De: "Robert Alonso" robertalonso1997@hotmail.com Fecha: Lun, 21 de Abril de 2003, 8:20 am

POSTULADOS DEL “MOVIMIENTO DE DEFENSA RADICAL” (M.D.R.)

1.- Creemos que Venezuela transcurre en la inercia producida por la indiferencia, la ignorancia hacia el enemigo que se combate y la apatía producto de los fracasos pasados inmediatos. 2.- Creemos que con cada segundo de inercia nos enfilamos hacia la total y absoluta pérdida de la patria. 3.- Creemos en la recuperación de Venezuela para no volver a los errores presentes ni del pasado. 4.- Creemos en nuestro deber constitucional de recuperar y defender a Venezuela con todos los medios a nuestro alcance, incluyendo los radicales si fuese necesario. 5.- Creemos en poderes ABSOLUTAMENTE INDEPENDIENTES y en la importancia de una EXAGERADA INDEPENDENCIA (si eso fuese posible) del Poder Judicial. 6.- Creemos que el régimen de Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías es de disciplina marxista, leninista y castrista. 7.- Creemos que tan pronto el régimen de Hugo Chávez se sienta seguro del control para-militar y militar a niveles medios y bajos, se declarará oficialmente dictatorial, lo que generará una tragedia jamás imaginada en Venezuela. 8.- Creemos que de producirse un referendo consultivo bajo la supervisión internacional, Hugo Chávez perdería irremediablemente el poder y con él caerían todos aquellos que conforman la nueva clase dirigente. Por lo tanto, no habrá tal referendo consultivo y el régimen acudirá a cualquier artimaña para prevenirlo, violarlo o amañarlo. 9.- Creemos que luego de burlar el mandato soberano al referendo revocatorio – si no antes -- habrá que salir a defender la patria por la vía radical. 10.- Creemos en la fuerza de millones de venezolanos que no estamos dispuestos a perder a Venezuela. 11.- Creemos que la responsabilidad por la defensa de la patria – por la vía radical si fuese necesario – debe ser compartida por el “trípode” conformado por las organizaciones políticas, el estamento militar y por la sociedad civil organizada. 12.- Creemos en el liderazgo colectivo de la sociedad civil organizada y que los millones que la conforman han demostrado tener su propia fuerza y poder de convocatoria independiente de las otras dos patas del “trípode” y que volverán a ser factor determinante en el momento en que estén dadas las condiciones para la defensa y final recuperación de la patria. 13.- Creemos que el M.D.R. debe divulgar la capacidad de poder y acción autónoma que se centra en la sociedad civil organizada para ejercer el liderazgo colectivo dentro del mencionado “trípode”. 14.- Creemos que nuestra función como movimiento de defensa es educar a la población sobre la capacidad de acción colectiva en función de la recuperación de la patria, llegado el momento indicado e inconfundible en el cual Venezuela reclame nuestro máximo sacrificio. 15.- Creemos que nuestra función como M.D.R. es propiciar ese momento indicado así como coordinar las acciones de defensa a partir de la sociedad civil organizada y cohesionada bajo nuestro mismo objetivo. 16.- Creemos que la dirigencia militar actual no está en capacidad para ordenar la represión colectiva en caso de que la sociedad civil organizada decidiese tomar las calles de las principales ciudades de Venezuela con el fin de recuperar la patria aún a costa de las vidas de muchos de nosotros. 17.- Creemos en el sentimiento de hermandad y solidaridad de la inmensa mayoría de nuestros oficiales altos medianos y bajos, quienes – estamos absolutamente seguros -- comparten el pensamiento de nuestro Libertador en el cual se maldice al soldado que vuelva sus armas contra el pueblo. 18.- Creemos en una acción final y colectiva de calle que obligue a nuestros militares a definirse si están a favor de una supuesta revolución que obedece a intereses extranjeros CASTRO-COMUNISTAS o se pondrán al lado de la mayoría que quiere una patria libre y soberana sin los defectos que hemos venido arrastrando desde la independencia. 19.- Creemos en la recuperación de la patria para organizar de inmediato unas elecciones universales en las que se sienta representado la totalidad del pueblo venezolano. 20.- Creemos en el sagrado derecho que tenemos de escoger nuestro propio destino sin inherencias externas que obedezcan a intereses extranjeros.

Caracas, a los 20 días del mes de abril de 2003

Robert Alonso robertalonso2003@cantv.net

Charlotte Posted on Fri, Apr. 18, 2003 DIANNE WHITACRE Staff Writer

With the Easter weekend starting today, Carolina drivers will find gasoline prices down about 10 cents from a month ago.

It's the fourth consecutive week that prices have dropped as the war in Iraq winds down, supplies increase and the oil market loses its jitters.

N.C. prices average $1.54 a gallon for regular and $1.47 in South Carolina, where gas taxes are lower. In North Carolina, they range from a low of $1.49 in Raleigh to $1.60 in Boone, according to AAA Carolinas. South Carolina prices range from $1.39 in Spartanburg to $1.55 in Myrtle Beach.

Ginger and Pete Maxwell of south Charlotte were gassing up their Chrysler van Thursday on their way to Emerald Isle. "We'd go to the beach whether gas was $1 a gallon or $5 a gallon," Pete Maxwell said. "But I can't complain about the price drop."

Federal analysts predict gas will average $1.56 a gallon nationally this summer, up from $1.39 last summer. The national average is $1.58. The U.S. Department of Energy says uncertainties in the Middle East, Nigeria and Venezuela still affect the market.

The department also expects gas sales to increase 1.6 percent this summer over last as the recession eases and travel goes up.

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries announced it will hold an emergency meeting next week to discuss cutting production. World supplies are up because of extra exports by Saudi Arabia.

Earlier this year, on the eve of war, a few private analysts predicted prices over $2 a gallon. Prices peaked well short of that in the Carolinas. Prices for regular were a high of $1.63 in North Carolina and $1.58 in South Carolina, in mid-March.

Crude oil prices reached almost $40 a barrel before the start of the Iraqi war, but have fallen to less than $30 a barrel -- its lowest price in five months.

The United States imports 55 percent of its petroleum.

The Washington Times EDITORIAL • April 18, 2003

     As Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez celebrated the anniversary of his triumph over a short-lived coup against him this month, another, very different kind of threat emerged — the possibility of default. A combination of tight financing and excessively optimistic economic presumptions could lead to Venezuela to default on its debt this year, particularly if Mr. Chavez fails to hold a referendum on the need for new elections, as he agreed to do last Friday. Also critical to Venezuela's ability to pay will be the price of oil, which is expected to trend downward as the military campaign in Iraq comes to a close.

     A default in Venezuela would have a two-pronged effect on U.S. interests. It could lead to a full-blown, Argentina-style economic meltdown, since the government would be unable to secure any kind of multilateral financing. And market financing would become virtually nonexistent. The economic crisis could therefore turn into severe political and social upheaval. This volatility would call into question Venezuela's ability to supply the United States with oil. Currently, Venezuela is America's fifth-largest supplier of foreign crude oil.

     A Venezuelan default would also contribute to instability in the Andean region, and could, in a worst-case scenario, lead to a face-off between Colombia and Venezuela, which are currently in a war of words over Venezuela's alleged harboring of Colombian terrorists. This would lead to some difficult foreign-policy decisions for the Bush administration. And trouble in the Andean region would be felt in America through the inflow of drugs and refugees.      Venezuela's debt will total about $34 billion this year, or about 40 percent of gross domestic product, with large debt payments coming due in June, September, October and December. The government has probably overstated the price of oil this year and the amount of external financing it is likely to get. Also, the government's projections for non-oil-related revenue are too rosy. While the Venezuelan government expects to earn $18.1 billion in total revenue, Jose M. Barrionuevo, head of emerging markets strategy at Barclays Bank, pegs that number at $16 billion. Also, the government's external market financing will likely be about $3 billion less than it has budgeted. Therefore, Venezuela's average default probability is 57 percent for this year, with that number rising to 70 percent in the fourth quarter if the political situation in Venezuela remains unresolved, Mr. Barrionuevo said.

     Mr. Chavez's comments last month to small-business owners signaling his intention to restructure Venezuela's external debt this year make this fiscal scenario even more worrisome. After the president's statements caused a market panic, his government said Mr. Chavez sought a voluntary swap of debt, not a forced restructuring.

     Still, his best option for avoiding default would be to hold a referendum on elections. Such a move may lure back some investor financing. The United States and other countries brokering talks between Mr. Chavez and the opposition have a strong interest in seeing this referendum held to avert an unwelcome crisis in Venezuela and the region.

The Guardian Sam Jones Friday April 18, 2003

The biggest celebration of the Catholic calendar is under way, but Latin America's papers chose to ponder the continent's political calvary rather than debate the possibility of resurrection.

Venezuela's press marked the first anniversary of April 11 - the day on which soldiers and paramilitaries opened fire on a crowd, killing 17 unarmed protesters - with characteristic bitterness. "That day, for better or for worse, changed everything," wrote Gustavo Arnstein in El Mundo. Venezuela's robust democracy had wilted and the country had been left dangerously polarised. "[Our] society was split in two and its opposing heads are squabbling endlessly over the same atrophying body."

Arnstein's pessimism was echoed in an editorial in El Nacional. "Venezuela is sliding down the scale of countries that value human rights," said the paper, poring over a US state department report on extrajudicial torture and murder in Venezuela. The survey recognised that the president, Hugo Chavez, had been democratically elected, but expressed fears about the behaviour of the government and its security forces. "A report like this can not go unremarked," said El Nacional, apparently grateful to see the US taking a peek into its back yard. "It serves as a diagnosis of our problems and must be considered as such."

Things looked only a little brighter for the Peruvian president, Alejandro Toledo. El Comercio reported that Mr Toledo is under fire for allegedly trying to buy a television channel to guarantee sympathetic coverage. Invoking a timely image, La Republica's veteran commentator, Mirko Lauer, wondered whether Mr Toledo would survive another scandal. "He has already embarked on his via crucis ," said Lauer. "We'll soon see if it leads to his crucifixion, and, more importantly, to his rebirth." A tricky task, thought Lauer - "the media no longer believe in Toledo's democratic Teflon".

However, one Latin American politician's armour remained miraculously intact. The Buenos Aires daily La Nacion brought news that Carlos Menem, the undisputed comeback kid of Argentinian politics, was leading the polls in the run up to the country's presidential election. Attributing the results to widespread apathy, Pagina 12 could only laugh at the situation. Its front-page cartoon showed an anxious middle-aged couple confiding in a doctor that their drive has gone. "Sex drive?" asks the doctor. "No," they reply. "Electoral."

The Miami Herald Posted on Fri, Apr. 18, 2003 BY NANCY SAN MARTIN nsanmartin@herald.com

GENEVA -A 53-nation panel on human rights Thursday approved a relatively mild resolution asking Cuba to allow a monitor to examine the treatment of dissidents on the island, an implicit rebuke that stopped far short of the censure sought by some activists.

The vote was a defeat for Cuba, whose diplomats lobbied strenuously against it, but critics of President Fidel Castro were disheartened because the scolding by the U.N. Commission on Human Rights failed to mention the current wave of repression that has sent dozens of dissidents to prison.

Still, U.S. Ambassador Kevin Moley expressed satisfaction. ''We would have liked tougher language, but the fact is that any resolution against Cuba is violently opposed by Castro,'' Moley said. ``This action is helpful in giving some hope to those dissidents.''

By a vote of 24 in favor, 20 against and nine abstentions, the commission adopted a resolution that calls on Cuba to allow a representative of the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights to visit the country, assess the human-rights situation and prepare a report.

''We've clearly condemned the Cuban regime's crackdown on Cuban independent civil society,'' said a State Department official. ``Cuba's efforts to silence voices of opponents only makes our policy of a rapid and peaceful transition to democracy more relevant and urgent.''

''We'll continue to work with Cuba's civil society and people,'' a State Department official said, adding that the Bush administration was ``considering how to advance policy as a response to the crackdown.''

But U.S. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Miami Republican, blasted what she labeled a ''weak'' resolution, even as she commended those who voted for it. ''We could not expect much from a commission that has Libya as its chair and a host of other gross human-rights violators as members,'' she said.

The Cuban American National Foundation applauded the vote. ''It is a victory for the democratic opposition in Cuba,'' said Jorge Mas Santos, foundation chairman. ``Those votes represent the voices of men and women like Raúl Rivero, Victor Rolando Arroyo and Martha Beatriz Cabello, voices that convey the desire of the Cuban people to be free and that cannot be silenced despite the regime's brutal repression.''

In a move that continues to show clear divisions on the issue of Cuba, the panel rejected, by 31 votes, an effort to include language in the adopted resolution that expressed ''deep concern'' about the arrests and called for the immediate release of jailed dissidents. Cuba convicted 75 government opponents of being U.S. mercenaries and imposed prison sentences of up to 28 years.

''Each vote against the Costa Rican amendment calling for the immediate release of Cuban political prisoners was an act of infamy,'' said Republican U.S. Rep. Lincoln Díaz-Balart in a statement released in Miami. ``To a great extent the defeat of the amendment demonstrated a profound lack of interest, seriousness and rigor on the part of the U.S. State Department and its bureaucrats.''

The commission also rejected, by 26 votes, an amendment introduced by Cuba criticizing the four-decade-old U.S. economic embargo and alleging use of U.S. territory for ''terrorist'' acts against Cuba.

CUBA LASHES OUT

Cuba, which has consistently rejected a visit by a U.N. monitor, lashed out against those nations that voted in favor of condemnation.

''Why is Cuba attacked for defending itself, and why are those who try to put the Cuban people to its knees using hunger and diseases not brought to trial and condemned?'' asked Cuban delegate Juan Antonio Fernández. ``Why is the victim condemned but not the aggressor?''

''Cuba knows that attempts are made to condemn it because it has fought to be free,'' he said. ``And Cuba will continue fighting. No condemnations, no propaganda campaigns, no slanders, no blockages, or aggressions will make our people give up its unflagging decision to defend its revolution and its independence.''

Fernández's comments were -- for the second time this week -- met with loud applause from other U.N. delegates.

Moley, the U.S. ambassador, dismissed the applause saying it was not a measure of support for Cuba. Instead, he pointed to the vote results, which included nations traditionally friendly with Cuba, as proof that ``on the world stage, more countries recognize that Fidel Castro is a relic of the Cold War, that he's the last of the big-time totalitarian dictators.''

Among those voting in favor of the resolution, spearheaded by Costa Rica, Peru and Uruguay, were some of Cuba's trading partners, including Canada, France, Germany and the United Kingdom. Joining the Latin American vote were Mexico, Chile, Guatemala and Paraguay.

''President Bush welcomes the leadership of the Latin America democracies in highlighting these abuses by the only dictatorship of the region,'' said a statement issued by the White House. ``The Commission has sent the right signal to courageous Cubans who struggle daily to gain their basic political and civil freedoms.''

Mexico, which voted to censure Cuba for the first time last year, said it was ''deeply concerned about the situation of human rights in Cuba'' and added that the vote was a ``faithful reflection of Mexico's policy and President Vicente Fox's commitment to promote human rights.''

Mexico's relationship with Cuba, which had been close since Castro assumed power in 1959, has become strained under the Fox administration.

''We hope this appeal from the international community will be heard,'' said Mexico's U.N. delegate, adding that free elections and a free press were essential to democracy.

HOW SOME VOTED

As expected, Venezuela voted against the measure and Brazil and Argentina abstained. However, Argentina's delegation did express its ``serious concern of the detentions and summary trials of people who were fighting for political rights.''

The delegation also condemned Cuba's recent execution of three hijackers who commandeered a ferry in a failed attempt to reach the United States, even as it criticized the U.S. embargo.

This year's censure of Cuba fared a little better than last year's, when by a slim two votes the commission accepted a resolution condemning Cuba's human-rights record.

''This shows that the tide has clearly turned away from Castro,'' said Morley, the U.S. ambassador. ``He is posing as some sort of socialist, but the only people paying the price are his own citizens.''

Frank Calzon, head of the Washington-based Center for a Free Cuba, praised Costa Rica's attempt to have the crackdown reflected in the resolution. ``It would have been a disaster if no government in Latin America would have attempted to include a reference to what's happening in Cuba.''