English Edition N° 47 by Correo del Orinoco

Pg. g 7 | Analysis y

Pg. g 8 | Opinion p

Setting the record straight on Venezuela and Hugo Chavez - Venezuela is not a dictatorship

Atilio Boron makes a pledge for reciprocity to Cuba in a time of economic crisis and concern for its future

FRIDAY | January 14, 2011 | No. 47| Bs 1 | CARACAS

ENGLISH EDITION The artillery of ideas

Venezuela rejects foreign interference From Tucson to Venezuela The power of media and language cannot be underestimated. Last week’s tragic attack in Arizona against Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords that left 6 dead and dozens wounded has stirred a debate about violent speech and its consequences. In Venezuela, that debate led to a law prohibiting hate speech and violent attacks against public figures on radio, television and Internet, which some claim limits free expression. But how far should the shield of free expression extend?

Opposition lawmakers who went to Washington this week to seek foreign intervention against the Venezuelan government were decried by a majority as “traitors” While most parliamentarians were eager to attend their first session of the year, others were boarding planes to the United States, to meet with counterparts and officials in Washington and seek their aid to overthrow the Venezuelann government. A group of opposition lawmakers met with Organization of American States Secretary General Jose Miguel Insulza and others in the US Capitol, who share a similar agenda of aggression against Venezuela. Meanwhile, in Caracas, both the Executive and Legislative branches issued statements rejecting the interference.

Politics

The battle against land inequality The Venezuelan government is leading the fight against farmer exploitation and redistributing land in a more just manner.

International

Who’s the terrorist? Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, is tried as a terrorist while Luis Posada Carriles, confessed terrorist, is tried for mere perjury.

Social Justice

Dwellers’ movement takes action Community housing movements are finally being heard by the government to solve residents’ problems.

Haiti: a year of tragedy

Venezuelan securities exchange to open next week

enezuela’s state-run securities exchange, or La Bolsa Publica de Valores Bicentenaria, will begin operations next week, the country’s superintendent of securities told government news agency AVN Tuesday. Two companies “that never had access to the Caracas Stock Exchange” will be the first to make offerings on the new exchange, Tomas Sanchez said, though he declined to disclose the names of the companies. He said local Banco del Tesoro would serve as an intermediary

institution for the exchange but offered few more details. In November, President Hugo Chavez announced that he would be creating a “socialist” securities exchange that would help finance local companies after the government cracked down on Venezuela’s capital markets and established a state-run foreign exchange system. In his comments Tuesday, Sanchez stressed that the exchange would be open to private companies as well. He added that authorities are also looking to ways to

train a new wave of professionals for their securities industry. President Hugo Chavez also announced this week that Venezuela has dramatically increased its oil reserves and is now the world leader in petroleum. On Tuesday night, the Venezuelan head of state revealed that officials certified vast deposits of heavy crude in the Orinoco River basin in December, and that “we have reached 253 billion” barrels of proven oil reserves. T/ Agencies

ednesday marked the first anniversary of the earthquake that changed the face of a nation. More than 300,000 people perished last January 12 when the earth shook violently for a few seconds. Houses toppled, swallowing residents alive. Government offices and landmark buildings, including the Notre Dame cathedral, came tumbling down. Five days ago, three more bodies were pulled from the rubble in central Port-au-Prince. Haitians still come to pray at the cathedral every Sunday. On Wednesday, the crowds overwhelmed the small park in front. People embraced one another and cried openly. There was no reason to hide the sorrow that pervades their lives every day. For the rest of the world, January 12 is a day to mark the horror that unfolded in Haiti. But Haitians must cope with their memories every day.

2 | Impact

NoÊ{ÇÊUÊFriday, January 14, 2011

The artillery of ideas

Venezuelan opposition seeks foreign intervention, rejected by pro-Chavez majority According to the Venezuelan Constitution, the Enabling Act does not limit or inhibit the regular functioning of the Venezuelan parliament; it is merely complimentary. The National Assembly can continue to legislate as usual, even on the same matters authorized to the Executive, which are stipulated in the bill.

As opposition members of parliament made their debut this week in Washington, the pro-Chavez majority National Assembly condemned meddling statements made by the Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS)

enezuela’s National Assembly initiated its first regular session this Tuesday with much anticipated debate and interaction between the 40% minority right-wing opposition bloc and the 60% pro-Chavez socialist majority. But a group of opposition parliamentarians were absent from their first day at work. Instead of starting their new job in house, opposition lawmakers Ismael Garcia, Omar Barboza and others chose to fly to Washington and meet with counterparts in the US Capitol and the Organization of American States, to seek their aid in toppling the Chavez administration. In November, elected opposition legislators sent a letter to the Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS), Jose Miguel Insulza, requesting a meeting to discuss “issues related to the situation of Venezuela’s democracy” and the possibility of “invoking the Inter-American Charter” against the Venezuelan government. Articles 17-20 of the Charter outline the actions to be taken by the OAS “In the event of an unconstitutional alteration of the constitutional regime that seriously impairs the democratic order in a member state”, which include sending special missions to the country to investigate, convening extraordinary sessions of the Permanent Council and General Assembly to discuss the situation and suspending the country from participation in the Inter-American system. The latter occurred in the case of Honduras in 2009, after the coup d’etat that ousted President Manuel Zelaya from power. The Charter can only be invoked by a member state or the Secretary General.

INSULZA’S SAD ROLE Insulza began making public statements in November and December regarding legislation approved in Venezuela that was criticized by the opposition, particularly the Enabling Act passed in December, which gives the Executive Branch legislative authority over certain matters relating to an emergency situation in the country caused by the torrential rainfall that severely damaged infrastructure and left over 130,000 people homeless. Insulza reiterated in December that he was “concerned” about the Enabling Act and its “threat to separation of powers” in Venezuela. He also indicated that he was “talking to other member states who also expressed concern” about the “situation in Venezuela”. Last week, Insulza stated in an interview with Associated Press that he believed the Enabling Act in Venezuela was “anti-democratic, unconstitutional and a violation of the Inter-American Charter”, opening the door for opposition forces to pressure for further action to be taken. Simultaneous to Insulza’s statements, US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Arturo Valenzuela, declared during a speech at the Brookings

Institute in Washington that the laws passed in Venezuela, including the Enabling Act, were “anti-democratic” and “violated the Inter-American Charter”. The similar language is no coincidence. The “member state” concerned about the situation in Venezuela is the United States. The Venezuelan Foreign Ministry issued a statement last Friday rejecting Insulza’s declarations as “interference” in Venezuelan internal affairs and a sign of his “subservience” to the United States government. “The Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela fully condemns the distasteful declarations made by Jose Miguel Insulza regarding Venezuelan internal affairs, which constitute a new, abusive and opportunistic act of interference that discredits even more the Secretary General of the OAS”. “The mistaken declarations made by Insulza regarding the Enabling Act approved by the Venezuelan National Assembly... were produced hours after, and in exactly the same terms as those emitted by the US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Arturo Valenzuela, prolonging the sad role of the Secretary General of the OAS as

a transmission belt for the interventionist policies of US domination throughout the region”. The Venezuelan legislature issued a similar statement on Tuesday, during its first session of the year. “We categorically reject the declarations made by Insulza”, proclaimed the 98 socialist lawmakers. All 67 opposition legislators abstained from voting on the statement. Enabling Acts exist in most constitutions around the world and generally are used in times of emergency to facilitate the Executive Branch with powers to decree laws as a rapid response to urgent situations. In this case, the Enabling Act was requested by President Chavez in December in order to respond to the nationwide crisis caused by the heaviest rainfall Venezuela has experienced in over 40 years, which not only left nearly 40 people dead, but over 130,000 homeless. Agricultural production was destroyed in several regions, and still thousands more homes were left in risky situations, causing the government to respond by immediately placing families in temporary shelters set up in government institutions, including the presidential palace where Chavez resides.

OPPOSITION CALLS FOR INTERVENTION Despite the constitutionality of the Enabling Act, the Venezuelan opposition has distorted its applicability and extent sufficient to convince the OAS Secretary General and the head of the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights, Santiago Canton, to use it as a stepping stone to intervene in Venezuela, though neither need much convincing. Canton, a Venezuelan, applauded the 2002 coup d’etat that briefly, and unconstitutionally, overthrew President Chavez, while offering full support to the the interim dictatorship led by Pedro Carmona that forceably took power. Ironically, during that coup d’etat against President Chavez’s government, the OAS made no efforts to invoke the Inter-American Charter, despite the fact that a clear rupture in constitutional order had occurred. On Wednesday, opposition lawmakers Ismael Garcia, of the Podemos party and Omar Barboza of UNT, both parties funded by the US, led the delegation in Washington that meet with Insulza and Canton. They also meet separately with several ambassadors from member states of the OAS, including the United States and Canada. In declarations via telephone to Globovision, Garcia claimed that he and his partners were in Washington to request OAS intervention in Venezuela against the government, bizarrely stating, “We’re here because as Venezuelans, we need to resolve matters for our country by ourselves, in a sovereign way. So we’re meeting with the Secretary General and ambassadors from member states for their help”. T/ Eva Golinger P/ Agencies

NoÊ{ÇÊUÊFriday, January 14, 2011

The artillery of ideas

Analysis

From Tucson to Venezuela: using the banner of “Free Expression” to spread hate S

hortly after the assassination of US President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963, the militant Black Nationalist and member of the Nation of Islam, Malcolm X, referred to the politically motivated murder in Dallas, Texas as a case of “the chickens coming home to roost”. The civil rights leader, who famously advocated the use of “any means necessary” to combat the terrorism and inequality that has afflicted African American communities in the United States for centuries, was quickly condemned for his remarks by the mainstream media. He was also sanctioned by the then head of the Nation of Islam, Elijah Muhammad, and would soon leave the ranks of the US Muslim sect after adopting a more inclusive approach to the advancement of social justice in the US and internationally. Although many in the media interpreted Malcolm X’s comments regarding the Kennedy assassination as an apology for the murder, he clarified his remarks during a subsequent interview, stating that his use of the adage was intended to highlight the fact that Kennedy’s “assassination was a result of the climate of hate” that plagues the United States. Indeed, Malcolm X himself, along with numerous other civil rights leaders including Dr. Marin Luther King, Jr., would also soon fall victim to this very climate of hate, being gunned down in calculated offensives perpetrated against progressive activists by the US right-wing. NOT ISOLATED CASES This type of hatred, of course, has not only led to the murder of high profile political figures. Countless others have also been victimized by the intolerance that has emanated, historically, from the United States’ conservative and fundamentalist establishment. From the terrorist lynchings carried out by the Ku Klux Klan to the more recent “hate crimes” perpetrated against non-white, nonstraight, immigrant communities across the country, violence has been the palpable result of a coordinated campaign of bigotry and fear that

the coup but the same hatred was employed later that year to push forth an oil-industry lockout, crippling the nation’s economy and causing widespread hardship. And the violence has continued. In 2004, the public attorney in charge of investigating the coup, Danilo Anderson, was assassinated by a car bomb while in 2005 and 2006 congressman Braulio Alvarez, leader of Venezuela’s land distribution program, was attacked and shot by armed assailants. With respect to the land reform, just this past October, Feliz Castillo was added to a list of over 200 landless farmers who have also been assassinated since the program began in 2001.

has been the mainstay of right-wing media discourse for decades. On Saturday, this hatred claimed 20 more victims in what could be considered yet another example of “the chickens coming home to roost”. During an event with constituents in Tucson, Arizona last weekend, Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was attacked by an armed assailant who opened fire, killing 6 by-standers and wounding 12 others. Among the dead were a federal judge and a 9-year old child. TARGETED BY THE RIGHT Giffords, who was critically wounded in the rampage, had earned the ire of right-wing Tea Party members by supporting President Obama’s health care reform bill and opposing Arizona’s draconian immigrant legislation which legalizes racial profiling. Although the exact motivations of the assailant have not been determined, his actions fit into a pattern that can be associated with an aggressive witch hunt being carried out against politicians in favor of Obama’s plan. On a map published on her webpage, former vice presidential candidate and paragon of republican conservatism, Sarah Palin, explicitly targeted Giffords using

the cross-hairs of a gun to identify her congressional district. And Jesse Kelly, Giffords republican opponent in last November’s elections, is reported to have held fundraising events where, according to the Associated Press, “he urged supporters to help remove Giffords from office by joining him to shoot a fully loaded M-16 rifle”. Predictably, Palin and her extremist, gun-toting allies are now scrambling to distance themselves from the barbarism of last Saturday’s crimes. But they, along with the ultra-conservative mouthpieces that preach hate on a daily basis to millions of Americans through radio and television media, are ultimately the one’s responsible for the political violence that has increased notably over the past year. In fact, in just the first three months of 2010, more than 40 cases of violence or threats of violence had been reported by congressmen supporting Obama’s health care bill while, just after the bill’s passage, Giffords’ office was vandalized and gunshots were blasted through its windows and doors. VENEZUELA Venezuela, by way of comparison, has also been no stranger to political violence.

During the nearly 30-year dictatorship of Juan Vicente Gomez that ended in 1935 and that of Marcos Perez Jimenez in the 1950s, left-wing activists and sympathizers were systematically hunted down, tortured and assassinated. The same held true during the country’s period of “representative democracy” from 1958 – 1998, albeit in a lesser degree. When former Army Lieutenant Colonel Hugo Chavez won the nation’s presidential elections by a landslide vote in 1998 and embarked upon a plan of progressive reforms in the country, it seemed that Venezuela had turned the corner en route to a more democratic society. The country’s pattern of political violence began to resurface, however. Chavez’s program – based on redistribution of the nation’s massive oil wealth to the economically disadvantaged – prompted the country’s right-wing opposition to mobilize against the new president, using a media campaign of hatred and vitriol to demonize the leader. As a culmination of this campaign, in 2002, the private media and its allies in the business community orchestrated a bloody coup d’etat that left at least 17 civilians dead. Chavez survived

THE MEDIA LAW Much of the Venezuelan right’s virulence and antagonism against the reforms of the democratically elected Chavez government continue to thrive in the private media. The Chavez administration has attempted to respond to these acts, however, by passing the Law of Social Responsibility in Media, which seeks to outlaw messages interpreted to be inciting hatred, calling for the assassination of public officials, or causing civil unrest. A recently passed reform to the law extends the prohibitions to the Internet calling for, according to the government, “sanctions against those who use the Internet to incite hate, criminal activity, war propaganda, alterations in public order, homicide; or advocate to disobey constitutional authority”. Of course, the Venezuelan government has come under fire internationally for these measures in what Chavez foes claim to be a “clamp down” on freedom of speech. This, ironically, includes democratic members of the US Congress, who, as privileged members of the United States’ political establishment, have perhaps forgotten the lessons of JFK and what it means to be caught in the cross hairs of extremists who use the banner of “freedom of expression” to spread hatred and fear. T/ Edward Ellis P/ Agencies

4 | Politics

NoÊ{ÇÊUÊFriday, January 14, 2011

The artillery of ideas

Venezuela: battling land inequality and farmer exploitation Venezuela’s battle against land inequality and the exploitation of small agricultural producers has increased in intensity recently as the Chavez government steps up measures to redistribute fallow lands in the area known as South of Lake Maracaibo

ast week, one of the offices of the government agency in charge of carrying out Venezuela’s land redistribution became the target of vandalism in the town of Santa Barbara in the western state of Zulia. The National Land Institute (INTI), constitutionally charged with surveying land tenancy and granting plots to landless farmers, saw its office building torched on Saturday in an act that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez qualified as “terrorist”. “We will respond as the constitution and the law demands. We’re going to accelerate the rescue of lands South of Lake [Maracaibo]. They will not intimidate us”, Chavez said during his weekly television program, Alo Presidente. According to Venezuela’s Land Law, originally passed by decree in 2001, any lands reported by residents to be fallow or held illegally without title are subject to a technical inspection by INTI. If those lands are found to be unproductive or the alleged

owner of the terrain is unable to prove legitimate title, the plots in question come under government control to be distributed to organized landless farmers, known in Spanish as campesinos. PROMOTING EQUALITY The Land Law was passed in Venezuela with the expressed intention of promoting agricultural production and lessening the extreme inequality in land holdings that has plagued nation. According World Bank statistics, before Chavez took office in 1998, Venezuela was home to second greatest land inequality in Latin America. It was also known to import more than 70 percent of its food. Efforts to democratize land holdings in the region South of Lake Maracaibo, one of the most unequal areas of the country, have been prioritized recently after the zone became one of the most affected by recent torrential rains that have left more than 100 thousand displaced. In December, the government announced its intention to break up 16 latifundios –huge unproductive landownings– in the region South of Lake Maracaibo in efforts to respond to the needs of the displaced and engage in a productive reconstruction of affected zones. VIOLENCE AGAINST LAND REFORM The fact that the INTI office was targeted by opponents to the land redistribution initiatives comes as no surprise.

Various INTI officials have been the victims of violent reprisals over the Law’s 9 year history including the shooting of Jose Huerta in the state of Zulia in 2002 and the murder of William Prado in the state of Guarico last August. Campesino organizations have also reported the assassination of more than 300 small producers at the hands of hitmen contracted by landowners in opposition to the reform. Rancher and landowner organizations have denied any links to the killings. Although various paid assassins have been charged and sentenced for the crimes, not a single landowner has been successfully prosecuted for contracting the death of a campesino. Organizations such as the Ezequiel Zamora National Campesino Front (FNCEZ) blame corruption in the legal system and the “good old boy” system that continues to exist on the local level between landowners, judges, and public prosecutors.

In response to the violence, the Chavez administration has proposed the formation of campesino militias to defend the landless engaged in the land reform initiatives. On Sunday, the Venezuelan head of state called for the deployment of military officials in the area South of Maracaibo Lake to at least temporarily confront the violence. “These criminals will not stop us”, Chavez said during his program. “They’re threatening INTI officials and campesino leaders. We’ll have to see what the opposition congressmen say about this – nothing, because they aid these acts”. FARMERS’ SUPPORT In a show of support for the government’s land reform measures, members of the FNCEZ participated in a rally in the town of Santa Barbara on Monday.

“The struggle to free the lands South of Maracaibo won’t be stopped by anyone”, said campesino leader Francisco Javier Pulgar during the demonstration. Arias Cardenas, congressional representative of Santa Barbara in Venezuela’s National Assembly, also spoke during the rally and affirmed the legality of the land redistribution initiatives of the Chavez administration. “This process is developing within the mandates of justice and respect for the constitution. No one can say that government is acting outside the law with regards to the process of recovering land in order to generate employment and food”. The rally was also held to commemorate 151 years since the death of Ezequiel Zamora, Venezuela’s equivalent of Mexico’s revolutionary hero Emiliano Zapata. “Today, General Zamora lives in the struggle of the people” Foreign Minister, Nicolas Maduro declared. Zamora, a general during Venezuela’s federal war and a proponent of land distribution, was assassinated by a traitor on January 10, 1860. “We all know who has been using, for centuries, criminal violence and terrorism to maintain their privileges, to persecute people and to impede justice”, Maduro said on Monday with reference to the Venezuelan oligarchy. “Oligarchs, tremble! Long Live Freedom!” exclaimed Maduro and the hundreds of participants in Monday’s rally. T/ Edward Ellis P/ Agencies

NoÊ{ÇÊUÊFriday, January 14, 2011

The artillery of ideas

International

If Julian Assange is a terrorist, then what is Luis Posada Carriles? T

he trials of the creator of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange and of international terrorist Luis Posada Carriles began with less than a 24-hour difference on January 10 and 11, one in London and the other one in El Paso, Texas. The anomaly immediately catching the attention of many is that the champion of freedom of information will be accused of the very serious crime of terrorism, while the confessed terrorist will be tried for migratory crimes sanctioned by a sentence he has already served. The ANSA news agency reports that the request of extradition made by Sweden for the charge of “sexual molestation” against Assange was transferred from a court in the center of London to Belmarsh Court, specializing in terrorism issues and annexed to a maximum security prison, rebaptized years ago by the BBC as “The British Guantanamo”. Assange will appear in court on a charge of terrorism, which implies, according to British laws, his arrest and confinement. Luis Posada Carriles will continue to be free on bail when he appears in the United States before a judge who acquitted him in a first trial and who openly expressed her sympathy for him in a courtroom full of followers, many of them with a terrorist past. A spokesperson of the British legal authorities stated that the transfer to the court of Belmarsh, in the southeast area of the capital, is due to “logistical reasons” and not, as stated by WikiLeaks, due to US pressure. SPEED UP FOR ASSANGE, DELAYED FOR POSADA The truth is that while in the case of Assange, the procedures have been speed up, skipping stages as much as possible after a series of tricks to silence the Australian man, in the case of Posada Carriles, a former CIA agent who served the Agency as an instructor of explosives, a torturer, a police captain, a hired assassin, a terrorist and a promoter of assassination, records of dilatory maneuvers to draw out his case are surpassed. In addition to use a panoply of dirty tricks to pressure Assange, sabotage his operations system,

take away his income, recover the leaks, manipulate the content, US agencies have terrorized the man who dared to open the valves of the huge can of diplomatic trash of the United States. Hundreds of texts have been written, books have been published and documentaries have been made about the criminal record of Posada, the Klaus Barbie of US intelligence. On May 17, 2005, at 1:30 pm, Luis Posada Carriles was arrested near Miami, and taken in a golf cart to a helicopter, “with every courtesy possible”, for his transfer to the offices of the Department of Homeland Security. On April 1st, 2005, a lawyer for Posada Carriles, Eduardo Soto, confirmed in Miami that his client - who illegally entered US territory on board a shrimp vessel owned by a kingpin of the Cuban-American mafia-, would ask for asylum to stay in the country permanently. In spite of the accusations presented in Caracas for his participation in the terrorist attack against

a Cuban aircraft that killed all 73 people on board in 1976; his arrest in Panama in 2000, in connection with a plan for an assassination attempt against Cuban leader Fidel Castro; his public acceptance for having organized a terrorist campaign against tourist facilities in Havana in 1997; and his close links with terrorist networks, Posada Carriles received full support from the US government. On September 27, 2005, an immigration judge in El Paso, Texas, William Abbott, following federal instructions, used the absurd testimony of an old accomplice of Posada and former official of the Venezuelan secret police, Joaquin Chaffardet, to rule that he could not be deported to Venezuela, from where he escaped prison and fled justice in 1985. GETTING RID OF THE “HOT POTATO” Four months later, on January 24, 2006, three days before the inauguration of Honduran President, Manuel Zelaya, The Miami Herald cited what it called “frag-

ments” of a statement by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Bureau (ICE), that pointed out the following: “ICE is progressing in carrying out of the removal of Mr. Posada from the US”. The White House -in the face of an international scandal- assessed that the best way to get rid of the “hot potato” - the former agent, terrorist, torturer and assassin, was to find him refuge anywhere outside US territory. Three days later, on January 27, 2006, US ambassador to Honduras, Charles “Charlie” Ford, visited Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, on the day of his inauguration, to make an insolent request. “Ambassador Charles Ford came to ask me to grant a visa to Posada Carriles”, said Zelaya later. “It was impossible to give a visa to Luis Posada Carriles, since he was questioned for terrorist acts. They defend that kind of terrorism, I vouch for that”, he underlined. On April 19, 2007, Posada Carriles, found not guilty by Cardone, was back in Miami not to set foot in a detention center ever again.

BROWNFIELD: “POSADA DOESN’T PUT ANYBODY AT RISK” On March 18, 2008, as a response to statements made by Cuba and Venezuela at the United Nations, the person in charge of legal affairs in the US mission, Caroline Wilson, pointed out with candor that her country “had carefully followed the legal procedures in force in the case of Posada Carriles”. “As happens in democracies in the world, a person can’t be tried or extradited if there isn’t enough evidence that he committed the crime he’s accused of”, she asserted. In July 2008, US ambassador to Venezuela at the time, William Brownfield, in statements to the Panorama newspaper, in Maracaibo, made it clear that the United States had no intention whatsoever of putting Posada at the disposal of Venezuelan justice, which was claiming and continues to claim him. “Mr. Luis Posada Carriles doesn’t represent an imminent danger for anybody”, Brownfield said, making it clear that the US would never turn over its veteran agent. Ironically, a few days before the Brownfield blunder, Sub-Secretary of State Thomas Shannon, today US ambassador in Brazil, assured the OAS that the US Department of Justice was “still carrying out investigations” about Posada Carriles. While Assange is hastily taken from a minor court to another one that can lock him up for good, the Venezuelan government is waiting for an answer, for more than five years now, to its extradition request for terrorist Posada Carriles. Assange, the Web idealist demonized by major communication networks and persecuted by US agencies, will soon know how imperial justice gives a piece of its mind, with or without intermediaries. Ignored by an accomplice press, Posada, the mercenary assassin, will keep on evading laws and haunting the dozens of victims and relatives of victims of his crimes, who have been devastated by the permanent despicable and cowardly willingness of those serving the empire. T/ Jean Guy Allard P/ EFE

6 | Social Justice

NoÊ{ÇÊUÊFriday, January 14, 2011

The artillery of ideas

Community housing movements working together with government M

aking good on his promise that 2011 will be the year of addressing his nation’s housing shortage, Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez met with organized community members last Saturday in the Caracas neighborhood of El Calvario to discuss options and initiatives presented by activists and residents. The meeting was held between the Venezuelan head of state and a network of grassroots housing organizations referred to as the Dwellers Movement (Movimiento Pobladores). Government officials including Vice President Elias Jaua and the new president of the National Assembly, Soto Rojas, were also present during the community assembly, which touched on themes of recovering abandoned lands in Caracas and financing new housing projects. During the meeting, President Chavez approved the expropriation of a nine thousand square meter plot of land reportedly owned by the Venezuelan corporate behemoth, Empresas Polar.

The abandoned land had been occupied by community members demanding dignified housing for residents in the shantytowns of Antimano – an impoverished neighborhood in western Caracas. “We’re going to take back what belongs to us. We’re going to build a socialist community inside the holistic transformation of

Caracas”, said community activist, Renny Paruta. 39.4 million bolivars ($9.16 million) will be allocated by the national government to the project, Chavez informed. USING THE ABANDONED The President also signed on Saturday an order for the acqui-

sition of a series of other abandoned lands in the Caracas areas of January 23, Baruta, and Baralt Avenue. Community leader Juan Carlos Rodriguez, speaking during the community forum, called attention to the number of abandoned lands in the capital and proposed the granting of

collective credits to communities in order to facilitate housing construction. “We’re proposing the payment of housing collectively. [We can] acquire housing and pay for them in the long term”, Rodriguez said. A commission will be established to study Rodriguez’s proposal. Earlier on Saturday, Chavez inspected the construction of a new housing project across the street from the presidential palace, Miraflores. The apartment building will be the new home for displaced families currently taking refuge in the presidential palace as a result of the rains that ravaged many parts of the country last month. “There will not be a single displaced family without a home”, Chavez said of the government’s disaster relief efforts. “And in this decade, not a single Venezuelan family will be without there own, dignified housing”. T/ Edward Ellis P/ Presidential Press

Third-grade children to receive 500,000 ‘Canaima’ laptops As this year’s ﬁrst semester was inaugurated on Monday, the Venezuelan government continues to provide educational laptop computers for schoolchildren nationwide as part of program to guarantee universal access to technology

elebrating the beginning of the school semester after the lengthy holiday break, President Hugo Chavez inspected a public elementary school located in Catia, a populous slum in western Caracas, where children received laptop computers as part of the Canaima Plan, an educational program to improve technological innovation amongst school children. During the event, Chavez announced that in September,

500,000 kid-friendly Canaima laptop computers will be distributed to third-grade school children. “Tomorrow we will continue handing over Canaima laptops to second-grade children in public schools. I have signed the authorization so the government can acquire 500,000 more laptop computers to start delivering them as soon as possible”, the Venezuelan President said. Chavez also reported that a Canaima laptop factory would be inaugurated “at the end of the first semester of the year to begin assembling these computers in Venezuela”. The Venezuelan leader affirmed, “technologies of information and communication have to be tools for development. This is not a gift; it’s a necessary tool so children can incorporate themselves into the education process”. “The Canaima project moves forward with the development of content”, said Minister of Education, Jennifer Gil, referring

to the educational programs included in the plan. The Canaima program began in mid-2009 as part of a trade agreement between Venezuela and Portugal. The laptop computers run on the open source, free software, operating system Linux, and the educational programs and software included in them are designed by Venezuelan engineers at the Ministry of Education and the National Center for Information Technology (CNTI). ACCESS TO INTERNET A PRIORITY The government of President Chavez has aggressively boosted Internet access in Venezuela through policies to build Infocenters –community centers with free Internet services- and provide computers and laptops in public schools. Since 2000, the number of Venezuelans with access to Internet has increased from 800,000 to 7.5 million. In the year 2000,

only three percent of Venezuelans were online, while in 2009 the figure increased to 27 percent. The government created and funded Infocentro system, which has set up thousands of free computer and Internet centers in communities nationwide, was awarded the UNESCO King Hamad Bin Isa Al-Khalifa Prize this week in recognition of its successful work developing adult technological literacy. The Infocentro Foundation, a division of the Ministry of Science and

Technology, will receive a $25,000 bonus as part of the award, which was focused this year on “Digital Literacy: Preparing Adult Learners for Lifelong Learning and Flexible Employment”. The Infocentro Foundation was selected for the award from a pool of 49 projects from 34 countries from around the world. T/ Presidential Press P/ Presidential Press

NoÊ{ÇÊUÊFriday, January 14, 2011

The artillery of ideas

Analysis

Setting the record straight on Venezuela and Hugo Chavez W

ith so much misinformation circulating in different media outlets around the world about Venezuela and President Hugo Chavez, it’s time to set the record straight. Venezuela is not a dictatorship and President Chavez is no dictator. Just days ago, the Venezuelan head of state participated in a meeting with a group of housing activists, who not only criticized - live on television - government policies and inaction on tenant and housing issues, but also proposed laws, regulations and projects that were received with open arms by Chavez himself. And last week, the Venezuelan President vetoed a law on higher education that had been approved by the prior year’s majority pro-Chavez legislature, calling for more “open and wide” debate on the subject, to include critics and those who had protested the bill. That is not the behavior of a brutal dictator. As someone who has been living on and off in Venezuela for over 17 years, I can testify to the extraordinary transformation the country has undertaken during the past decade since Chavez first was elected in 1998. He has been reelected by landslide majorities twice since then. When I arrived to Venezuela for the first time in 1993, the country was in severe turmoil. Constitutional rights had been suspended and a nationwide curfew was imposed. Repression was widespread, the economy was in crisis, several newspapers, television and radio stations had been shut down or censored, and the government had imposed a forced military draft targeting young men from poor communities. There was an interim president in power, because the actual president, Carlos Andres Perez - hailed by Washington as an “outstanding democrat” - had just been impeached and imprisoned for corruption. Perez eventually escaped confinement and fled to Miami, where he resided until his death last month, living off the millions he stole from the Venezuelan people. Even though a new president was elected in 1994, constitutional rights remained suspended on and off for years, until the elections in 1998 that brought Chavez to pow-

er. Since then, despite a short-lived coup d’etat in 2002, an economically-shattering sabotage of the oil industry in 2003 and multiple attempts against his government during the following years, President Chavez has never once limited constitutional rights nor imposed a curfew on the population. He hasn’t ever ordered a state of emergency that would limit rights or shut down any media outlets. He even issued a general pardon in 2007 giving amnesty to all those involved in the 2002 coup, with the exception of individuals directly responsible for crimes against humanity or homicide. Under the Chavez administration, poverty has been reduced in half, universal, quality, free healthcare and education have been guaranteed for all Venezuelans, new industries have been created and more and more political power has been placed in the hands of “ordinary” people who were previously excluded by the elite that ruled the country throughout the twentieth century. So why do so many newspapers and broadcast media classify him as a dictator? You may not like Hugo Chavez’s way of speaking, or the fact that he was born into poverty, comes from the military, is a leftist and doesn’t fit the stereotypical image of a head of state. But that doesn’t make him a dictator. In Venezuela, more than 80% of television, radio and print media remain in the hands of private interests critical of the government. So, despite what some international press claim, there is no censorship or violation of free expression in Venezuela. Calls to overthrow the government or to incite the armed forces to rebel against the state, which would clearly be prohibited in most nations, are broadcast on opposition-controlled television channels with public concessions (open signals, not cable). Just last month, the head of the Venezuelan chamber of commerce, Fedecamaras, gave a press conference live on television, during which he called the armed forces “traitors” who would “pay the price” if they didn’t disobey government orders and “obey” the dictates of big business.

Recently, the legislature passed a law called the Law of Social Responsibility in Radio, Television and Digital Media. The law does not censor internet or any other form of media. What it does do is disallow calls to assassinate the president or other individual, as well as prohibit incitement to crime, hate or violence on web sites operated from Venezuela. This is a standard in most democracies and is a sign of civility. The law also instills on media a responsibility to contribute to the education of citizens. Media have a huge power over society today. Why shouldn’t they be responsible for their actions? Another issue widely manipulated in mass media is the Enabling Act that was approved last month by the Venezuelan parliament. This law gives “decree” powers to the Executive to legislate on specific issues as stipulated in the bill. The Enabling Act does not usurp, inhibit or limit legislative functions of the National Assembly, nor is it unconstitutional or anti-democratic. The parliament can still debate and approve laws as usual within its authority. The Enabling law, which is permitted by the Constitution, was requested by President Chavez in order to provide rapid responses to a national emergency caused by torrential rainfall that devasted communities nationwide at the end of last year and left over 130,000 homeless. And speaking of the Venezuelan legislature, there is a lot of deceitful information repeated and re-

cycled in media worldwide about the composition of this year’s new parliament. Venezuela had legislative elections in September 2010, and opposition - anti-Chavez - parties won 40% of the seats. Some say this is a majority, which is very strange. The pro-Chavez PSUV party won 60% of seats in the National Assembly. That’s 97 out of 165 seats, plus 1 more which was won by the pro-Chavez PCV party, for a total of 98. On the other hand, the opposition bloc won 65 seats represented by 13 different political parties that don’t necessarily agree on most issues. Two other seats were won by a third, independent party, PPT. The opposition bloc has already announced it will seek foreign intervention to help overthrow the government. Not only is this illegal, it’s incredibly dangerous. Many of the candidates and most of the parties that conform the opposition in Venezuela have already been receiving millions of dollars annually in funding from several US and international agencies, such as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the US Agency for International Development (USAID). The stated purpose of this funding has been to “promote democracy” in Venezuela and help build the opposition forces against Chavez. This is a clear violation of Venezuelan sovereignty and a waste of US taxpayer dollars. This week, opposition leaders met with their counterparts in Washington. They have already

said their mission is to seek more aid to help remove President Chavez from power. Unfortunately, their undemocratic actions have already been welcomed in the US Capitol. Representative Connie Mack (R-FL), now head of the House Sub-Committte on Foreign Relations for the Western Hemisphere, announced that his one goal this year is to place Venezuela on the list of “state sponors of terrorism”. On January 1, President Chavez held a brief, informal and amicable encounter with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Brasilia, during the inauguration of Dilma Rousseff, Brazil’s new president. No agreements were reached, but the exchange of hands and smiles stabilized an escalation in tensions between both nations. Upon her return to Washington, Clinton was severely criticized by media, particularly The Washington Post, which accused her of being too “soft” on Venezuela. The Washington Post’s calls for war against Venezuela are dangerous. Remember, conditioning of public opinion is necessary to justify aggression against another nation. The campaigns of demonization against Saddam Hussein, Iraq and Islam were essential to initiate the wars in the Middle East which have yet to cease. Is the public willing to be influenced by media that have a political (and economic) agenda that seeks to oust a democratically-elected government just because they don’t like its politics? With the recent tragic events in Arizona it should become even more evident that media have power and influence over individual actions. Hate speech, demonization campaigns, manipulative and deceitful information are dangerous and can lead to abominable consequences, including war. It’s time to stop the escalating aggression against Venezuela and accept the facts: Venezuela is not a dictatorship, and while many of you may not like Hugo Chavez, a majority of Venezuelans who voted for him do. And in this scenario, they’re the ones who matter. T/ Eva Golinger P/Agencies

FRIDAY | January 14, 2011 | No. 47| Bs 1 | C ARACAS

ENGLISH EDITION The artillery of ideas

A publication of the Fundacion Correo del Orinoco • Editor-in-Chief | Eva Golinger • Graphic Design | Alexander Uzcátegui, Jameson Jiménez • Press | Fundación Imprenta de la Cultura

OPINION

A Marshall Plan for Cuba C

uba is currently faced with a crucial dilemma: either it updates, revises and reconstructs its economic model or it runs the risk of succumbing to the combined pressures created by its own errors and the aggression of the US embargo. The countries of Latin America and the Caribbean as well as all of those in Africa and Asia cannot remain indifferent towards this situation or limit themselves to contemplating how the Cuban Revolution will overcome this decisive battle without any assistance beyond its own capacities. Help however, cannot be confined to verbal support, which is fine but insufficient. Cuba needs something more concrete: that its creditors, and in particular, that the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean cancel Cuba’s external debt. Argentina is Cuba’s main creditor- due to a loan which was granted by the government of Hector Campora and his minister of economy Jose B. Gelbard in 1973- and which the ex-minister of foreign affairs of Kirchner’s government, Rafael Bielsa renegotiated by proposing a reduction of 50% of the amount. By combining the capital and the accumulation of interests, this debt rose to approximately 1.8 billion dollars. At the same time, a colleague of Rafael Bielsa, the minister of the economy, Roberto Lavagna proposed to the creditors of Argentina a reduction of 75% on the nominal value of Argentina’s debt in default with the collapse of the exchange rate in December 2001. Argentina finally obtained a reduction of around 70% of the value of its debt. Argentina should at least guarantee to Cuba the same treatment that Argentina received from its creditors. The 1,147 inhabitants of Argentina who have recovered their sight free-of-charge thanks to Operation Milagro during this last year at the Doctor Ernesto

Guevara of Cordoba Ophthalmologic Center and the more than 20,000 people who have become literate learning to read and write thanks to the Cuban program “Yo si puedo” are some of the reasons to cancel the debt. It would be an act of strict justice. Equally the government of Mexico- which has claims to the amount of 500 million dollars- of Panama 200 million; Brazil 40 million, Trinidad and Tobago 30 million and Uruguay also with 30 million should do the same. Why is it a question of strict justice? For many different reasons, but specifically two. First, as just reciprocity for Cuba’s generous internationalism which has driven its Revolution and transcended its frontiers by sending doctors, nurses, dentists, educators and sports instructors throughout the entire world, while the Empire and her allies saturated the world with soldiers, ‘special commandos’, spies, intelligence agents, police and terrorists.

During the last decade Cuba has sent 135,000 health professionals to more than 100 countries worldwide particularly in Latin America and the Caribbean and Africa but also in Asia. Cuban doctors were in Haiti long before the fateful earthquake and afterwards their numbers rose while the US sent marines. Cuban aid in combating sickness and preventing deaths in the country has been and is concrete and effective. There is also a moral obligation for helping Cuba because we think of what would have happened to our countries if the Cuban Revolution had not resisted the pressures of imperialism and of the global right after the collapse of the Soviet Union? This ideological and political change was materialized by the ascension and consolidation of Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales and Rafael Correa- to mention only the most significant cases.

Moreover would the advent at the beginning of this century of a very moderate center-left in countries such as Argentina, Brazil or Uruguay have been possible without the heroic resistance of Cuba, the ‘bad example’ which has a lower infant mortality rate- despite an embargo and assaults- than that of the United States? No way! In addition to the reasons unique to each of these cases, these advances have been made possible thanks to the resistance of Cuba. If Cuba had surrendered and become a protectorate of the US, the tsunami of the right would have ravaged this part of the world. Thanks to Cuba, our people have avoided a catastrophe of such magnitude. It is for this reason that as well as cancelling its existing debts with the countries of the region, the creditor countries, along with others, should create a special fund of solidarity with the Cuban Revolution. The

United Nations made a similar initiative to save the Europeans in the stampede after the Second World War and its success has been extraordinary. The Marshall Plan has fully satisfied the expectations that arose and the European economies have rapidly recovered. Cuba, which has suffered the equivalent of two Marshall Plansthe cost today of the US embargo on the fragile Cuban economylargely deserves a similar gesture from its sister Latin American Nations. They have enormous reserves in their central banks. In 2007, President Rafael Correa calculated that the existing reserves in the region were around 200 billion dollars and this figure has not stopped rising during subsequent years. Statistics from the IMF indicate that at the end of 2009 Argentina’s international reserves rose to 49.5 billion dollars, Brazil’s to 238.5 billion, Mexico’s to 90.8 billion, Chile’s to 26.1 billion, Colombia’s to 32.8 billion, Peru’s to 32.8 billion and Venezuela’s to 35.8 billion. With the increase recorded in 2010, the combined reserves of these countries- plus those of Bolivia, Ecuador and Uruguay which were not recorded in this statistical study- would be over 500 billion dollars. Hence, this shows the enormous importance of creating the Bank of the South, which remains hampered by bureaucratic excuses and political short-sightedness shown by certain governments. By assigning just 2% of these reserves, a special fund of 10 billion dollars could be created to finance the complex process of socialist economic reforms which Cuba should implement during the course of the next few months. This would be a well deserved reciprocal gesture towards Cuban solidarity. - Atilio Boron