Another one of these articles? Really? The first sentence of the source article should have set your alarm bells ringing.
In any case, before Mr. Snowden flees to the land of ‘21st-century
socialism,’ where toilet paper is among the many goods in short supply
The implication being that socialism is a failure and that Venezuela is some kind of pathetic joke of a country. This kind of attack is to be expected. First it was a case of shoot the messenger, now it’s a case of “shoot the country.”
Now he has been summoned for questioning by a state prosecutor
The charges are patently absurd. The evidence against Mr. Bocaranda…
This makes it sound like he is being charged with a crime. Yet on closer investigation it seems that he is just being called as a witness at an inquiry about violence that occurred after the election.
The whole Washington Post article is cheap piece of propaganda.
The implication is chavismo (or, as Chávez called it, 21st-century socialism) is an utter failure that can’t even provide (or let others provide) something as basic as toilet paper. Or electricity. Or a healthy economy, for that matter.
And yes, this is a joke of country (a sad joke). And I say it as a Venezuelan.
Although the prosecutor is calling Bocaranda as a witness, official discourse suggest they want to indict him as a “co-conspirator”, or “mastermind” of these events (widely discredited not only in “mainstream media” but in alternative media as well, and even with users of social networks on their own). And since in Venezuela there is no real separation of powers (the executive or legislative branch somehow always get their way with the judiciary) the possibility of an indictment is very real. The case of Maria Afiuni serves as a precedent.
So, now reality is propaganda? There is a lack of toilet paper in Venezuela. And Venezuela is a pathetic joke of a country these days. My father complains he has to do long lines to get toilet paper, flour, oil, you name it. He has to wash his ass when he shits because often there’s no toilet paper.
What do you want? That embarrassing facts are not told because they offend you? Poor thing, are you too fragile to be able to stand reality?
Our congress had to approve an additional credit to buy toilet paper Afirman que en Venezuela falta papel higiénico porque la gente come más. And guess where did the toilet paper came from. From the United States. Or maybe from China, marked as “made in the USA” with an American flag:
I guess we wipe our asses with the Empire… That’s a sad and pathetic joke. Well, it’s nasty and disgusting for those who suffer it, unlike those who are all cozy in their armchair in developed countries, admiring the mirages of Venezuelan propaganda.
Our former vice president, now a minister said literally: “do you want homeland or do you want toilet paper?”. No, I am not making that up. Here’s the video:
That’s a pathetic, sad joke of a country.
We have one of the highest murder rates on the planet, our govt promised to achieve the Planetary Peace and the Universal Equilibrium. We have food shortages, yet our govt talks about “food sovereignty”, even if these days we are importing much more of our food. We have daily blackouts that last more than an hour, but the govt talks about “energetic sovereignty”. All of this during an oil boom. Those are obscene, almost Orwellian jokes.
But we are against Capitalism and we stand up to the USA! Therefore we will… buy more! Yes, we will buy more!
Our imports from the US have increased more than six fold since Chávez started his govt. We import, in net figures, more than Colombia, that has a lot more population than us and a Free Trade Agreement.
Source of the image, with the numbers:
We have a lot of official media that only spews propaganda. Even photoshopping fake fireworks to claim that people are following Maduro’s orders to counter oppo protests:
They don’t even have the decency to delete that after being caught redhanded. That’s the level of official journalism here. Sick, sad joke.
For a tweet? That’s harassment. A journalist should not be harassed. Specially after proving that the govt is lying about opposition burning hospitals. The govt lied about it, people took pictures of the hospitals undamaged, they were pissed off. They made a brouhaha, accusing the opposition of killing govt supporters, again, without evidence. However, they ignored completely the 6 dead people on Maduro’s closing speech in his campaign.
If you really support human rights, a fair world and a system where poor people have the basics and all citizens are treated equally, stop making excuses and talking ignorantly about Venezuela. Start spreading the word about Scandinavia and its social democracy. It really works. Venezuela? Sick sad joke that those living there have to endure, while foreigners cheer without a clue.
This makes me remember the last comment of OSGuido:
Apparently, there is a recurrent use of the false dilemma fallacy here to solve the issue regarding Venezuelan sources: One either use the “truthful” sources (i.e. alternative media), or, otherwise, one will get bamboozled by the evil “mainstream media” that is always, always wrong.
Well, first (I think I said this earlier today) there is no such thing as objectivity. And second, everybody lies to some degree. The only variable is where.
The naive expectation that we somehow we will always find the truth in alternative media, and always lies and more lies (oh so horrible lies) in mainstream media is pretty much that: An expectation…
Sadly, you are abroad, and you do not have the insight I do have, being here. You do not have context. So you have to rely in pieces and bits of media, and yet you choose to believe only in one part of it, because you judge the other part false. Based on what, I wonder? You do not have context. You are not even here…
That’s the luxury they have OSGuido: They can cheer from the distance, back in their countries, where they don’t have to cue (or fight) to get toilet paper… When there is toilet paper…
Ah, the comfort of rooting for something that doesn’t actually affect your life!
I am just going to repeat what I wrote on the WaPo website with regard to their Bocaranda editorial: This is typical of the WaPo editorial board - present an issue that is mostly true, but leave out some essential details that would change the context quite substantially if it had been revealed. In the Bocaranda case they conveniently leave out exactly what Bocaranda had tweeted, namely: “I am informed that in the diagnostic center of LA Paz, Gallo Verde, in Maracaibo, there are ballot boxes being hidden and that the cubans there are not allowing them to be removed.” The next day there were attacks on diagnostic centers (clinics) all across the country, also because the opposition leader, Henrique Capriles, said people should go on the streets and protest “with all their rage” against the supposedly stolen election. Of course, the opposition claims that no clinics were attacked, but that is patently false. Something like 11 people were killed the following day by opposition protestors, some of them who were trying to protect the clinics.
Really? Patently false? The claim was dismissed by a local NGO, who visited the places, and found no damage at all… Oh, and also this:
The nice thing about this is that the debunking process was not the product of “just the mainstream media”: Locals approached the sites allegedly attacked too, and guess what? They found nothing…
Your reply is just basically doubling down. You haven’t refuted what I said --: Venezuela is anti-US enough to ignore US pressure so it is probably the best place for Snowden to go. But if he accepts asylum, maybe he will come to regret it . .
And how does that make him actually responsible of anything? How does that tweet constitute a “call to violence”? (that didn’t actually take place, by the way)
That is a very lame Strawman, and not actually what Capriles said. Capriles was talking about “let your rage go with the cacerolazos”. I.E., to beat the hell of the casseroles to protest. He said nothing about going to the streets and protest with rage, and he actually cancelled a demonstration over those concerns with violence…
Actually, he did. And he showed you a very clear example of it (Venezuelan oil exports to the U.S.). Also, our dependence in American imports have increased six times fold during Chávez government (check out the reply to DaveUK for that matter). All the “Anti-US” posture of Chávez (and his succesor) has been just for show. Sorry to break the news for you.
If they were really that Anti-American, why not cut at once the oil supply to the U.S.? Chávez never did it. Not even at the highest point of the Iraq War.
No, he didn’t. The US government doesn’t directly buy Venezuelan oil. US companies buy Venezuelan oil. US companies sell stuff to Venezuela as opposed to the US government. So what you are comparing is apples to oranges.
Then I guess you never read (or heard) too much about Chávez discourses. One of his permanent (and most repeated) threat was about to “cutting the oil supply to the evil U.S.”. Of course, that was all it was. A threat. And an empty threat since as you have already pointed out (thank you BTW, but I already knew that) oil exports are made to private companies in the U.S., not to the U.S. government. He couldn’t risk to loose one of PDVSA’s big markets (the American market). He couldn’t break those contracts that easily, without losing face.
So, as we say down here lo de Chávez era pura paja chico (Chavez was just pure trash talk). Chávez knew that Venezuela depended on the U.S. (U.S. private sector) both for the oil exports and imports (food and technical supplies) for its subsistence. In public, he acted defiant with his grandiose speeches, but in private he just bent the knee every time he saw it as necessary.
Double standard too much?
-Not to mention, his “teenage-that-just-saw-Justin-Bieber-and-is-about-to-go-beserk” attitude every time he faced Obama (or another U.S. diplomat) at a summit (like the one in Trinidad and Tobago).
-Also, and more importantly, not to mention the more than well known cowardice (and incompetent manner) he displayed when leading man on the field. Chávez failed miserably to seize Caracas (while all the other plotters achieved success in the rest of the cities) and ran and hid in the most shameful of ways, when his coup attempt back in 1992 collapsed. He hid in the Museo Militar (ironically, the place where he is buried now) and that’s where he was captured, in disgrace. Perhaps that’s why the Venezuelan historian Manuel Caballero used to call him sarcastically “El héroe del Museo Militar” (the hero of the Military Museum)…
None of the nations I mentioned “uses the dollar as currency.” The US dollar is the reserve currency of the world, for better or worse, and so any state that wishes to do international business must have US dollar reserves. That doesn’t mean they don’t have their own currency.
And actually, Venezuela has been mismanaging its oil infrastructure (Chavez was not the best steward and did not reinvest enough in the oil industry) and that is why it is seeking loans – to fix and expand its oil drilling equipment.
And I linked to an article that explicitly discussed the very questions we are debating and you totally ignored it and ironically went on a rant about “facts” without actually introducing any of your own.
And with regard to the US media, yes it is an extremely consistent barometer of what nations the US is not happy with. When was the last time you read a positive piece on Iran, Venezuela, Argentina, Ecuador or Nicaragua in any US mainstream publication? I challenge you to find a single positive piece on any of those countries within the past 5 years in any major US news source. A single one.
I see, so the US didn’t stage a coup to remove Chavez, who was democratically elected?
Chavez didn’t reduce poverty by almost a half in Venezuela (even the NY Times admitted that much, although they managed to make it sound unimpressive, which was actually pretty impressive)?
The people of Venezuela didn’t rise up to demand their leader be restored because the US returned him out of the grace of the hearts of the CIA?
“Both currencies were to circulate, the dollar being used for all but the smallest transactions. Only coins would continue in the local currency.”
It seems like they have a dual currency system. I wonder what the average Ecuadorian uses for currency. And regardless, that is only one nation out of the five I mentioned: Argentina, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua. It also doesn’t mean that Ecuador’s government is pro-US, which was the main point we were discussing. You do realize that Julian Assange has been sitting in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for the past year, to the great consternation of the US and UK governments? Does that sound like a nation under the thumb of US domination?
That apparently seems to be one of the most repeated claims of the Pro-Chávez crowd abroad… That he reduced poverty “in half”.
But everybody seems to have its own opinion about this, as I’ve found that as time goes by (economy seems to be not that much of an exact science, methinks). For example, we have this paper, from a reputed Venezuelan economist (and former supporter of Chavez) that discredit that notion:
Not to mention, the impression of the ones living in Venezuela (common citizens), that can not possible correlate all this fanfare and cheering about “poverty being reduced” with what we see day after day, poverty and violence like we never saw before…
It does mean Rafael Correa’s Ecuador (very much like Hugo Chávez Venezuela) talks the talk, but doesn’t walk the walk. A lot of hot air and nothing more. Perhaps that’s why he backed down in the Snowden case.
