<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Friday, June 06, 2003 By: Caare W

Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 09:41:24 -0400 From: Caare W caarew@hotmail.com To: Editor@VHeadline.com Subject: Venezuelan exiles and the vote

Dear Editor: Ms. Gable starts her letter ”Why exactly should Venezuelan exiles be allowed to vote” by saying ”I don’t understand.”

Well, let me say that those three words are about the only correct information she gives in her letter. She clearly hasn’t understood, and doesn’t seem to have done much to understand.

First, even though I’m not a citizen of United States, it took me about five minutes to find out that she hadn’t understood (or bothered to check) the laws of her own country. I have to admit that this makes me skeptical about her ability to give a qualified opinion about laws and regulations in Venezuela.

She writes: ”I believe that US citizens abroad can vote in US federal level elections ... but I don't know about those who have given up residential status. I'm sure those who no longer pay US taxes may no longer vote in the US.” What’s for sure is that she's wrong.

The Federal Voting Assistance Program www.fvap.gov clearly states that ”Generally, all US citizens, 18 years or older, who are or will be residing outside the United States during an election period are eligible to vote absentee in any election for Federal office.”

There is no connection between paying taxes and being allowed to vote ... citizenship and the right to vote is not something you pay for by paying taxes ... it is a right you have as a citizen of a country.  Further, to vote is a right you have even if you’ve never been to the US ú see www.fvap.gov for further information.

In her question ”Why should they have any influence over the daily life that they refuse to participate in,” she seems to suggest that those Venezuelans not currently living in their country are abroad because they have some negative sentiments towards Venezuela.

Please think about the fact that all Venezuelans living abroad are not oligarchs bathing in money in Miami or Aruba. People might have reasons like studies, work, family ... you name it. There's no way one could distinguish between moral or immoral reasons why citizens choose to live in another place. The right of a citizen to participate in the democracy of his or her country is ... and should be ... a blind right, no matter who you are.

That’s exactly why Venezuelan exiles should be allowed to vote.

So please Dawn Gable try to base your opinions on facts, and not vice versa. Venezuelans abroad ... like citizens of other nations ... should of course have the right to vote. And Venezuelan consulates abroad, like consulates of other nations, should of course help Venezuelans in exercising those rights.

Regards, Caare W. caarew@hotmail.com

PS: Dawn Gable also comments that ”YES, they do hold elections in Cuba”. She's quite right. And you know what? Cubans avoid all those problems with deciding who they want to vote for, because there is just one candidate for each position. Isn’t that a good idea? Really a revolutionary democracy.

Phil Brennan, NewsMax.com Friday, June 6, 2003

While Washington’s attention is focused on the Middle East, communism and communist terrorism are threatening America's security in Latin America, where another Axis of Evil is spreading its tentacles throughout the region.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is getting credit from the Internatinal Monetary Fund and Wall Street's useful idiots for following the orthodox economic policies of former president Fernando Cardoso while plunging his nation into communism and allying himself with Fidel Castro and Castro's puppet in Venezuela, Hugo Chavez.

So radical is the regime under Lula that the Rio de Janeiro city council recently declared President Bush persona non grata by passing a resolution offered by Fernando Gusmao, a councilman affiliated with Brazil's Communist Party.

Brazilian-American Gerald Brant, a writer and former candidate for Brazil's congress, wrote that "anti-American sentiment has grown so high in Brazil that President Bush received a lower approval rating among Brazilians than Saddam Hussein in an opinion poll conducted during the war in Iraq by the respected IBOPE Institute. This phenomenon has some relation to the Brazilian Workers' Party's (known as PT) attitudes towards the US."

When Lula was running for the presidency, Brant reported, he covered up PT's historic radicalism, but once elected he was able to pacify Wall Street while giving itself cover to gradually renationalize formerly privatized assets. "This strategy has worked brilliantly, so far," Brant wrote.

"While Brazil's new socialist government has drawn applause from the IMF and financial circles for continuing former President Cardoso's orthodox economic policies in order to maintain bond and currency market stability, it has adopted an aggressive and nationalistic foreign policy clearly based on PT doctrine."

'Offsetting Our Losses in Eastern Europe'

Brant points his finger at Lula's foreign policy adviser, Marco Aurelio Garcia, a notorious hard-line Marxist operative and founder and executive secretary of Sao Paulo Forum, a coalition of leftist parties and revolutionary movements dedicated, Garcia says, to "offsetting our losses in Eastern Europe with our victories in Latin America."

In other words, rebuilding shattered world communism in Latin America.

A NewsMax.com investigation has revealed that Garcia, in his role as head of Sao Paulo Forum, controls and coordinates the activities of subversives and extremists from the Rio Grande to the southernmost tip of Argentina.

This new axis of terrorism begins in Cuba, then works its way down to Colombia, financed with Venezuelan oil billions, and ends in Lula's Brazil.

In a policy dictated by Havana, Garcia has shown special interest in terrorist Manuel Marulanda Velez, a.k.a. "Tirofijo," leader of the terrorist Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

Every year since 1990, Garcia has made it his priority to meet with FARC. The meetings have not just taken place in Havana (with Fidel Castro himself being always present), but also in Mexico, where Marco Aurelio Garcia traveled to meet with FARC member Marco Leo Calara on Dec. 5, 2000.

What they talk about is a matter that remains behind closed doors. But every time they meet, FARC always increases its attacks in the weeks that follow, with a high cost in loss of human lives.

Brazil's foreign policy, under the guidance Garcia, will be designed in Havana. Garcia's Brazil will actively work against United States policy, starting with its policy toward Castro. "We'll attempt to eliminate the trade embargo against Cuba," he promises.

Garcia describes PT as "radical, of the left, socialist." But he is more than radical, and more to the left of mere socialists. Garcia is, in fact, a hard-line communist. He wants to revive communism.

The Communist 'Agenda Is Clear'

In an article which he wrote about Karl Marx's "The Communist Manifesto," he concluded: "The agenda is clear. If this new horizon which we search for is still called communism, it is time to re-constitute it."

Whereas Lula strives to fool the world about the true nature of his Marxist regime, Garcia makes no bones about what is going on. "We have to first give the impression that we are democrats, initially, we have to accept certain things. But that won't last."

Since Lula took power on January 1st, his government:

• has gone back and forth on abandoning the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and building nuclear weapons.

• has gone back and forth on offering exile to Saddam Hussein.

• has refused the Colombian government's request to consider the FARC terrorists.

• shored up Chavez with oil shipments during the height of the Venezuelan opposition's strike.

• declared a "strategic partnership" with communist China.

• abandoned scientific cooperation agreements with the U.S.

• appointed a self-defined Trotskyite and a Communist Party leader as cabinet ministers.

• repeatedly compared Free Trade Area of the Americas to "U.S. annexation."

• vocally supported France's anti-war efforts.

• lobbied Chile to vote against the U.S. on the U.N. Security Council and abstained from condemning Castro's crackdown on dissidents at the U.N. Human Rights Committee in Geneva.

All of these are ominous signs for the future of Latin America. As Richard Nixon once remarked, "As goes Brazil, so goes Latin America". If that's true, Latin America is headed for a communist takeover.

Brant wrote: "Lula's brand of socialism is becoming a role model for he entire region. Analysts consider Nestor Kirchner's Presidential election victory in Argentina a boon to Mercosul (the customs union between Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay, and Paraguay) and a serious setback for the FTAA (Free Trade Area of the Americas) negotiations with the US."

Brant worries that "the entire South American continent may be getting off the train." Note:

• Chavez has announced he is not going to resign peacefully despite massive Venezuelan discontent with his rule.
• Leftist regimes are also in power in Chile and Ecuador and spreading fast.
• In Bolivia, rebel leader Evo Morales could stage a coup or, at the very least, continue to destabilize the government.
• In Colombia the communist FARC and ELN narco-terrorists are besieging the government.

"Fidel Castro's wildest revolutionary ambitions," warned Brant, "are being fulfilled right under the nose of the Bush administration. As Castro once said, "The US can't attack us if the rest of Latin America is in flames."

Our Leftist in Brasilia

Most shocking is the fact that elements in the Bush administration, including U.S. Ambassador to Brazil Donna Hrinak, is an ardent Lula backer, Brant reveals.

Brant says that Hrinak's sympathies for Lula's Marxist party are "so notorious that the running joke in Brasilia was to ask whether she would show up at Lula's inauguration in a red dress."

According to Brant:

• Hrinak publicly applauded the global appeasement movement and agreed to meet with Hussein's ambassador in Brasilia at PT's suggestion, just weeks before her boss, Secretary of State Colin Powell, requested that all countries expel Hussein's diplomats.
• Hrinak recommended the U.S. provide financial assistance to Lula's flagship "Fome Zero" (Hunger Zero) social assistance program even though the PT picked a clearly anti-American slogan for the program specifically, "A nossa Guerra é contra a Fome" (Our war is against hunger).
• When prime-time TV ads sponsored by PT and its allied parties such as PC do B (Brazilian Communist Party) and PSB (Brazilian Socialist Party) attacked President Bush for his position on Iraq, Hrinak failed to defend Bush.

At home in the U.S., Brant says, Clinton leftovers such as national security adviser John Maisto seemed to be calling many of the shots on Brazil policy.

President Bush will meet with Lula at the White House on June 20.

Read more on this subject in related Hot Topics: Bush Administration

Castro/Cuba

Latin America

Editor's note: Have an Opinion About This? Click Here to Send an URGENT PriorityGram Today

<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Friday, June 06, 2003 By: Gustavo Coronel

VHeadline.com commentarist Gustavo Coronel writes: It is my opinion that President Chavez and most of his team of collaborators would be behind bars. As it is, however, the team is mostly and quietly sitting at bars...

The Law was passed in March of this year and seems written for a country which does not look at all like Venezuela 2003, where ethics in public function is practically non- existent. The almost proud disdain of this government for ethical rules of the game largely explains the immense crisis we are facing.

The Law was passed in characteristic fashion. Citizens had no previous access to the project and were served with a "fait accompli." Even after its passing the law stayed in the subsurface and known onlt to the very few ... it took me about one month to track it down at www.asambleanacional.gov.ve

Having said all this, I think the law is sufficiently stringent to produce the imprisonment of most of the government team if it was enforced. This is not going to happen because the officers in charge of enforcing the law are members of the team ... and these men do not commit political suicide. They'd rather be dishonest.

The Law contains many articles which are of very general nature, so that, although anybody can see that they are being violated, their subjective nature makes it impossible to measure the violation. Article 1, for example, calls for a behavior of public officers which "will protect the public patrimony, will guarantee the transparent and efficient use of public resources, based on the principles of honesty, transparency, participation, efficiency, efficacy, legality, accountability and responsibility..."

This sounds good ... but all we can say is that the reality of Venezuela is to this article as south is to north.  Chavez acts in a manner totally opposite to the letter of the article.

To prove my assertion I would have to write a book ... which I might do... In the meantime, however, I will offer some tidbits:

Article 7 reads: "The public officers will manage and protect the public patrimony with decency, decorum and honesty, in such a way that the utilization of assets and the expenditure of public resources be made in accordance with the Constitution..."

As I read this article. I could not help thinking of the 53,000 barrels per day we send to Cuba, under terms which are clearly unconstitutional, as the agreement was not approved by the National Assembly; and highly inefficient and damaging to the national treasury since it involves a huge subsidy of about $1 billion from the poor people of Venezuela to the poor people of Cuba. This is a crime that the Law defines as of lese fatherland ("lesa patria").

Article 8 stipulates that all information about the management of public funds will be made public.

Article 9 dictates that public administrators will keep citizens informed of the way they manage the assets and monies entrusted to them, information that should be published quarterly in a simple and understandable manner.

Article 10 says that all citizens have the right to request this information and receive it promptly. All of this is science fiction under this government and anyone going to a government agency asking for this will be lucky to leave in one piece.

Article 11 establishes that the project of national budget should be consulted with public opinion before going to the National Assembly. This has never been done, although the stipulation already existed in the Law of Public Administration.

Article 13 reads that "public officers are at the service of the State and not at the service of political or economic groups." But Chavez is also the president of MVR, the political party which supports him, while the Bolivarian Circles, the armed groups of the government have their headquarters at the Presidential Palace.

Article 41 says that the General Comptroller will investigate all public officers which contract with the State through companies in which they own shares. General Baduel, one of the military members of the team own or did own shares of a radio station which contracted government advertisement. Although he publicly admitted this, he was never bothered by his friend the Comptroller.

Article 46 defines as illicit enrichment any patrimonial size out of proportion with the income of the public officer. The burden of the proof is on the public employee. And yet the majority of these men and women are clearly living beyond their means, buying real state in Venezuela, Chile and the US that could not be bought on the basis of their salaries. Former Minister Rodriguez Chacin, who reported assets of Bs.70 million as he entered his job, bought a 2,000 acre ranch for Bs.400 million, although real estate experts say that the property is worth more than Bs.1 billion.

Articles 56 and 57 establish prison terms of 6 months to 4 years for any public officer who applies public funds to any other objective than that originally established by law. On the basis of these articles, President Chavez and his then Minister of Finance, Nelson Merentes, should be behind bars. They diverted, illegally and openly, some $4 billion from the Macroeconomic Stabilization Fund to other purposes, largely still unaccounted for.  This is the worst case of mismanagement of public funds I have ever seen. The employees Chavez and Merentes were duly denounced ... to no avail.

Article 58 states that "any officer who claims an emergency situation to eliminate the bidding process to acquire public goods and services will be sent to prison for 6 months to 3 years."  Yet, a recent Presidential decree collides head on with this law, allowing all government agencies to dispense with bidding procedures due to reasons of exception or emergency. This conflict borders on insanity since the man who guided the law and the man who produced the decree are one and the same. I am reminded of the man who tells a friend: "I thought I had a problem of split personalities, but now I think we are OK"....

Article 66 deals with the utilization of confidential official information for personal gain, a crime punished with prison of 1-6 years and a fine of up to 50% of the benefits obtained (why only 50%?). Economist Orlando Ochoa, highly respected in our economic sector, has just denounced Minister of Finance Tobias Nobrega for this kind of manipulation in connection with external debt bonds. Ochoa also mentioned in a TV program ("Primera Pagina") that the money that should flow from the Ministry of Finance to the regional governments falls in the hands of intermediaries who give less than the amount to financially starved regional entities and pocket the rest. This is a dirty trick used in Venezuela by all dictators since the Monagas brothers were in power in the 1850s. If you wanted to collect a government debt you had to talk to Mrs. Monagas who charged a modest 10% commission.

Articles 70-75 deal with extortion while article 79 deals with influence peddling. Plenty of examples of that among the lesser revolutionaries.

Article 81 establishes prison terms of 1-5 years for anyone opening a personal bank account with public monies. This was standard practice among the military during the brief but intense disaster of the Bolivar 2000 program (see the book of Agustin Beroes: "Corruption in the times of Chavez").

These are only a few examples of the ethical collapse of this regime. This is twice as painful, as this government came to power on the wings of a very strong anti-corruption stance. They came to clean the house but now the house is filthier than ever before.

A final comment: Most of the provisions of this law existed already in previous instruments, such as the Law of Protection of Public Patrimony, in force since 1982.

So, not one of the dedicated defenders of the regime can come now and say that the new rules of the game could not apply retroactively.

This would be such an impudent and cynical defense that I doubt that anyone would dare to use it.

Gustavo Coronel is the founder and president of Agrupacion Pro Calidad de Vida (The Pro-Quality of Life Alliance), a Caracas-based organization devoted to fighting corruption and the promotion of civic education in Latin America, primarily Venezuela. A member of the first board of directors (1975-1979) of Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), following nationalization of Venezuela's oil industry, Coronel has worked in the oil industry for 28 years in the United States, Holland, Indonesia, Algiers and in Venezuela. He is a Distinguished alumnus of the University of Tulsa (USA) where he was a Trustee from 1987 to 1999. Coronel led the Hydrocarbons Division of the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) in Washington DC for 5 years. The author of three books and many articles on Venezuela ("Curbing Corruption in Venezuela." Journal of Democracy, Vol. 7, No. 3, July, 1996, pp. 157-163), he is a fellow of Harvard University and a member of the Harvard faculty from 1981 to 1983.  In 1998, he was presidential election campaign manager for Henrique Salas Romer and now lives in retirement on the Caribbean island of Margarita where he runs a leading Hotel-Resort.  You may contact Gustavo Coronel at email gustavo@vheadline.com

Un grupo de muchachos “hispanos” que estudiaban en Suiza decidieron organizar una especie de orgía.   Al ratico de comenzar la alocada fiesta, Mario Ramírez prendió la luz y gritó: ¡Vamos a organizarnos, vamos a organizarnos…!”  Que va: le volvieron a apagar el “suiche” y continuó la parranda.  No habían pasado quince minutos cuando Mario volvió a prender la luz: ¡Vamos a organizarnos, vamos a organizarnos…!”  La escena se repitió varias veces hasta que uno de los amigos de Mario paró la fiesta al tiempo en que le preguntaba cuál era su interés por organizarse, a lo que éste respondió: “… es que desde que comenzó la fiesta me han seducido equivocada y erróneamente ya diez veces y yo no he podido seducir a nadie todavía ni una sola vez…”

Mientras vivía en el “Conjunto Residencial Potro Redondo”, en la Unión (El Hatillo), asistí a cualquier cantidad de reuniones para llegar a un acuerdo consensuado sobre el tipo de portón electrónico que debíamos colocar en la entrada del estacionamiento a fin de prevenir los múltiples hurtos que comenzamos a sufrir hacía ya un tiempo, entonces.  Luego de MIL discusiones me mudé del lugar y al cabo de los años me enteré que al final la junta de condominio había llegado a una conclusión, pero que al colocar el portón éste había durado sano un par de meses y en consecuencia todo había quedado igual, con el agravante del costo que supuso la colocación de aquel adefesio inoperante, producto del consenso vecinal.

¿Moraleja? Los “hispanos” no sabemos ORGANIZARNOS.  Nos reunimos y hay tantos “expertos” en la materia que se discute que siempre ponemos el caldo morado.

El pasado jueves 12 de junio asistí a una “Asamblea General de Vecinos” en Terrazas del Tamanaco donde asistieron como ponentes los señores Carratú Molina, Medina Gómez y Alejandro Peña Esclusa.   Todos estaban más claros que el agua clara, sin embargo, a la hora de “rematar”, se quedaron en el aparato. 

Coincidían todos en que NO HABRÁ REFERENDO NI UN COMINO; en que la pelea será peleando, pero cuando “llegaron al llegadero” en  sus intervenciones, lo único que pudieron producir fue una invitación a ORGANIZARNOS.

Yo tenía una señora detrás que insistía en que le respondieran cuándo había que comenzar a organizarse… y quién nos organizaría.   Yo intenté preguntarle al General Medina Gómez en cuanto al tipo de organización: ¿bélica? ¿política?  Al final – ya al final – le mandé un papelito preguntándole qué creía él de “LA GUARIMBA”, cosa que no me supo responder… porque no sabía muy bien qué cosa era “eso”.

Alejandro Peña Esclusa habló con mucha emoción y nos pidió que nos organizáramos.  Ya para cuando al V/A Iván Carratú le tocó el turno de contestar sus preguntas, el público estaba alterado y quería ver sangre… pero nos animó, nuevamente, a organizarnos.

Salí, por supuesto, tremendamente derrotado y deprimido de la “Asamblea General de Vecinos”.   Había oído a tres líderes hablando más claro que el agua clara, pero absolutamente incapaces de concluir y de producir una solución práctica, efectiva e INMINENTE.   Mientras el régimen CASTRO-COMUNISTA de los señores Chávez y Castro sabe perfectamente qué es lo que quiere, cómo lo quiere y qué debe hacer para obtenerlo, nosotros “guaraleamos” entre pitos y medias tintas, apelando a la organización del pueblo, en un momento en el cual el tiempo hace rato que está en nuestra contra.

Como no brinquemos con un líder “atrincado” en las próximas horas, nos veremos forzados a apagar la vela y coger la de Diego por los caminos del destierro, dejar los dientes en las prisiones que pronto inaugurará el régimen, entrar horizontalmente y con los pies por delante en el cementerio… o morirnos de miseria, encorvados y derrotados, caminando por las calles llenas de nube de esta noble patria de la cual un día salieron los libertadores de casi todo un continente.

Caracas 14 de junio de 2003

ROBERT ALONSO

Envíen sus comentarios – UNICAMENTE – a robertalonso2003@cantv.net pues los otros buzones colapsan con la cantidad de correo que reciben.  --

PORTAFOLIO VIRTUAL DE ARTÍCULOS Y ENSAYOS DEL MISMO AUTOR

Albuquerque Tribune Online Thursday

"Frontline/World" (9 p.m., KNME-Channel 5) New York Times reporter Juan Forero investigates the political crisis in Venezuela and 19 unsolved murders that have bitterly divided the country. The report includes Forero's interview with Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and a trip to India, where reporter Arun Rath encounters an actor portraying Osama Bin Laden in a startling street theater production about 9/11 and its aftermath. Fascinating and well-worth your time.