|
He confronts the distortion very clearly, in a very even-tempered and rational way. I love this response. He was speaking of CNN's (reporter Glenda Oman's) absolutely wrong statement that the Chavez government issued some sort of edict prohibiting information a week before the election. In truth, Chavez was UNDER an edict--the edict of Venezuela's widely admired electon law--and he himself could not campaign or speak. The law is aimed at preventing last minute hit pieces where a candidate does not have time to correct some unfair allegation. (It's sort of an anti-Rove law.)
Regarding this, Chavez said, "How can you (CNN) state something that you haven't investigated? It wasn't the government of Chavez who prohibited the distribution of political propaganda days before the elections. This is in the law and the Electoral Power stipulated this." (my emphasis)
Lord, it's so refreshing to hear the corpo/fascist 'news' monopolies challenged on their bullshit!
"How can you (CNN) state something that you haven't investigated? YES! HOW CAN THEY?!
Chavez continued, "But the intention is to make my government seem disrespectful and like a curtailer of political rights." The article says, "Janiot responded that the statements by Omana were rectified afterwards, but Chavez replied that the damage was already done."
Point, Chavez. The damage had already been done. That IS the point of these lies. The corpo/fascist media acts like a rightwing, Rove-schooled candidate, without restraints. I'm thinking of Saxby Chambliss in GA, in 2002, and his (Rove's) hit pieces on Max Cleland, a man who left three limbs in Vietnam, calling him a "friend of Osama bin Laden." The 'news' monopolies and their rightwing tools in politics work in the same way, trying to create a false negative impression with outright lies that cannot really be erased. They did it to John Kerry. They did it to Howard Dean. In some cases, it is merely the pre-written narrative for a stolen election. In others, it influences public perception and even votes. And it totally screws up political debate--with much time wasted on correcting lies, and less time on the vital issues of the day. Thus, we hear talk about flag pins and the cost of a haircut, and inadequate discussion of the Patriot Act or torturing prisoners or tax cuts for the rich. CNN has never accurately described Venezuela's election in the first place. The Electoral Council and election laws operate completely independently of the Chavez government. This is why election observers from around the world study Venezuela's system for how it's done. This is why the Bushwhacks have been unable to break Venezuela. It all comes down to honest, well-run elections. And with a few false words, a corpo/fascist 'talking head' can give 10 billion people the opposite impression--to slander Chavez, once again, as the "dictator" that he isn't, for what purpose we don't know--possibly the preliminary psyops for yet another coup attempt.
Psyops have a dual purpose--to put we, the people, up here in the north to sleep, so if they try another coup, people here won't think about it much ('Oh, it's just that dictator Chavez'), and to demoralize the target and his many supporters, the people of Venezuela; also, to impact his many allies among the leaders of South America (fear of getting the Chavez treatment if they act in the interest of their people). The latter people and groups--Chavez himself, his supporters and his allies--have proven quite resistant to Buswhack/corpo-fascist psyops. But the very intense media campaign to demonize Chavez has had some success here, even as to influencing someone like Barack Obama, who either doesn't know the truth, is afraid to speak the truth, or agrees with all the lying about Chavez (in the interest of our global corporate predators?). Hard to tell, at this point, with Obama. I hope it's just wrong information/bad advisers, because he seems intelligent enough and curious enough to correct that information deficit, and not get himself into a struggle he can't win with the democracy-passionate people of South America. There is probably more danger of the Bushwhacks handing him a goddamned mess in South America, before they leave office--a concern I share with Chavez. They have already tried to do so in Bolivia, this September, and appear to have failed, due to Evo Morales' popularity and the solidarity of South American countries in preventing that white separatist coup. They will probably fail in Venezuela as well, but Obama's appointments do not seem aimed at keeping him out of trouble--or getting him out of Bushwhack-instigated trouble--in South America.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(519 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
