hasta de los jefes inmediatos“

Translation:“There were a lot of rumors and you could hear it a lot that there were going to be people fired, a lot of people fired in case they went to sign up … you could hear it sometimes even from your immediate superiors.”

11:04 (Mabel Ettedgi, CNE - fired because she signed up –especially telling since this is the supposedly independent impartial branch that had to organize the referendum!)

“Amenazas de pasillo, donde nos decian: mira que te quedes tranquila que fulano dijo que no te van a botar, pero eso si, que no vayas a firmar “

Translation:“Corridor threats! they would tell us: Hey! stay calm that this guy said (any one in charge) that you were not going to be fired, that is if you don’t go to sign up”

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - 2006

“The constitution provides for these rights, and the government generally respected them in practice, although there were numerous reports that persons were denied passports and other official documents by government agencies for having signed up the 2004 recall referendum. There were regular reports of individuals bribing authorities for expedited issuance of identification documents. Extremely long waits for issuance of passports often had the effect of restricting freedom of foreign travel.”

Those "corridor threats" didn't stay rumors for long: Government members of the different branches didn’t even have a problem to tell publicly what would happen to anybody working in the public sector that happened to be on the list:

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

17:08: (Roger Capella, Minister of health and social development, 20th March 2004):

Ministro: "Un traidor no puede estar en un cargo de confianza y este estado tiene una politica y una correspondencia con el gobierno que tiene donde no hay espacio para los traidores."

Periodista: "Cuántos serian más o menos?"

Ministro: "Los que sean necesarios --- los que hayan firmado, estan botados."

Translation:

Minister: "A traitor can not be in a trust position; this state has a policy and is in agreement with the government we have and there is no place for traitors.[/b]" (I know: it doesn’t make sense what he said, but to be able to talk is NOT a requirement to be Minister)

Journalist: "How many more or less would that be?"

Minister: "As many as it is necessary --- whoever signed up is fired."

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

17:20: (Aristobulo Isturiz, Minister of education)

Ministro: "Que me digan un nombre de un despido en el ministerio de educación, pues, que me digan un nombre....."

Translation:

Minister: "Give me a name of anybody who was fired in the education ministry.....give it to me..." (Next scene shows one of those cases the minister wanted: Juan Carlos Campos).

Well, That's history. After the threats, after the Referendum passed, The Tascón list have been used systematically to fire and discriminate people ever since. Everybody knew about it: government, citizens, you name it!

And What about our president? Did he have anything to say about the list? Here you have him in “aló presidente 214”, making jokes about it:

31:30: (Chavez, Aló presidente 214)

[/i]“Tascón ve aca!, se acuerdan de la pagina de tascon?, la gente le tiene miedo a la pagina de tascon (burlandose), yo no aparezco en la pagina tuya no?”[/i]

Translation: “Tascón come here! Do you remember Tascón web page? (asking the public present : all ministers and important military people are obliged to assist to this show), "People are afraid of this page" (jeering), "I’m not there in that page of yours, am I?” (asking Tascón)

Ok, Stop here and think about it: This is Chavez (the president of all Venezuelans) public on TV, making a joke about those fired, discriminated people who can not find jobs in the public sector because of their signatures; The same folks you talk about so often here who are so very happy that Chavez is our president --- Do you believe that only those corrupted oligarchs who governed before Chavez went to sign up to have a Referendum?

Hear what this very corrupt-looking guy has to say about it:

25:04: (Jesús Bastidas – Nomina contractual de Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) – discriminated because he signed up)

“No solamente es el caso de los 22000 despedidos que firmamos y aparecemos en la lista de Luis Tascón, sino nuestros hijos, que firmaron, obviamente firmaron porque nos acompañan, ellos tambien quieren que esto se resuelva....y muchos ya son profesionales y estan asustados, no saben que hacer, se quieren ir del pais, o sea tenemos que irnos del pais 3 millones y medio de venezolanos? no puede ser!”

Translation: “It is just not only the case of the 22000 people fired (from PDVSA) who also signed up and are registered in the Tascón list; it is also our sons and daughters, who also signed up, obviously because they are with us, they want things to get better….many of them are already professionals and are scared, they don’t know what to do, they want to leave the country. What does this mean? That 3 and a half million people have to leave the country? That can not be!” (Voice breaking)

There were so many News and stories about the discriminations being made; so many letters of fired people published in the Newspapers, that Chavez had to publicly order:

32:11: (Chavez at the V Gabinete Movil regional – April 2005):

“La famosa lista de tascón, nosotros debemos archivarla ya, eso ya pasó, eso ya pasó, entierrese la lista de luis tascon, seguramente cumplio un papel importante en un momento determinado”

Translation: “The famous Tascón List, we must archive it, that’s history; that’s history, Let us bury the Tascón list! It surely had an important role in the past, but that’s already over.” (Is it my biased ear, or didn’t it sounded as if the people present in the room, didn't know very well at the beginning of this statement, if it would be all right to applause?)

The problem is that when a Pandora box is opened, it is very difficult to close it again. The Tascón list transformed itself in the “Maisanta software”, which instead of having the information of only the 3 million people who signed for the Referendum, now has a huge database with the information of 14 million people. The information include if you signed up or not, if you vote or NOT! If you participate in the government missions, where you live, where you vote. Here you can see different screen photos of the software (The software can be freely bought in the streets; you can see more information in the documentary around minute 39:20):

The fact that it is possible to know if you vote or not is also a violation of the constitution, since you can also be threaten if you don’t go – which robs you your right to decide:

40:22: (Congresswoman Iris Valera, Parliamentary election’s day 2005):

“Funcionario publico de libre nombramiento y remoción que hoy no salga a votar, hay que ponerle el ojo porque a ese funcionario hay que botarlo”

Translation: “Public employee who doesn’t go to vote today, we have to keep an eye set on him/her because that employee have to be fired”

(There was a 75% abstention in that election; Opposition decided not to participate in the elections – a mistake in my opinion – which left a 100% pro-Chavez legislative branch).

The president of the Monitors of the European Union, Jose albino Silva Peneda, said:

40:54: (Jose albino Silva Penda, presidente delegación de la union europea)

“La publicación de una lista informatizada de ciudadanos donde se indican la preferencias politicas expresadas en el proceso de recolección de firmas para el refendum revocatorio presidencial, el llamado programa maisanta,ha generado temor a que pueda violar el secreto del voto.”

Translation: “The publication of a computer list of citizens where their political preferences in the recollection of signatures for the presidential referendum are revealed, the so called Maisanta Software, has generated fear that the secrecy of the vote could be violated”

Even nowadays, two years after Chavez's orders to bury the list were given (Are you not asking yourself at this point what is the role of the People’s Ombudsman? Why hasn’t he done anything?), the list is still being used to decide who gets fired or not:

Sincor: La caza de los infieles - Despidos políticos en Sincor / Sincor: The hunt for infidels Political firings in Sincor (July 2007)

“Cuatro empleados fueron botados ayer de la filial de Pdvsa. No hubo explicación alguna para prescindir de sus servicios, más allá de que sus nombres están en la Lista de Tascón”

Translation: “4 employees were fired yesterday of the PDVSA filial (Sincor). There were no explanations for the dismissal but their names are in the Tascón List”

Another employee (anonymously, of course) gave this list, which was the one supposedly used to make the decision.

The titles of the columns that cannot be clearly read are in the PDF Document are:

Main Title: Filtro (Filter).

From left to right (3 columns): Consultivo (the first recollection), Reafirmazo( Third recollection) and Reparo (last recollection).

An “X” means you signed up in the process described by the column; a double “X” means you did it in the “Firmazo” and the “Reafirmazo”. The word “APTO” which means “adequate” is used for the people who never signed up. You can find the names of the fired people on the list. See how they were marked? These are young fresh graduated from the Universities; No corruption rotted politicians of the past.

So I ask you now: Have you ever heard about this situation before? Would you consider elections in your country to be fair if such conditions were present?.

Finally, if you think that what I’m painting couldn’t be worse. You are wrong! There has been an escalation!

That people who don’t agree with the government were being politically discriminated was clear for all of us.

But there are not only “Chavistas” and opposition in Venezuela. There is a third group, possibly the biggest one, whose TURN to be discriminated has come:

We call this group: the “Ni-Ni” – which if translated, would be something like “Neither-Nor” – They are neither for Chavez nor for
the opposition.

Anyways, This “Ni-Ni” group would be decisive if they ever decide on which side they are. They see what Chavez is doing but they don’t think that the opposition is any better – So for them, it is the same who is the president! I guess as long as there is a lot of money to spend on the streets (You can also read in this link more about the current economical situation in Venezuela nowadays); they see no necessity to change things.

Now, this is the escalation: It seems that the government doesn’t find acceptable anymore this “Ni-Ni” condition in the people who work for them – You are either a convinced revolutionary or you better go and leave your job to somebody who is; a neutral position is not desired.

The video I’ll show was secretly done (you know like those people who record a film while they watch it at the cinema) during in a meeting in PDVSA, where Rafael Ramirez – President of PDVSA and Minister of Energy (The Revolution has never heard about the concept of “conflict of interests”) – gave the following speech to PDVSA high management, directors Board and Ministry’s directors – That is: People in positions of great power. (Some people suspect this Video was even made public by the government; who knows! Either way, it is a scary thing).

Video Here

I’ll use the parts I need to support what I said, but If you are interested, I made the whole translation (horrible translated, I know – my English is not as good as I thought) and you can read it HERE. (It is REALLY a horrible translation, - But I did it around midnight and I was a little tired. I hope it is understandable)

So, the minister said things like this:

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

2:34 "Yo quiero que aquí ustedes se sacudan de la cabeza el tema de que alguien nos puede sancionar, o alguien nos puede criticar si nosotros expresamos a nuestro pueblo que esta empresa está cien por ciento apoyando al Presidente Chávez, es un asunto (aplausos), una situación que ha paralizado a alguna gente nuestra, a nuestros obreros, a nuestros empleados."

Translation: "I want you to get out of your heads the possibility that anybody can punish us or that anybody can critize us if we express the people that this company is supporting Chavez 100%, This is a subject (Applause), a situation that has paralyzed some of our people, our workers, our employees."

3:45 "Aquí estamos apoyando a Chávez, que es nuestro líder, que es el líder máximo de ésta Revolución, y vamos a hacer todo lo que tengamos que hacer para apoyar a nuestro Presidente, y el que no se sienta cómodo con esa orientación, es necesario que le ceda su puesto a un bolivariano (aplausos, público corea: uh ah Chávez no se va"

Translation: "We are supporting Chavez here, he is our leader, the Maximum leader of this revolution and we are going to do whatever we have to do to support the president and whoever is not comfortable with this orientation, it is necessary for he/she to cede his/her post to a Bolivarian"
(Applauses, Public shouts: Uh Ah, Chavez won’t go away)

6:03 "A nosotros no nos tiembla el pulso, nosotros sacamos de esta empresa a diecinueve mil quinientos enemigos de este país y estamos dispuestos a seguirlos haciendo, para garantizar que esta empresa esté alineada y corresponda al amor que nuestro pueblo le ha expresado a nuestro Presidente".

Translation: "We won’t hesitate, we threw out/fired 19500 enemies of this country and we are willing to keep doing it to guarantee that this company is aligned and responds to the love that the people have expressed to out president." (Applauses)

6:25 "A mi me indigna, y yo estoy seguro que ustedes también se indignan, nuestra Junta Directiva se indigna, cuando nosotros nos encontramos que haya gente Ni-Ni, que haya gente Light, que haya gente que ahora diga que aquí estamos en unos procesos de tal para cual, que necesitamos abrir esta cosa, no señor!, aquí el que se le olvide que estamos en medio de una revolución se lo vamos a recordar a carajazos, pero aquí esta empresa está con el Presidente".


Translation: "It angers/outrages me, and I’m sure you it angers you as well, It angers our Board of directors, when we find out that there are “Ni-Ni” people among us, that there are people-light, that there are people who now say that we are living through processes “this and that” (I don’t know what he means – this makes no sense in Spanish), that we need to open this thing (referring probably to the possibility that everybody have a right to work in the company, no matter his/her political orientation)! No sir! Whoever forgets here, that we a