Geen evolutie en ecolutie zonder revolutie!

Albert Einstein:

Twee dingen zijn oneindig: het universum en de menselijke domheid. Maar van het universum ben ik niet zeker.
Posts tonen met het label L. Lopez. Alle posts tonen
Posts tonen met het label L. Lopez. Alle posts tonen

maandag 14 augustus 2017

Venezolaanse regering treedt terecht op tegen de uiterst gewelddadige oppositie!!

Anti-Media bracht afgelopen zaterdag een artikel van Geopolitics Alert over de chaos in Venezuela. De schrijver, Jim Carey stelt dat men in de VS maanden aaneen iedereen aan het woord laat, als deze maar spuugt op de regering Maduro....... Als een religieus voorschrift herhalen de reguliere (massa-) media deze verhalen, die echter maar één kant van het verhaal laten horen, een leugenachtig verhaal, of ronduit leugens wel te verstaan......

Economische isolatie van Venezuela door vooral de VS en onder druk van de VS, hebben velen in diepe ellende gestort, echter de oppositieleiders die beweren in dezelfde ellende te leven, zijn voor het overgrote deel welgestelde figuren, die het aan niets ontbreekt. Opvallend overigens, dat de oligarchen nooit hebben hoeven vluchten, ook niet onder Chavez, deze figuren gooien overdag met stenen en begeven zich 's nachts in het nachtleven, waar ze horeca gelegenheden bezoeken, waar het grootste deel van de Venezolanen alleen maar van kan dromen......

De VS heeft haar winkelketens, die supermarkten in Venezuela hebben, al een paar jaar geleden opgedragen de winkels niet langer te bevoorraden, waarmee voor de gewone burgers de ellende begon. Dit is overigens maar één van de maatregelen uit de smerige VS koker...... Vergeleken met Oekraïne en Syrië is er één groot verschil, de VS doet zelfs geen moeite haar steun aan 'de gematigde oppositie' (uiterst gewelddadig) te verbergen......

Vanaf 2009 zou de VS 49 miljoen euro in de oppositie van Venezuela hebben gestoken, reken maar dat dit bedrag in de praktijk een stuk hoger ligt..........

Overigens geldt wat betreft het verslaan van de demonstraties en rellen hetzelfde voor de reguliere (massa-) media in de EU landen en dus ook in ons land. Maduro is de kwaaie pier en de oppositie is geweldloos en zo heilig als Maria....... Terwijl het grootste geweld wordt gebruikt door deze oppositie........

An anti-government protester wields a shotgun taken from security forces during clashes in Caracas, Venezuela, May 8, 2017. The protest movement has drawn masses of people into the streets nearly every day since March, has left some three dozen dead. (AP/Ariana Cubillos)

Lees dit prima artikel en geeft het door, onder het volgende artikel vindt u nog een aantal links over Venezuela en wat daar echt aan de gang is:

Why the Venezuelan Government Is Right to Resist the Venezuelan Opposition


August 12, 2017 at 10:12 pm
Written by Jim Carey

(GPA) — The US corporate media has spent months championing the cause of everyone they know in Venezuela, even the slightest of publicly known figures, as long as they are willing to go on record and slander the government of Nicolas Maduro. These quotes are religiously parroted by every major US media outlet that only wants readers, viewers and listeners to hear one side of the ongoing fight in Venezuela.

This article is meant to help clear up a lot of the questions that are left unanswered by US media, and to do that, we have to dissect a few key aspects of the current situation. In order to understand the Venezuelan opposition better, we should look closely at three key pieces of this puzzle:
  1. Who the opposition is and the methods they use.
  2. US backing of the opposition and what happens in other countries where US backed opposition is allowed to operate.
  3. And finally, what exactly the alleged “brutal crackdowns” by Maduro have actually entailed.

The Venezuelan Opposition: Peaceful Resistance or the ‘Moderate Rebels’ of Caracas?

If your primary source for news on the crisis in Venezuela is the US corporate media, it’s likely you have a certain image that comes to mind when you hear about the Venezuelan opposition. If you believe outlets like CNN or The New York Times it’s likely you conjure up an image of the opposition as a faceless mass of hungry and poor people risking it all to stand against tyranny in a massive fight for some subjective concepts like “freedom.”

Now this idea of brave everyday people protesting on the ground level probably has some truth behind it, but like most “uprisings” of this nature, the civilians in the street aren’t the ones responsible for the planning and logistics behind the scenes. The truth however, is that the forces that are actually behind this AstroTurf movement* are much more sinister than the average protester and promote methods that are well beyond anything that would be considered ‘peaceful and democratic’ opposition.

The opposition leaders may claim they share in the suffering endured by regular Venezuelans, and feel the same pain as those hurt the most by the economic isolation of the country but this is hardly the reality of their lives. In truth, many of the people who are seen as the leaders of the anti-Maduro movement (and who provide organizers essential financial support) live lives of extreme comfort and luxury while their pawns go hungry.

Many of the opposition leaders and financiers actually come from the wealthiest strata of Venezuelan society. While almost everyone is aware that the main driver of the Venezuelan economy is the nationalized oil industry, many people overlook or are unaware of the fact that most other sectors of the Venezuelan economy are still in the hands of private businesses.

Despite what many people may assume, both Chavez and Maduro had no problem with this arrangement. The most obvious example of this acceptance is the fact that even people like the pre-Chavez corrupt former oil tycoons still remain in Caracas with their stockpiles of ill-gotten wealth. These are the people who, in their own words, admit that “by day we throw stones,” and by night enjoy the exclusive night life that regular Venezuelans couldn’t even dream of. These oligarchs and crooks have opposed the government since Hugo Chavez won his first election and began distributing the nation’s wealth to the most poor Venezuelans as well as subsidizing and placing price controls on consumer goods.

And throwing stones isn’t all the opposition does.

Contrary to the rosy image of the opposition painted by US media the truth is that violence is one of their primary tools. The opposition has done everything from hiring poor local teens and providing them crude weapons like molotov cocktails and explosives, calling on international banks to cut off capital and further harm average Venezuelans to encouraging a military coup against the elected government. We know this is true, in part, thanks to independent US journalists who have been brave enough to expose the truth, such as Abby Martin, who opposition protesters promptly threatened to hang.



Now, you may be asking yourself, how does the opposition have the nerve to claim legitimacy and moral superiority while using such despicable methods? The answer to this question should be obvious based on earlier statements about US media’s representation of the opposition. The opposition’s claim of legitimacy is supported by the same people who support violent uprisings from Ukraine to Syria, the US government.

The Open Secret of US Subversion in Venezuela

Much like the recent history of Ukraine or Syria, the opposition in Venezuela persists thanks to political and financial support from Washington. Unlike Ukraine and Syria however, the US doesn’t even attempt to hide their connections to the oligarchs opposing Maduro.

The US shoves this support into the spotlight as an obvious insult to Maduro with the traditional arrogance that is expected when the US exercises what they consider to be their right to interfere in Latin America. There is such an absence of shame in the case of Venezuela that the Trump regime has no problem broadcasting events like when Trump met with the wife of opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez, who himself has taken calls from prominent US figures like Vice-President Mike Pence.

Opposition leaders don’t just enjoy the political lip service that the US gives to anyone who opposes leaders Washington hates. As mentioned above, one major factor that allows the opposition to carry on this way is the millions of dollars sent from the US over the past few years.

Money for the Venezuelan opposition is a crucial piece of Washington’s long-game strategy to topple the Bolivarian government. This cash has been flowing to Caracas since at least 2009, adding up to at least $49 million to date. Congress’ stated purpose behind this “aid” for Venezuela is the same as it is for any country hostile to the US: “promoting democracy, civil society, independent media, and democratic political parties.”

In the 2011 budget, $1 million was specifically designated for “political competition,” showing that similar to US strategies in places like the Middle East, Washington was supporting a mediocre and artificial opposition and waiting for an opportunity to unleash their manufactured leaders. In Venezuela this chance finally presented itself when the price of oil drastically dropped, in part due to market manipulation by the US.

When you lay out all the above factors, it should be obvious why Nicolas Maduro is so committed to fending off his opponents’ attacks. If you look at other countries where the US has used tactics like those employed in Venezuela, Maduro is relatively lucky that it took this long for the opposition to become violent.

Syria, Ukraine and the End Result of US Failures

Two countries where these US policies failed due to either the unexpected resilience of the state (Syria), or the failure to predict organic resistance to intervention (Ukraine), most likely serve as examples of what’s at stake to Maduro.

Syria is a case study in what happens when a “revolution” backed by the US ends, in what is essentially, a failure. Just like Venezuela, the US was so ecstatic that they finally saw an opportunity to topple President Bashar Al Assad that Washington was practically falling all over themselves to find groups to arm and fund.

This ambition for Syria of course ended with the US placing their trust in a variety of Sunni extremists who – predictably – had no intention of taking orders from the CIA or Pentagon. Washington even allowed their future foes in the Islamic State to operate freely with the hope they would get to Damascus. Venezuela’s opposition looks similar to these groups just in a different context. In fact, the Venezuelan opposition even held a fake referendum similar to ridiculous votes organized by the US’s precious Kurds.

Ukraine should also serve as an example; not just to Maduro but to the US and the opposition as well. If the US has their way in Venezuela and basically forces an unpopular oligarch into power they should expect resistance from the millions of people who benefited from and still support the current government. They should also prepare for new dissenters once the new government is installed and actually lays out their presumably neoliberal policies, which aren’t popular anywhere in Central of South America.

These reasons show why the only option available to Maduro is to resist. At the government level Maduro has worked completely within the confines of the law, while still enjoying massive support as evidenced by Venezuela’s voters support for the new Constituent Assembly in a country known for it’s election integrity. As far as what is happening at the street level, we must make sure we take the opposition’s actions into account and understand the damage they could eventually do.

By Jim Carey / Republished with permission / Geopolitics Alert / Report a typo
=========================================

* Astro Turf movement: een beweging die wordt betaald om protesten te organiseren (zoals in dit geval ook met het terroriseren van een stad, of wijken in een stad), maar de schijn ophoudt dat protesten en acties spontaan uit de bevolking komen.

Zie ook: 'Venezuela: Target of Economic Warfare'

       en: 'Venezuela’s US-Backed Opposition Turns Up The Violence Following Assembly Vote'

       en: '10 Things You Need to Know About the Terrorist Attack in Venezuela'

       en: 'Venezuelans in the Streets to Support Constituent Assembly'

       en: 'What Mainstream Media Got Wrong About Venezuela's Constituent Assembly Vote' (met mogelijkheid tot directe vertaling)

       en: 'The Left and Venezuela' (met mogelijkheid tot directe vertaling)

       en: 'Rondje Venezuela schoppen op Radio1.........'

       en: 'Venezuela moet en zal 'verlost' worden van Maduro, met 'oh wonder' een dikke rol van de VS en de reguliere westerse media'

       en: 'Venezuela ontwricht, wat de reguliere media u niet vertellen........'

       en: 'Venezuela: 'studentenprotest' wordt uitgevoerd door ingehuurde troepen.........'


      en: 'Venezolaanse regionale verkiezingen gehekeld door westen, terwijl internationale waarnemers deze als eerlijk beoordeelden..........'

Na plaatsing toegevoegd: realiseerde me vanavond dat ik nog vergeten ben in te gaan op de uitspraak van Trump, dat hij desnoods Venezuela militair zal aanpakken (als Maduro niet opstapt en zich suïcideert, stel ik me zo voor)....... Militair ingrijpen is inderdaad de laatste stap die de VS in deze gevallen neemt, nadat het de economie van een land voor een groot deel heeft vernietigd en een opstand op poten heeft gezet die niet leidt tot het juiste doel, een 'correcte' VS belangenbehartiging, door het liefst een VS vriendelijke dictator (die op zijn beurt schijt heeft aan het arme deel van de bevolking in zijn land...)........

Zoals gewoonlijk zijn de westerse ministers van Buitenlandse Zaken, zoals PvdA doedelzak Koenders, weer doodstil over deze grove opmerking, uh beter: openlijke bedreiging met oorlog....... Met andere woorden: men vindt het wel best als er alweer door toedoen van de VS duizenden, of zelfs tienduizenden doden vallen.... De NAVO schijnt intussen al aanwezig te zijn in Columbia, een buurland van Venezuela, dus............

woensdag 19 juli 2017

Venezuela ontwricht, wat de reguliere media u niet vertellen........

Venezuela is zwaar ontwricht, dit zou volgens de reguliere zogenaamd onafhankelijke media de schuld zijn van president Maduro, maar wat u niet zal horen of lezen in dezelfde media, is de echte oorzaak van alle ellende: een smerige economische oorlog van de VS tegen het Maduro bewind in Caracas. Al in 2015 werden winkelketens van VS bedrijven (veelal supermarkten) slecht of niet bevoorraad, een direct gevolg van het agressieve Obama beleid. Deze winkels staan nu al voor meer dan een jaar leeg, waardoor er flinke tekorten zijn......

Uiteraard is het de bedoeling dat hierdoor een opstand uitbreekt, echter daar heeft de VS het geduld niet voor, dus heeft de CIA de oppositie voor haar kar gespannen en samen hebben ze deze opstand op poten gezet (benieuwd wat e.e.a. gekost heeft, voor de opstand met eenzelfde opzet in Oekraïne gaf Hillary Clinton daar maar liefs 4 miljard dollar aan uit....)...

Volgens de reguliere 'onafhankelijke' media treedt het Venezolaanse bewind keihard op tegen de demonstranten en zouden er daardoor doden zijn gevallen, echter het omgekeerde is waar, het geweld komt in hoofdzaak van de (veelal ultrarechtse) demonstranten en omgekochte jongeren..........

Lees het volgende artikel waarin links (en 'humane mensen' die verder nadenken dan hun neus lang is) terecht wordt opgeroepen zich achter de regering Maduro te stellen. Oordeel zelf, onder het artikel kan u klikken voor een vertaling (voor meer berichten over Venezuela, klik op de link onder het artikel en/of klik op het label met die naam, direct onder dit bericht):


Time for the International Left to Take a Stand on Venezuela

By Gregory Wilpert

July 16, 2017 "Information Clearing House" -  The mainstream media consistently fails to report who is instigating the violence in this conflict.

Venezuela is heading towards an increasingly dangerous situation, in which open civil war could become a real possibility. So far over 100 people have been killed as a result of street protests, most of these deaths are the fault of the protesters themselves (to the extent that we know the cause).

The possibility of civil war becomes more likely as long as the international media obscure who is responsible for the violence and the international left remains on the sidelines in this conflict and fails to show solidarity with the Bolivarian socialist movement in Venezuela.

If the international left receives its news about Venezuela primarily from the international media, it is understandable why it is being so quiet. After all, this mainstream media consistently fails to report who is instigating the violence in this conflict.

For example, a follower of CNN or the New York Times would not know that of the 103 who have been killed as a result of street protests, 27 were the direct or indirect result of the protesters themselves. 
Another 14 were the result of lootings; in one prominent case, because looters set fire to a store and ended up getting engulfed in the flames themselves. Fourteen deaths are attributable to the actions of state authorities (where in almost all cases those responsible have been charged), and 44 are still under investigation or in dispute. This is according to data from the office of the Attorney General, which itself has recently become pro-opposition.

Also unknown to most consumers of the international media would be that opposition protesters detonated a bomb in the heart of Caracas on July 11, wounding seven National Guard soldiers or that a building belonging to the Supreme Court was burnt by opposition protesters on June 12th or that opposition protesters attacked a maternity hospital on May 17. 

In other words, it is possible that much of the international left has been misled about the violence in Venezuela; thinking that the government is the only one responsible, that President Nicolas Maduro has declared himself to be dictator for life (though he has actually confirmed that the presidential elections scheduled for late 2018 will proceed as planned), or that all dissent is punishable with prison (disputed by major opposition leader, Leopoldo Lopez – who was partly responsible for the post-election violence in 2014 – recently being released from prison and placed under house arrest).

If this is the reason for the silence on Venezuela, then the left should be ashamed for not having read its own critiques of the mainstream media.

All of the foregoing does not contradict that there are plenty of places where one might criticize the Maduro Government for having made mistakes with regard to how it has handled the current situation, both economically and politically. However, criticisms – of which I have made several myself – do not justify taking either a neutral or pro-opposition stance in this momentous conflict. As South African anti-apartheid activist Desmond Tutu once said, “If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.” 

Perhaps the Venezuelan case is also confusing to outsiders because President Maduro is in power and the opposition is not. It could thus be difficult to see the opposition as being an “oppressor.”

However, for an internationalist left, it should not be so confusing. After all, the opposition in Venezuela receives significant support not only from private businesses but also the U.S. Government, the international right and transnational capital.

Perhaps progressives feel that the Maduro Government has lost all democratic legitimacy and that this is why they cannot support it. According to the mainstream media coverage, Maduro canceled regional elections scheduled for December 2016, prevented the recall referendum from happening and neutralized the National Assembly.

Let’s take a brief look at each of these claims one by one. 

First, regional elections (state governors and mayors) were indeed supposed to take place in late 2016, but the National Electoral Council (CNE) postponed them with the argument that political parties needed to re-register first. Leaving aside the validity of this argument, the CNE rescheduled the elections recently for December 2017. This postponement of a scheduled election is not unprecedented in Venezuela because it happened before, back in 2004, when local elections were postponed for a full year. Back then, at the height of President Hugo Chavez’s power; hardly anyone objected.

As for the recall referendum, it was well known that it would take approximately ten months to organize between its initiation and its culmination. However, the opposition initiated the process in April 2016, far too late for the referendum to take place in 2016 as they wanted. If it takes place in 2017, there would be no new presidential election – according to the constitution – and the vice-president would take over for the remainder of the term.

Finally, with regard to the disqualification of the National Assembly, this was another self-inflicted wound on the part of the opposition. That is, even though the opposition had won 109 out of 167 seats (65%) outright, they insisted on swearing in three opposition members whose election was in dispute because of fraud claims.

As a result, the Supreme Court ruled that until these three members are removed, most decisions of the national assembly would not be valid.

In other words, none of the arguments against the democratic legitimacy of the Maduro Government hold much water. Moreover, polls repeatedly indicate that even though Maduro is fairly unpopular, a majority of Venezuelans want him to finish his term in office, which expires in January 2019. As a matter of fact, Maduro’s popularity (24% in March, 2017) is not as low as several other conservative presidents in Latin America at the moment, such as that of Mexico’s Enrique Pena Nieto (17% in March, 2017), Brazil’s Michel Temer (7% in June, 2017) or Colombia’s Juan Manuel Santos (14% in June, 2017). 

Now that we have addressed the possible reasons the international left has been reluctant to show solidarity with the Maduro Government and the Bolivarian socialist movement, we need to examine what “neutrality” in this situation would end up meaning – in other words, what allowing the opposition to come to power via an illegal and violent transition would mean. 

First and foremost, their coming to power will almost certainly mean that all Chavistas – whether they currently support President Maduro or not – will become targets for persecution. Although it was a long time ago, many Chavistas have not forgotten the “Caracazo” – when in February 1989, then-president Carlos Andres Perez meted out retaliation on poor neighborhoods for protesting against his government and wantonly killed somewhere between 400 and 1,000 people. More recently, during a short-lived coup against President Chávez in April 2002 the current opposition showed it was more than willing to unleash reprisals against Chavistas.

Most do not know this, but during the two-day coup over 60 Chavistas were killed in Venezuela – not including the 19 killed, on both sides of the political divide, in the lead-up to the coup. The post-election violence of April 2013 left 7 dead, and the Guarimbas of February to April 2014 left 43 dead. Although the death count in each of these cases represented a mix of opposition supporters, Chavistas and non-involved bystanders; the majority belonged to the Chavista side of the political divide.

Now, during the most recent wave of guarimbas, there have also been several incidents in which a Chavista, who was near an opposition protest, was chased and killed because protesters recognized them to be a Chavista in some way. 

In other words, the danger that Chavistas will be generally persecuted if the opposition should take over the government is very real. Even though the opposition includes reasonable individuals who would not support such a persecution, the current leadership of the opposition has done nothing to rein in the fascist tendencies within its own ranks. If anything, they have encouraged these tendencies.

Second, even though the opposition has not published a concrete plan for what it intends to do once in government – which is also one of the reasons the opposition remains almost as unpopular as the government – individual statements by opposition leaders indicate that they would immediately proceed to implement a neoliberal economic program along the lines of President Michel Temer in Brazil or Mauricio Macri in Argentina. They might succeed in reducing inflation and shortages this way, but at the expense of eliminating subsidies and social programs for the poor across the board. Also, they would roll back all of the policies supporting communal councils and communes that have been a cornerstone of participatory democracy in the Bolivarian revolution.

So, instead of silence, neutrality or indecision from the international left in the current conflict in Venezuela, what is needed is active solidarity with the Bolivarian socialist movement. Such solidarity means vehemently opposing all efforts to overthrow the government of President Maduro during his current term in office. Aside from the patent illegality that overthrowing the Maduro Government would represent, it would also literally be a deadly blow to Venezuela’s socialist movement and to the legacy of President Chavez. The international left does not even need to take a position on whether the proposed constitutional assembly or negotiations with the opposition is the best way to resolve the current crisis. 

That is really up to Venezuelans to decide. Opposing intervention and disseminating information on what is actually happening in Venezuela, though, are the two things where non-Venezuelans can play a constructive role. 

Gregory Wilpert is the author of Changing Venezuela by Taking Power: The History and Policies of the Chávez Government (Verso Books, 2007)

This article was first published by teleSUR -


Click for SpanishGermanDutchDanishFrench, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.
=======================

Hier de link naar het originele bericht, waarin ook 2 video's die ik niet kan overnemen, één met een pro-Maduro demo en een ander met de bekentenis van een tiener, die toegeeft betaald te zijn om te gaan demonstreren en geweld te gebruiken.

Zie ook: 'Venezuela moet en zal 'verlost' worden van Maduro, met 'oh wonder' een dikke rol van de VS en de reguliere westerse media'

       en: 'Venezolaanse regering treedt terecht op tegen de uiterst gewelddadige oppositie!!'

       en: 'Venezuela: Target of Economic Warfare'

       en: 'Venezuela’s US-Backed Opposition Turns Up The Violence Following Assembly Vote'

       en: '10 Things You Need to Know About the Terrorist Attack in Venezuela'

       en: 'Venezuelans in the Streets to Support Constituent Assembly'

       en: 'What Mainstream Media Got Wrong About Venezuela's Constituent Assembly Vote' (met mogelijkheid tot directe vertaling)

       en: 'The Left and Venezuela' (met mogelijkheid tot directe vertaling)


       en: 'Venezuela: 'studentenprotest' wordt uitgevoerd door ingehuurde troepen.........'




Mijn excuus voor de vormgeving.