Chavez goes to the last frontier or when criminals get really creative

Is this a joke?

Well, how come am I surprised? If Baron Münchhausen where alive that's exactly the type of enterprise he would be into it. For once, I'll be happy if the whole Chavista crowd decided to take an interplanetary flight á la "Lost in the Space" and never return! They even had a whole set of Dr. Smiths on board their robolución (JVR, Jorgito Rodriguez, Isaias, Chaderton, Diosdado and Comandante Fausto, only to name a few). Phewww...

Now, seriously, could it be that The Pharaoh has decided to broadcast "Aló Presidente" on a Intergallactic level so the whole Galaxy can listen to him? Or, maybe he has decided to take the business of snooping around seriously? Or, this would be another money pit for the Chavismo for them to be able to do their little business with the Chinese and other partners under the table with a Top Secret label on it?

What do you think?

Hugo wins this time 1,000 Golden stars for creativity! He just surpassed their Italian Mafia teachers with flying colors.

The hunt for the liter of milk

This is how much Hugo Chavez loves Venezuela that the people has to get into hour long lines and fight between each other to get a simple liter (one liter = about 33 oz) or a kilo of powder milk (3/4 dry powdered milk produces aprox. one liter. 1 kilo = 4.4 cups = apróx 4 litres of milk) . So, this line is to get 33 oz of milk or 1 kilo of powdered milk if they are lucky, only one of those choices per person though, and God only knows when they will be able to get more.



Food shortages have been what's happening among Venezuelans on their day to day life since the last few months now. What people are commenting is that Pharaoh Hugo wants to implement a food ration card in pure Havanaesque style. Why this is happening? The main reason is because of a populist price control that has put farmers over the edge (those evil imperialist farmers!). What it really bothers me with all of this, is that it takes one hell of a stubborn man to continue with such erroneous policies, just because. You know, this is so easy to fix if you allow the market to regulate itself, (yeah, with some controls, don't panic). Ay caramba!!

Yes, the very rich oil country's Pharaoh is killing Venezuela's agricultural industry.

Why the stupidity of insisting into such bad policies that doesn't give ANY results but MORE problems? Why to create more problems that instead to resolve them? Why Hugo? My take, besides the power trip that might give Hugo the rush of his life (forget about good'ol sex), this is a very good thing to talk about and to DISTRACT the public opinion like that's the most important item of the day. Unfortunately, and as much dramatic is to live under a food shortage, in the meantime, close door policy, the illegitimate Venezuelan congress is illegally approving the change of our democratic constitution to a communist one.

Source.

Venezuela Police Fight Opposition Marchers in Caracas

There you go. I wonder why the people who call Bush a fascist, who teared their clothes because the police repressed their right to protest at the WTO Conference think about this. Hhmmm...
Photos here. (Be patient, seems that there's a lot of traffic today).

By Steven Bodzin and Alex Kennedy

Oct. 23 (Bloomberg) -- Venezuelan riot police fired tear gas at thousands of protesters in downtown Caracas as they marched to oppose President Hugo Chavez's plans to change the country's constitution.

Scuffles broke out after demonstrators, led by student groups, pushed through a police line, according to images shown on television station Globovision. After a group of about a dozen student leaders met with lawmakers at the National Assembly, the protesters left the downtown area without further incident.

Hundreds of National Guard troops reinforced riot police to keep the march from reaching the National Assembly. Police also kept hundreds of Chavez supporters from clashing with the demonstrators, according to Globovision.

Chavez is seeking to amend the constitution to eliminate presidential term limits, create new federal territories under his control and eliminate central bank autonomy as part of an effort to transform Venezuela into a socialist society.

Congress is debating the proposal, and the government expects to hold a national vote on the changes in December.

To contact the reporter on this story: Steven Bodzin in Caracas at sbodzin@bloomberg.net ; Alex Kennedy in Caracas at akennedy1@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: October 23, 2007 15:13 EDT

Venezuela has a new Pope

Long are the days were good'ol Hugo called for the Catholic leadership to become actively involved on the social problems of the country, something that the Catholic church has always done, under Chavez's recommendation, or not.

Morally unacceptable says who? Mr. Morality and Ethics of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez? Ha! The Bishops made us ashamed to whom? Cardinal Urosa, who nobody can't say that he hasn't been spoken in total disagreement with "the opposition voice" when he considered it so, is he working for the Empire? Chavistas used to loooved him, he was the "Chavista" Cardinal, that is, until now. Happens that Hugo is not happy with the Catholic Episcopal Conference statement.

Ahhh but now, no, the Cardinal is not that great human being that they liked to praise so much. Only because the Cardinal is giving his opinion, and this time, is against Hugo's will. Let's watch Chavez Pope-like comments as per yesterday:

Chavez Slams Catholic Leaders
CBNNews.com
October 22, 2007

CBNNews.com - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called his nation's Roman Catholic Church leaders "morally unacceptable" for criticizing his proposal to rewrite the constitution to do away with term limits.

Chavez latest slam against the Catholic Church came late Sunday, Reuters reported.

Last Friday, church leaders issued a strongly worded statement accusing the Venezuelan president of trying to centralize his power with an "authoritarian" proposal.

His proposal also includes a provision that allows security forces to detain citizens without charge during political "emergencies" or major natural disasters.

The latest plan is just one of 58 amendments that would overhaul the nation's constitution. Chavez helped rewrite the present constitution when he took power in 1999.

Chavez says the amendments are fully democratic and are there to help the country's transition to socialism.

Voters are expected to approve Chavez' reform plan in a special election this December.

The proposal includes moves popular with the public, including shortening the workday and extending social security benefits to street vendors.

Bishops 'Make Us Ashamed'

"They say the reform is morally unacceptable - they are morally unacceptable," Chavez said. "Those bishops that we have make us ashamed."

The Catholic Church is one of the few respected, independent institutions in Venezuela. It has repeatedly criticized the president's leftist policies and has often told him to tone down his often aggressive rhetoric.

Chavez remains popular due to his spending of oil income on the poor. He often casts church bishops and clergy in the role of elitists to the public. He also blames the church for backing a failed coup against him in 2002.

Roman Catholicism is the most popular religion among Venezuelans. However, on the average, they generally practice their faith less than Catholics in other Latin American countries.

Watchdog Groups May Be Outlawed

Watchdog groups believe Chavez is speeding up his drive to build a socialist state.

Also last Friday, non-governmental organization's warned that Chavez's proposal to prevent "polticial associations" from accepting foreign donations may cut off pro-democracy and human rights groups.

Chavez has accused the U.S. of supporting efforts to destabilize his government by these organizations.

The U.S. government denies those accusations, saying that millions of dollars in aid have in fact financed nonpartisan, pro-democracy work.

"Unfortunately, the government of Venezuela has taken a number of steps that have eroded the foundations of democracy in the country," said U.S. Embassy spokeswoman Robin Holzhauer.

Source: Reuters, Associated Press

Venezuelan bishops oppose constitutional changes

Caracas, Oct. 23, 2007 (CWNews.com) - The Catholic bishops of Venezuela have staked out their clear opposition to a set of constitutional reforms proposed by President Hugo Chavez, saying that the proposal "violates the fundamental rights of the democratic system and of the person."

The people of Venezuela will vote on December 2 in a nationwide referendum to determine the fate of the constitutional reform, which would lower the voting age to 16 and eliminate term limits. The constitutional amendments would also help Chavez to consolidate political power-- a prospect that worries the Catholic hierarchy.

The proposed "reforms," the bishops note, would establish Venezuela as a socialist state. In stating their opposition to that move, the bishops said that constitution, as amended, would "limit the freedom of Venezuelans, add excessively to the power of the state, stop the process of decentralization, and put many aspects of civil life under the government's control."

A socialist state, the bishops add, would run the risk of the same experiences that other socialist societies have endured: a trend toward poverty, accompanied by more and more oppressive government and the gradual elimination of civil liberties.

Although the amendments proposed by Chavez and his supporters have been billed as a constitutional "reform," the Venezuelan bishops argue that the proposals call for "radical and profound changes" in the government, going far beyond reform of the existing law.

The proposed constitutional changes, the bishops conclude, are "morally unacceptable in the light of Church social doctrine."

You can read the document from The Venezuelan Episcopal Conference in Spanish here.

Hugo Chavez and the Catholic church

This pictures were taken from a Virgin that is being built by the Chavismo in a alternate route from Barcelona and Puerto La Cruz on Jan, 2007.



Look at the face of the Virgin. Have you ever seen a Virgin, from any ethnicity, with that strong, masculine, warrior-like, mad face?



What do you think? So now in Venezuela even the Catholic Virgin have to look like Hugo Chavez!

What's up with this? Was the author or the commissioner of this work a misogynist, or only wanted to engrace with the Supreme Pharaoh of Venezuela Hugo Chavez?

To me, honestly, what strikes me the most, is the mad face, like she is full of RAGE and not Grace. I have never, never seen a Virgin with a mad face. H/T to Correfoc for these pictures.

-------------

UPDATE AND DISCLAIMER: I want to be very clear, since I have received some commentary of people who think I am speaking about the ethnicity of the Virgin, like if a Catholic doesn't know that the Virgin has come to us in all the ethnicities or races of the world, case in point, the Lady of the Americas, Guadalupe, is a mestiza, half-Indian, who spoke to San Juan Diego in his indigenous language. My commentary, for the people who are not getting it, is about HER MASCULINE, CHAVEZ-ESQUE LOOK, AND HER FACE WHO LOOKS SHE IS ENRAGED.

I don't know if you noticed she EVEN has a big mole, like you-know-who.

I have never seen a Virgin with that mad expression in her face, from the Catholic church. If you have a picture of one, please send it because it will be a good case study. Thanks.

-------------

To me, this is not coincidence, as there is no coincidence that the Chavista government hasn't given their official condolences of the death of Cardinal Rosalio Castillo Lara.

Cardinal Castillo was against Chavez abuses, like many Venezuelans. This was Cardenal Castillo talking about the Dec 2006 elections, mentioning Chavez's indefinite reelection:



Look at Chavez making fun of Cardinal Castillo:



I can totally see the Jews back in the days saying exactly the same commentary about a speech from Jesus. It's hard to listen to the truth my dear.

Chavez hates the church because they don't stop to tell the truth about his communist bullshit.



But this was his snake charmer 1998 electoral speech, as you see, totally different:



About Cardinal Castillo, here.

TELEGRAM FOR THE DEATH OF CARDINAL CASTILLO LARA

VATICAN CITY, OCT 17, 2007 (VIS) - The Pope has sent a telegram of condolence to Cardinal Jorge Liberato Urosa Savino, archbishop of Caracas, Venezuela, for the death yesterday at the age of 85 of the Venezuelan Cardinal Rosalio Jose Castillo Lara S.D.B., president emeritus of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State.

In the telegram, the Holy Father expresses his "heartfelt condolences" to Cardinal Urosa Savino, to the relatives of the deceased and to all the Venezuelan people, entrusting to the mercy of God "this zealous pastor who served the Church with such charity."

The Pope's telegram continues: "Cardinal Castillo Lara's generous and intense ministry, first as coadjutor bishop of Trujillo" and later in the various posts he occupied in the Roman Curia, last of which was that of the presidency of the Pontifical Commission for Vatican City State, "testifies to his great dedication to the cause of the Gospel, at the same time demonstrating his profound love for the Church."

I see Chavismo's mirror image as well...

"So phrases like "oposición oficialista" entered the debate, slurs meant to not to criticize the arguments of the other camp but to disqualify them on the basis of their their identity. In fact, the internal opposition debate has come to resemble nothing so much as the debate we used to have between the government and the opposition, with deeply entrenched positions and a growing sense that the other side is more than just wrong, it's evil.

So it's more than just a failure to learn, Katy. It's that the structural preconditions for collective learning aren't in place. It's that the norms of public discourse within the opposition itself have been chavesized, have devolved into a dysfunctional, primitive form where debate is always about people, never about ideas, and therefore yields enmity and resentment far more often than mutual understanding and convergence."

-Quico, from Caracas Chronicles.

Dear Quico,

Ok, I decided to reply to this comment since I am the first one who love to use the phrase "Vichy opposition", which is the same as "oposición oficialista". Actually, Vichy to me explains it better. Go back to war time and consider the French reasons for this and you will see the face of many Venezuelan politicians in it. Is not that degenerate to understand why France tried to do this. And all along with their justifiable reasons, it also came the bad part, which was to cooperate with the Nazi's racial policies.

See, maybe that's my intention, just like you said, to discredit some of the political parties who are calling to vote without enforcing the electoral conditions. But I am using some arguments in my reasoning, Quico. This is all about their ideas and nothing to do with the people. As a matter of fact, I know some of the people from the "other side" of the opposition who are very dear to me. But I still need to criticize their attitude.

Why do the Vichy political parties don't want to listen to the civil society? They say, in the name of peace and not create a civil war, let's deal with Chavismo the most we can, right? It doesn't matter right now, let's vote without fair electoral conditions, doesn't matter that this reform is not even an electoral matter, but we have an "strategy" that this time will work out. An strategy that doesn't even have some legal background... But curiously, the strategy that the 1999 Bolivarian constitutions suggest to deal in the case of a manic dictator wants to get away with it, it is disregarded as the part of the opposition who wants to use it is label as radical mirror of Chavismo, c'mon.

And what about the "let's debate" affair? Don't they have realized yet that this is exactly what Chavez wants? How much time until realize that if Chavez is calling to debate then hint that probably that's not a good idea? Chavez wants to take everybody to an eternal blah-blah-blah that won't take the opposition anywhere. We all are running on circles chasing our own tails thanks to those stupid constitutional "debates". He knows it, you know it, I know it... so, why keep on with it?

Am I wrong Quico? Tell me why my arguments as a citizen are not important for that Vichy political opposition who is calling to vote. Just like the 3 wise Chinese monkeys: "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil," they are nor listening.

In my opinion, the Vichy political opposition with their condescending and presumptuous attitude wants to take the civilians to the slaughter house, the same way Vichy France helped the Nazis to take on racial policies against the Jews. Why do I have to cooperate with them?

Why Quico?

The society know their drill already: they have asked the citizens to vote 3 times, the first during the RR in Aug 2004, they said they will do anything to protect the votes, even though a fair set of electoral conditions where not met. They didn't protect our votes. OK. It was very frustrating but somehow it was understood that we all were set up, that there wasn't anything else we could do. Second time, parliamentarians elections in Dec 2005. Nobody decided to vote this time. The politicians got it at the end that people were not going to vote and make a last declaration of "no participation" the night before the elections. Third time, Presidential elections 2006. Manuel Rosales entered the play. He asked for our votes and said that this time they will take care of out votes, that they will cash them in. I don't know what he cashed but it wasn't our votes since he was already giving a conceit speech even before the total votes were all counted for the first time.

But somehow to call them Vichy, or Chavista opposition in an insult. But for them not to respect the civil society and our votes is totally fine.

Why aren't they listening this time? Why do they think that is OK to work first for their party and secondly for the country is the way to go? What is it to me? I am not even into politics. Why do they even think this is OK? The political party which in my opinion have lost total sense of reality with the opposition is Primero Justicia. They decided to abandon the middle class to advocate to the lower classes, changing the tone of their speech to a 1950's populist-Chavistoso one. I understand their reasons but I don't know if in the long run would work for them since to abandon one platform which they worked hard for it, to go for another one makes them to look only desperate for votes and not genuinely worried for the country, and their people. The good thing would have been to go for both platforms and always been consistent with their line, since both sectors are part of the country, don't you think? Why do they are not even interested into getting a consensus? Have you though about it? I imagine you don't know the answer as well, since you are nor a militant of any of those parties, I am just lamenting out loud.

Moreover, why the dinosaur politics from them now? Cooooonchale hasta cuando! Don't you think we all deserve a little better? Don't you think the lower classes, more than any others, are sooo tired of empty promises?

So, what is it that they want this time? What's their plan? By any means, asking to vote with no electoral conditions will take us to seal the Chavismo into some type of democratic approved way.

It doesn't matter that 700 millions Venezuelans vote to take our democratic constitution to a communist one, were we won't be able to vote anymore (do this make sense to the reader? To vote to take out the right to vote?), the NYT publishes it and Jimmy Carter approves it. There's something called the Human Rights declaration were there are some natural rights of human beings than cannot be taken away. There's nothing to discuss, debate or to vote about it. Isn't this important? It is certainly for the rest of the country. So, why don't they talk about it in their populist speeches to the poor?

I don't understand the reasons on why some political parties do act like the Chinese 3 wise monkeys, they have to listen to the people and act, not setting up a political strategy that will benefit them-politically-and ask the people to act as they want to. That won't never work outside their members, for obvious reasons.

The first priority should be the country, and the second one should be their political interest, if any. Not the opposite. When you talk to them you hear them so caught into talking about how much they need to protect the interest of their party, to separate from the "old" politicians, and etc, that they don't even talk anymore about what is interest to the civil society, like the general food shortage that is taking over the whole country, only that will give you a hint of what's on their priority list. And maybe that's the real reason on why they don't even think it is so vital to reach a consensus RIGHT NOW. See, seems it's not even important for them... as a matter of fact, PJ is on their own Quixotesque crusade all alone. Can you tell me if that lonely man quest would help the country right now, and if so, how?

So, that's why we are in the place we are right now, politically speaking.

Do you think the people will ever forget and forgive that they didn't act accordingly to defend our democracy?

Who would care about political parties after Dec 9 anyway?

Something else that is important to mention that apparently is newsflash for those political parties which are calling once again to "vote" without fair electoral conditions: the "abstentionism" has come spontaneous. The speeches of people like Hermann Escarrá (who is not even asking for a political seat), has gotten a lot of reception spontaneously from both Chavismo and opposition people, maybe the % of people sympathetic with this won't be enough to make a difference, but it's growing much more than the "Vichy opposition" because it exposes the general voice of discontent of the country. Then we have to think why the "other" opposition hasn't been able to lower their tails and get that sympathy from the people, and why aren't they cooperating into reaching some type of agreement, consensus with this "other" opposition.

What would it takes to get a general political opposition consensus? Without it, Chavez will stay per secula seculorum on his Miraflores seat. Time is running very short!

Any ideas? What do you think? I think that there's a lot of discontent "common points" or intersections from all sectors, including Chavismo. So, why don't they all make a list with the most important of those important points who have to do with the country and not their personal interest and work it as a solid group with one common interest? Why does it has to be so hard?

Am I totally on crack in here or do you think I have some valid points to call that opposition "Vichy"?

Yours truly,

-f

Hugo's enemies or the stuff that America is made of

Three of the reasons on why I am such a junky for the goofy sci-fi show "Stargate Sg-1", now exported to "Stargate Atlantis" are: One, there is nothing impossible in this sci-fi serie, I love that. Second, I loooove the character of Col. Jack O'Neill. And, last but not least, I also really, really like the character of Major Samantha Carter.

Major Carter is one of the best feminine role model to young women out there. Major Carter was this smart blonde, with a theoretical Astrophysics PhD, who was appointed to the highest classified mission in the U.S, the Stargate program. For those who doesn't know what the Stargate was, it was this device that an ancient civilization created to travel to other worlds. So, guess what, she could even get to travel to other words and fight aliens all along with handsome Col. O'Neill. Mayor Carter now is Col. Carter and she is the head of the city of Atlantis operations in the Pegasus galaxy.

Needless to say that Col. Carter, brilliant and beautiful, also kick serious ass, and she is not the typical airhead beauty with no brains sex symbol that is so common in the TV world. She doesn't have to show cleavage to be in her role.

Funny thing is that women like her really exist. A great example are these two women:



Major Nichole Malachowski, and Major Samantha Weeks. They are members of an elite flight squadron of the U.S. Air Force called the "Thunderbirds". I have the pleasure to see them performing last weekend and I couldn't believe it. I cannot imagine how many people they had to compete against to get this position, men and women. These two pilots are la créme de la créme among many fine pilots in the US Air force. They made it look sooo easy! And then I remember I am always terrified to get in the ferris wheel at Disneyland! I am so proud to see women like her. I only wish they were given more space on the news than Paris Hilton and Britney Spears.



You can read their bios in the Thunderbirds official page.

Yes, these two brilliant, beautiful and skilled women are part of the U.S. Military. Those who go to Iraq to eat babies for breakfast and that Hugo Chavez and Sean Penn despise so much. Do you think have they been in Chavista Venezuela that Pharaoh Hugo would have offer them the room and the resources needed for these two girls to become the two great woman that they are now?



And how about Lt. Mark Jennings Daily? The history of this guy really touched my heart. What a beautiful person, inside and out.

Something about the U.S. Military has a lot to do with the American spirit and the people of this great country. I have been watching this series, called The War, a must for anybody who like history, and they remind us how much they (the U.S military) have accomplished to their country and to the world. Just to remind you, as per Dec 7, 1941, Pearl Harbor attack, the U.S. military was the size of Rumania's military, by the end of WWII, America was producing half of the total world's production. And, obviously, the majority was military equipment made by Rosie the riveter. On tactics, they were totally unprepared to fight with the Germans, their first encounter in 1943 (down in Africa with Rommel) they didn't know how to fight. According to Gen.Montgomery from the British troops, he mentioned that if Americans didn't put their shit together they will become more a liability than a help in Europe. But then came the invasion of Italy, and the Battle of Normandy where Americans had it very bad, and yet they managed to keep Omaha and Utah beach and force the Germans to back off. The rest is history.

Yes readers, this is the stuff that Americans are made off that Hugo Chavez and others resents so much. This is the Imperial military, an institution that helps to develop young men and women into very fine people. Of course, like any other institution, they have their bad apples as well, but they are not the common.

They are more a great example than the make believe monsters that the media portraits.

I prefer 10,000 times to stay with Chavez over Rosales!

Let's be very clear, this man who is touring the word representing Venezuela's opposition DOESN'T represent me and many at all.

He stopped represented me the day he lost the elections to Hugo Chavez on Dec 2006. Not because he lost it, we really never gonna know the real results. He called the people to vote, under a very shady electoral conditions (An electotal council run by Chavista partisans, just like right now, therefore my "we never gonna know the real results"), and said he was gonna fight until the last vote. Well, all the votes were not totally counted when Rosales was already giving a concession speech (remember that he said he was gonna fight to prove every single vote was real and OK).

He clearly was used by Hugo Chavez to make believe this is a democratic process that is running smoothly.

Well, Rosales is again playing the part of the "opposition", this time visiting Thomas Shannon, US Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs.

"Rosales told AFP nonetheless that "we are suggesting to the US government the possibility of pressuring in international organizations so that the reforms can be made public, debated, and so the (Chavez) government lengthens the time frame" in which it is to be considered.

"The government is setting out to change, in three short months, the basic principles of the Venezuelan constitution," Rosales said."

I hope that the reader's curious mind will NOTICE who the electoral conditions are not even mentioned in this meeting. The reform debate is of course, important, and lengthening the time of this absurd discussion is important as well, but, these "opposition" people are asking the people, once again, to vote, because they will fight, again, until the last vote, and they will undercover Chavez's fraud, if any, and they will make sure that the elections were transparent. Yes, just like the last time. Nobody asked for one list to be checked, one ballot to be recounted, nyet! Nothing.

The electoral conditions to take this illegitimate reform to elections HAS to be something important to talk about with Shannon, don't you think?

This are few of the electoral conditions and the principal reason of why many Venezuelans swear they won't ever will vote again, until this is not corrected: A 100% Chavista partisan electoral council, electronic machines who has been proven and super ultra proven how easy they are to hack, or altered. A tampered voter registration list with all kind of aliens who are not legal to vote, thousands of people having the same address (obviously they are not real). Only these 3 conditions are enough to question any electoral process.

All of these has been proven, but hey, this is not important for Rosales that he doesn't even mentioned them to Shannon.

Who is this guy wants to foul??

But, on top of the electoral conditions, which this VICHY opposition is pushing, there's a bigger problem that they has decided not to talk about: taking this reform to vote, the way Chavez is doing it, is not the legitimate way to do it. Why? Because it violates the original principles of the previous one. And it is explicitly explained in here if you want to know more in deep. But, seems very few Venezuelans care about this. So they are talking about the debate, the reform, lengthening the period of discussion, talking it to elections, but they are not talking about the electoral conditions, and moreover the fact that this is not an electoral matter by any means.

I am not supporting illegalities activities from one side nor the "other".

"An ignorant country is blind instrument of their own destruction", -Simón Bolívar

Under this famous quote of Simón Bolívar, many Venezuelan organizations (and bloggers) are desperately trying to untangled the trap of this Constitutional reform proposed by the continental clown who likes to dress in red. Why a trap? Because he talks to the masses and being the snake charmer he is, he tells them, let me do this, let me do that, I need to become indefinite president since I am the master painter of this socialist reform in Venezuela, etc... etc... Many people specially from humble backgrounds think it is OK to let him reform the constitution, they trust his words and will let him change the democratic spirit of the constitution thinking this is the best route for the country, and in the end, they will be giving away all the democratic rights and duties that our forefathers fought for... so...

In this order, one of these groups that is also doing their job is the Gumilla Center (Centro Gumilla), a social research and investigative center from the Jesuits. They just opened a radio show (and blog) dedicated only to the reform. They are inviting Venezuelans from all walk of life to talk, both Chavista and opposition. As you can imagine, some invitees I endorse more than others, but it is good to listen to all. I recommend everybody to listen to this show. Something good can come from it. It's in spanish.

Social and collective property belongs to the people, and I am the people...

Therefore, all property is mine...

The title seems to reflect what's on Hugo's mind lately.

"The Bolivarian revolution, I repeat, doesn't exclude, prohibit or have any kind of plan to eliminate private property," Chávez said over the weekend, referring to his program to transform Venezuela in honor of the 19th-century South American revolutionary, Simon Bolivar.

While preserving private property, a revised Constitution would also protect "social" and "collective" property, like the country's large oil reserves, Chávez said, without giving further details.

Constitutional changes, to be drafted by a presidential committee and submitted for public approval in a national referendum this year, are the first of "five engines" of change Chávez has outlined for Venezuela since beginning his second, six-year term in office on Jan. 10."

(...)

"Private property isn't the only kind of property," Chávez said Saturday. "When the conquistadors arrived here by sea, there was social property, collective property, and everyone was the owner of everything."

"This is a debate that should deepen," he said.

Chavez is lying in regards to private property, or he is simply crazy. This the article he says is "preserving" private property, translated by Pedro Bernardez:

Article 115 as per today (1999 Constitution):

“The right to own property is guaranteed. Every person has a right to the use, enjoyment, and disposition of his/her goods. Property will be subject to the contributions, restrictions and obligations that the law establishes in the spirit of public use or general interest. It is only in the spirit of public use or general interest, through final judgment and quick payment of fair compensation, that any kinds of goods may be expropriated”

Article 115’s proposed reform:

“The different forms of property are recognized and guaranteed. Public property [“la propiedad pública”] is that which belongs to State entities; social property [“la propiedad social”] is that which belongs to the people in its entirety and to the future generations, and may be of two types: indirect social property, when it is exercised by the State in name of the community, and direct social property, when the State assigns it, under different forms and in outlined territories, to one or several communities, to one or several communes [“comunas”], constituting thusly communal property, or to one or several cities, constituting thusly cityward property; collective property [“la propiedad colectiva”] is that which belongs to social groups or persons, for their benefit, use or common enjoyment, of either social or private origin; mixed property [“la propiedad mixta”] is that constituted by the public sector, the social sector, the collective sector and the private sector, in differing combinations, for the utilization of resources or carrying out activities, always subject to the absolute respect of the Nation’s economic and social sovereignty; and private property [“la propiedad privada”] is that which belongs to natural or juristic persons and is recognized over user and consumer goods, and legitimately acquired means of production.

All property, will be subject to the contributions, burdens, restrictions and obligations that the law establishes in the spirit of public use or general interest. In the name of public use or general interest, through final judgment and quick payment of fair compensation, the expropriation of any kind of good may be declared, without restricting the right of State officials, of previously occupying, during the judicial process, the goods being expropriated, within the parameters established by law.”

As you can read, the new proposed article mentions private property but it doesn't "preserve "it" by any means, because it can be expropriate it in the name of public use, which can be a pretty broad territory, any bureaucrat can rule anything in the name of public use, for his or her own benefit.

Bernardez also has an excellent explanation about the definition and uses of private property on the "new" constitution:

"Private property: although, in a technical sense, the articles barely contradict each other in regards to private property, what does happen is that the definition of private property is specifically narrowed down to “user and consumer goods and legitimately acquired means of production” and subject to greater restrictions than in the current article.

Under the new article, persons do not explicitly have a right to the disposition of their goods, which means that for example rental of said goods could not be exploited for economic gain.

This means that all economic sectors that rely on rent such as hotels, rented apartments, rental stores, and businesses that rent out industrial equipment would cease to exist as private, either becoming collective or disappearing.

Also, since private property is restricted to “user and consumer goods and legitimately acquired means of production” it includes neither land (unless it were a “legally acquired means of production”) nor intellectual property, unproductive land and real estate (even the land one lives on) and personally produced works of art could never constitute one’s own private property.

In addition to these restrictions is the fact that State entities have the guaranteed right to occupy goods when and while a judicial process to expropriate them is pending.

“Legitimately acquired means of production” presents another problem: since it is the people (on whom sovereignty rests according to the Constitution), and therefore the State (in the people’s name), what define what “legitimately acquired is”, it leaves the State with the option of acquiring said means of production, possibly without compensation, by simply declaring such acquisition as “in the people’s interest. The use of legitimate as opposed to legal implies the possible use such supra or extralegal justifications for the acquisition of said means of production even if they were legally acquired.

This is in addition to any restrictions on legal acquisitions. It is also the State who defines the laws, and therefore may rule ownership of certain property illegal by simply altering existing laws to exclude such property. The State already did so when it redefined what legally acquired lands were in 2005, and took lands that were outside this definition (in this case, private lands that were not registered in 1821)

In other words, as opposed to the current article (which guarantees private ownership except in the “spirit of public use or general interest”), the new article gives the government the implicit power to instantly requisition all means of production if it wanted to by a simple change of the law or “on behalf of the people”.

Lastly, note that the new article does not explicitly establish the right for the personal and exclusive enjoyment of one’s private property; in fact, nowhere in the article are citizens given any rights over property: only the State explicitly reserves them for itself.

In conclusion, private property as understood by the new article is a much more restricted and narrow version than it is in the current one, and essentially nullifies most of it."

The debate has taken place, but the government hasn't take note of it. And they won't. In the end, due to the stupidity and ignorance of many citizens, they will take the bait, accept to vote for this illegitimate proposal. Moreover, the people will be accepting to go to vote with the present electoral council conditions (run by Chavista partisans)... and as you can imagine, the Chavistas will win, and they will do whatever they want, and the people won't have any other choice but to submit to the new Pharaoh.

The technicalities of Jimmy Carter

This come courtesy of the man who put his seal of approval to the fraudulent Referendum in Venezuela, 2002. Gateway Pundit has a commentary about it (thanks Kate).

"Carter, whose charitable foundation, the Carter Center, worked to establish the International Criminal Court (ICC), said: "If you read the law textbooks ... you'll see very clearly that it's not genocide and to call it genocide falsely just to exaggerate a horrible situation I don't think it helps."

Let's see if his clarification helps:

This is the law Carter is referring to:

"1) the mental element, meaning the "intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such", and 2) the physical element which includes five acts described in sections a, b, c, d and e. A crime must include both elements to be called "genocide." Article III described five punishable forms of the crime of genocide: genocide; conspiracy, incitement, attempt and complicity."

Excerpt from the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Genocide (For full text click here)

"Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

I imagine that Jimbo must be literally right, I don't know since I am not an expert. Probably there's one or two steps that are not happening in Darfur. Since we cannot label it as Genocide, I am sleeping better at night. And you should too! What the world would do without Jimmy Carter, Mr. Clarification?

I am debating with myself into labeling Jimmy Carter as a fool or as a simply senile folk... what do you think?

MORE on Jimbo's wisdom here.

New Age Ku Klux Klan...

Just listen to this man and tell me if this pobre diablo is not a XXI Century Ku Klux Klan from the near future.... if they let them go sooner or later they will start lynching white folks and drinking their blood in the name of the Mayan Gods...



Kate has an interesting writing about this video here.

What a shame this guy is a Latino. Nothing good can come from these type of organizations who promote hate between races.

Michael Moore's Sicko and the gruesome reality of the Cuban health care system

Even upper mid class Americans are struggling to get a good health medical, there's no questions about that if you want to get good health care in America you have to have money, or being an illegal. And there's also no question that something has to be done in regards of American's health system (I don't even want to talk about the stratospheric cost of drugs) . However, what's the point of Michael Moron to lie again to the Americans one more time? Oh I know! He wants to make money! Money is good!

I know that the feeling of many Americans is to socialize medicine. I am not so sure this will be as great as many people think it will be. Would you be able to see a doctor whenever you want? Can you choose to see an specialist or some name will be given to you and that's the one you must visit? How fast would you be able to get your appointment? It seems to me that you won't be able to be proactive with your health anymore. Right now, with the worst insurance available, you always can change your primary care doctor if you don't like him or her. Would you be able to pick and change doctors if you wish?

"Canadians concede that waiting time is a problem that stems from the country's lower costs and commitment to universal coverage. In a letter to the Wall Street Journal, Robert S. Bell, M.D., President and CEO of University Health Network, Toronto, said that Michael Moore's film SICKO "exaggerated the performance of the Canadian health system — there is no doubt that too many patients still stay in our emergency departments waiting for admission to scarce hospital beds." However, "Canadians spend about 55% of what Americans spend on health care and have longer life expectancy, and lower infant mortality rates. Many Americans have access to quality health care. All Canadians have access to similar care at a considerably lower cost." Canadians pay 9% of GDP to insure 100% of citizens, compared with 14% of GDP to insure 85% of Americans. The Kaiser Family Foundation found that 63% of Americans were worried about not being able to afford health-care services. There is "no question" that the lower cost has come at the cost of "restriction of supply with sub-optimal access to services," said Bell. A new approach is targeting waiting times, which are reported on public web site"

Source.

Now, regarding Sicko and Cuba:



This is the great health care that Cubans get... yeah righ let's get Michael Moore the same treatment that Fidel likes to give to the Cubans. No wonder why the Cubans who have such a great health care jump into rubber boats to the Caribbean sea full of sharks to arrive to Miami.

Everything you want to know about El Ché, saviour of the world, pardon me, saviour of the Universe

El Ché, that wonderful Argentinian star of the college merchandise and apparel, was also an important figure on the Cuban Revolution. And Humberto Fontova did the reseach y'all need to study so you can meet the real Ernesto "Ché" Guevara, far different from that "motorcycle diaries" guy. Watch the video here. (h/t to Kate for this link).



Chavez, in the meantime, is remembering el Ché's death anniversary, swifting his Bolivar quotes in his speeches and newspaper ads to Ché Guevara ones. Lovely. This is the point of view of Darwin, the Venezuelan cartoonist, about it:



Ché says, "How smashing! You are so terrible with the hammer", and Marx replies, "Ha ha, and you, always the bloodthirsty"... we all know who is the guy in the center...

Related news about this useful idiot´s icon: "A Revolutionary Icon, and Now, a Bikini".

From this article: "Ms. Guevara is in fact a pediatrician and mother of two who favors pantsuits over military fatigues. She resembles a Cuban soccer mom more than a revolutionary."

A Cuban soccer mom?? Are there soccer moms in Cuba?

I want to know your opinion...

Poster by David Garibaldi.

Dear reader,

I finally found how to have music on the blog and so I feel like a monkey with a new toy. However, after receiving this email from Steven:

Feathers, thanks for the video. However, my initial experience was mixed. As soon as I started playing it, the Imeem music player started playing something else. It sounded nice, but at that moment I couldn't figure out where it was coming from and it was interfering with Simon. Please, please don't play music automatically when someone visits your page. That violates a commandment of web design, somewhere. Still, it exposed me to Imeem and to some artists that I never heard of. -Steven

I may consider it to turn off the auto on. So, I made this little poll on the upper right side of the blog to found out what´s the general feeling about it.

If it will make you not coming back, then I prefer to turn it off so it will be up to the reader to turn it on if they want to hear music.

Thanks!

Venezolanity

While some foreigners might entertain themselves and having a laugh listening to Chavez singing (he came up with a CD called "Canciones de siempre" , hey! I have an idea why Mr. Chavez quit the presidency and leave it to someone who wants to take it seriously and become a professional singer? I don´t think he will do good though, baseball player, military, president, all being a failure, don´t think he would do better as a singer. Maybe as a clown...), some of them who never heard the word "Venezuela" before Chavez, might think Chavez represent our identity as Venezuelans, that is, there´s nothing as Venezuelan as Hugo Chavez. I simple cannot disagree more.

If I have to name with a surname and a last name Venezuelan music I would pick Simón Diaz. His songs, like "Caballo Viejo", are among the most popular folk songs in the world.



But looks who is listening! None other than Carlos Andés Perez, the president in those days. Oh, how painful, I suddenly went back to those days and make a quick comparison with today. Gosh, how bad we have fallen. Even though the government of Carlos Andrés Perez (CAP) was corrupted like the others, and even more when his first presidency due to oil prices and the nationalization of the oil industry, and he was one of the causes that brought a mutant like Hugo Chavez to power, we cannot even compare his time to what´s happening right now in Venezuela. And we certainly cannot compare CAP the persona, his party member of the International Socialist, with Hugo Chavez, a socialist that cannot even get one of his socialist parties a membership with the famous socialist organization. Not even the real "left" like the ideological tortilla of Chavez. Carlos Andrés at least tried to fix the economy in his second period and Venezuelans didn´t let him do it.

I have to say about Carlos Andrés, he didn´t took over the democratic institutions of the country the way Chavez has done, he could have done it in his first time. CAP was also the first person that I heard talking about the Internet as the "road" of the future (those were the old days just before the era of the "brick" cel phones, late 80´s-early 90´s), the man had a vision that unfortunately is not the same "vision" than our current president have, one was looking ahead and watching over the interest of his country, the other has exactly the opposite "vision". To destroy, impoverish his people, take our constitutional democratic rights, let the Cubans invade our country, take care of Colombian nationals kidnaps but don´t intervene with the Venezuelans who also have been kidnapped by the FARC, give away our money to countries abroad (Bolivia, Argentina, the Bronx!) like if the most needed Venezuelans don't need it, and some Venezuelans haven´t woke up, they still thinking that they will "vote" to show they are not in agreement with the president and he will listen to them. Why are people doing talking about statistics and polls? That's very foolish.

We cannot say about CAP that he was a traitor to democracy and his country the way that Chavismo and the head of the band, Hugo Chavez, is doing with the country who watched him born.

I have no words to describe the mixed feeling when I watched this video. We were very HAPPY and we didn´t know it. I never was an ADECA, but today I think I am.

hat tip to Miguel for the link.

From Venezuela to the Bronx, with LOOOVE

Please have the Pepto Bismol handy. Look at the way the president spent our money abroad, this time to the Bronx township of the poor New York City, one of the economically poorest cities of the whole world. And he doesn´t have the balls to only spent it at the Bronx, but they have to come with a BIG whole color propaganda page with the New York Times on Wed, Sept 26, 2007:







Gracias Kate for the pictures :)

Tech problems

Dear boys and girls who read this blog, I knew one day it will happen. I lost all my links and stuff on the sidebar since I changed from the old template to the new one. Good news is that I have saved a copy of the old stuff, otherwise would be in big trouble. Will build them again soon. Sorry for the inconvenience.

On the other hand, I decided to sign up as an Amazon associate, as you can see on the sidebar, the robot pairs you what they have in the book store with what you write about. A lot of good propaganda (Gollinger, Gott, Wilpert) for Le Mussolini Tropicale... so don't come to this blog to tell me that the evil empire doesn't love Hugo, OK?

Cheers,

-f

Menomena: "Evil Bee".

A friend sent me this really well made but kind of weird cgi music video that you won't regret watching it.

The artists are giving us their perspective, as individuals and humans we are, about living the way that Bees live. Or, imagine the Bees have conscience of their own individuality, as we do. Oh! The paradise of working on a socialist commune! Seems that today, a hundred years of communist (and fascist) failure and repression, still for some ugly people out there they don't know better than the bees, go figure. Taken from PS-flyers.

The "Evil Bee" video was underwritten by PF Flyers as a way to support a group of artists that we view as kindred spirits. Not only does Menomena share our passion for detail and design, but they have consistently pushed the envelope with their creativity, earning them rave reviews and loyal fans along the way. This animated video for the song “Evil Bee” (from their current album Friend and Foe) explores the darker side of life for a worker bee and can be seen exclusively here on pfflyers.com until October 31, 2007.

You Tube link here.
Lyrics here.

10 Reasons to why I reject the Venezuelan constitutional reform

by Román J. Duque Corredor, former Venezuelan Supreme Court Judge.

(Original en español a continuación de la tradución al inglés).

1. Because it will take away from my children the right to get free education and to choose what profession they will like to be (Art. 112).

2. Because my vote WON'T COUNT any longer on making decisions and designate my neighborhood councils, my governor and my major (Art. 11, 16, 136, 156, Nos. 10 y 11; y 236, Nº 3) .

3. Because the back up of my money will depend only from the President (Art. 236, Nº 12; y 321 de la reforma).

4. Because I want to get the right to enjoy my property and dispose of it as my will, and not from a permit from the government (Art. 115).

5. Because I won't be able to choose about to keep the political division of my neighborhood, my township and/or even my state (Art. 11, 16, 18, 156, Nos. 10 y 11).

6. BECAUSE MY INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AS A CITIZEN WON'T BE TAKEN IN CONSIDERATION ANYMORE BUT AS MEMBER OF A COMUNE (Art. 136 y 184).

7. Because I won't have the right any longer to private enterprise and to choose what type of work I would like to do (Art. 87 y 112).

8. Because with indefinite reelection I won't be able to vote to choose the president and the government (Art. 230).

9. Because I won't be able to vote about what is good for me or not about the constitutional reform.

10.Because for me to be able to work and because to be reduced my work shift, it will be necessary to be imposed to me and every citizen only one way of thinking and only one ruler for life (Art. 90, y 16, 70, 112, 113, 158 , 168, 184, 230, 318.

In Spanish:

DIEZ RAZONES PARA RECHAZAR LA REFORMA CONSTITUCIONAL

1. Porque se les quita a mis hijos el derecho de educarse para dedicarse a la actividad de su preferencia (Artículo 112 de la reforma).

2. Porque ya mi voto no contará en las decisiones y designación de las organizaciones de mi barrio, de mi gobernador y de mi Alcalde (Artículos 11, 16, 136, 156, Nos. 10 y 11; y 236, Nº 3, de la reforma).

3. Porque el respaldo de mi dinero dependerá solo del Presidente ( Artículos 236, Nº 12; y 321 de la reforma).

4. Porque quiero tener derecho a disponer de mis bienes y no tener solo un permiso de uso sobre mis bienes (Artículo 115 de la reforma).

5. Porque ni siquiera podré decidir sobre si se conserva o no mi Parroquia, mi Municipio o mi Estado (Artículo 11, 16, 18, 156, Nos. 10 y 11).

6. Porque ya no valdré como ciudadano sino como miembro de una Comuna (Artículo 136 y 184 de la reforma).

7. Porque ya no tengo el derecho a la libre iniciativa y a la libertad de trabajo (Artículo 87 y 112 de la reforma).

8. Porque con la reelección indefinida no podré votar para cambiar de gobierno (Artículo 230).

9. Porque no se me deja votar sobre qué me conviene y no me conviene de la reforma.

10. Porque para poder trabajar y para que se reduzca la jornada laboral, se me quiere imponer una sola forma de pensar y un solo gobernante de por vida (Artículos 90, y 16, 70, 112, 113, 158 , 168, 184, 230, 318 de la reforma constitucional que propugnan un Estado, una sociedad y una economía socialistas).

-Román J. Duque Corredor