Martha Colmenares on the Futility of the Vote in Venezuela

 

I am going to post a translation of an article written by Martha Colmenares for Diario de América last year following Venezuela's second national referendum on extending the term limit for the office of President, which Hugo Chavez called by executive decree, after losing an earlier vote by a significant margin.  The "official results"--i.e. "the lie"--of the vote were reported as a Chavez victory, supposedly giving him a one million vote margin along with the option of continuing his presidential mandate indefinitely, which is where things now stand.  Obviously I do not believe the vote was as announced, but that is another story altogether, part of which will be told in this blog entry.

Before I get to the translation I want to offer an apology to Martha for my incorrect use of the term Ni-Nis, roughly translated as "neither-nors," as one that applies to all electoral abstentionists, which I used in my post of yesterday, as well as in comments I made within a forum discussion on her web site.  Martha has corrected me, pointing out that the term really applies most of all to the apathetic within Venezuelan political life who will not vote for either Chavez or his opposition.  Martha would be much better described as a willful abstentionist who seeks other means to bring about change in Venezuela.  Though I adopted the usage of the term from others, that is no excuse.  Martha is one of the most dedicated bloggers anywhere when it comes to the issues affecting human freedom and democracy and she deserves to be treated with genuine deference for all she has done.

As a gesture of my sincere respect, and indeed admiration, for Martha and her work I have decided to translate an article which states her own view of the futility of Venezuelan politics in very clear terms.  I think everyone will be able to see that there is a solid foundation of evidence to prove that the electoral system under Chavez has been corrupted totally, I know I am convinced, and whatever one's outlook may be on the path to hopeful change, dealing with the electoral hurdle is a most significant problem.

Martha's answer to the obvious question of how Chavez can be confronted successfully and Venezuela reformed for the better is Mass Civil Disobedience.  I certainly do not argue with the proposal, though I do not see it as antithetical to electoral political activism.  And I especially should mention that when the moment comes for Chavez to go, I do not expect it will be as the consequence of an election result all by itself.  No; Chavez will have to be forced out in one way or another, I just believe that the electoral process must be part of the mix of the witches brew that will have to be concocted to make him leave.

I will let Martha tell her story in a way English-language readers can understand.  And with everything I know about her I want to take this moment to say that I know the story she tells is the truth.  You can believe Martha Colmenares.

TRANSLATION: Chavez's Rigged Election Was Announced February 17, 2009

Illegally, the official vote counts do not reflect real votes, and the regime does not even have to reveal the official results. By Martha Colmenares Introduction: Chavez's grand strategy is to continue balancing the appearance of democracy with the reality of totalitarianism. The main thing is that in a country where there is no law, whether one votes or not does not matter. The reason why it does not matter is very clear: The regime says what the results of the voting are and its word is final, as happened in the referendum last December 2, 2007, so that one has every reason to believe that the amendment's rejection was overwhelming, nevertheless, the regime also stated that the decision was almost a tie, and there left the matter to rest, and there was no legal recourse to know the official results, which certainly have little to do with the actual results. This says that, without legal restraints, the official vote counts do not reflect actual votes, and the regime does not even have to reveal the official results. It might be a first reason for understanding that whether one votes or not does not matter. The second reason is that you can win every amendment referendum in the world, and reform still proceeds as if Chavez had won instead. There can be no forgetting that the dictator Gómez governed Venezuela, literally, from his home for decades without being president of the republic. Chavez can put any candidate on the ballot as he pleases, including the terrorist "The Jackal", and still have himself elected President, so that he remains the boss, and everyone knows that he is the one giving orders. And if any corrective action is needed, then once again he can amend the constitution to create the office of "Head of Government", or "Head of State," "Meritorious Hero," "Lord Protector", "Ayatollah", etc., in a way in which Chavez continues being the one who gives orders. To illustrate this nothing more is needed than to see what happened with the constitutional reform that was rejected scarcely one year ago: the regime submitted it anew, and again, there was no legal recourse to stop it. The third reason is the farce that we are seeing today, that we voted on the same thing that was rejected one year ago. If this is the way things really were, we would have a presidential recall referendum every year as well, but as it turns out, since there is no law, the regime may submit the same referendum as many times as it wants to win it, but when it is opposed, then it is spared and it denies the right of people to decide, as happened when we rejected the consultative referendum, the recall petition signatures, re-signatures, all the damned signatures. The fourth reason is that there was no reason to pay attention to the call of those who showed up to vote NO on that occasion, because those people are the same ones who time and again were called upon for a vote against the regime and then left it to steal the election. Chavez's grand strategy is to continue balancing the appearance of democracy with the reality of totalitarianism. That is, one must recognize that Chavez has been very competent in maintaining the balance by allowing a little bit of criticism within the mass media to maintain the appearance of freedom of expression as he goes about censoring that criticism, keeping it at a "simmer"; while today, he has already shut down Radio Caracas's public signal, bought those of Venevisión, and by terrorizing journalists, newspapers, radio and television stations, he has created a climate of self-censorship that is steadily becoming more effective in silencing criticism altogether. When a naive person from afar asks: "But if Chavez is another gorilla, where are the thousands of disappeared or incarcerated journalists?", and there is no response, then that naive person becomes bored and no longer believes that there is a tyranny. The same thing is done with elections. Another balancing act, on the one hand creating the appearance of democracy, while on the other, through the use of official advantadge (i.e., using all the nation's resources to promote his candidates), through the biased application of laws, vote fraud, and by reholding elections he loses (which by the way, as he did last year, Chavez at times accepts a defeat here, as in government office X, or there, as in referendum Y), gaining the appearance of having his agenda approved by democratic elections. The farce is sufficiently well done so that both the dumb as well as the vivacious (those who get the most from Chavez) gain from the world they created, with each new election bringing another turn of the nut of totalitarianism. It bothers me that most of those who call themselves opponents of the Chavez regime resign themselves to playing his balancing game, to me it is very clear that in this manner they do not achieve anything more than giving him the legitimacy he needs to put an end to the awakening of the world community who would be the only ones who could put the brakes on him, giving shelter to the defenders of democracy in Venezuela and denying him international support for his regime. The reason why there are politicians in Venezuela still calling people out to vote is easy to explain: To legitimize the regime in elections means that the regime has to concede just a small share of its power to them, and that is what politicians calling people out to vote are seeking. As we have seen, it matters little whether or not people elect an opponent of Chavez, because if they elect a Chavista, the one they choose steals what is dear to people, and if they choose an anti-Chavista, then the Chavez regime takes away resources and designated authority (as is happening with the recently elected governors and mayors) only to give those resources and powers to their own followers so that they in turn become the ones who do the stealing. Therefore I say that the people are screwed every which way. Indeed, it seems appropriate to clarify that although Chavez has been competent in maintaining the critical balance, he has stumbled more than once, including in April 2002, which, we remember, was because Chávez needed to purge the oil industry of qualified personnel to fill it with his most loyal supporters, and then, he created that huge provocation by humiliating and insulting its managers so as to force his opposition to reveal itself in protests; the problem is that the provocation was so great that the protest literally spun out of control and he lost the presidency when he ordered the killing of some of the two million protesters demanding his resignation and was disobeyed. Which brings me to the last part of this introductory reflection, the manner of defending democracy in Venezuela is not voting, because in that way what can be achieved at the ballot box (if anything!) is lost a little at a time indirectly legitimizing the Chavez regime which does exactly the opposite of what was won at the polls; but rather by DISOBEYING. The regime must be disobeyed in every way possible; but before doing so, we must organize ourselves so that everyone acts at the same time. What happened this past February 15th, 2009 in the process of voting on the term limit amendment? In a shameless use of official advantadge, motorized gangs intimidated the citizenry starting at dawn, up to the point where Chavista bands injured people with baseball bats and chains. It happened the day before and the leadership of the CNE turned a blind eye. Of course that went unpunished. So be it, the proclamation of victory went out on the state channel with that of Chavez's own PSUV party, when it was prohibited, as ordered by the man himself, so that they would close any media outlet that issued anticipated results. How could they know the results as early as 4 pm? Clearly, that is why they lengthened the process two more hours, when voting hurriedly was not justified. At 4 p.m. the "No" votes exceeded the "Yes" by more than 10.5% and they then nailed it down, using WI-Fi communications between 4 and 6 p.m.; the Chavistas were supposedly celebrating their victory already at 4 p.m. A pro-Chavez governor voted twice, tore up ballots, committed electoral crimes and nothing was done, on the other hand the student leadership was raided by state security forces according to some five witness affidavits. Chavez used the daily television channels to insult us, everything that gave him pleasure, he told us he was going to grind us up dozens of times. What does this mean? That Chavez was bragging about his rigged election. Rigging the electoral registry, the disaster of the voting machines and, is there anything here that Chavez does not own? The Supreme Court, National Assembly, electoral office, militias, army, public ministry, money, oil, everything, everything. No one wins against all this. In case this is not shameful enough, what about the statements of the "opposition leadership" which legitimized or are legitimizing an electoral office that is controlled by Chavez? They even went so far as to cheerfully recognize the results of five million for the opposition to six for the Chavistas. In conclusion, I am ashamed of this "opposition leadership" (which does not represent me) that tries to ignore what can only be called ongoing electoral fraud, and in its place goes on speaking such nonsense as "if they lost it was because of electoral abstention" and speaking poorly of the abstentionists and telling I do not know how many more fairy tales ...

This is a perspective worth knowing.

StJacques

 

Read More. . . .

Chavez Removes the Mask: It Will Be Dictatorship or Freedom

 

"Democracy" Under Chavez:  A National Guardsman Holds a New, or Perhaps Very Old, Type of Weapon Known as the Garrampiño to Intimidate Protesters

A Political Meltdown in Venezuela?

Things are heating up in Venezuela in ways we have not seen before.  After revoking the broadcast license for independent television station RCTV in 2007, which removed it from the public airwaves in 2008, Hugo Chavez has now forced Venezuelan cable television services to cease providing the RCTV channel to their subscribers, along with numerous other stations he regards as threatening to his regime. This comes on the heels of his closure of some 150 radio stations who did not offer what he deems to be the proper level of support for his policies. Protests have sprouted up all over the country, though the strongest have been very large student-led demonstrations in Caracas and also in the western state of Merida, as police and national guard units have violently responded to what appears to verge on a mass uprising.  There have been at least two deaths thus far, but the situation threatens to take a turn for the worse, particularly in Merida, where a new phenomenon has emerged within the Venezuelan resistance.

In the protests in Merida, the opposition has shot back.

The demonstrations in Merida took an ugly turn Monday when protesters responded to an appearance by the pro-Chavez Tupumaro militia who joined National Guardsmen struggling to resist protesters and restrict their movements when shots felled a 16 year old Chavez supporter named Yorsinio José Carrillo Torres. Other shots ensued, with at least one volley coming from the protesters themselves, who wounded several guardsmen, one of whom was taken to intensive care. An anti-Chavista student was murdered later in the week, which Daniel Duquenal reports was likely the work of the Tupumaro acting in retaliation.

Pro-Chavez Tupumaro Militia Members in Merida Carry the Coffin of 16 year old Yorsinio José Carrillo Torres, Killed Last Monday Source:  El Nacional

A National Guardsman Wounded in Merida is Taken to Intensive Care Source:  El Nacional

The protests have spread across the entire country to include the states of Merida, Lara, Zulia, and more. And the results are revealing cracks among Chavez's former supporters. There have been resignations from his cabinet, forcing him to name a new Vice President and Defense Minister. With mounting protests in the state of Lara, Chavez has threatened to nationalize its police force, but its governor and former ally Henry Falcon has rejected the takeover stating that the police in the state have "for months understood the necessity of their internal transformation so as to create an ethical and responsible compromise with the people of Lara." The implications of Falcon's use of the adjectives "ethical" and "responsible" provide some indication of the internal debate which must now be taking place among Chavez's supporters; a most telling sign of the pace and direction of political change in the country.

Henry Falcon, Governor of the State of Lara and Historically a Chavez Ally, Speaks to the Press on Friday, Rejecting Chavez's Threat to Nationalize the Lara State Police Source:  Noticias24.com

Student Protests in Caracas:  The Center of the Storm

The driving force behind the protests now underway all over Venezuela is clearly the activism of university students in Caracas, who have shown up every day this week to demonstrate and at times, especially last Monday, in the tens of thousands.  They are presenting a unified resistance to the closure of RCTV and their dogged, stubborn insistence upon change is igniting and emboldening anti-Chavista elements across the country.

Numbers Matter:  Caracas Students Amassed for a Demonstration Against Closure of RCTV Earlier This Week Source: Noticias24.com

Students Arriving for Demonstration Source: Noticias24.com

The student demonstrations last Monday were peaceful in nature until they attempted to approach the Venezuelan communications agency offices of Conatel, when the police retaliated with tear gas and beatings to disperse them, a response that led to some of the students throwing rocks and returning the tear gas canisters in a substantial display of bravery in the face of intimidation from the regime. 

A Venezuelan Student Wearing a Gas Mask Throws a Tear Gas Canister Back at Caracas Police Last Monday Source: Noticias24.com

The Chavez government's retaliation against the students has begun, and it is taking various forms. Andres Bello Catholic University is practically under a state of siege at this time, and students are being arrested, detained, beaten, and otherwise harassed as they come and go from the university grounds. Chavez refers to this move as a "revolutionary action," though the rest of us might view it as simple terror. And the intimidation of student protesters has gone all the way to torture, a charge the Chavez regime has unsuccessfully denied.

Evidence of Chavez Regime Torture:  Students Injured at Hands of Venezuelan Police My thanks to everyone at Babalú

Analysis:  Something Old, Something New

As has always been the case, it is very difficult to gauge the current political climate throughout Venezuela in terms of the impact of the closure of RCTV, the student demonstrations and larger protests around the country, and the at times brutal response of the Chavez regime. But there is now clearly something new in the mix; the opposition is becoming emboldened and for a number of reasons. RCTV has been one of the most popular television channels in the country for years, and this has as much to do with soap operas and other entertainment, i.e. "non-news," programming as anything else. Its closure cannot be viewed with satisfaction in the country by very many Venezuelans beyond the most disciplined Chavistas, an observation that is strengthened when the RCTV closure is grouped together with the other recent actions taken against hundreds of broadcast outlets in radio and television combined. And all of this is added on to the very real and serious complaints Venezuelans have with the regime for its gross mismanagement of practically all facets of the economy and public life. The students know they have an audience that is willing to listen.

But the most striking thing in my opinion is that the students themselves seem to be showing a newfound courage that leaves them optimistic about their prospects for success, and that is a little more difficult to explain. But take a look at the following photo of students within last Monday's demonstration:

Students Protesting in Caracas Last Monday Source: Noticias24.com

It is a purely subjective observation on my part, but I make it forcefully. There is something in those smiles and bright eyes that tells me they know something we don't. As best as I can explain it, they have seen the regime unmask itself before the Venezuelan people. Chavez recently acknowledged that he is a Marxist and what we are therefore seeing, in my opinion, are the steps necessary to put aside the trappings of Democracy and to impose dictatorship in its place. The divisions among Chavez's former supporters, the geographical breadth of the protests, and the intensity and courage of Venezuelan student activism tell me that he will fail and the students know it.

Chavez is on his way out.

Around the Blogosphere

The intensity of the recent protests in Venezuela has exploded within the blogosphere and it would be impossible to track it all. But I want to take this opportunity to identify the blogs I believe will offer the most informed insight and who I believe represent some of the finest work done on Venezuela that is now out there on the web.

Alek Boyd has really led the way, being one of the first to truly nail Chavez for what he is and who I acknowledge was a great influence upon my own decision to blog Latin American leftism. Check out his most recent commentary on the Wall Street Journal "weighing in" on the meltdown of the Chavez regime. I am ever an admirer of Gustavo Coronel, who blogs in both Spanish and English. Gustavo sees the significance of Chavez's clash with the students very clearly, give "dictatorship - vs - students: the death of the Chavez nightmare" a look, along with everything else. From within Venezuela, Daniel Duquenal's Venezuela News and Views blog is one of the very best and often has some of the finest insights delivered quickly and succinctly. The "Let's Do the Math on the Gerrymander" article in the Caracas Chronciles blog is only the most recent entry, keep an eye on the site for some excellent and serious analysis. Miguel at The Devil's Excrement has been posting some very fine content. I especially recommend his take on a recent and very influential editorial by Teodoro Petkoff of Tal Cual that seems to have touched Chavez to the quick, as he is now threatening retaliation against the newspaper.

Perhaps the first of the "Freedom Bloggers" on the web were the anti-Castro Cubans and/or Cuban-Americans--I wouldn't want to misname them--and they are not missing the significance of what is going down in Venezuela. The Babalú Blog is among the best at getting out the news in a hurry and you might find them among the first at reporting. Ziva Sahl's Blog for Cuba has been tracking what is going on, frequently in Spanish but at times in English, and very much worth a good look.

Finally, for those looking for exclusively Spanish content, I always recommend Martha Colmenares, who has been posting articles from Venezuelan news sources at a rapid pace recently and who does perhaps the finest job anywhere of "covering the bases"--I don't think Venezuelans would object to a baseball analogy--when it comes to presenting a comprehensive coverage of what is transpiring in the country she loves so dearly.

I will have much more to say on Venezuela in the coming days and months ahead. These are fascinating times.

StJacques
 

Read More. . . .

Venezuelan Blogger Martha Colmenares Threatened by Basque Terrorist Supporter

   

The Six Most Wanted ETA Terrorists, Left to Right, Top to Bottom: Aitzol Etxaburu, Ander Múgica, Eneko Zarrabeitia, Joseba Mikel Olza, Leire López and Saoia Sánchez.

It is with considerable anger that I must report that my very good friend and fellow Freedom Blogger Martha Colmenares has been threatened at her web site by an individual claiming to support the Basque terrorist group known as the ETA.

The threat, which was sent as a commentary response to Martha's post "Photos of the Most Sought-After ETA Terrorists," stated "walk carefully, the gun may be pointing towards you one day."

Intimidation is ugly under any circumstances, but especially so when it occurs in full view of the public.  Martha Colmenares has contacted French authorities, given that the IP address of the user who made the threat was traced to France, and she has forwarded all necessary information.

If anything should develop from this, I will post more.

In the meantime, I express my full support for and solidarity with Martha Colmenares, a true Freedom Blogger.

StJacques
   

Read More. . . .

One of My Blogs Published in Diario de América

   
Well; I opened this blog April 5 and a little less than seven weeks later I have one of my entries published in Diario de América.  I think I'm doing okay so far.

The entry is my May 15 posting "Before the Reyes Documents ..." in which I included a translation of an article Martha Colmenares had published at the end of January for the Spanish news service Minuto Digital.  Martha has written for Diario de América before and she was able to take the translation, along with my blog, and get them published.  Martha has been very supportive of my work and I am most grateful to her.

Un abrazo Martha

StJacques
   

Read More. . . .

Before the Reyes Documents: Martha Colmenares on Chavez's Ties to the FARC (translation included)

   

Interpol Secretary General Ronald Kenneth Noble

The confirmation of the authenticity of the documents taken from the hard drives of former FARC leader Raul Reyes has been made.  In a press conference in Bogota on Thursday representatives from the Interpol computer forensics team who examined the four laptops at the request of the Colombian government made a full report to the world that presented their findings that the Colombian government did not insert new files, nor did they tamper with existing files, nor did they modify or alter the content of the hard drives in any way.  According to Interpol's Secretary General Ronald Kenneth Noble "the eight proofs [presented by the Colombian government] registered no modifications."  Noble went on to say "we did not request to be involved, but when the call came from Colombia we did not doubt that we would accept the task, even though we knew that this could create a lot of criticism."  Interpol also made clear that the volume of data to be examined was extensive, that analyzing it required the use of ten Interpol computers and more than four thousand hours of work time, and that there was too much data to do a thorough study of the content.

Conclusions:  Colombia did not mess with the evidence and Interpol is not going to comment on the full meaning of what the documents present.

I expect to see a rush on the part of many bloggers who have been waiting for this moment to trumpet the authenticity of the Reyes documents and I wish them well.  Some of these bloggers, like me for instance, have been studying Chavez for years and we've known the FARC connection was indisputable.  There have been some very shameful attempts on the part of Chavez idolators to discredit the information Colombia released to the public, in spite of some very good indications -- external evidence -- that events following in the wake of the seizure of the laptops; such as arrests in Thailand, the search of a FARC safe house in Costa Rica where $480,000 in cash was found, the seizure of 66 pounds of uranium in a home north of Bogota and more, all pointed to the likelihood that this was an intelligence bonanza.  But I want to take a step back from the cheering among the good guys right now and raise one very important question I consider timely at this moment.

Haven't the Colombians and Venezuelan dissidents been telling us that Chavez was directly behind the FARC, both for reasons of substantial and indisputable evidence along with his own openly declared policies and known personal history?

The answer is an obvious "yes," they have been informing the wider world.  But their repeated efforts to publicize the truth have been drowned out by the background noise of a concerted campaign to delegitimize them, and the story they tell, for their avowed opposition to leftist politics, as well as for the deliberate intent of a major news media establishment that neglects their view as either uninteresting or at odds with a political agenda they only attempt to disguise.

And what did we hear from these sources?  Well; let me put up a quick list:

The details of Hugo Chavez's personal biography going back to at least the late 1980's show a consistent involvement with the Latin American Left; including Cuba and the Sao Paulo Forum, where his most important contacts were established and from whom he received significant resources enabling his rise to power.

Chavez has openly endorsed the FARC and they have returned the favor likewise, a relationship that has been well-established since the late 1990's, as has been made clear in the public statements of both.

Chavez's support of the FARC has been a publicly-stated policy of the Venezuelan government from the earliest days of his regime.

Venezuelan government officials under Chavez have openly admitted that they support the FARC as a policy initiative.

Chavez's involvement in recent efforts to free kidnapped hostages of the FARC has only been cynical political theater as his regime has assisted in the kidnapping of its own countrymen.

With the authentication of the Reyes documents, it is now time to revisit the information that has come from these sources, whose stories have been vindicated in the content of the archived correspondence of a known terrorist leader.  I have been presenting a good deal of evidence over the past three weeks from the Colombian perspective.  I now want to return to an important Venezuelan dissident, Martha Colmenares, whose work I have highlighted before.

The following is a translation of an article by Martha which was posted on the Spanish news site Minuto Digital on January 29 of this year.  That's a full month before the attack on the FARC encampment in Ecuador where Reyes was killed.

Read the details and ask yourself why we did not hear more of this before March 1.

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

Translation:  Chavez's Relations with the FARC

Published January 29, 2008 | Author: Martha Colmenares

Chavez's relationship with his Colombian allies is longstanding, one part of it was kept secret, and another part has come into public view.  Before entering the Military Academy, Chavez was a communist agent, supervised by his brother Adan and together they must have begun their contacts with the Colombian guerrillas.

On leaving prison pardoned in 1994, he traveled to Colombia to look for political and financial support for his political aspirations in Venezuela, offering compensation in return if he achieved his aspirations for power.  Therefore he traveled to Havana in December 1994, where he was received at the airport by Fidel Castro himself.  The alliance with Castro gave Chavez a direct passport to communism in Colombia.  Already by 1990 Castro had formed the Forum of Sao Paolo (FSP) with all the communists who were left disbanded following the fall of the Berlin Wall.

In May 1995, Chavez traveled to Buenos Aires, picking up Argentine revisionist Norberto Ceresole, a denier of the Holocaust, on his way.  Both of them continued on to Montevideo, where leftist General Liber Seregni (of the Frente Amplio) received them, and who introduced Chavez and his MVR-200 (Bolivarian Revolutionary Movement - 200) at a meeting of the FSP.  The organization was holding its fifth gathering in that city.  Once enrolled in the Forum of Sao Paulo, Chavez took on a formal and functional relationship with the Communist Party of Colombia, the FARC and the ELN, who are also members of that organization.

In 1996, Chavez traveled to El Salvador to participate in the Sixth Meeting of the FSP.  This would serve as a setting to interact with the Colombian delegates, including the FARC guerrilla Raul Reyes, who later publicly expressed his sympathy for Chavez and who classified him as a "patriot."  That same year he said that the FARC are "about the same" as Chavez.

In January 1999, three weeks after assuming the presidency, Hugo Chavez publicly modified the traditional position of Venezuela regarding the Colombian guerrillas, who ceased to be enemies. Venezuela would be "neutral."  On October 2 of the same year, he told the news media that the guerrillas were no longer the common enemy of Colombia and Venezuela.  He previously had expressed his readiness for the ELN to carry out its national convention in Venezuela.  The terrorist group said that Chavez was a leader to follow.

There is a document from the year 2000 which states that Chavez was the candidate of the Colombian guerrillas.  This can be confirmed from a review of the clippings in the Venezuelan press at that time.

As early as February 2000, the FARC issued a statement supporting President Chavez.  Months later, the former director of the Venezuelan security agency DISIP (Directorate of Intelligence and Prevention Services), Jesus Urdaneta, said that Chavez was impelling the guerrillas against the government of Colombian President Andres Pastrana.

Pastrana denounced the fact that the Colombian government ordered him to deliver 300 thousand U.S. dollars to the Colombian guerrillas, adding that President Chavez always had wanted to give them arms.  The guerrillas were trying to launch a final offensive towards Bogota and overthrow the Pastrana government.

When the FARC linked the political party named Movimiento Bolivariano (Bolivarian Movement) with the "New Colombia," on the 5th of May, 2000, Chavez showed his satisfaction with the creation of the new party and publicly welcomed it.

On July 16, 2000, General Victor Cruz Weffer, one of the military leaders closest to Chavez, told the weekly newspaper Quinto Dia that the Colombian oligarchy was more dangerous than the guerrillas.

Since then, there have been numerous items of public evidence of the mutual support between Chavez and the Colombian Communists:  from the Communist Party, the Democratic Pole, the FARC and the ELN.  You can get enough of this evidence by regularly reading the FARC's website.

That sequence of events was denounced in Venezuela, by people such as the President of Fuerza Solidaria (Solidarity Force), Alejandro Peña Esclusa.  Even then, there were sufficient reasons to judge him for betrayal of the country.

In 2001, Hugo Chavez Frias refused to sign the Asuncion Declaration against Terrorism and Narcotics Trafficking in Paraguay to which the participating nations subscribed.

The insolent and shameless eulogy to the FARC's war crimes delivered at the National Assembly of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, during the presentation of the report on government management last Friday January 11, on the part of the sinister Chavez, has only ratified his pretensions of ending the stability of the continent's democratic countries, especially Colombia.

It is not left to anyone in the world to doubt his claims in the least.

Like those of a ruler who indignantly denies the existence of dozens of kidnapped Venezuelans, repudiated by the people of his country for that reason.  For his alleged playing of the hero of the show, as we became witnesses to the occasion of the liberation of the Colombians Clara Rojas and Consuelo Gonzalez.

Capable of bathing his country and his neighbor, Colombia, in blood to impose these heartless ones responsible for crimes against humanity with such force.  It was his decree of war to the death. Hence "Socialism, Homeland or Death," his sentence of judgment engraved in stone.

But outside the spirit of that decree of War to the Death, which on June 15, 1813 the headquarters of Trujillo, Venezuela left as testimony to the Liberator Simón Bolívar, in response to the crimes committed by the worldly Domingo de Monteverde.

Spaniards and Canarians, count on death, even if indifferent, if you do not actively work in favor of the independence of America.  Americans, count on life, even if guilty.  (see note below)

In no way does this correspond to the patriotic sentiment of the Liberator, that of Hugo Chavez who proclaims these murdering insurgents of the FARC "Bolivarians."

Chavez only profanes Bolivar every time he invokes him.

Martha Colmenares

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

Translator's Note:  This italicized quote is the final line from Simon Bolivar's famous Decree of War to the Death of June 15, 1813.

StJacques
   

Read More. . . .

What Happened on April 11, 2002? Martha Colmenares Gives the Opposition's Version of Events (Translation)

   


Venezuelan Dissident and Human Rights Activist Martha Colmenares

I am awaiting news of the demonstration today in Caracas that will commemorate the events of the protest march of April 11, 2002 against Hugo Chavez's politicization of the state-owned Venezuelan oil company, PDVSA, in which some 19 demonstrators were killed and an additional 150 were wounded when paramilitary and military forces opened fire on them. This sad event, whose official story is only referred to obliquely within the Chavez-controlled Venezuelan government, has become a rallying point for the Venezuelan opposition, which demands a full investigation into what happened and insists that the government's refusal to give them one represents a cover-up of an official order to "shoot to kill" demonstrators for their opposition to Chavez.

Before I get that news, I think it might be useful to post a translation of a statement of one member of the Chavez opposition, Martha Colmenares, which was published on the Diario de América web site on April 4. There is much about Martha Colmenares that is worth knowing. Not only has she done a lot to inform the world outside of Venezuela, and even within it, about what the realities of life under Chavez truly are, she has also done some very notable work on behalf of political prisoners in Venezuela, Cuba, and elsewhere. I'm going to tell her story in more detail when I have time, but for now I simply want to get this translation up for everyone to see the version of the Venezuelan opposition as to what really happened on that terrible day in Venezuelan history.

And just to state my own take on all of this, I am convinced that the informed history we will see after Chavez will bear out the facts as Martha Colmenares presents them.

My personal notes: The "4th of February" coup you will see referenced in Martha Colmenares' statement refers to a February 4, 1992 coup attempt involving Hugo Chavez and other Venezuelan military officers. Also, Pedro Carmona was the interim President of Venezuela for about 36 hours from April 12-13, 2002 during the tumultous events surrounding this story.


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

Translation: April 11, 2002:  Day of Slaughter in Venezuela

04/11/2008

Chavez: ". . . stained with the blood of Venezuelans." The ex-coup participant of the 4th of February [1992], F. Arias Cardenas, said it. In spite of that, years later he was named Venezuelan Ambassador to the UN by Chavez.

April 11, 2002:  Day of Slaughter in Venezuela

I need to do a retrospective of the events of April, 2002, to undo that lie that Chavez usually ends up imposing. It is a fiction of the type that is easier to believe than the reality. For those who do not know democracy as Venezuelans know it, and suffer from it, Hugo Chavez is nothing more than a lying, rustic tropical dictator.

By Martha Colmenares

The alleged coup d'etat in April, 2002 began when the Venezuelan people were provoked to defend the professional model of the industrial oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, or PDVSA.

That provocation consisted of the dismissal of its professional employees, all those who were resisting the politicization of the state-owned oil company, on the Sunday before the massacre. The greater impudence came years later, when in a recent speech before the National Assembly, he recognized provoking the confrontation because it was necessary.

The strategy was that in the foreseeable national reaction, the professionals in the industry would protest, which would identify them, assisting the subsequent purge, or "political cleansing."

On consecutive occasions the Venezuelan government has provoked people (and even institutions!) with insults that they are obstacles to reaching and enjoying the absolute power about which they obsess. Lamentably, the provocation is effective because this way it forces people to act inopportunely, while Chávez is completely prepared to distort and to manipulate the interpretations of events, and thus always wins.

As demonstrators who subscribed [to a common goal], we found ourselves within a march of more than one million two hundred thousand people, in exceptional places, by reason of which we can affirm with the authority of eyewitnesses present, how armed paramilitary groups sympathetic to the government of Hugo Chavez, as well as the military, were slaughtering the demonstrators.

What resulted were 19 dead and hundreds of gravely wounded, while the government impeded people from knowing what was in fact happening, forcing a joint television transmission on national "chains," of a historically insipid address of President Chavez, which left it very clear that he was simply killing time while the slaughter occurred.

The confusion of the day began when the slaughter of the demonstrators was not carried out on the scale which the regime attempted, but that on the contrary, military men of the highest confidence of the President, such as General Rosendo, disobeyed orders to slaughter the demonstrators. The series of facts of that day is so detailed, that its dispassionate chronicle is unbelievable:

At night, the only side that managed to move military tanks to the street was the pro-government side, which was under the control, as would be known much later, of the Minister of Defense, General Jorge Luis Garcia Carneiro, who took a detachment of tanks to protect the seat of government, the Miraflores Palace.

Later around midnight, the day of the 12th, it was also released on national broadcast "chains" before the world, that General Lucas Rincon Romero, was accompanied by the High Command to announce that Chavez had resigned, and they thus said:

"The members of the Military High Command of the National Armed Forces of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela deplore the lamentable events that happened in the capital city yesterday. Facing such facts it has requested, of the President, the resignation from his duties, which he accepted."  (Translator's Note: This is on the 2nd video on this page at MarthaColmenares.com)

Pay attention that he [Chavez] was never called to make a statement and at that moment enjoyed the sanctuary of an embassy.

Nevertheless, the implosion of the regime was such that the President was negotiating through the Venezuelan Episcopal Conference the delivery of power to the military in rebellion. In rebellion, yes, but in *passive* rebellion refusing to accept the genocidal orders of the regime. Almost immediately, the political facts which followed led to a scramble for power in the high spheres and the resulting unconstitutional decree emanating from Pedro Carmona. What happened was that the same military officers who, with their ascendancy over the armed forces, managed to depose tyranny, doubtlessly gave it back safe and sound to Hugo Chavez.

As you may appreciate, Hugo Chavez was not killed in custody of the military which disobeyed his order to slaughter the demonstrators. He was not tortured, he was not beaten, nothing! He was only under custody, and he was given back the presidency being respected in his physical integrity at every moment.

Most atypical for a supposed coup d'etat ... How I would like Chavez to respect the physical integrity of his political prisoners in the way the supposed coup participants respected his!

A little afterwards, the very same Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ), literally filled with Chavistas, which is to say, mediocre jurists who came to the Supreme Court of Venezuela only because they were considered pieces of officialdom, absolved the military who disobeyed [the order to] slaughter from accusations of coup participation.

And fully enjoying absolute power, Chavez successively named his great latecomers Lucas Rincon and Garcia Carneiro as ministers; dismantling the Supreme Court with jurists who were even more mediocre, but more loyal to his regime, dismantling other institutions like the National Electoral Council (CNE).

Also, he purged the armed forces of institutionally experienced officials, he destroyed the Metropolitain Police of Caracas, he jailed the commissioners (Simonovis, Forero, Vivas) and the policemen who defended us at the march, and of course, he began the dismantling of the professional petroleum industry, substituting it with the "red, pink" PDVSA of today.

[What is] very significant, the statements in an interview, as a result of these deeds, on the part of the ex-coup participant of the 4th of February [1992], Francisco Arias Cardenas, who would later become during his years in government, the Ambassador of Venezuela to the UN: "Chavez: a murderer stained with the blood of Venezuelans." (Note: This statement is visible at this page on YouTube.com).

The only coup d'etats in the last 40 years of the history of Venezuela have Hugo Chavez as protagonist: the military coups of February and November of 1992 against a legitimately constituted government.

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

You will also find this article referenced at this page on MarthaColmenares.com.

Read More. . . .

March in Caracas Friday: Remember 11 April 2002

One of the most heartbreaking events of recent Venezuelan history was the "April 11 Massacre" in Caracas on April 11, 2002, in which some 19 protestors marching against Hugo Chavez were killed and about 150 more wounded. It remains a difficult story to tell because Chavez has never permitted an open investigation into the matter, which leaves popular discussion exactly where he wants it -- his version versus our version.

Tomorrow there will be a march in Caracas to commemorate the sad event organized by the "11 Group" (Grupo 11), who have been working to get the story told and charges pressed against whoever is responsible.

I'm translating and posting an announcement of the march now up in at Marthacolmenares.com:

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

Translation: 11 Group, For the Victims of April 11th, Crystal Park, this 4/11

The 11 Group, "We Want to Know," this Friday 11 April 2008, will be present in Crystal Park [Parque Cristal], at the Monument of the Fallen, [Monumento de los Caidos] the Great Woods [Los Palos Grandes] at 7 p.m. (after concentrating in Brion Plaza gathered in line at 4 p.m.). One more time, as on every 11th of the month, having [continued for] 1 year and five months, to honor the memory of all those who were killed in that glorious peaceful march that was converted into a massacre the 11th of April, 2002. There were 19 people killed and more than 150 injured by bullets, and at present no one is held either responsible, convicted, or judged, impartially and objectively, for either the dead or the wounded. For this charge we demand justice, the commitment of this group, the day of the 11th, as an emblem of the crimes, political prisoners and politically persecuted since 1999 and against terrorism. It is Forbidden to Forget! . . .

Among the gravely wounded, a dear friend, Malvina Pesate. A bullet hit her cheek destroying the bones of her face, without even having an open investigation to determine the causes of her serious injury, these days thanks to God she has recovered.

After the 11th of April, 2002, a purge unleashed the armed forces from institutionalized officials, it destroyed the Metropolitan Police of Caracas, imprisoning its Commissioners (Simonovis, Forero, Vivas) and the police who had defended us, and of course, began the dismantling of the professional oil industry substituting it with the "red" PDVSA of today and with that, thousands of employees were dismissed.

(After the concentration in Brion Plaza which gathers in line at 4 p.m.)

[The march] will proceed to the floral offering and the traditional minute of silence summoned by the directors and founding members: Luis Semprum, Maria Eugenia Fossi, Irma Gonzalez and whoever signs up. Accompanied by the brave founders, among whom Adela and Antonio Riso, Noel Leal, are our collaborating friends and relatives of some of the victims.

Day: Friday 11 April 2008
Time: 7:00 p.m.
Place: Monumento de los Caídos del 11A, In front of Parque Cristal, Los Palos Grandes

Our Motto: "The Desire of Freedom through Truth." Los Peones Negros

For the 11 Group
Martha Colmenares

Read More. . . .