ETA terrorist high rank officer in Hugo Chavez's government of thugs

While Hugo Chavez howls in the UN that the US government is an hypocrite because they hide terrorists (or freedom figthers? as they like to call their own) like Posada Carriles, the government of Venezuelan, not only hides them, but employs them.

"The Venezuelan Embassy meanwhile confirmed on Wednesday that an ETA terrorist is on the staff of the Venezuelan Ministry for Agriculture.
Arturo Cubillas, who was wanted for three ETA assassinations in Spain, has held the position of Director assigned to the Ministry’s Administration and Services Office since October 2005. His wife has recently been promoted within the Venezuelan Presidential Office. Cubillas was deported to Venezuela from Algeria in 1989, after extradition proceedings between Spain and Algeria broke down." Source.

Who is the biggest hypocrite in this story??? WHO???????

What should Venezuelans do with Chavez?

What should a country do with a president who has acted criminally against the nation's interest?



From an email from someone who is related to the industry and CITGO:

Consequences from Chavez big mouth bully speech at the UN:

* BY last Friday Citgo had received more than 70 clients (about 3,500 gas stations - 30% of total), notifying Citgo that they want to end their contract of supplies and flags.

* The union of workers of Citgo had notify a decision of removing any logo of the company on the uniforms since they are ashamed to work for this company and they also feel attacked as citizens by you-know-who's speech at you-know-where.

* That Citgo received a letter from Governor Pataki, in which he was declining the heating oil low priced gift from Chavez. This is the only news I got related to it. I don't think this is totally true otherwise we should have heard about it. Surely Pataki doesn't like Chavez though.

* That in Boston the citizens were organizing into signing letters to ask for a removal of the Citgo sign. Also in Houston.

* Also, in Houston, the management of a Football team notify the ending of a sponsorship contract as well of the removal of a big Citgo sign, since the fotball fans were theatening with boycott them for the season.

* That is very possible that Citgo will loose 50% of the market and 10,000 syndicated gas stations since people are not buying gas there (I guess this is in addition to the 7-11 incident) (I haven't in a long time, how unfortunate. I remeber when I came to this country how proud made me feel to buy gas at Citgo)...

Anti-Zionism, the sugar coated world for Anti-Semitism

This morning I was doing my usual reading of Venezuelan bloggers, and stumbled across with this article coming from the blog of Daniel, whom he picked it up from Alex Beech's blog. She did an english translation of it that you want to read.

I am ashtonished to see how this anti-zionist agenda is being pushed so successfully by the caveman who calls himself Mahmud Ahmadinejad and how it is blinding so many people out there, and how it is spreading now into Venezuela's chavismo.

I just want to tell Mr. Muci and Mr. Ahmadinejad and everybody else who is oppose to Israel, the only country in the middle east in wich feminist, homosexuals and lesbians can live without being afraid of execution, the same words that Dr. Martin Luther King spoke one day in 1968 short before his tragic death, at a Harvard University appearance: "When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism." Who wants to sugar coat this truth?

Just read this piece from Mr. Muci's article:

"Let's pay attention of the Israeli-Zionist associations, unions and
federations which are conspiring to Venezuela to take over our
finances, our industries, commerce, construction; which are
infiltrating government positions and politics. Possibly, we'll have
to expel them from the country, as other nations have done,... "

If this is not anti-semitism, then I don't now what it is.

So, for Chavez, his enemy it's not only Bush, who is the devil and the political opposition who are the devil's worshippers, NO! Now they have added the Jews to the mix.

Mr. Muci demands: "... if they stop presenting themselves as the Chosen people of God," (?!) Ah? This quote tells me that Mr. Muci can't care less about what God think of Israel. Gee... chavismo never stop surprizing me! One thing I have confirmed over and over again, is that chavismo don't have a religion and don't respect people who have one.

I have to agree with Daniel this piece is not worth a decent trash can.

I am so ashamed of the Venezuelan arab community, since I am part of it, that is keeping up with this agenda of hatred. I want to think most of them think like me and find this totally repulsive.

There's this letter by Congressman John Lewis that everybody should read, and reflects Dr. King's views of Israel. Please don't leave without reading it. Maybe it would enlight and call to attention some good people who still thinks well about Chavismo. Chavismo is taken the wrong turn and we all Venezolanos are gonna get burn by it if we don't stop this lunacy.

Meanwhile Hugo I still is playing how to be a disrespectful international leader...

A massacre of miners has been held down on the south of Venezuela by the military of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, commanded by his excellency, Dictator Hugo Chavez Frias. The reason? The military wants that area for them to smuggle gasoline and do their little exortion games. Pure Soprano style.

The surviver miners have confirmed that the executers where Venezuelan military and not colombian guerrilla or garampeiros.

The poor folks still believing that Hugo Chavez cares about them, are asking his merciful appearance into the area to fix this problem. Will Chavez show his face to this poor miners? Or Venezuelan local affairs have become "peanuts" for his big ego? What do you think he will do? No show is my prediction.

Thanks Miguel for pointing out this news.

Sifrinos Oligarcas con Manuel Rosales

Alek is in Venezuela following up Manuel Rosales electoral campaign.

He took some video so you can see how rich upper class snobs Bush puppets are these evil people who are for Rosales. Yeah right!

One thing is that we are all so f****** tired of Hugo Chavez!!



Enjoy!

Alvaro Vargas Llosa talks about Chavez's Inferno

Thanks A.M. Mora y León from Publius Pundit.

Chávez’s Inferno

By ALVARO VARGAS LLOSA
September 25, 2006; The Wall Street Journal Page A14

It would have been more appropriate for Hugo Chávez to brandish Dante’s “Divine Comedy” than Chomsky’s “Hegemony or Survival” during his sulfuric broadside at the U.N. last week. In the first part of the Italian masterpiece, the author undertakes a journey through the nine concentric circles of the Inferno, each representing a type of evil. Dante’s description reads like a script of present-day Venezuela.

Dante’s first circle is for those who lack faith. In Chávez’s Inferno, the first circle is made up of those who lack food. Cendas, a research center, maintains that 80% of Venezuelans cannot meet the cost of a basic daily diet. According to an official statistic the government inadvertently made public on the Web site of the Instituto Nacional de Estadística, between 1999, the year in which Chávez took office, and 2004, poverty rose to 53% from 43% of the population. The authorities attributed the figures to an outdated methodology and now claim the rate of poverty is 42%. If it were true, that would be embarrassing enough, because it would mean that poverty has remained at nearly the same level for eight years.

Dante’s second circle is for those unable to control lust. Chávez’s second circle is for those unable to control homicidal instincts. His government has degraded social coexistence so much that there have been more homicides in Venezuela during his seven-and-a-half years in office than there have been deaths in any single armed conflict around the world in recent years. Between 2001 and 2006, the number of homicides in Venezuela has been three times the number of victims in Afghanistan.

Dante’s third circle is for gluttons who leave us with no food. Chávez’s third is reserved for corrupt authorities who leave Venezuelans with no wealth. The major sources of corruption have been Plan Bolívar 2000, the state-owned oil company, and social programs known as “missions.” Under Plan Bolívar 2000, the army took over development programs from the local governments. In the case of PDVSA, the energy giant, no one but Chávez and his cronies have access to detailed financial records. The budget for social programs, personally controlled by Chávez, is not included in any government ministry.

Dante’s fourth circle is for misers. In Chávez’s Inferno, the fourth circle is made up of bureaucrats who claim to provide social services but use funds to pay people to attend rallies or bust up opposition gatherings. Marino González, from Universidad Simón Bolívar, says that the “Barrio Adentro” program that purports to tend to all the pregnant women in the country only serves 2,000 expectant mothers out of a total of half a million each year. No country ever became prosperous through socialism, but for a government that claims to be able to tend to the needy, not being able to meet even 1% of the commitment is a particularly hellish sin.

Dante’s fifth circle is for those who succumb to wrath. Chávez’s fifth is for political persecution. Venezuela’s human rights record is atrocious. Two violent incidents involving Chavista henchmen with many fatalities have gone unpunished, including the killing in April 2002 of 12 people who were protesting near the government palace. There are political prisoners such as Francisco Usón, former minister of finance in Chávez’s government, who received a six-year sentence for saying he thought an incident in which a few soldiers died at Fort Mara in 2004 was no accident. Henrique Capriles, the mayor of Baruta, was jailed in 2004, accused of organizing a violent protest against the Cuban embassy which he had actually helped diffuse.

Dante’s sixth circle is for heretics. Chávez’s sixth circle is for heretic journalists who try to tell the truth. In December 2004, a “gag law” was imposed making it easy to prosecute journalists. The president continually threatens to withdraw TV and radio licenses — the reason why there are no opinion programs on network TV. Government-controlled mobs called Bolivarian Circles, formed with the help of the Cuban intelligence apparatus, harass journalists.

Dante’s seventh circle is for the violent. Chávez’s seventh circle is another name for imperialism. His government has bought (or is buying) 100,000 AK-47s, 53 Mi-35 assault helicopters, fighter jets, transport planes, patrol boats, speedboats and Tucano jets from Russia, Spain and Brazil. Chávez is a long-time supporter of FARC, Colombia’s terrorist group. He granted Venezuelan citizenship and protection to Rodrigo Granda, its “foreign minister,” until Alvaro Uribe’s government hired bounty hunters to bring him back to Colombia in 2005. The Venezuelan leader has given financial and political support to movements from Mexico to Bolivia. (His support for Ollanta Humala in Peru and Andrés Manuel López Obrador in Mexico was a major factor in both men’s recent defeats.)

Chávez buys influence through oil. It is a form of blackmail: At OPEC, Chávez fights for increasing prices, making life hard for poor countries that import oil, and then offers those very nations oil subsidies they have no choice but to accept. That is what happened with the 14 Caribbean countries that make up the Caricom group. He also sends 100,000 barrels of oil to Cuba daily; and 200,000 barrels to Bolivia every month in exchange for soy, poultry and political subservience. And he has bought $3 billion worth of Argentine bonds to entice President Kirchner’s loyalty. Chávez is denying his nation its wealth from oil, somewhere between $40 billion and $50 billion a year. His annual “aid” budget totals more than $2 billion. He sponsors 30 countries, including some in Africa, in order to buy their vote for a seat at the U.N. Security Council.

Dante’s eighth circle is for those who commit fraud. Chávez’s eighth is fraudulent anti-Americanism. Chávez exports 1.5 million barrels of oil a day to the U.S. Since oil makes up half the government’s revenue and the U.S. is the principal destination of Venezuelan oil, he pays daily homage to U.S. capitalism. Moreover, Venezuela imported $18 billion worth of goods and services from the U.S. in 2005. He may have signed 20 trade deals with Iran’s Ahmadinejad, but what he really lusts for is U.S. capitalism. (Another type of fraud involves the electoral system. Chávez has manipulated the voter registration rolls, adding two million phantom voters, including 30,000 who are 100 years old and citizens named “Superman.” Four out of five members in the Electoral Council are Chávez lackeys.)

Dante’s final circle is for traitors. Chávez’s ninth is for traitors, too — and the place is getting crowded. Army officers betray Chávez every day. Labor leader Carlos Ortega recently fled with three officers from a high-security prison controlled by the army. They evaded security controls thanks to help from army personnel.

At the end of Dante’s Inferno is the center of the earth, where Satan is held captive in the frozen lake of Cocytus. In Venezuela’s Inferno, Satan is frozen in oil-rich Lake Maracaibo, a metaphor for astronomical wealth squandered by tyrannical populism. The journey through hell is now complete.

Mr. Vargas Llosa, author of “Liberty for Latin America” (Farrar Straus Giroux, 2005), is director of the Center on Global Prosperity at the Independent Institute.

URL for this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115914134454172599.html

Baily talks about the good manners of Pres. Chavez

Chavez among other attacks to many people, calls Bush, murderer, genocide and a drunk... Jaimy Baily then, makes an apology to drunk people asking if they share the same moral level than being a murderer and a genocide. And reminds people that many good books were written by alcoholics while being drunk. (In spanish) Very funny!

Would Bush be allowed to criticized Chavez in Venezuela the same way Chavez did to Bush in NY?

Let's take aside the UN speech since it's international ground, and let's focus on his speech at the Baptist church in Harlem. Bush wouldn't be allowed to do the same speech in Venezuelan soil against Chavez.

And he killed Chomsky too.

What can I say? I though this was an exaggeration of Fox News until found the news in the NYT.

"At a news conference after his spirited address to the U.N. on Wednesday, President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela expressed one regret: not having met that icon of the American left, the linguist Noam Chomsky, before his death."

UPDATE Oct 3:

Apparently the Chomsky is dead thingy is not right. He was referring to John Kenneth Galbraith, a man Chavez had the indulgence of reading his economic theory books when he was a child! I didn't know that Chavez was so smart! Certainly he come across as a charlatan to me!

What would be Chavez's epitaph? "Here lies the golden child, missunderstood prodigy, President of Venezuela, he has it all and yet fucked up everything he touched!"

Boston pol takes aim at Citgo sign after 'devil' comment

"Given the hatred of the United States displayed by dictator Hugo Chavez, it would be more fitting to see an American flag when you drive through Kenmore Square," McDermott told The Boston Herald. "I think people would soon forget the Citgo sign."

-Councilor Jerry McDermott

And so, unfortunately, he is right. My most sincere apologies as a Venezuelan to the American people. We didn't vote for the piece of shit, only 1998 (not me thogh). He committed fraud on the 2004 referendum.

Chavez speech at the UN is criminal against Venezuela's best interest.

And, after spending so much money in propaganda, in Citgo signs, in buying a security council seat all over the world, all that money is gone forever and nothing would be accomplished. And we are looking and doing worst than ever. Just like Cuba.

What Hugo didn't tell at the U.N.

Hugo's Big Lies.
What Tyrant didn't tell U.N.
By Thor Halvorssen

September 21, 2006.- JUST a few days before his rant at the United Nations yesterday, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez gave a speech in Caracas playing up the most obscene 9/11 conspiracy theory - that the attacks were planned by the Bush administration as a pretext for war. Yes, on Sept. 12, Chavez said, "Maybe it was even the imperialist North American power that planned and drove this terrorist attack against its own people and the citizens of the world to justify the aggressions immediately following against Iraq, Iran and threats against all of us, against Venezuela as well."
This guy is really, really big on "the Big Lie."
Yesterday's fire-breathing speech - carried live by dozens of world TV broadcasters - was nonstop hate, aimed at the United States, President Bush, Israel and the United Nations itself, along with Western democracy and economic liberalism. Calling "world dictator" George Bush the "devil" over and over again, he discussed everything from CIA plots to assassinate him to how he - along with Cuba, Iran and the non-aligned countries - will save the world from imperialist doom. Chavez has said the United States is "afraid of truth, is afraid of independent voices," yet Chavez has suffocated all dissent in his own backyard. Beyond rewriting the Constitution to bolster his legal power, he's passed a law banning "the use of language deemed to be insulting to the President of the Republic."
Human Rights Indeed, any expression of dissent, public or in private, against any public official is punishable with prison. Francisco Usón - a former minister in Chavez's own Cabinet - recently drew a six-year jail term for expressing an opinion on television. Carlos Ortega - the president of Venezuela's AFL-CIO-affiliated federation of workers - got a 16-year sentence for instigating a legal strike despite protests by the International Labor Organization of this unspeakable violation of human rights. (Ortega escaped from prison last month.) Chavez claimed yesterday that the United States protects terrorism while his own government is "fully committed to combating terrorism and violence." In fact, Chavez has demonstrably protected and armed the FARC terrorists of next-door Colombia. (He's also presided during the greatest crime wave in Venezuelan history, with a death toll exponentially larger than any previous government's.)
Chavez denounced capitalism as the generator of "mere poverty." Yet, thanks to a capitalist oil boom, he has profited from the richest Venezuelan government in history - but squandered its wealth on a new Venezuelan oligarchy of petro-millionaires masquerading as government officials. Meanwhile, misery and malnutrition are at a historic high. Chavez railed against Western-style democracy. Yet it was western style democracy that brought him into power (after his own armed coup failed) and may remove him in the end. This is why he does everything he can to hollow and weaken democratic institutions. He has frequently praised the "participatory" models of Libya, North Korea and Cuba as ideal forms of government - countries where rulers, accountable to no one, torture, imprison and murder their opponents.
As for his references to peace and world understanding, well: The Venezuelan leader has increased military spending to $10 billion a year, dwarfing all social programs, education and health budgets - and vastly above the nation's previous arms spending. He's bought 100,000 automatic assault rifles, 53 Mi-35 assault helicopters and several supersonic fighter-bombers from Russia, as well as transport planes, patrol boats and speedboats from Spain. He has also signed an agreement with Russia to build Latin American's first-ever Kalashnikov factory.
The worst may be his roars about the threat of imperialism - for, in Latin America, Hugo Chavez is the face of modern imperialism. Chavez's grants to Fidel Castro alone are larger than all United States aid packages in the Americas. He helped get coca-grower Evo Morales elected president of Bolivia. He is putting Venezuelan oil cash behind Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua. His neighbors resent it: Voters in Peru and Mexico recently rejected Chavez-backed candidates (Ollanta Humalla and Andres Lopez Obrador) in good part because of the Chavez taint.
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton dismissed Chavez's thundering rhetoric yesterday as cartoonish. Other leaders have referred to him as a buffoon and a joke. But, like Korea's much-ridiculed Kim Jong Il, Chavez poses a deadly threat not only to his own nation but to the peace and security of the region. He has signed more than 80 international agreements with Iran, stating repeatedly that if international action is taken to prevent Iran from developing nuclear capacity, Venezuela will attack the United States. His own "hypothetical" nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. Chavez was brandishing a book by MIT professor Noam Chomsky yesterday. He's plainly taken one of Chomsky's maxims to heart: "If you repeat it loudly enough, it will become the truth."
Thor Halvorssen is president of the New York-based Human Rights Foundation

www.ivcdteam.org
www.blog.ivcdteam.org

Seems that after all Manuel II Palaeologus was right!

The peaceful Muslims have been very busy showing to the world how right was evil Pope Benedict XVI when he decided to quote Byzantine Emperor Manuel II's words .

Quote: ""Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

Muslim Reaction: "Conquering Rome is the Answer"

But the Pope, trying to exhaust all possible human ways to appease the intolerant, has invited the Muslim ambassadors of the Vatican for further talking.

The Rangel/Pelosi anti-Chavez statement creates a nervous breakdown at PSF(*) nation

Their brain fuses blew out!

Enjoy!

(*) What is a PSF? "Pendejos-sans-frontier" First world safari explorers who travel all over the world finding a cause to fight to fill their empty lives. Some take pictures with them to prove they were there! The Cindy Sheehans of the world, the College Kid with the murderer Che t-shirt, etc, etc...

Did Chavez leave the country or not?

The rumor was that President Chavez, former militarucho golpista (*), left NYC, but apparently he still is in town.

In an article from the Washington Post, Mr. Jeffrey Jeffrey Laurenti from the Century Foundation wonders if Chavez's know his shit.

"But Chavez would never be able to translate the popular reaction to his rant into political support for his positions because, while the moment "might be emotionally satisfying," the delegates "know this is not the real world," said Jeffrey Laurenti, a seasoned U.N. analyst at the Century Foundation."

I believe he thinks not.

Source here.

(*) What is a militarucho golpista? A third tier military official who participated on a coup d'etat.

Chavez steals the spotlight at the U.N., long live to the ignorant(*)!!

The "deliriously ignorant", term which Arturo Uslar Pietri, one of the most educated and brilliant intelectual minds of Venezuela used to describe Chavez (*), has spoken. And the people of the UN have cheered! So easy a caveman can do it.

But, the question is, do the ambassadors knew who were they cheering? Somebody who was even called "not too well "furnished" mentally" by his intelectual mentor?

He did what he likes to do best, a big comedic show, and this time he went to the Radio City Music Hall. He called Bush the devil, that the UN still smells like sulphur, that blah blah blah... because of Bush this and Bush that and Bush thinks and Bush ... and Bush ... and Bush ...

And he recommended the ambassadors to read the rant of Chomsky. Good grief. Can you imagine any other leader having the balls to ask others what they should read??????? I mean, the arrogance of the ignorant is always something that deserves to be talked about.

Did he have something interesting to say taking appart the anti-american speech? (Apparently not, since all the news about his speech started with the title "Hugo Chavez Calls Bush 'Devil'", so that was the highlight).

He finalized asking to move the UN to Venezuela. Actually, I would love that. I think the UN would have a more according home on a Circus like Venezuela than on a serious country.

F

(*) This is what Uslar Pietri said about Chavez, in 2001:

"Un delirante, ignorantísimo, dice disparates, qué desgracia, el país no logra encaminarse. Pero era muy difícil que Venezuela pudiera encontrar su camino, trató de encontrarlo con López y con Medina, después vino el 18 de octubre y los gobiernos militares y esto se fue, se perdió. Este hombre habla con una arrogancia y una suficiencia increíbles, a él se le han pegado algunas frases que ha oído, como esa del liberalismo salvaje, eso lo llena de felicidad. No puede haber liberalismo salvaje, el liberalismo es la flor de la civilización, el tolerar la divergencia.” (Arráiz Lucca, 2001: 39)"

Source here.

UPDATE:

Now he is giving an interview to the press, first question was what he would do to reform the UN, and he is answering with a history class... sigh... now he is mentioning "my friend, Kofi Anan..." so far, no concrete answers... I'll get back to you when I finishing listening... maybe he says something interesting. Ah yeah he said, they need to take the path of brotherhood and peace... that was his answer.

Question about Calderon:
Some phone rang and it was asked to turned it off, to what Chavez said, "Discipline, very good!" uhmmm. His answer has taken the road of chatting about the cumbre with Castro a few days ago... no direct answer to his position about Mexico, yet. Now David and Goliath... Now asking back to the reporter if he is a Mexican... still waiting for a definite answer... TV comercials now....

(*) Thanks Justin, I know you are enjoying my bad command of the english language big time. But it was very kind from you to note it. Sad thing is that seems I never ever will stop making english grammar mistakes!.

Prove me wrong!

Maria sent me this, some comments about the evil Pope incident with the tolerant and peaceful Islamist:

From an Australian forum:

"It has just been proved that the morality and tolerance of Islam has not moved one iota in the last 600 years. Islamic Fanatics can justify any claims, but any criticism is rejected as hateful, discriminatory and evil. It is OK to preach genocide, promote murder, entrench female slavery and prohibit free speech, as longs as you are Islamic. In Islamic countries it is dangerous (if not illegal) for some one to preach any other faith. Often it is just as dangerous o preach a different type of Islam. Yet Islam demands that the can freely preach in non-Muslim countries. Why do their leaders fear freedom, education and criticism? Perhaps they rightly fear these things because then their followers might realise that the faith they are following is not one of love and tolerance, but hatred, hypocrisy, murder and repression. To recant your faith in Islam is punishable by death. A religion that not only would condemn your soul, but also encourage your murder. There must be many millions of Muslims that would wish to leave this blood thirsty religion, but only stay for fear of their life. Each individual religious teacher can say what ever they want. The way that Islamic sects seem to debate is by murdering their critics (both Muslims and non-Muslim) in a most indiscriminate way, also killing hundreds of bystanders. This religion of hate, intolerance and murder should be prohibited. No civilised person could even consider this to be a religion. The puppet leaders of Islamic countriues that wish to retain this dead religion, should not have any of the amenities of modern society. They wish to live with 14th Century leaders and philosophy then they should also have similar medicine, weapons and education. "

From a friend:

I love this reaction to what the Pope quoted from the old text.

What the Pope quoted from an old text:
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached," Benedict quoted.

Moslem reaction:

"We tell the worshipper of the cross (the Pope) that you and the West will be defeated, as is the case in Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya," said an Internet statement by the Mujahideen Shura Council, an umbrella group led by Iraq's branch of al Qaeda, according to the Reuters news agency.
"We shall break the cross and spill the wine. ... God will (help) Muslims to conquer Rome . ... God enable us to slit their throats, and make their money and descendants the bounty of the mujahideen," said the statement.

If that doesn't exactly prove the point, I don't know what does. Even us Lutherans can cheer the Pope this time.

What did the Pope Say?

Before today's Pope's statement, I was reading about this from the muslim (Turkish Press) point of view, and anybody was talking about the big elephant in Islam's room that the Pope apparently saw for a brief moment:

What does the Pope say?
by Henrike Hochmuth

"He probably has not meant his quotations the way they are interpreted now by politicians, religious people, and journalists all over the world. But as a religious leader with an enormous influence over millions of people in many different countries he has to mind his speech. Especially after September 11, people are very sensitive on this issue, which has only been proven by the debate after the publishing of the Mohammed cartoons by Danish newspapers. In official statements, the Vatican declares that the Pope did not mean to offend the sensitivity of the Muslim faithful. But apparently this is exactly what he has done when he quoted the medieval source. In order to point at the relation between religion, violence and reason, he could have chosen a different source without any reference to a religious personality. It is too late now to change anything in his speech, but it is not too late to take an influence on the consequences. By directing himself to the Muslim world with a clear message of regret, he can probably prevent an escalation of the situation. It is of utmost importance that religious and politic leaders take a clear stand against a clash of civilizations."

Henrike Hochmuth is a researcher at ISRO, European Studies
Read the whole article here.

Of course he mind his speech. And he should have total responsibility of what he says, being such an important persona, His Holyness.

"In order to point at the relation between religion, violence and reason, he could have chosen a different source without any reference to a religious personality."

This is where I want to go. Why? Why he cannot talk about the relationship of violence between young Islamist and its religion? Why the sensitivity about criticizing the Islam? I mean, the western world is also very sensitive about this issue, and wants to know if this violence comes embedded from their religion or comes from a misunderstanding of some of them trying to understand some passages of their Holy Book?? Which one is true, muslims of the world? Can anyone be kind enough and tell me? Because we are very touchy-feely in this side of the world too!

Sorry His Holiness, We Couldn’t Get It
by Selma Sevkli

"The Pope Benedict XVI formerly known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger is known for his enrollment in Hitler Youth in 1941.(...)

For a true dialogue, we should forget about mistakes have been made in history. I could talk about Christianity as the religion of sword and refer to Crusade wars. But, would that solve anything? Are we trying to prove whose religion is better, or how can we co-exist in the same world? It is time for conscience for all of us, and the leaders should pioneer it."

Read the whole article here.

Ms. Sevlkli,

My question to you is, what is the part muslims cannot understand? The one in which His Holyness calls to ponder the calling of violence from the Islam in the name of God? Why he cannot talk about it?

Referring to the actual Pope been a member of Hitler Youth, I think Ms. Sevlkli doesn't understand what it is to live on a regime where there's no much of a personal freedom to choose what to do. And pointing out the relationship of the catholic church and the Pope with Nazism, will only lead to spitting to themselves, since it's widly know the close relationship of the Mufti of Jerusalem with Adolf Hitler on WWII days. And, Joseph Ratzinger is not known because of he was member of Hitler Youth when he was a kid, but because he is the Pope.

In reference to the cruzades, Ms. Sevlkli apparently haven't notice it yet, that catholics don't do that anymore. And moreover, John Paul the Great, this marvelous Pope she refered to, asked for forgiveness to the world for this. Are you guys gonna keep talking about the cruzades like an actual violence topic or we should get into what's causing violence these days? Why Ms. Sevlkli criticize a medieval cruzade but they don't criticisized its youth becoming suicide bombers in the name of God?

The Pope’s Speech and The Turkish Press
by Abdi Noyan Ozkaya

Digging more into this news and how tolerant muslims are seeing this news I found this very sensible article about how this news have been shown by the Turkish press:

"After these critical words about the Turkish press, something must also be said about the Pope’s quotations and the aim of his speech. The Pope ostensibly aimed to deliver a speech on the connection between reason and Christianity. He also finished his speech by urging dialogue between cultures. However, the Pope’s example is extremely irrelevant for a speech calling for intercultural dialogue. I still cannot understand how a top-religious person can give a disturbing example by using the name of the Prophet Muhammed but still call for dialogue between religions. Yes, it is a quotation and the Pope stresses that he finds the Emperor’s words excessive, but this doesn’t justify the use of this example. Everybody knows that such speeches are prepared days before the day of delivery. He should have known that such discussion would not be approved by the Muslim communities."

Abdi Noyan Ozkaya is a research assistant at ISRO and a regular contributor to the Journal of Turkish Weekly.

We come again to the point that the problem was that he mentionned Mohammed. Now seems to me that any of this muslims people have understood that the Pople is questioning directly the Islam and its relationship with violence. Will they be offended forever or will they open their eyes to the big problem that extremism is doing to his youth, and try to do something about it, so we can all live in peace? Seems that the rest of the world, christians included, can't question what's going on with Islam's suicide bomber youth. Is the Islam directly commanding this or Islam is really a religion of compassion that have the good will of sharing differents faith with the rest of the world?

Truth of the matter is that the Pope touched a very important point that needs to be openly discussed by Islam and the rest of the world.

On why a true leftist doesn't believe in Hugo Chavez's lunacy

This is my argument as to why all the people and organizations that support Chavez's "Socialismo del Siglo XXI" are not ideologically mature or ideologically sound on what socialism is all about.

How Luis Miquilena fits into the life of the comedian Hugo Chavez, who, according to Jaime Baily and a whole bunch of Venezuelans, spends his free time acting as the President of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela? Miquilena is, ladies and gentleman, the father of Frankenstein.

Luis Miquilena who is considered the political mentor of Venezuelan comedian/ president Hugo Chavez, is a founding member of the Communist Party of Venezuela, a former chairman of Chavez’s MVR (Movimiento Quinta Republica) party, he organized Chavez’s first trip to Cuba, where he met Fidel Castro. He also organized Chavez’s first electoral campaign in 1998. He was also Chavez’s former omnipotent minister of both the Interior Ministry and Justice Ministry; and President of the Congress until 2002, when he renounced, due to Miquelena’s disagreements with his Hugo, the boss. His loss to the Chavista Revolution was a very hard hit for the chavismo, since almost all of the serious left in Venezuela and the world, separated from Chavez and his revolution.

He gave an interview to Andres Oppenheimer, which is part of his new book, “Cuentos Chinos”. You can read the whole interview in Spanish, in here (*). I don’t know if this text is exactly the one coming from his book, but regardless this is a resume of the Spanish text that I read. It offers a very good insight of the mental state of the enigmatic President Chavez. I can't wait to read the whole book.

"... He met Chavez in 1992 after his coup d'etat intent, and when Chavez was in jail already. He was invited once to visit him (1). After this meeting, they became friends and Miquelena became his ideological mentor. They had a father and son relationship.

After Chavez left jail, he lived at Miquelena's home for 5 years, until he won the 1998 presidential elections. They used to sit at nigh and watch the starts, dream and talk about a new Venezuela, a decent country, a humble country with no criminals (free of corruption).

Miquelena introduced him to the Cubans, to Fidel.

How would Miquilena describe Chavez? A new Castro? A leftist Pinochet? Or what? Oppenheimer asked. Miquelena described him as intellectually limited, impulsive, temperamental, surrounded by obsequents (condescending aids), incredibly disorganized in all aspects of his life, never on time for appointments, meetings or anything, totally ignoring finances, luxury lover and very erratic.

Miquilena also added that Chavez is the most unpredicable man he had ever know. He said that making any description of Chavez is impossible since he is a temperamental, emotive, erratic persona. He also mentioned that he is not too well "furnished" mentally and he doesn't have any definite ideology.

Miquilena keep describing the hero of many as tailor made for confrontation. Chavez, according to Miquilena, doesn't understand the execution of power as for him to be the nation's arbiter, to manage the rules of the game and to manage conflict from a democratic point of view; he is not prepared for it. Oppenheimer asked: “But, doesn’t he share Castro's views?” Yes and No, Miquilena said. He saw Fidel as a success in the sense he has stayed in power for more than 40 years, but he is aware that Cuba is not a model for today's world. “But then, did he radicalized with time?” Oppenheimer added. Miquilena said that the dynamic of events drew him closer to Castro, and more because of temperaments (disposition, personality) than ideology. He also added that probably because of Chavez's narcissism, he was drawn to a very confrontational rhetoric (closer to Castro’s) and also because of this, it generated bigger world attention that could projected him to the international stardom as a continental leader. (2)

Moreover, the more anti-Yankee the speech, the more international attention he was getting from the international left. And, as the internal political decay in Venezuela became impossible to cover up, Chavez could not have found a better excuse for it than to blame the US for any real and non-real aggressions. Fidel also seeded into him the idea that he was going to get killed, and that’s when Chavez started getting more and more consultations from Chavez’s Cuban intelligence and security services. The oil strike was used by Cuba to send “help”, and Chavez happily accepted 17,000 "helpers" from Cuban “doctors” and “teachers” (3).

But Chavez never had a really defined ideology, not a long-term plan, because he was, fundamentally, an undisciplined man, Miquilena added. His style of government was teenager-like. He used to call his ministers past midnight to tell them about a brilliant idea that he just had. He gave them a lot of instructions and everybody agreed with him. Then, when things didn’t work, he simply changed his ministers. It’s not a coincidence than in 5 years of government, he has made 80 changes in ministry appointees.

Hugo Chavez is surrounded by “ordenanzas”, the military term for his aids, who never ever contradict him. Oppenheimer also talked to Ignacio Arcaya, a former minister of the Government and Justice, who said that Chavez used to call him very late at night, sometimes around 4 a.m. with some urgent requirement, only for the President to forget all about it the day after. He once told the President that he was the sole cause of disorganization of his government. Chavez then asked why Arcaya said that. To which Arcaya replied it was because of the way he (Chavez) over-tasked his ministers by ordering such diffuse assignments such as to "prepare a report about education, to bring you a sancocho, to go the US for banking, come back and take his children to the baseball game". "You cannot do this,” Arcaya said, “because of the ministers aren’t ever going to say no, but of course, they won’t get anything done.”

One time he asked Arcaya for a report on the jails in Venezuela first thing in the morning. Arcaya spent the night working on it, only for the President to leave for Margarita Island in the middle of the night and forget all about the jail systems and the report upon his return.

Miquilena also remembered how much he disliked Chavez disorganization, his non-punctuality and the humiliatingly bad treatment he gave his aids, governors, high officials, etc… One time he fired a governor from his desk and told him he was a "piece of shit" and to leave immediately from his desk. Then, after realizing he had overreacted, apologizing and giving the man his job back. Yet he would soon overreact again and insult and fire somebody else.

Regarding the economic management of the country, Miquilena pointed out how arbitrary Chavez was, like he was managing a personal farm, without any rules. Suddenly, asking to give X and Y millions to the bank. One time, he was caught in tape giving a speech about the “Banco de la Mujer”. He was fascinated with the work done and yelled “Is there a minister in here? Someone from the military house? Ah, Gonzalez, take note of this: give 4 billion bolivars to this bank”. Miquilena said that this was something that happened all days.

According to Miquilena, Chavez incendiary rhetoric was producing a lot of enemies, not only from government outsiders, but insiders as well. Because the president was talking about a fictitious revolution that didn’t have anything to do with what was really happening. Then, he started to divide society between rich and poor, between oligarchs and the people, with a revolutionary speech with wasn’t in tune with what was really happening in real life, “and that it won’t never happen”, in Miquilena’s opinion. Because, Chavez’s speech was to eliminate the oligarchy from Latin America, but he is economically following neoliberal economic policies and is also giving historically the best and juiciest contracts to North American multinational oil companies. Miquilena warned him that one day people would discover the lie. He said to him that with this speech, he was deceiving revolutionaries (those who think they are), to the economic sectors as well as the old left which was still wishing for a revolution. Miquelena got tired of telling him that with this speech he wasn’t gaining anything but losing support from all sides.

And how did Chavez react to this, Oppenheimer asked? He did react positively and used to asked Jose Vicente Rangel (former Foreign affairs minister, Defense minister and actual vice president), as well as Miquilena to fix things for him. Just after the air was cleared, he started again with the violent speech.

One time Chavez asked Miquilena to call Gustavo Cisneros (Univision, TV mogul), who in that time was having a very aggressive agenda as an opposition member(4). Chavez wanted to get into an agreement with him. Miquilena invited him as well as the Attorney General (Isaias Rodriguez), and they all three had a very extended lunch. All parties agreed on tone down the speech. After lunch, when Miquilena was driving home, he turned on the radio to find Chavez giving a live speech insulting Cisneros. So, this was happening at the same time he was asked to try to fix thing with Cisneros. So, this defines the characteristics of Chavez persona, “anything unpredictable goes”, he added.

When Miquilena concluded that he wouldn’t be able to change Chavez. He looked to Fidel for help. He managed a meeting on 2002’s “Cumbre de Nueva Esparta”. Fidel agreed with Miquilena's argument of helping Chavez to fix his politics, since stupid politics wouldn’t benefit anyone. Castro mentioned that Chavez wasn’t doing any type of revolution. Fidel knew what a revolution was, Chavez didn’t. For Fidel, a solution would have been a change of the social means of productions from one class to another… but he knew that Chavez wasn’t doing that, and it wasn’t planning on making it.

Castro was a realistic person who valued, more than anything, for Chavez to stay in power and for what he could bring to Cuba. And how didChavez react to this? He agreed to tone down the speech once again, only for him to turn it on again once he arrived to Caracas. At that point Miquilena quit.

Before ending this interview Oppenheimer asked which one of this two analyst was right. Petkoff (Teodoro), whose analysis of Chavez’s process is that there is “not a dictatorship but a process of institutional weakness to make a stronger caudillo”. Or Garrido (Alberto), who says that Chavez was implementing a gradual plan of total absolute control. Miquelena answered that Garrido is supposing that Chavez is a man with a plan, with some type of ideological structure, and that he disagrees with him in this aspect. He thinks that Chavez has a total scramble of mixed things in his brain, and that he let himself go depending of the day. He mentioned again how purely temperamental Chaves is. His north is to stay in power. He doesn’t have any discipline or a clear theory on where he is going. After winning the referendum, Chavez made fun of the process, allowing certain democratic facades. He would make a “Briton government, trying to get the perfume of democracy around him while maintaining some type of judicial, parliamentary and electoral mock-ups.

The man with two pedals.

As a lot of people were afraid of, Chavez radicalized its victory after 2004. On mid 2005, with oil to US $60 a barrel, almost 8 times more expensive than when he was elected, and with a demoralized and intimidated opposition, the president had accumulated powers without precedent in Venezuelan’s contemporary history. Some months after the referendum, he won 22 of the 24 government elections and 280 of 335 townships. Likewise, he appointed 12 more justices, all of whom were "Chavista" to the Supreme Tribunal, making it from 20 to 32. He approved the “Ley de contenidos” (spring media law), which gave him the power to close the media outlets upon his order. And he also made a change of the modus operandi of the congress so some very key laws could have been approved with simple majority. This gave him control of the Legislative power, in which his members had little participation to this point.

Also, he dedicated to buy weapons all over the world, to restructure the military and change their uniform to give them some type of anti-imperialist charm. He also expanded the reserve members from 90 thousand to 500 thousand. Among other things, he bought 15 Mi-17 attack helicopters, Mi-35 and more than 100 thousand Ak-103 from Russia, 10 troop transportation planes and 8 patrol ships to Spain, and 24 Super Tucan light fighter planes to Brazil, in addition to start negotiation to buy 50 Russian Mig-29 fighter jets, all for the price tag of US $2 billion.

For the Venezuelan opposition, the thing that worries them most is the expansion of the reservist troops, since they are not under the defense secretary but under the presidency. People believe that they are only popular militias created with the solely purpose to watch the citizens, Cuban style. In that time, Chavez and Castro were announcing already the “International” (Cuban) population of “doctors” and “teachers” and etc, inside Venezuela, to be expanded from 17 thousand to 30 thousand. In the meantime, Chavez has kept ratcheting up the rhetoric against the United States. Expanding Cuba’s daily oil subsides from 53 thousand to 90 thousand. He has invested more and more his cash stack of petrodollars to expand his influence in the region, with projects like Telesur, the Alba, etc… “The Cuban and Venezuelan revolution are only one”, he proclaimed on TV on July 9, 2005, in an act in which he commentated 96 Cuban consulting aids from the Misión Robinson.

Oppenheimer decided to call Petkoff since he became very intrigued of the course that Chavez’s government has taken to ask him if he still believed that Chavez is not making a Cuban revolution. Petkoff said that without any doubt, he thinks that Chavez has expanded his control of the state institutions but he also said that his rhetoric doesn’t come with the structural economical and social changes of what any revolution should have. He emphasized on Chavez expanding control on the state institutions.

So, what is Venezuela right now? A Totalitarian system, or a democracy with a strong man? Oppenheimer asked. Petkoff answered that he doesn’t pay attention to Chavez’s “revolutionary” speech but he used two pedals, one is the authoritarian one, the other is the democratic institution, depending on the need. Petkoff ended by saying that these days he has used the authoritarian one much more than the democratic one.

Oppenheimer had put into balance all that Miquilena and Petkoff had said to him and has come to the conclusion something he always suspected: Intellectually, Chavez is a rudimentary military man, but very clever, who holds on very tightly to his power. His political success is due in good part to the sky high price of the oil barrel in his administration. On mid 2005, when the oil barrel was around US $60 per barrel, Chavez presented himself as the savior of 500 years of oppression. “The polarization between rich and poor was created by capitalism and neoliberalism, not by Chavez” he mentioned on an al-Jazeera interview, he added (5): “It was created by a slavery system that has lasted more than 5 centuries. Five centuries of exploitation, especially during the 20th century, when the capitalist system was imposed upon us (6), and at the end of this century when the neoliberal age was also imposed to us. This is the most unvarnished stage of the wild capitalism. This system created very hard conditions that leaded to a social explosion. In 1989, I was an official of the army and I saw the country errupting like a volcano. Then, there were two military operations, one of which I participated along with thousands of military and civilians”.

Maybe the best description of Chavez is the one given by Manuel Caballero, another very respected Venezuelan leftist intellectual against Chavez. He also suggested to Oppenheimer, along with Petkoff and Miquilena to take Chavez’s leftism with a grain of salt, and one should see him more as populist military man rather than an ideologue. And after watching him for so many years, Caballero ends: “Chavez is not a communist, not a capitalist, nor a muslim, nor a Christian. He is all of them if he needs to be, in order to stay in power until 2021”.


(*) H/T to Cuyuni for the link
(1) For those who don't know, Chavez he was a celebrity in Venezuela on those days, and all who-is-who in Venezuela was obliged to visit the star Hugo, celebrities, intellectuals, jet setters, etc..
(2) This is so true. Just look at him now. Take the anti-Bush speech and the “I love Fidel” phrase and he is nobody.
(3) The “” are mine, since I have the serious doubt that these people are really medical doctors and teachers.
(4) Not anymore.
(5) ZZZzzzzz…..
(6) Since he mentioned the word "especially", I suppouse that acording to Hugo, feudalism was a better system than capitalism...

Should the Pope apologize?

Happen that his Holyness was given a speech about how reason and faith should be reconciled in the west and opps! He comitted the SIN of quoting some words of a medieval emperor on the errors of Islam and jihad, or holy war.

Of course, the media, always so sympathetic and nice to the catholics, decided to highlight the quote of the medieval emperor and forget the whole point of the conversation.

The age of reason has died.

And now, the muslim community who really are very touchy-feely of its religion, (gee, maybe catholics should become like them!) have given their last world, The Pope is the new Fuhrer (I though it was Ahmadinejad, but nevermind)

"But he said the pope did not intend to make a critical assessment of Islam, much less offend Muslims. On the contrary, Father Lombardi said, the pope's talk focused primarily on the religious shortcomings of the West and the reluctance of truly religious cultures to accept a Western "exclusion of the divine.""

Hopefully, the anger and roar that the media is showing from ALL the muslim community is also taking out of context.

Andrea Mitchell just said...

I am just watching her live from Cuba in the TV while she talks about the "Cumbre de los no-aliñados"...

Quote: "Cubans and Cuban officials loves American, they only hate Mr. Bush's policies..."

Oh really? Only Bush? Forget JFK and so on... it's BUSH's BUSSHHHSS, BUSSHHH! *sigh*

Maybe Cubans will love Al Gore or Hilly's future policies? Can she show a little more partinsan love in front of the camara?

Coñooooo!

Remembering Carrie B. Progen killed on the terrorist attack of Sept 11, 2001

I signed to sponsor a 9-11 victim of the terrorist attacks on dcroe's 2996 site, and randomly I get this girl, who happens to be an illustrator and a painter, just like me. Also, just like Carrie, I practiced martial arts, and was very enthusiastic of it. I don't believe in coincidences. Just want to point out how much of respect terrorist hold for collateral damage.

Carrie Beth Progen
Portrait of the Artist and Her Dreams
December 9, 2001

"By day, Carrie Progen worked as an administrative assistant at Aon's offices high atop the World Trade Center. But her real work began on the subway ride home, when the 25-year-old artist got out her sketchbook to capture the subtle shifts of thought and emotion she saw playing across the faces of her unsuspecting fellow commuters.

"It's like she had two lives," said her live-in boyfriend, Erik Sharkey. They met in 1995 at Brooklyn's Pratt Institute - she was studying illustration; Sharkey was working on a film degree - and began dating a year later. Progen's day job was just that, he said, a way to pay the bills while she worked as a freelance illustrator and tried to figure out how to break into the art world. At night, she spent long hours painting in the tiny one-bedroom apartment they shared in Fort Greene.

In high school, Progen told her older brother Matthew's art teacher, "You've got the wrong Progen in your class, because I'm the one who's going to be an artist." After graduating in 1999, she set out, with typical gumption, to to just that. New York, with its high rents and relentless competition, is a hard proving ground for struggling, young artists. Both Progen and Sharkey ended up grudgingly taking office jobs to support their artistic endeavors - he produces videos for corporate clients such as Lehman Bros. But that didn't sour her enthusiasm for life in the big city.

"We were always laughing and going out, always spontaneous," said Sharkey, a Bronx native who turned Progen, originally from Ashburnham, Mass., into a Yankees fan. One of her favorite activities was people-watching at jazz clubs and quintessentially New York events like the Mermaid Parade in Coney Island and the Festival of San Gennaro in Little Italy. "She wanted to soak up that atmosphere," he said.

Being here was the culmination of Progen's small-town dreams. "She wanted to have an exciting life, and she wanted diversity," her boyfriend said. The daughter of an assistant district attorney, Progen came from a very traditional family, but "she had her own goals," said her mother, Kathy Progen. "She had her own way of thinking about everything." Still, said Sharkey, for Progen to go from Ashburnham, population 5,000, to New York was "gutsy."

That was her hallmark. A martial arts enthusiast who spent 10 to 12 hours each week studying jeet kune do, Progen challenged herself to be the best in her class by taking on her male classmates, "and she didn't want them to pull any punches," Sharkey said with a laugh. "She was tough."

But not with him. Living with Progen was like "the slumber party that never ended," Sharkey said. "We always talked about growing old together." Her mother said that Progen didn't want kids, but was set on being "the favorite aunt" to her 1-year-old nephew, Kael.

That plan was cut short by the Sept. 11 attacks on the trade center. Sharkey, who worked nearby at the World Financial Center, spoke with his girlfriend after the first plane hit. She said she was evacuating, but she failed to make it down from her office on the 100th floor before the south tower collapsed.

"It's like a huge part of me has gone with her," Sharkey said. For him, one of the hardest things to bear is the knowledge that Progen's life was cut short before she got the chance to prove herself as an artist. "One of her dreams was to have a really good Manhattan art show," he said. So he put together a posthumous exhibit of her work on Nov. 17 at Anderson's Martial Arts Academy in Manhattan, the studio where she studied. "I wanted to give her a night for her," he said. "That was the way she would have wanted it to be done."

-- Jennifer Smith (Newsday)"

From a loved one:

"As the A train gently rocked her, Carrie Progen would sit with a small pad in her lap and sketch hurried portraits of the commuters sitting and standing around her in silence. These fleeting moments were among life's truest, she told her boyfriend, Erik P. Sharkey, "the moments when New Yorkers were thinking the most." In all, she filled four notebooks with sketches that seemed to reveal the thoughts of strangers. But they also reflected a young artist's passion for her adopted city, Mr. Sharkey said. "The one thing, if you could, is to say how much she loved New York." Ms. Progen, 25, came from Ashburnham, Mass., where she celebrated her high school graduation by getting a Celtic-style tattoo. "The correct terminology for Carrie is free- spirited," recalled her mother, Kathleen. Ms. Progen, who lived with Mr. Sharkey in Fort Greene, Brooklyn, was an administrative assistant at the Aon Corporation . But her passion was her art, including illustrations she had just completed for a children's book about "two parents trying to find their little girl who's hiding from them,"

Thanks to Fanatholic.

"I went to high school and elementary school with Carrie, and she was one of the most beautiful girls I knew. She was caring, extremely talented, eclectic and altogether a wonderful woman. When she moved to New York, we lost touch, but I will always have wonderful memories of bike rides in the summer, sleepovers, art classes and other great times. She will forever be in my heart.

Jennifer Lamoureux, friend"

Source here.

Please visit the memorial page of dcroe "2996"

Carrie B. Progen Scholarship Fund
This scholarship was created in memory of Carrie Beth Progen. For donation information, contact the Athol Savings Bank, Main Street, Ashburnham, MA 01430.

Letter from a Venezuelan M.D. puzzled under the techniques of her Cuban partner...

Just another Venezuelan complaining about the tragedy of this government. I received this letter by mail and can't tell if this person is for real or not, but my source, which I trust very much, seems to confirm the authenticity of this person and what's happening with medicine to this level in Venezuela. Things are not going better in this regard.

The poor translation is mine and I am sure I am making a lot of mistakes translating medical terms. So, bear with me.

Her name is Andreina Vegas Carbonell and she just graduate from the Central University of Venezuela (UCV), Caracas. In order to finish her degree, all Venezuelans M.D. have to finish a year under a rural "residency" program. She choose a little town called Todasana in Vargas (I am sure Venezuelans know this town 'cuz it had an awsome beach). She says that she has all the tools and supplies necessary to acomplish her job and she also says that she is working with a Cuban doctor, specialized in Family Medicine, who has 9 years of graduate.

Her first labor assignment was to change the keys of the ambulatory since there were irregularities with the equipment and the medicines. Since that day she says a war started with this man, who she calls an arrogant who like to say there are two medicines, the cuban one, and the Venezuelan one. She also mentions that this man believes that he is there to save Venezuelans from the venezuelan medicine.

Now this is the tragic part of this story, the man doesn't use medical terms to record diagnostics and treatments. His diagnostics are: "pain in the belly", "inflammatory neumopathy" (with no microscope); he uses abbreviations without knowing what he is abbreviating. For example, he uses IRA (spanish, for) for respiratory infection, without making note if it's high or acute, and it's not important for him since he uses the same treatment. She also notes that he not only commit errors in diagnostic but in treatment. The pediatric doses he uses are always the same ones: half spoon of teaspoon ("depending on the size of the baby", he says). Antiashmatic medicine is according to him, the same as antiflu medicine. She says he doesn't know the spectrum of antibiotics, since she has seem a kid with his teeth getting black for abuse of tetraciclin, giving by him. He also treats viruses with penicilin.

The last thing he saw was how he was hydrating a patient who wasn't clinically hydrated with 3500 cc of fast dropping (not sure if this is the correct english term), and she confronted him since she wanted to know where did he get this calculation and he couldn't answer her. She said to him that they use the Holliday rule for this and he said that because this is the way it was done in Venezuela, he was gonna do it using the Holliday rule too. (I am not sure, but seems to me the Holliday rule is the rule... maybe in Cuba they have another method, uh?)

The Cuban "doctor" also, have no idea how to manage a diabetic insulin dosage, how to nebulize and ashmatic. He doesn't know how to make cytologies since in Cuba "the nurses are the ones who does them", he says. She also mentions that not only is worrysome somebody who obviously doesn't have the knowledge of a M.D, and comit so many recurrent errors, but the way he, very arrogantly, explains to her his voodoo like she is the one who doesn't know shit.

Finally, she points out that she consults everything with medical literature in english, as well as in spanish, just to be sure that she is correct, so she know and she is pretty sure what she is talking about. She questions herself why this is happening.

She also points out that she has to cover all her expenses meanwhile this doctor has all his covered by the Venezuelan government. Why the distinction? I ask. She doesn't want to quit since she knows her knowledge is needed.

She wants everybody to know what's happening in that little rural town in Venezuela. Why the stupid media hasn't done a campaign about this??

Why Hugo Chavez and his band of gansters are letting the country be invaded by Cubans?? Obviously this man is not a doctor. Because Fidelito told him to do it so. A good way to have agents everywhere.

There's no need to have foreign doctors in Venezuela. There are plenty and there have been plenty always, and they are really good ones. This is the real invasion of Venezuela, and doesn't come from the marines but from CUBA.

This is her letter in spanish:

"Ante todo hago llegar mis saludos. Permítanme presentarme, mi nombre es Andreína Vegas Carbonell, médico recién graduada de la Universidad Central de Venezuela, Escuela Luis Razetti. Les explico mi situación actual.

Actualmente estoy cumpliendo con el artículo 8 que es la pasantía rural. Estoy trabajando en un pueblito en la costa que se llama Todasana ubicado en el Estado Vargas, lugar que escogí con LIBERTAD. Aquí en Todasana cuento con un ambulatorio rural tipo I con los insumos necesarios y con un buen personal de enfermeria, hasta aquí todo va muy bién, el pequeño detalle es que también "trabaja" un médico Cubano, este médico está en Venezuela desde Enero del presente año, dice ser médico familiar y tiene 9 años de graduado.

La primera labor que me asignaron fue cambiarle las llaves a todo el ambulatorio debido a que estaban habiendo irregularidades con equipos y medicamentos, pues desde ese momento comenzó la guerra. No sé si será en particular este señor, pero solo tengo experiencia con este médico cubano, este señor es un altanero, para él hay dos medicinas, la Cubana y la Venezolana, cree firmemente que él está aquí para salvar a los venezolanos de la Medicina Venezolana (valga la redundancia).

No emplea términos médicos en sus diagnósticos, tengo el registro de la morbilidad del ambulatorio donde es increible ver lo que él hace, sus diagnósticos son: "dolor fuerte de barriga", "Neumopatía inflamatoria" (sin ni siquiera tener un microscopio); usa abreviaciones sin estar muy claro qué está abreviando, por ejemplo abrevia IRA y le es indiferente que sea Infección respiratoria alta o aguda, total, para qué si siempre usa el mismo tratamiento... y hablando de tratamiento, ojalá solo los errores fueran de diagnósticos pero por ejemplo de las dosis pediátricas no tiene ni idea, cree que es algo que se usa solo en la Medicina Venezolana, para él todo es media cucharada o una cucharadita ("segun el tamaño del nene"), los antiasmáticos son antigripales, no se conoce los espectros de los antibióticos, ya ví un niñito con los dientes negros por el abuso de las tetraciclinas, las virosis las trata con penicilina.

Lo último que ví fue cómo hidrataba a un paciente que no estaba deshidratado con 3500 cc a goteo rápido, cuando le pregunté de dónde había sacado ese cálculo no me supo responder y le dije que esos lo sacamos en base a la Regla de Holliday y me respondió que como estábamos en Venezuela lo iba a hacer como se hacía aquí.

No tiene la menor idea de cómo manejar las dosis de insulina de un paciente diabético. No sabe cuántas veces se debe nebulizar a un asmático. No hace citologías porque según él, en Cuba se encargan las enfermeras, no sé, para mí que no aprendió nunca a hacerlas. Pero creo que lo peor no son los errores(aunque es preocupante la cantidad de errores que comete y lo seguido), si no que al intentar hablar con él y plantearle las cosas que está haciendo y las que está dejando de hacer, le explica a uno en un tono muy convincente como si el de la duda fuera uno.

Todo lo que yo no estoy de acuerdo lo reviso en literatura, tanto en español como en inglés, antes de hacerle cualquier observación a este "doctor". Ahora se vuelve a plantear la misma pregunta ¿Será necesario que sigan mandando a Venezuela médicos cubanos para "salvar" a la medicina venezolana y para que ocupen los pocos cargos de rural?

Como les dije antes, en mí caso yo escogí con LIBERTAD el lugar de mí pasantía rural, esta pasantía es un requisito académico que todo médico recien graduado debe cumplir para trabajar en Venezuela, créanme somos muchos los que aspiramos en continuar formándonos en el exterior, pero realmente son muy pocos los que se van del país sin haber cumplido la pasantía rural. Esta parte como que no la sabe el embajador de Cuba, todos los recién graduados necesitamos trabajar y nuestro trabajo se lo están dando a médicos cubanos que ni siquiera tienen licencia para ejercer en Venezuela, y creo que tampoco tienen los conocimientos, no sé que puedo hacer, pero como yo, hay muchos recién graduados que están trabajando con médicos Cubanos y da mucha tristeza cuando vemos que a estos médicos cubanos les ofrecen todas las comodidades (casa, transporte y comida entre otros) y a nosotros los médicos venezolanos recién graduados solo nos ofrecen los puestos, yo tengo que costear parte de mí comida y mí pasaje de jeep, carrito y metro para poder llegar a un lugar donde sé que necesitan a un médico venezolano, o simplemente a un médico; por eso me quedé a pesar de las tantas cosas negativas.

No sé por dónde hay que empezar a luchar, lo primero es que las personas sepan lo que está pasando, que aquí los médicos no corren a las clínicas privadas, que hay muy buenas intenciones pero muchas dificultades, que nos están quitando nuestro territorio, pareciera que estamos perdiendo parte de nuestra libertad....

Dra. Andreína Vegas Carbonell"

Hugo "Bonaparte" Chavez is looking for indefinite "reelections"

The Napoleon Bonaparte cartoon that calls himself President of Venezuela these days, spoke the other Sunday in his comedic show "Aló Presidente", threatening the citizens with indefinite reelections.

The man finally shown his facist colors.

What can we get from Mr. Chavez threatening Venezuelans with indefinite reelections? Simple. That the man is going publicly against the republic and democratic spirit of the country and he is getting into the swamp land of fascist dictatorship á la Mussolini. You get the idea. Not that this is news or something. This has been foreseen for Chavez's oppositors since day 1.

The Miami Herald en español have a good comment on this issue (bold highlight is mine) :

Víctor Flores
AFP-El Nuevo Herald

Preocupa la reelección indefinida de Chávez

El presidente Hugo Chávez, quien busca su reelección hasta el 2013 en diciembre, anunció su disposición a llamar en el 2010 a un referendo para establecer la reelección indefinida en Venezuela, calificada por la oposición como una intención ''mesiánica'' y "tiránica''.

Los planes de Chávez, quien gobierna desde hace casi ocho años y controla todos los poderes del Estado, ya desataron una controversia con sus adversarios.

Chávez, quien da por descontada su reelección, dijo que en el 2010 convocará a un referendo con dos preguntas. La primera para que los venezolanos lo ratifiquen en el poder y la segunda para que digan si quieren que sea reelecto una tercera vez.

En caso de respuesta positiva a esta última afirmó que "habría que modificar la Constitución, con la aprobación del pueblo para que la reelección en Venezuela sea indefinida''.

''Desde el 2007 hasta el 2021, serán 14 años para sembrar a fondo, profundizaremos las raíces y extenderemos la revolución por todos los espacios, para que Venezuela sea una República Socialista Bolivariana en toda la dimensión'', anunció Chávez el viernes.

El mandatario ya había lanzado esta propuesta pero como amenaza, si la oposición boicoteaba la elección presidencial de diciembre.

El candidato unitario opositor Manuel Rosales exigió a Chávez "evitar esas manifestaciones mesiánicas, tiránicas, de hombres que creen que están por encima del bien y del mal''.

El domingo en su programa Aló Presidente, el mandatario dijo que su revolución bolivariana ''está tiernita, sólo tiene siete años y debemos cuidarla'', al compararla con la revolución cubana de Fidel Castro, de quien es ferviente admirador.

El constitucionalista Hernán Escarrá opinó que la reelección indefinida "sólo es posible en un sistema parlamentario, donde el Presidente no tiene concentrado todos los poderes y no en uno presidencialista, como el venezolano''.

El Artículo 130 de la Constitución venezolana sólo permite una única reelección y el Artículo 6 señala que el gobierno debe ser "pluralista y de mandatos revocables''.

Otro constitucionalista, Gustavo Sosa Izaguirre, dijo a la cadena Unión Radio que equivaldría a que se "entregue la patria a una sola persona''.

Gerardo Fernández, abogado constitucionalista, señaló que los planes de Chávez van a contracorriente en el mundo actual: "La tendencia en Europa y América Latina y en las democracias modernas del mundo es hacer periodos más cortos de cuatro o cinco años, con una sola reelección para cumplir la alternabilidad democrática en el poder''.

Tulio Hernández, doctor en Sociología y profesor de la Universidad Central de Venezuela dijo a la AFP que el proyecto de largo plazo de Chávez es "neoautoritario, porque no concibe la alternancia política como principio de gobernabilidad sino la necesidad del continuismo''.

Dijo que el modelo que busca Chávez "tiene uno de los estigmas típicos de los proyectos militares dictatoriales y revolucionarios de tipo marxista aplicados en Latinoamérica: ambos extremos partían de que necesitaban periodos de tiempo muy largos para poder realizar el proyecto político''.

''En Venezuela, el dictador Pérez Jiménez decía que si le hubiesen dado ocho años más habría transformado Venezuela; Juan Vicente Gómez que gobernó 28 años, decía que necesitaba toda su vida'', dijo el politólogo que también mencionó los casos de Pinochet y Castro.

'Hay un 'revival' de una vieja cultura política que en América Latina ha tenido exponentes de un estilo caudillista y mesiánico, que no confía en la alternabilidad'', dijo Hernández.

Chávez "no se imagina a sí mismo como líder de un partido democrático, está seguro de ser el dueño de su movimiento, ni se imagina que el MVR (su Movimiento Quinta República) realice elecciones internas para decidir su candidato''.

Obviously, the unconstitutionality of Chavez's speech is blatant.

Some important points of the article posted above translated into english:

1) Chavez controls all the powers of the country already.
2) He have no doubts whatsoever that he will win.
3) Herman Escarra, constitutional lawyer, explains that for indefinite reelections to be called democratic, they can be held in countries where the parlament rules, not in countries were the president rules, like in Venezuela.
4) Art. 6 of the constitutions says that the government MUST be pluralist and with revocable mandates.
5) Another constitutional lawer, Gustavo Sosa, says that indefinite reelections would be the same that giving the country to the rule of one single person.
6) Another constitutional lawyer, Gerardo Fernandes, says that that the tendency of the world governments this days is to shorten the periods to effectively comply with the democratic intention of the government.
7) Finally, another constitutional lawyer, Tulio Alvarez says that he presents himself as a neoautoritarian since he is against political alternative as form of government but continuism. And he also points that Chavez doesn't even imagine making internal elections of his party, the MVR. He simply cannot see himself as not the leader.

Hello?? Can somebody please call the mental institution NOW??

Bruni has also a very interesting post about this on her blog (in spanish), in which I took the liberty to post a reply that I want to share here as well:

"Hola! Yo no se que tanto se pueda llamar dictadura constitucional. Me parece extremadamente importante para los ciudadanos efectivamente constatar si Hugo Chavez está actuando adentro o afuera de la constitución al formularse esa pregunta.

Artículo 139. El ejercicio del Poder Público acarrea responsabilidad individual por abuso o desviación de poder o por violación de esta Constitución o de la ley.

Artículo 230. El período presidencial es de seis años. El Presidente o Presidenta de la República puede ser reelegido, de inmediato y por una sola vez, para un período adicional.

Sección Segunda: De las Atribuciones del Presidente o Presidenta de la República

Artículo 236. Son atribuciones y obligaciones del Presidente o Presidenta de la República:
(...)
10. Reglamentar total o parcialmente las leyes, sin alterar su espíritu, propósito y razón.

Es legítimo para este cesar que no le llega ni por los pies al original romano, formularse esa pregunta y fomentar la destrucción de la democracia al no permitir diferentes ciudadanos como gobernantes sino la reelección permanente de una sola persona??

Artículo 342. La Reforma Constitucional tiene por objeto una revisión parcial de esta Constitución y la sustitución de una o varias de sus normas que no modifiquen la estructura y principios fundamentales del texto Constitucional.

Obviamente tener un presidente que pueda ser reelecto permanentemente modifica fundamentalmente el espiritu republicano de nuestro país.

El problema es que los ciudadanos Venezolanos no conocen sus leyes y no las enfuerzan.

Ave Cesar!
feathers | Homepage | 09.03.06 - 12:26 pm | #"

In fewer words, Chavez doesn't have any constitutional right to modify the constitution with laws that are will alter the spirit of this. Changing the law to permit indefinite reelection is obviously one that will completely change the democratic and republican spirit of our country, Venezuela.

Note: Thanks Quico for the pict/link of Hugo.