Is this your way of condemning what happened in 1992?
<a href=www.vheadline.com>Venezuela's Electronic News Posted: Thursday, May 29, 2003 By: Luis Zuleta
Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 14:01:39 -0300 From: Luis Zuleta luiszuleta@hotmail.com To: Editor@VHeadline.com Subject: Comment
Dear Editor: (Re: <a href=www.vheadline.com>Enzo Labartino's April 18 letter on Chavez The Film). As much as I agree with you that many anti-Chavez Venezuelans have become more fanatics than objective individuals ... something clearly shown by constant comparisons to Hitler or other characters of that nature, what YOU seem to forget is that there WAS also a Constitution in 1992.
Therefore, as much as you remind people that a democratically-elected government cannot be overthrown by unconstitutional means, the fact remains that Mr. Chavez IS still responsible for the February 1992 coup and the subsequent deaths that took place.
Notice I say responsible NOT guilty ... the fact that other plotters from that day are now opposed to Mr. Chavez means nothing at all, since that only represents an opinion, therefore, I don't really understand your point in bringing that up.
But you can't deny your lack of objectivity when you condemn coups, but all you have to say about 1992 is "certainly we agree that it was political and economic mismanagement of previous governments that lead to the rise Chavez Frias who condemns coup d'etats, yet in February 1992 attempted a coup against the corrupt government of President Carlos Andes Perez."
I particularly ask: Is this your way of condemning what happened in 1992?
I respectfully say that this reads more like a justification than anything else. I also highlighted corrupt because you seem to justify the coup of 1992 because of that fact, but then again at that time corruption was as rampant as it is today, or need I remind you of the $2.3 billion missing from the FIEM ... just to name one instance.
I also find interesting (make that funny) that, simply because Mr. Chavez was in jail then, he didn't have anything to do with the second coup in November 1992. Then I guess the old "I wasn't even there" routine really does work.
As for Mr. Chavez being held prisoner ... well I seem to remember watching a video of him turning himself in very peacefully in full military gear which shows that he never meant to "defend his revolution to the death" like he now says, and that he was really a coward who was trying to remind his captors that he shouldn't be hurt, since in the end he was one of them.
- And by the way, you do realize that by wearing military gear he AGAIN violated the law, right?
It actually seems to me that the best thing that could have happen to him was to be taken out ... I don't think it was a good idea for him to be walking around in the streets. Then again that should come as no surprise to him since that is exactly what he wanted to do to CAP in his coup attempt.
I also remember a certain General claiming that he personally had asked Mr. Chavez to resign and he had accepted ... and that happened way before he was held prisoner ... but then again you don't seem too interested in those facts.
You do have the right to report what you want and I'm not arrogant enough to demand anything from you, but to suggest (that's basically what you did in your note) that anyone who happens to differ from you in your vision of what happened on April 11, 2002 was simply watching Globovision or any other anti-government media is a pretty sorry excuse for your lack of objectivity.
Sincerely, Luis Zuleta luiszuleta@hotmail.com
Venezuelan (who was living abroad on 4/11/02 by the way, so I was NOT watching Globovision)