From: "J.D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Personally, I find it funny that these people > criticized America for supporting despotic leaders > during the Cold War, but when we wink and nod at the > demise of a despot - well, we get bashed for that too. >
John, what group was behind the coup? Democrats? No, it was the generals and the ultra rich. Sound familiar? Let's see now, what was the first act of the plotters? Oh yes, suspend the constitution and close the parliament. This was a coup for democracy? No. And after all those years of the US preaching the role of democracy, a lesson that, however fragile all the rest of central and south America has learnt, which bastion of democracy came out and supported the coup? And then, irony of ironies, had to immediately backtrack when POPULAR OPINION in Venezuela stymied the coup. To quote from that US bashing organ, the NY Times: "And Mr. Bush's message, that the United States is defending freedom and liberty, was muddled in recent days by allegations that his administration did not discourage the overthrow of the elected president of Venezuela, Hugo Ch�vez, and was too quick to applaud his ouster." And here's a letter to the editor: "After Sept. 11, many Americans found themselves astonished at the level of resentment felt around the world against the United States. Events in Venezuela should give Americans a clue as to one of the reasons for this resentment: American hypocrisy in its foreign policy. Americans have long declared democracy and human rights to be the cornerstones of their foreign policy. But when given an opportunity in Venezuela to denounce an undemocratic coup, the United States chose to blame President Hugo Ch�vez for bringing it upon himself. Latin America doesn't have as short a memory as America does. We remember America's support for Pinochet of Chile, Somoza of Nicaragua and Trujillo of the Dominican Republic. We see how the United States Navy treats the people of Vieques. Venezuela is only the latest proof of what we have suspected all along: that America cannot be counted on to help us defend democracy if this defense contravenes its interests. LUIS E. HESTRES Washington, April 16, 2002" Brett: Same old same old, there John. No matter how undemocratic Chavez acted - and that of course depends on which group of Venezuelans you listen to - he was democratically elected and ousted in a military-business led coup. The old right wing groups of old. Oh, and suddenly oil production was to increase. What a coincidence. And who supported that coup? The US. Full stop. Period. End. Here's Paul Krugman, in "Losing Latin America" in the NYT Op/Ed: "Many people, myself included, would agree that Hugo Ch�vez is not the president Venezuela needs. He happens, however, to be the president Venezuela elected - freely, fairly and constitutionally. That's why all the democratic nations of the Western Hemisphere, however much they may dislike Mr. Ch�vez, denounced last week's attempted coup against him. All the democratic nations, that is, except one. Here's how the BBC put it: "Far from condemning the ouster of a democratically elected president, U.S. officials blamed the crisis on Mr. Ch�vez himself," and they were "clearly pleased with the result" - even though the new interim government proceeded to abolish the legislature, the judiciary and the Constitution. They were presumably less pleased when the coup attempt collapsed. The BBC again: "President Ch�vez's comeback has . . . left Washington looking rather stupid." The national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, didn't help that impression when, incredibly, she cautioned the restored president to "respect constitutional processes." Surely the worst thing about this episode is the betrayal of our democratic principles; "of the people, by the people, for the people" isn't supposed to be followed by the words "as long as it suits U.S. interests." end quote: for full article, see http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/16/opinion/16KRUG.html And then you get: "NEWS | April 18, 2002 Bush Urges Chavez to Embrace Democracy By REUTERS (Reuters) News WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush said Thursday that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez should learn from the turmoil that led to his brief ouster, ..." ha ha ha ha ha ... That's really selling that old democracy there now, isn't John. Let's try the Washington Post, another pinko news-sheet: "Paging U.S. Policy, Paging U.S. Policy Still seems to be some confusion at the U.S. Embassy in Caracas in the wake of the botched coup attempt last week. The embassy's Web site in English lists three official statements on April 12, hours after the coup. But the pages are blank for "Events in Venezuela: Change in Government" and "U.S.-Spain Joint Statement on the Situation in Venezuela." Clicking on the "Statement by the Ambassador of the United States (Spanish)" at least gets something, but it's an Oct. 15 press release on "Humanitarian Aid to the Afghan People." Fortunately, Ambassador Charles Shapiro's statement is available in the Spanish version. Shapiro, without mentioning the removal of elected President Hugo Chavez, applauds the interim government's pledge to investigate the former government's apparent shooting of demonstrators and lauds its "intention to strengthen democratic institutions and processes within a framework of respect for human and civil rights." Unfortunately, the military-installed (now former) president, businessman Pedro Carmona, figured the way to go democratic would be to abolish the country's Congress. Must have lost something in the translations." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13170-2002Apr19.html Brett: So, isn't it funny that people: > criticise the US America for supporting despotic leaders > during the Cold War, but when we wink and nod at the > demise of a despot - well, we get bashed for that too. Apart from the fact that you just happened to be supporting another batch of despotic leaders (the plotters) who got there by the gun and not the ballot. Deja vu. Brett
