Posted: Tuesday, February 25, 2003 By: Dawn Gable

Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 04:06:58 +0000 From: Dawn Gable morning_ucsc@hotmail.com To: Editor@VHeadline.com Subject: Land of Smiles?

Dear Editor: To all those who don't have a grasp on Venezuelan history and who are being mislead by Gustavo Coronel and others like him, here is a piece I originally wrote for another purpose. You will notice many recurring themes such as coups, CTV strikes, capital flight, corruption, brutal military dictatorships, nationalization of industry, riots, etc. etc.

Brief History of Venezuelan Politics author: Dawn Gable - Bolivarian Fund

Pre-Democracy

Venezuela was emancipated from Spanish rule in 1811. Credit for the liberation is given chiefly to the Caracas-born Simon Bolivar whose vision reached beyond Venezuela to Gran Colombia which included present-day Bolivia, Columbia, Panama, Peru and Ecuador.

Gran Colombia fell quickly apart due to power struggles and bickering. Bolivar was in the end kicked out of Venezuela ... he left saying that Venezuela was ungovernable and that his life had been wasted "sewing the sea."

Military and politics were closely tied for nearly the first hundred years: 22 of the first 30 presidents were generals. This was a time of chronic civil war, approximately 50 coup d'etats, and 25 constitutions.

Oil was discovered in the early 1900s during the brutal 27-year reign of Juan Vincente Gomez.

After Gomez' death the oppressed masses burst with newfound freedom. Political parties sprang up like wild flowers but none were functionally structured. Nearly a decade passed before Accion Democratica emerged via a coup as an organized force and Romulo Betancourt was appointed interim President and the AD held the Palace for a few years. Among other things the party called for tax hikes, education and health reforms, higher royalties from oil industry and a civilian militia. A coup d'etat in late 1948 by dictator Marcos Perez Jimenez ended these efforts.

Perez Jimenez is remembered for his horrific cruelty, blatant thievery, and extreme anti-communism. This last trait earned him a decoration of high honor from Eisenhower. In his ten years, he focused nearly exclusively on developing Caracas at the expense of the countryside causing massive migrations into the "ranchos" (slums) that surround the capital. After he was finally run out of the country, loaded down with gigantic sums of money, the AD party took up where they left off. Literally. The coups benefactor was again the appointed interim president Romulo Betancourt. Somehow, despite Betancourt's avenues to the Palace, he is frequently misnamed "the father of democracy."

1960's AD decade

In the early sixties the country as a whole enjoyed a healthy period of economic growth. However, Venezuela's characteristic gross inequity showed little sign of reprieve for the vast majority. While, in 1965, the GDP rate of increase was 8%, at least 30% of the 1.5 million residents of Caracas lived in the "ranchos" and 40% of all Caracas habitations had no water. According to a UN report, Caracas was the most expensive city in the world at that time.

The AD took a strong stand against communism and banned the Venezuelan Communist Party (PCV) and the Movement of the Revolutionary Left (MIR) provoking leftist guerilla activity ... typical of Latin America in this decade ... by a group called the Armed Forces of National Liberation (FALN). In the short run at least, the FALN were counter-productive in that they made the AD appear centrist and thus allowed them to pick up support on the right. There were various military conspiracies, one coup attempt and at least one Presidential assassination attempt.

The AD carried out a land reform and distributed unproductive private and public lands to more than 166,000 persons. Unfortunately, it was not accompanied by loans or any other support and most of the new owners sold off their land quickly. OPEC was formed and Venezuelan Petroleum Corporation (CVP) was established to oversee the gradual nationalization of the oil industry while industry was protected from foreign competition, and even subsidized through the Venezuelan Development Corporation (CVF). Unionized labor was welcomed and money was allotted to social programs.

A glimpse of democracy

March 11, 1963 ... a milestone was reached in Venezuelan history. For the first time an elected President took office peacefully.

1970s

Rule was barely won by the more conservative COPEI (Christian Democratic Party) in 1970 largely due to a split in the AD party. Caldera promptly reopened relations with the Soviet Union and other European socialist countries as well as with some South American countries under military rule. He legalized the Communist Party, bestowed amnesty on the guerillas and continued carrying out many of the AD reforms. Tax on petro-companies reached 70% in 1971, and the Hydrocarbons Reversion Law was passed handing all oil companies back to the State when their concessions ran out. (These are the same people who today are crying about government intervention in the industry ... I guess it's only OK when they are in power).

1973 Presidential elections introduced the current Vice President, Jose Vincente Rangel ... then candidate of the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) party which advocated socialist democracy and had split from the Moscow-line PCV.  However, using populist campaigning techniques, AD candidate Carlos Andres Perez took the sash and the two-party dominance of AD and COPEI was codified.

International oil prices had set the nation on a giant spending spree ... wages were increased, price controls were instated, imports were subsidized and $350 million worth of farming loans were forgiven.

Iron ore was nationalized in 1973

In 1976, PDVSA was created to oversee the newly fully nationalized oil industry.  The culture of "something for nothing," that has plagued Venezuela ever since, was born. Oil would pay for everything, and the government was the paternal, benevolent disperser of abundant riches ... everyone scrambled to get more than their share of the money and corruption abounded.

Venezuela was taking in so much money from oil revenues that it started granting international loans to oil-importing Latin American countries through the Venezuelan Investment Fund (FIV). It also loaned out money through the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB). Venezuela took the lead role among Latin American countries and promoted southern hemispheric independence from US hegemony. This, along with tensions concerning the OPEC oil embargo, the Panama canal, the US involvement in Salvador Allende's overthrow in Chile tainted Venezuela's relationship with the United States.

In 1976, however, oil revenues leveled-off and began to decline in 1978. Careless spending, capital flight, incompetence, graft and corruption quickly put the nation in debt. Perez had in his 5-year term spent more money in real terms than all the other governments to date combined! Voters decided by a slim margin to switch back to COPEI.

1980s collapse

Oil prices recovered considerably in 1980. President Herrera lifted price controls and raised wages and inflation rose too. The new boss, just like the old boss, spent like mad. Between 1979 and 1982 he managed to rack up a $8 billion deficit. Real GDP declined from the past 4 year's average of 6.1% to 1.2% between 1979 and 1983. Unemployment was plus or minus 20% throughout the 80s.

Oil prices settled lower again in 1981 and the country was in debt some $32 billion by 1983. A frenzy of capital flight occurred in anticipation of the impending devaluation of the Bolivar.

PDVSA leadership was politicized and billions of dollars of its reserves were expropriated to pay a bit of the debt ... price controls were again set.

The labor union (CTV) mounted various strikes bringing a mid-80s total of $2.2 million work hours lost since 1960. In 1983 the nation was handed back to AD in shambles and it continued to deteriorate.

In 1989 Perez was reelected at the height of discontent ... he immediately began inflicting an IMF-sponsored neo-liberal program (El Paquete) on the country. Privatization of State-owned industry, elimination of subsidies, devaluation of the currency hit the public hard and they screamed out in protest in the form of labor strikes, student strikes, and violent urban riots.

El Caracazo

A gas price hike was the last straw, and on 27 February, 1989, Caracas and other Venezuelan cities erupted. Spontaneously, the masses struck out against bus drivers who had unfairly raised their fares and shop clerks who were hoarding subsidized inventory for later sales. Joining them for 5 days of chaos were the destitute from the slums in the hills that surround Caracas who converged on the valley city looting stores, breaking windows, stealing cars, and generally wreaking havoc.

• The uprising was finally ended by a vicious massacre of some 2000 persons by the police and military.

1990s

The tone had been set for the next decade. The streets of the capital had become the arena for social discourse. Not only were there demonstrations, protests, and strikes by every imaginable organized group at one time or another, but also different factions of the State, such as the police and military cells began airing their grievances publicly. This practice continues today.

February 4, 1992 (then) Lieutenant Colonel Hugo Chavez Frias led an unsuccessful coup attempt. He was captured and incarcerated. But first he was allowed to address the nation on the television. During his address he admitted defeat "por ahora" (for now) and this statement became the mantra of the movement that would eventually sweep him into the Presidency.

Public displays of discontent became the norm. Choruses of banging of pots and pans out of windows were heard regularly. Violence often sprang out of protests. An attempt was made on President Carlos Andres Perez' life and the Bolivar and the Venezuelan stock market plummeted. In November there was another failed coup attempt and in December COPEI gained several governorships.

Mid-1993 Perez was accused by Congress of corruption and impeached. New elections were held in December. 40% abstained from voting and Rafael Caldera took the sash as an independent, breaking the two-party stranglehold. Caldera formed a following named Convergencia which included MAS (Movement Toward Socialism) together with La Causa R. These two peripheral leftist parties took in more votes than the two traditional parties AD and COPEI.

Chavez was released from prison in March 1994.

Because Congress was still held by the old parties, there was a stalemate and little change occurred in the next 5 years. La Causa R split with its larger faction becoming PPT which fully backed Chavez in 1998. (And still does)

At first loathsome of participating in the electoral process ... which Chavez considered to be a corrupt charade at the time... by 1997, he began to warm to the idea of running for office. He launched the transformation of his MBR200 Bolivarian Revolutionary Movement into a political organization.

By July 1998, he had formed an official political organization which he named MVR, Movimiento Quinta Republica, or Fifth Republic Movement which incorporated PPT and La Causa R, many smaller parties, and his own followers ... he was at this time receiving 45% of the votes in the polls.

Why MVR?  Venezuela had had 4 Republics in its history. Two formed in 1811 and 1813 during the wars of independence, the third encompassed Gran Columbia in 1819 and the fourth was founded after the breakup in 1830.

• Chavez describes the 4th Republic as being built by a class of oligarchs and bankers, on the bones of Bolivar and Sucre.

Chavez clearly felt the need for a new beginning. The MVR declaration states:

"Its Mission is to secure the well-being of the national community, to satisfy the individual and collective aspirations of the Venezuelan people, and to guarantee a state of optimum prosperity for the fatherland."

AD and COPEI scrambled to pick up candidates and promptly drop them and choose another when the polls showed little hope of their success. In the end they both backed the same candidate who brought in 39% of the vote among 4 candidates. Chavez walked away with a cool 56%.

February 2, 1999: Chavez was sworn in as the President of Venezuela.

His first Presidential address announced a national referendum would ask the people if the Constitution should be re-written for the 26th time. In April, 88% of voters answered a resounding YES. Elections were held for a Constituent Assembly in July. 119 out of 131 seats were won by Chavez supporters receiving a collective total of 91% of the vote.

The new constitution was approved by 71% of voters on 15 December:

• It radically restructured the judicial system to one much like that of the United States.
• It created a unicameral National Assembly.
• It bestowed rights on indigenous peoples.

The Constitution also changed the name of the country to: La Republica Bolivariana de Venezuela

Hugo Chavez Frias was to become the first elected President of the new Republic and of the new millennium. Along with candidates for the new National Assembly, he subjected himself to the polls after little more than a year in office to be sure the public had stayed with him through the profound new changes.

They had.

The above is a summary of information found in the following publications:

Inside South America   John Gunther 1967 (amazon.com) Venezuela a country study  Richard A. Haggarty, 1993. (amazon.com) The Street is My Home   Patricia C. Marquez, 1999 (amazon.com) In the Shadow of the Liberator  Richard Gott 2000 (amazon.com) Reinventing Legitimacy Eds. Damarys Canache & Michael R Kulisheck 1998 (amazon.com)

www.vheadline.com Posted: Monday, February 24, 2003 By: Daniel Burnett

Date: Sun, 23 Feb 2003 08:52:30 -0500 From: Daniel Burnett dburnett1@nyc.rr.com To: Editor@vheadline.com Subject: Listening with an open mind

Dear Editor: I would like to respond to the most recent editorial by Mr. Gustavo Coronel entitled "President Chavez' Bedside Manners."  Mr. Coronel seems concerned that most VHeadline readers don't have a proper appreciation of Chavez' manner of speaking. Actually, I think a great many do.

All of President Chavez' speeches are transmitted over the internet by Venezolano de Television www.venezuela.gov.ve -- I personally find most of his speeches good, some excellent, and some bad.

For example, I found this Sunday morning's "Alo Presidente" speech to be very good. I don't normally react to speeches that I hear over the Internet, but he had me rolling in laughter as he parodied Carlos Ortega and Carlos Fernandez. And his points regarding the necessity of taking legal action against those who led the "strike" couldn't have been better put.

Yes ... his speeches are sometimes pedantic, and often way too long, but I would rather listen to him than Carlos Ortega any day. Yes ... there are too many "cadenas" but maybe if the commercial networks did anything but transmit 24/7 anti-Chavez propaganda he would feel less need to have them. Yes ... he would do everyone, including himself, a favor if he expunged the word 'fascist' from his vocabulary ... but the word 'coupster'?

It's appropriate, no?

I mean pretty much everyone in an opposition leadership position supported the April coup didn't they?

Many of them were in Miraflores celebrating as I recall. And aren't their current anti-military histrionics the result of the military being unwilling to undertake another coup attempt?

If you can think of a more appropriate word to describe this behavior by the opposition leaders by all means let us know. Contrary to what Gustavo Coronel implies, Chavez is generally quite calm, composed and soft spoken during his speeches.

• But no one should just take my word for it ... log on to the next "cadena" or "Alo Presidente" show and listen for yourself.

I hope you don't take the above the wrong way. As I have mentioned to Gustavo Coronel before, I appreciate his commentary and always look forward to reading it.

As with Chavez' speeches, I find many of his articles quite good, some excellent, and some just plain terrible.  But I am always very grateful to him for writing them, and VHeadline for publishing them. The great attribute of VHeadline is that it publishes letters and commentary irrespective of their pro- or anti-Chavez sentiment. After all, you learn the most when you listen to those with whom you disagree.

Unfortunately, this concept seems lost on most of the opposition. Take for example any of the English-language opposition web sites -- Vcrisis, Caracas Chronicles, Devils Excrement, etc.

Where are their equivalent of Gustavo Coronel? They don't have one.

Where are their "Letters to the Editor" where voices from across the political spectrum can be heard? They don't exist.

But for the people who create these web sites it makes sense ... in their view there is only one truth in Venezuela and they have a monopoly on the it ... so why bother to entertain other points of view when theirs is the only valid one?

Of course, the creators of these web sites are free to feel that way =- they have no responsibility to the public -- but as you must know, their disdain for contrarian views extends to virtually all the commercial media in Venezuela. And that media does have public responsibilities which they willfully ignore.

• Gustavo Coronel says that Chavez devotes much more time to discussing politics than to discussing the economy and his plans to improve it.

That is certainly true. However, it is difficult to focus on the hard work of economic development when you have to deal with an opposition that spends every minute of every day ... and uses all means, legal and illegal, to overthrow the government.

Maybe, if he could spend less time trying to figure out which members of the officer corps have been bribed into carrying out a coup against him, he could spend more time thinking about what would be an appropriate monetary policy for Venezuela.

Do I think that Hugo Chavez has a coherent plan to develop Venezuela's economy and take its society forward? No, I do not. Without going into detail I will say that I believe that this is the fatal flaw of the Chavez administration. However, this is really a very big topic and would need to be addressed in other letters. I will say this though.

The people who currently run and support the opposition are largely the same people people who made economic policy in Venezuela for the past half century. Clearly they didn't have a coherent and workable development plan either, based on the condition in which Venezuela found itself in 1998. And it doesn't appear that they have used the past 4 years to develop one either. If they have, why don't they ever discuss it or publish it somewhere we can all read and debate it?

So as distasteful as the idea may be to you, maybe you should be a bit more attentive to what Chavez says in his speeches and less attentive to his body language. And as difficult as it may be, try listening with an open mind. Although I am sure you will still disagree with 99% of what he says, you may find yourself occasionally reacting to his statements as I occasionally react to your commentary -- "Gee, I guess he does have a point there".

Regards Dan Burnett dburnett1@nyc.rr.com New York, USA

www.examiner.ie 24/02/03

IT isn’t very often that one is treated to a compelling documentary on RTE, but the True Lives series produced a gem on February 18 regarding Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and the attempted coup in April of last year.

Anyone who dismisses as a conspiracy the allegations of oil being a driving force behind US policy on Iraq would do well to look at the situation in Venezuela.

It is the third biggest supplier of oil to the US where the administration has openly admitted its interest in the strategic value of this country and its commodity.

Chavez's crime was to attempt to distribute the oil proceeds among his people. The coup was orchestrated by the disposed oil barons and compliant elements of the military. It failed when the people refused to accept the new regime. Most Venezuelans are convinced of CIA involvement, which the US denies. What the US cannot deny, however, is the peddling of lies on behalf of the plotters and their verbal support of a ‘regime change.’

In short, Chavez’s oil policy doesn’t suit the US. Therefore they see it as strategic imperative to secure their supply through whatever means are necessary. The US administration’s fundamentalist view of the world as good or evil is a nonsense. If you’re with them, your good; if you’re against them, you’re evil. Morals don’t come into it.

Cormac Cahill, 3, Eugene Drive, Grange Heights, Douglas, Cork.

www.vheadline.com Posted: Sunday, February 23, 2003 By: Dick Emanuelsson

Swedish freelance journalist Dick Emanuelsson writes: It was in the village Santine that the Land Reform Law was made public by President Chavez Frias on December 10, 2001. Thousands of farmers were present. In Caracas landlords and cattle farmers were demonstrating against the law -- together with the employer's organization Fedecamaras and the trade union confederation CTV.

It was the same venal forces that on April 11 would carry out a coup d'etat and erase the Land Reform Law and 48 other laws that the government has brought about to help the most poor Venezuelans.

Zulay Martinez, the beautiful 34 year old Mayor of the city Andres Eloy Blanco receives me in a simple barrack ... this is the house of the Mayor for this city of 22,000 inhabitants ... it is 40ºC in this calm farm area, with forests as well as thick rainforest that makes it a possible future tourist's paradise.

Dreams coming true

Three years ago the area became a community. Previously it was ruled by the corrupt social democratic Accion Democratica (AD) supported by 'Terratenientes' and 'ganaderos' ... landlords and cattle farmers.

It was a hard blow for these local politicians when this little woman defeated them with 60% of the population behind her in the community's elections ... and the atmosphere has really changed. The land reform is welcomed, and for the first time, many landless farmers can see their old dreams fulfilled.

But things are not simple; the big landlords and cattle farmers make harsh resistance.

"In many areas leaders of the landless farmers have been murdered and harassed by these powerful forces. Via their legal representatives, they try to delay the hand-out of  land to the farmers. But neither the land reform, nor the revolution is going to be stopped by these venal forces," says this thin woman who used to be a teacher in the city.

When the coup d'etat was carried out on April 11 last year, the old corrupt politicians tried to regain power in the community. But the people, farmers and other workers, stood up behind Zulay, who belongs to Chavez' party, the MVR ... The Bolivarian Party of the Fifth Republic. "A group of 30 people tried to occupy the Mayor's residence, but the great majority of the population hit back and brought an end to this local coup.

US companies chop down the rainforest

She criticizes bureaucrats within the state bureaucracy who have become a hampering factor in the development of the various revolutionary laws by using bureaucratic norms and regulations. This has also been true about the land reform ... "Chavez is well aware of this problem and he has taken measures" says the Mayor. "But in spite of that, the organization of the farmers and the farm workers is going rapidly. In the state Barinas, where our city is situated, there is today 25 farm co-operatives. Three years ago there was not a single one."

"We also have co-operatives that work with attending to the forests and re-planting and we also work to strengthen environmental care. Those things did not exist before. Here the corrupt politicians gave a US company a concession to chop down vast areas of rain forest ... now we are working with the government to re-plant these destroyed areas."

Dick Emanuelsson dickema@hotmail.com Translated from Swedish by Bjorn Blomberg blombergbjorn@hotmail.com

www.vheadline.com Posted: Sunday, February 23, 2003 By: Oscar Heck

VHeadline.com commentarist Oscar Heck writes: I would like to give some examples of the fashion in which many (if not most) of the media reports generated by the privately-owned Venezuelan television stations are manipulated to suit the continuing anti-Chavez effort to oust him from power.

To add a taste of panic and desperation, most of the reports, especially those coming from Globovision, are both alarmist in nature and edited for maximum “brainwashing” impact ... often using “impending doom type” background music reminiscent of that used by CNN and others when the Twin Towers were attacked in NYC.

When reading the examples, imagine screaming, yelling, people crying, chaos, etc. ... all part of the audio-visual reporting style used.

Example 1:  February 21, 2003:

Globovision reports, with the corresponding video clips ... asking the rhetorical question:

“Why is it that John Doe, a well-know convicted murderer, is escorted handcuffed from one place to another escorted by only 5-6 police/security personnel (and calmly at that), while Carlos Fernandez is escorted handcuffed from one location to another by tens of armed security/police personnel closely surrounding him as if he were a violent criminal? Why is he being so badly treated?”

(Carlos Fernandez is the president of Fedecamaras ú a major Venezuelan business association ú recently arrested on five charges including treason).

Analyzed with a little bit of logic, the answers to the rhetorical questions posed by Globovision may be quite simple.

A known convicted murderer does not need to be escorted by many armed police people because if he does try to escape, the police will shoot him and nobody would complain. In addition, if there's someone out there that wants to assassinate the murderer while in police custody, say a family member of the victim, it is more convenient that the murderer not be closely surrounded or guarded, making an attempt at revenge easier. Nobody would complain if the convicted murderer were assassinated.

However, the case of Carlos Fernandez is quite different. There are probably people out there that want to assassinate him. (Before his arrest, he was regularly escorted by several bodyguards).  If Carlos Fernandez is not closely guarded by many armed police while in police custody, and if he is assassinated whilst in police custody, who will be blamed for his murder?  Certainly the Chavez government and possibly Chavez himself, for not providing adequate protection.

So why is Globovision, in such an alarmist fashion, reporting that Carlos Fernandez is being “so badly treated” by the police ... treated worse than a convicted murderer?

Why? Because they can use this in their anti-Chavez smear campaign ... and they're using it!

The opposition ... including Globovision personnel ... are now accusing the Chavez government of human rights violations in the Carlos Fernandez case, and people are taking to the streets in support of Fernandez.

Globovision does not explain to viewers the real reasons why Fernandez is being kept under such close police protection. It's simply not convenient at this time.

Example 2: February 21, 2003:

News reports are stating that Chavez personally approved the arrest of Carlos Fernandez ... that Chavez “gave the order,” thus making him "a dictator."  He is also being called heartless because he shows joy at "the misfortunes of others" ... in this particular case, the misfortunes of Carlos Fernandez.

In order to “prove” that this is “true,” Globovision and other media sources, are repeatedly showing a very well-edited video clip, where Chavez recounts his telephone discussion with the judge who issued the order for the immediate arrest of Fernandez.

According to this clip: Chavez says “ ...well, then go ahead...” then smiles a vengeful smile and says something to the effect of “...now I am happy and will sleep better...” ending by laughing and saying sarcastically that he will celebrate with some sweets that his mother sent him.

What Chavez said is true ... however, it is only a part of what Chavez said within a broader context. I have seen the unedited version ... the source of Globovision’s clip ... a lengthy speech that Chavez made on February 21, 2003, broadcast on Venezolana de Television, the government run station.

It went like this: Chavez was, as usual, talking about many issues including the role of the justice system in Venezuela, when he brought up the issue of the arrest of Fernandez. He said something to the effect “... and I received a call from the judge. He said to me that the court had signed an order for the immediate arrest of Carlos Fernandez, ordering the police force to take the action.  I replied ... well, if it was so decided, then, well, go ahead...” Then he smiled a vengeful smile and said “ ...now I am happy, and I'll sleep better...”  He said jokingly that he'd celebrate with some sweets his mother sent him, and he laughed.

Taken in context, Chavez was basically saying: Why call me for the OK to arrest Fernandez if the court has already decided? It makes a lot of sense to me that Chavez would be happy, especially since he has been complaining for years about the inefficiency of the justice system in Venezuela. There's also no doubt in my mind that Chavez was also “personally” satisfied with the arrest of Fernandez ... but his personal satisfaction was clearly overshadowed by his joy at the fact that the justice system is finally on the right track.

Also, why accuse Chavez of laughing at the misfortunes of others?

What has the opposition been doing for the last 10 weeks of so?

For people who are not familiar with how the Venezuelan justice system has traditionally operated, the Prosecutor General explained it quite well in a televised press release this same day regarding the arrest of Carlos Fernandez. He said that many Venezuelans will find the new justice system/process slow and lengthy compared with the system they had been accustomed to ... but that they should be patient because the new system is more fair and just.  He added that the new system is based on  judicial systems used in modern countries where the person charged has the right to full due process and defense ... unlike the system Venezuelans are used to ... the “systema de justicia policial” (police judicial system).

(I have first hand knowledge and experience of several cases which are reflective of the “old system”)

Example 3: February 21, 2003

Globovision reports live, from the Francisco Fajardo highway ... one of Caracas’ main traffic arteries ... as Juan Fernandez, the president of 'Petroleum People' (one of the main PDVSA union organizations) tries to convince demonstrators to stop blocking the highway, which they had been blocking since before his arrival.

The previous day, the Coordinadora Democratica (the main anti-Chavez movements) had publicly called for all Venezuelans to demonstrate (which usually includes blocking streets) throughout many areas of Caracas in support of Carlos Fernandez. The demonstration call was officially cancelled by CD in the afternoon , but a little too late since people had already begun to block the highways.

Why did Globovision do this live report? Especially when it is precisely Juan Fernandez, along with Carlos Fernandez, Carlos Ortega and the Coordinadora Democratica that ... for the last 10 weeks or so ... have been screaming and yelling, telling people to go out and march, to block the streets!

Juan Fernandez has never before asked people not to block the roads. On the contrary! So, why now, Juan?

• Why is it suddenly, that Juan Fernandez is being filmed trying to tell people not to block the highways?

Within the same report, Globovision announced that even with Juan Fernandez telling people not to block the highways, people refused to un-block the highway. It must be the will of the people! The reporter seemed very intent on “proving” this.

Will this Globovision reporting be used to "exonerate" Juan Fernandez?  Exonerate him from what?...  Like Carlos Fernandez, it is highly probable that within the next few days Juan Fernandez will also be arrested and charged with inciting people to unlawful acts and treason.

What has been happening with a goodly portion of the Venezuelan media ... especially since the National Assembly approved the “Ley Habilitante” (1991) ... a set of laws that include Land and Bank reforms ... is quite amazing.

One must see it to believe it.

Venezuelans have been bombarded incessantly with manipulated information, often under the guise of “editorials”, “commentaries”, “advertising”, “interviews” and “special news programs”, not to mention “news.”

Even with pending media content laws and legal action, it appears that a major portion of the media is circumventing the laws/regulations in an attempt to justify the continued dissemination of manipulated “news.”  Globovision especially, since they advertise themselves as an “all news, twenty-four hours per day” television station.

I've also been thinking of another issue.

Why has the opposition, along with what appears to be whole-hearted support from the private television stations, been constantly calling on all Venezuelans to “take to the streets.” This has been puzzling me for weeks (there are many other ways to protest). Their reason is that "this is the only thing that Chavez understands." It has also been puzzling me that simultaneously, this same media has constantly been bombarding us with “Bolivarian Circles are armed circles of terror” and that “crime is increasing dramatically”.

Here is my theory, another “paranoid” theory?

I calculate that since December 2, 2002, over 3.2 million man-hours have been expended solely in local police/security budgets for demonstrations and marches in six major Venezuelan cities ... not counting the use of equipment, gasoline, food, etc. (calculations are based on the number of security personnel used at Maracaibo’s demonstration of February 21, 2003, - an estimated 300,000 demonstrators. The policeman responsible for security announced that approximately 1,800 local security/police people were present.)

Two observations:

1. How much does this cost, and who pays for it?

2. Is this another diabolical tactic used by top opposition leaders to deviate security forces to the marches, thus increasing crime outside the demonstration perimeters?

Thieves are not that stupid. While the police force is occupied with demonstrations, they have easier access to committing crime. It is a well-known tactic used worldwide by criminals themselves in many robberies ... distraction ... and it usually works wonders for robbers.

Can the supposed increase in crime (which coincidentally appears to be occurring in the major cities, which coincidentally are also the most anti-Chavez areas) be caused directly or indirectly by the fact that so many demonstrations are taking place?

• And if crime is truly on the increase in these areas, then isn’t it coincidentally a perfect opportunity for the opposition to blame Chavez for it?

And isn’t it coincidental that the increase in crime is blamed on the Bolivarian Circles, these supposed circles of terror? They are certainly not at the opposition marches, and according to the vast majority of opposition supporters, the Chavistas belonging to these supposed circles of terror are unemployed and poor!

Here is another interesting subject:

All Venezuelans are now invited to a grand march “For the love of Venezuela” in Caracas and other cities. The difference with this march is that now they, the unnamed organizers are saying “Come, all Venezuelans, to the streets, to march for the love of Venezuela ... to embrace Venezuela ... here we are Lord ... for peace ...for civilization ... all together, we yell to our Lord ... here we are ... come all together together in prayer ... in the streets...“

This is a grand religious march scheduled today, Sunday, February 23, 2003.

Who is organizing it?

I've asked people if large religious marches of this kind are typical yearly events here in Caracas. The answer is no, this is the first year.

One took place last week, but I thought it was quite normal since it was called the “March of the Virgin Corromoto” the Venezuelan patron.

Oscar Heck oscarheck111@hotmail.com