Editor's Note: Leonard Freeman's views of President Chavez and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is representative of the views of many in the United States. He can certainly be forgiven, considering the disinformation about Venezuela being funded by the United States government and flooding the corporate media. Carlos Herrera's rebuttal to Freeman's letter clarifies Freeman's folly. These two perspectives on U.S.-Venezuelan relations help us understand some of the issues and just how widely perspectives on modern Venezuela vary. - Les Blough, Editor
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 10:47:56 -0400
From: Leonard Freeman halfvenehalfusa@hotmail.com
To: Editor@VHeadline.com
Subject: Why did the Neo-Imperialist cross the road?
Can you really blame the US for wanting to have a pro-USpresident in Venezuela? Wouldn't you want a pro-Venezuela president in the White House? Especially when you have so much invested in the country in question.
Chavez has made it perfectly clear that he is not going to give the United States the preferential treatment that they have enjoyed for decades. OK, so who does get preferential treatment? Fidel? Russia?
Chavez has been called "the anti-Bush" ... but is he anti-American?
Like many others before him. Chavez needs someone to marginalize in order to make himself seem more "presidential" ... just like Bush needed Saddam.
You see, the great thing about the US system is that in 2008, Bush is out of here! Can you say the same for Chavez in 2006? How long will he be President? Forever? How many times will he change the laws to his favor so he can remain in absolute power?
What will happen when Bush is no longer in office? Who will you point the finger to then?
- Will Arthur Shaw and Carlos Herrera start writing about the Kerry regime? That was just an example; lets not get excited.
Instead of pointing the finger at the United States, why don't you point to the long line of corrupt Venezuelan ex-presidents and government officials that pillaged and mis-managed Venezuela for so long?
Who put those people in power?
From what I understand, some were democratically-elected ... a few by a vast majority ... sound familiar?
Lets make a new rule: You are not allowed to use the words "regime" and "neo-imperialist" more than 5 times in any article. If you are having trouble fighting the urge, I suggest you take a look at your clothes (probably US brands), take another sip of your Coke or Pepsi product, and hit the backspace button on your IBM or Dell. Isn't Microsoft software great?
Maybe you should switch to Cuban clothes and Cuban hardware and software. Oh wait a minute ... that doesn't exist! Maybe its because Cuba is a complete political and industrial failure. Lets emulate them...good idea!
No need to reply, I already know your response: "Neo-imperialist, regime, regime, neo-imperialist, neo-conservocrats, regime, neo-imperialist, regime." Good answer!
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 16:37:26 -0400
Subject: Re: Why did the Neo-Imperialist cross the road?
I am not a Chavez-hater ... on fact I admire his conviction in many ways, and some of his policies. I really feel that its a shame you don't have someone more objective on your staff though. All the articles I am reading lately are strongly praising Chavez and just plain hateful towards the United States.
Did you read Carlos Herrera's article titled "Maria-Corina Presidenta"? He says she'll be "banged up in Los Teques." What's that supposed to mean? (Editor: it's Anglo-Saxon for 'imprisoned'). He also calls the "opposition" (very broad term) "naughty little eunuchs" (LOL).
Also "Mediocre, self-centered, individualistic, short term thinkers, racists, blind to the needs of the majority and poisoned by a feeling of misplaced superiority due to “education,” social standing, materialistic trappings, where you live (I think he means place of residence), your gourmet tastes and the money in your bank accounts ... and all rounded off by an irrational, personalized hatred of President Hugo Chavez Frias."
Leonard Freeman
halfvenehalfusa@hotmail.com
P.S: Thank you for letting Carlos post his picture with his articles. I like a good laugh just as much as he does. Except I don't "roll on the floor," seems a little strange for an adult.
The Devil is in the Details ... or in the Bush - by Carlos Herrera
VHeadline commentarist Carlos Herrera writes: The reaction to my recent article “Maria Corina Presidenta” has been sharp and swift, not only to me personally but also those letters sent to the editor of VHeadline.com.
Leonard Freeman’s letter makes some good points but even his observations and criticisms make it clear that he does not understand what is happening in Venezuela, especially with regard to the US ... he just has to cast his mind back to last December when the current onslaught in the mass media and diplomatic circles against the Venezuelan people and President Chavez took off.
It all started with the Granda affair which has had reams written about it (to refresh your memory, use the VHeadline search engine) in a vain attempt to paint Venezuela as a “haven for terrorists.”
In the end, Uribe came to Venezuela and ate humble pie since Chavez simply suspended all projects between Colombia and Venezuela, stopped all the contraband gasoline supplies sneaking over the border (causing a crisis in Colombia), which Uribe could not allow to get out of hand and had to opt for damage limitation.
Since then, the US and main stream newspapers such as the L.A. Times, N.Y. Times and Washington Post as well as news channels such as Fox News have made every attempt to blacken Chavez’ name as a terrorist, “communist,” destabilizer of the region and so on.
I’ll list the most recent provocations later on.
The idea espoused by Mr. Freeman that the US wants a pro-US Venezuelan President is perfectly understandable. But why ... when oil is being sent regularly, drilling concessions are being granted to companies such as Chevron-Texaco ... why should the US receive preferential treatment?
- And if Cuba or Russia received preferential treatment ... that is a sovereign decision and nothing to do with the US government.
Venezuela is in the oil business and we are experts at it.
The only matter that is being proposed is that the 28 multinationals operating in the country should pay their back taxes from the end of 2001 onwards as laid out in the Hydrocarbons Law of the same year. The preferential treatment Mr. Freeman refers to in his letter was to extract the oil, pay 1% royalty, export it and not pay any other taxes ... a great deal amounting to almost daylight robbery, especially since oil is a non-renewable resource.
Chavez has simply applied the 1943 oil law which is his obligation as President of the Republic and asked the IRS/Seniat to collect the back taxes which amount to around US$2-4 billion. The idea of “pointing the finger” at past Presidents who helped ransack the country, from Gomez onwards, when the first oil concessions were granted in 1922, is very often spoken about and analyzed ... but the clock cannot be turned back.
- Action has to be taken to stop the rot and to ensure that the Venezuelan people receive the revenue (which if justly theirs) from the sale of oil and gas and not hand it on a silver platter to the driving force behind the current Bush administration ... the global corporate empire.
In addition, the US$150-200 billion held in off-shore accounts by rich (and in many cases corrupt) Venezuelans should be addressed by obliging them to repatriate these funds ... in the same way the French government did in the early 1970s when that country was in a desperate financial crisis.
We cannot turn the clock back ... but we can certainly use the French example and methods to recuperate these monies.
- If you think about it, the only industry capable of generating this amount of income is the oil industry - PDVSA.
If this policy were to be implemented by Chavez, can you imagine the outcry? Communist!
On the other hand, there was no such hue and cry when Giscard D’Estaing’s government threatened to expropriate ... without compensation ... properties and wealth of the individuals holding funds outside France in the nation’s national interests.
We can all see the inherent double standards at work here, even though this is still a hypothetical situation.
Mr. Freeman is an expert at making blanket and misleading statements to make his point. A good example is the reference to Cuba as “a complete political and industrial failure.” It is debatable if Cuba is a “political failure” but in terms of “industrial failure,” Mr. Freeman conveniently omits to mention the US economic blockade against the island which has been in force for more than 40 years. Despite this, Cuba has made great strides in medicine, education and sport to name just three areas.
No country is “perfect” however.
I recently saw some interesting graffiti in Havana: “In Latin America, there are 20 million abandoned children. In Cuba, not one.” An interesting observation which says a lot about the Cuban state and which is still part of the “axis of evil” according to Bush.
Mr. Freeman’s comment about Bush being out of here in 2008 is objectively true. It is also an objective truth that Chavez can run for re-election in 2006 and enjoy a second term until 2013.
- It is also an objective truth that Chavez can only run for two terms ... as Bush and Clinton did.
Mr. Freeman writes about Chavez: "How long will he be President? Forever? How many times will he change the laws to his favor so he can remain in absolute power?”
I doubt if it can be forever ... Chavez cannot change or write the laws as that is the work of the National Assembly. In addition, any change to the Bolivarian Constitution of 1999 has to be approved in a national referendum. The Magistrate of the Supreme Tribunal, Luis Alvaray, was promoting a project to allow a President to be re-elected as many times as possible (when I say “President”, this is generic and not referring to Chavez) but Chavez, in his “Alo Presidente” program, said he did not agree and would not support any such amendment.
In any case, if any amendment to the Constitution is to be approved in a national referendum, what is wrong with that?
- Here in Venezuela, we have participative democracy - i.e. real democracy.
Mr. Freeman’s style of writing is either due to simple ignorance or more likely an effort to mislead readers into thinking that Chavez has “absolute power” ... and as such is a “dictator.”
In Venezuela, there are five independent branches of government and Chavez is the head of the Executive ... that’s all.
All the comments made that Chavez controls all the institutions is easy to say or write ... but no one ever provides evidence ... the only ”evidence” is that heads of the institutions sympathize with government policies and are not hell bent on promoting another coup d’etat or destabilizing the country.
Chavez' party, the MVR, holds 41% of the seats in the National Assembly (AN) and has made alliances with other smaller parties to maintain a majority ... that’s parliamentary democracy, right?
In Venezuela, products from all over the world are available - not just the US. I am wearing a pair of “Tevi” jeans at the moment ... probably made to imitate Levi in Venezuela. Most “US brands” of clothes are manufactured in sweat shops in Central America; Banana Republic and Tommy Hlifiger come to mind ... hardly “made in the USA,” Mr. Freeman.
Microsoft software is great ... but so is Linux and the Venezuelan State will eventually change over to Linux as Brazil intends to do. In Venezuela, we have a brand called “Big Cola” - half the price of Coke or Pepsi and just as good.
Why is there this ongoing impasse between the US and Venezuela and so the finger is always pointed at the US, according to Mr. Freeman’s analysis? Historically, the US has intervened militarily south of the Rio Grande a total of 41 times in the last 110 years (approximately) ... to overthrow regimes it did not like or which did not serve its interests.
An "excellent" track record of interventions and something we Venezuelans cannot disregard, as we could be number 42, considering the constant comments by US State Department spokesmen interfering in Venezuela’s internal affairs.
You know, they could be just laying the ground for another military adventure ... evidence has emerged from documents under the FOIA that the US supported the 2002 coup in Venezuela and Ari Fleischer and Bush himself were hot off the blocks to recognize “Pedro the Brief,” even though the transition government was illegal under OAS rules.
Last week, for example, the following incidents occurred - all of which were aimed to provoke the Venezuelan government:
• The US is refusing or delaying the extradition of master terrorist, Luis Posada Carriles to Venezuela on the grounds that he is an illegal immigrant.
• It’s like catching a murderer when he runs a red light and then just take him to the traffic court.
• The President of the Supreme Tribunal had his tourist visa revoked by US authorities. They are not obliged to give an explanation
• Indicted electoral fraudster, Maria Corina Machado visits Bush in the White House
• Congressman Fred Wolf, accompanied by Ambassador Brownfield, visits the National Assembly and says to Venezuelan deputies that the US will continue supporting opposition groups with funding, even though he must know that it is illegal to receive such funding under Venezuelan law
• The US issues a report maintaining that Venezuela is involved in the trafficking of human beings so as to be able to question Venezuela’s human rights record, when there is plenty of evidence to the contrary as pointed out in a diplomatic reply from Venezuelan Ambassador to Washington, Bernardo Alvarez.
• The US wants to amend the OAS Charter so as to be able to apply it to Venezuela in the on going, and so far unfruitful attempts to isolate Venezuela internationally.
Mr. Freeman, this is just one week of incidents ... what are we supposed to do?
Go down on bended knee and ask them to stop ... or simply cave in to US demands as previous governments have done?
This is why the “finger is pointed” at the United States, and why the US government is viewed with suspicion and hated by the great majority of the Venezuelan population ... I stress, the Bush administration, not the US people themselves.
Neither we Venezuelans nor our government want this constant aggression, and your assertion that Chavez needs the US to appear more “presidential” is just oversimplified poppycock.
I suggest you read my article “Maria Corina Presidenta” again since I labeled the opposition “political eunuchs” and likened them to “naughty children” and did not combine the two terms into “naughty little eunuchs” as you erroneously state.
Regarding Maria Corina even running for President, I understand that she was originally Spanish and is now naturalized. You cannot run for President if you were not born Venezuelan. She may have another 15 minutes of “glory” at the OAS meeting in Fort Lauderdale next week, and is due to appear in court in Caracas on June 10. My colleague Oscar Heck is of the opinion that she will not return to Venezuela. Thinking about it, he is probably right and then ... she will be yet another fugitive from Venezuelan justice to add to all her other qualities of coup monger, fraudster and liar.
To make matters worse, Maria Corina obtained permission from a judge to go to the United States to visit "someone" ... since she had been banned from leaving the country. She then shows up at the White House, and I am certain that if she attends court on June 10, the prosecuting lawyers will probably ask for her to be held in custody as there is a risk of flight.
She is in a very tricky situation indeed...
I hope this essay will have served as some from of education for you about Venezuela, Mr. Freeman. Stop thinking and writing in blanket statements - the devil is in the details, or in the Bush as we say here these days.
Carlos Herrera
Carlos.Herrera@VHeadline.com