European Tribune

Who's afraid of Hugo?---well, ah,---- hand me the pliers, willya?

by geezer in Paris
Sat Dec 1st, 2007 at 10:09:47 AM EST

Sunday's the day.

 Hugo gets a freer hand, or he gets slapped down, and will have to live with less authority and less time.
Observers from 36 countries will be there to watch the voting and the counting of the votes, as well as reps from the Carter Center and the EU, and many others. Like the last several plebiscites, it will be fair. At least on the part of the Chavez government.

I apologize for the lazy man's diary here, but I thought this too important- and too rare- to just supply a link. Those who think Hugo is just another authoritarian dingbat can depart now.
Those, like me, who believe that results count more than labels-- that labels are usually a substitute for thought- may find the rest of this ---well, revealing.
Hugo is getting real results.


       Operation pliers
On a scarier note, an internal CIA memorandum has been obtained by Venezuelan counterintelligence from the US Embassy in Caracas that reveals a very sinister - almost fantastical, were it not true - plan to destabilize Venezuela during the coming days. The plan, titled "OPERATION PLIERS" was authored by CIA Officer Michael Middleton Steere and was addressed to CIA Director General Michael Hayden in Washington. Steere is stationed at the US Embassy in Caracas under the guise of a Regional Affairs Officer. The internal memorandum, dated November 20, 2007, references the "Advances of the Final Stage of Operation Pliers", and confirms that the operation is coordinated by the team of Human Intelligence (HUMINT) in Venezuela. The memo summarizes the different scenarios that the CIA has been working on in Venezuela for the upcoming referendum vote on December 2nd. The Electoral Scenario, as it's phrased, confirms that the voting tendencies will not change substantially before Sunday, December 2nd, and that the SI (YES) vote in favor of the constitutional reform has an advantage of about 10-13 points over the NO vote. The CIA estimates abstention around 60% and states in the memo that this voting tendency is irreversible before the elections.

Officer Steere emphasizes the importance and success of the public relations and propaganda campaign that the CIA has been funding with more than $8 million during the past month - funds that the CIA confirms are transfered through the USAID contracted company, Development Alternatives, Inc., which set up operations in June 2002 to run the USAID Office for Transition Initiatives that funds and advises opposition NGOs and political parties in Venezuela. The CIA memo specifically refers to these propaganda initiatives as "psychological operations" (PSYOPS), that include contracting polling companies to create fraudulent polls that show the NO vote with an advantage over the SI vote, which is false. The CIA also confirms in the memo that it is working with international press agencies to distort the data and information about the referendum, and that it coordinates in Venezuela with a team of journalists and media organized and directed by the President of Globovision, Alberto Federico Ravell.

CIA Officer Michael Steere recommends to General Michael Hayden two different strategies to work simultaneously: Impede the referendum and refuse to recognize the results once the SI vote wins. Though these strategies appear contradictory, Steere claims that they must be implemented together precisely to encourage activities that aim toward impeding the referendum and at the same time prepare the conditions for a rejection of the results.

How is this to be done?

In the memo, the CIA proposes the following tactics and actions:

    * Take the streets and protest with violent, disruptive actions across the nation
    * Generate a climate of ungovernability
    * Provoke a general uprising in a substantial part of the population
    * Engage in a "plan to implode" the voting centers on election day by encouraging opposition voters to "VOTE and REMAIN" in their centers to agitate others
    * Start to release data during the early hours of the afternoon on Sunday that favor the NO vote (in clear violation of election regulations)
    * Coordinate these activities with Ravell & Globovision and international press agencies
    * Coordinate with ex-militar officers and coupsters Pena Esclusa and Guyon Cellis - this will be done by the Military Attache for Defense and Army at the US Embassy in Caracas, Office of Defense, Attack and Operations (DAO)

To encourage rejection of the results, the CIA proposes:

    * Creating an acceptance in the public opinion that the NO vote will win for sure
    * Using polling companies contracted by the CIA
    * Criticize and discredit the National Elections Council
    * Generate a sensation of fraud
    * Use a team of experts from the universities that will talk about how the data from the Electoral Registry has been manipulated and will build distrust in the voting system

The CIA memo also talks about:

    * Isolating Chavez in the international community
    * Trying to achieve unity amongst the opposition
    * Seek an aliance between those abstentionists and those who will vote "NO"
    * Sustain firmly the propaganda against Chavez
    * Execute military actions to support the opposition mobilizations and propagandistic occupations
    * Finalize the operative preparations on the US military bases in Curacao and Colombia to provide support to actions in Venezuela
    * Control a part of the country during the next 72-120 hours
    * Encourage a military rebellion inside the National Guard forces and other components

Those involved in these actions as detailed in the CIA memo are:

    * The CIA Office in Venezuela - Office of Regional Affairs, and Officer Michael Steere
    * US Embassy in Venezuela, Ambassador Patrick Duddy
    * Office of Defense, Attack and Operations (DAO) at the US Embassy in Caracas and Military Attache Richard Nazario

Venezuelan Political Parties:

    * Comando Nacional de la Resistencia
    * Accion Democratica
    * Primero Justicia
    * Bandera Roja

Media:

    * Alberto Federico Ravell & Globovision
    * Interamerican Press Society (IAPA) or SIP in Spanish
    * International Press Agencies

Venezuelans:

    * Pena Esclusa
    * Guyon Cellis
    * Dean of the Simon Bolivar University, Rudolph Benjamin Podolski
    * Dean of the Andres Bello Catholic University, Ugalde
    * Students: Yon Goicochea, Juan Mejias, Ronel Gaglio, Gabriel Gallo, Ricardo Sanchez

Operation Tenaza has the objective of encouraging an armed insurrection in Venezuela against the government of President Chavez that will justify an intervention of US forces, stationed on the military bases nearby in Curacao and Colombia. The Operation mentions two countries in code: as Blue and Green. These refer to Curacao and Colombia, where the US has operative, active and equipped bases that have been reinforced over the past year and a half in anticipation of a conflict with Venezuela.

The document confirms that psychological operations are the CIA's best and most effective weapon to date against Venezuela, and it will continue its efforts to influence international public opinion regarding President Chavez and the situation in the country.

Operation Tenaza is a very alarming plan that aims to destabilize Venezuela and overthrow (again) its legitimate and democratic (and very popularly support) president. The plan will fail, primarily because it has been discovered, but it must be denounced around the world as an unacceptable violation of Venezuela's sovereignty.

The original document in English will be available in the public sphere soon for viewing and authenticating purposes. And it also contains more information than has been revealed here.

For the full text in Spanish, see: Operación Tenaza: Informe confidencial de la CIA devela plan de saboteo al referéndum del 2 de diciembre

Can anyone authenticate this?
I will ask Ivonne to read the Spanish text.
The tactics described are vintage CIA- from as far back as 1954 and Iran, through El Salavador and the 13 families, and the death of Bishop Oscar Romero, Guatemala and the destruction of President Jacobo Arbenz, Cuba and Fidel (he hit the state department shit list when his education program became an internationally admired success), through the destruction of Ecuador over their recognition of Fidel's Cuba, Nicaragua and the same success equation with Daniel Ortega and his programs,(worked so well the CIA and State had a cow)---and now, Hugo.
On the other side-

-It's awfully convenient that the document is just now hitting the stage-- when there is little time to authenticate, and also that the original is not yet available.

-If it is real, it's an amazing intelligence coup.

An illustrative example:
Long years ago, Ecuador had diplomatic relations with Cuba, and was threatening to normalize trade. Ecuador then was a country with a neutral diplomatic policy, a good growth rate, that needed little to no foreign aid.
With little nationwide television coverage, most Ecuadorians got their information from a young but prolific press. It would be fair to say that their society was held together by public confidence in the printed word.
The CIA set out to get them to break diplomatic relations with Cuba, and succeeded. This is how.

They did a lot of stuff using the Catholic Church, to preach the evils of Fidel from the pulpit, (largest number of CIA contract employees in Equador at the time was in the Church) and when this did not have enough effect, they forged a parcel of documents that purported to reveal a Cuban plan to invade across the border that implicated the police, the fire department, and that was set to happen--any day. They planted these forgeries in a fire station in Quito, and blew it up.
The papers were ti[pped off, found the papers and printed about ten grand scoops, on every front page in the nation. Chaos, terror, --then nothing happened. The Press looked like total fools, and confidence was shaken at many levels.

After about a dozen of these ops, the press were reduced to a laughingstock, destroying democracy in Ecuador. Ecuador had three presidents in less than a year, the currency collapsed, and within three years their economy was in the toilet and they became the largest recipient of foreign aid in the region. But--the Agency uses that ops as a training example of a successful operation..

One cannot help but see some similarities here.
Though I support the Chavez Bolivarian Revolution, I am not blind.
THIS will be interesting.

Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

Display:
I've read it in spanish. It's longer and more detailed, but the summary in english is OK.

An interesting article about Venezuela, on CEPR by Mark Weisbrot

http://www.cepr.net/content/view/1366/45/

What a difference from the noise in MSM.

Thanks!

by kukute on Sat Dec 1st, 2007 at 02:47:07 PM EST
Thanks for the link!

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.
by rg (leopold dot lepster at google mail dot com) on Sat Dec 1st, 2007 at 05:41:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well done - great scoop - why isn't the getting more prominence on ET?

Vote McCain for war without gain
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot dotty communists) on Sat Dec 1st, 2007 at 05:07:19 PM EST
It has been already disussed somewhat in Friday's Salon:

http://www.eurotrib.com/story/2007/11/16/14427/098#13 - see the discussion and additional links. :-)

by Fran (fran at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 03:58:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Good to read this, Fran. Thanks.

Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.
by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 08:18:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Hugo Chavez was a career military officer, had staff-functions on high levels.

 Chávez also held a series of teaching and staffing positions at the Military Academy of Venezuela.

In 1992 he felt strong enough to stage a coup.
It wasn't a succes because, among other things, the newest operational plane's in the airforce (two F-16's) blew almost all of the planes supporting Chavez,out of the sky.
But his fame was made and led eventually to the situation  of today.

He became isolated by the USA who, among other things, refused to deliver spare-parts for his airforce or sell other military stuff.

So Chavez, with in the mean time a lot of oil money'in his hands' went to Russia.
In two years time Venezuela ordered in Russia a staggering quantity of up to date military stuff:

  • 24 Sukhoi-30 jet fighters(picture)+weaponary.
  • More than 70 helicopters, from the modest MI-17 over the heavy attack chopper Hind-MI-24 to the largest chopper in the world the 20-tons-payload MI-26.
  • 100,000 Kalashnikov assault-rifles.
  • A factory to produce the riffles and ammunition locally.
  • Other stuff in the pipeline: transportplanes, patrol-boats, air-defence systems.

     
  Sukhoi-30

I know that Chavez does a lot for the people. e.g. a very strong point is healthcare which is for free now for over 2 million people.(Hundreds of Cuban medici work in that program in exchange for oil-deliveries to Cuba).
I'm aware of his "Bolivarian Revolution" ideas and the fact he was a protagonist of this since the 80's.

Your diary highlights a very important possibility, in fact I believe it is a reality since what I read in our press about nowdays Venezuela fits wonderful well in these 'operation pliers'

But Chavez is, au fond, a military man.

The massive weaponry he bought is peanuts for the US to blow away in case of armed conflict.
Venezuela's neighbours are not his enemy's.

So why he spend this massive amount of money on weapons while there is so much else to do in his country?
That is what troubles me about Chavez.

The struggle of man against tyranny is the struggle of memory against forgetting.(Kundera)

by Elco B (elcob at scarlet dot be) on Sat Dec 1st, 2007 at 05:25:52 PM EST
The warnerds take on it:

THE EXILE - Venezuela: Enchilada of Evil - By Gary Brecher - The War Nerd

When your AF flies all that high-priced American hardware, defense contractors can't give you enough freebies, most of them listed in the budget as "training visits." That means Venezuela's air force officers have eaten a lot of free surf'n'turf dinners at off-base bar & grills in Florida and Texas, and washed 'em down with a lot of expensive Scotch, all on Lockheed's or Uncle Sam's tab. It means every pilot in the Venezuelan AF has been offered a free trip to Disney World so his kiddies could get their pictures taken with Miguel Mouse.

That sort of thing is how you build alliances these days. I realize it ain't the romantic side of war, it ain't John Paul Jones transferring his command to the Serapis as the Bonhomme Richard slipped beneath the waves, but it's how things are done.

[...]

And that brings us to the real reason Chavez is spending all those petrodollars on useless Russian fighters: he's scared of a coup, not an invasion. So he's trying to create a new wing of the air force, trained on non-American hardware and loyal to him. It's the oldest trick in the book, creating a parallel military force to protect yourself from the established armed forces.

Trouble is, it takes a long time to create a loyal air wing -- years of bribing the pilots with those steak dinners and Disney trips. Chavez is trying to do it overnight, which is hopeless, a sign of desperation. For one thing, it takes real talent and years of training to create a fighter jock.

Chavez'd be better off putting all his loyal Communistas in charge of tank divisions, because tanks are pretty simple hardware compared to jets. You can put your nephew in charge of a tank brigade and hope he'll learn how to find the right gear to set up a perimeter around your palace when the coup starts. Try putting your drunk-but-loyal brother-in-law a in fighter cockpit and odds are you're going to be watching amateur video of his Su-30 starring in "Venezuela's Funniest Air Show Disasters," careening his fighter into a crowd and fricasseeing half your constituency.

by A swedish kind of death on Sat Dec 1st, 2007 at 09:16:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
From the same article:

So it's clear what these big arms purchases mean. Chavez ain't scared of Bush. Sad truth is, nobody's scared of that jerk any more, except maybe patriotic Americans like me, because the only country Bush ever really damages is America.

So don't get distracted by all that UN yelling. Watch the hands, like boxing coaches say. And Chavez's hands are saying he's scared to death of his own military, not ours.


Dang, that's a useful thought.

The struggle of man against tyranny is the struggle of memory against forgetting.(Kundera)
by Elco B (elcob at scarlet dot be) on Sat Dec 1st, 2007 at 09:49:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Chavez'd be better off putting all his loyal Communistas in charge of tank divisions, because tanks are pretty simple hardware compared to jets. You can put your nephew in charge of a tank brigade and hope he'll learn how to find the right gear to set up a perimeter around your palace when the coup starts. Try putting your drunk-but-loyal brother-in-law a in fighter cockpit and odds are you're going to be watching amateur video of his Su-30 starring in "Venezuela's Funniest Air Show Disasters," careening his fighter into a crowd and fricasseeing half your constituency.

Their air force (that part that is American) is effectively grounded- they have no access to spares, and have not had for years, so that whole thesis is bullshit. If the elite flyboys want toys that work- they will be given to them by Hugo. Perhaps the only part that is true is that the Air force, during the time of a tame Venezuela, was always a hang for the sons of the elite- yes. But--that's about all there is in the truth department here.

I hate to read this shit- not just because there is little to no sense in it, but because it just reeks of racism and contempt for the (non-white) world in general- it makes me ashamed to be an American. Sure- it's not explicitly stated-- but the attitude could hardly be clearer if they called them "Wetback brother-in-law".
It supports the cartoon Empire view of Chavez as a non-white buffoon--and all the rest of those people too.
After 14 years living in the Caribbean, and a wife born in Mexico City --a lot of my friends would be stuffed into their "Drunken Brother-in-law" category, and I resent their slurs.
After 30 years as a pilot, the best pilot I ever knew was a Jamaican non-white sorta guy.

Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 07:39:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
geezer in Paris:
I hate to read this shit- not just because there is little to no sense in it, but because it just reeks of racism and contempt for the (non-white) world in general- it makes me ashamed to be an American.
In Brussels I got a taste of that from a highly placed person in the "Brussels and Europe" 'local' Lib Dem party, who spoke some Spanish and quite gleefully branded Chávez a campesino (peasant) in relation with the recent spat between him and the Spanish King at the Iberoamerican summit.

This person, clearly from the right-liberal wing of the party, had personal connections with PP people in Spain, which is probably where she got the campesino line from.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo

by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 09:02:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I read war nerd because he generally makes some good points regarding military-political situations, under the layers of rascism and love of killing. I have given up on trying to figure if those layers are there because that is how he really feels or if he is playing to his presumed audience.
by A swedish kind of death on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 09:33:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
So why he spend this massive amount of money on weapons while there is so much else to do in his country?
That is what troubles me about Chavez.

Good question. Speculation:

Consider:

-Chavez is spending a far greater portion of national revenue on social programs than anyone has ever done before in Venezuela, and there is only so much that can be accomplished by throwing money at a problem in the short run. Many say he has passed that point already- that he squanders money on it. Don't agree, but it's a main opposition meme.

-One can speculate about the relationship between Venezuela and the "USS Colombia" next door, and the fact that an idiot who knew Uribe -and lived next door to him- would buy a big gun.

I avoid replacing thought with labels. Eisenhower warned us about the Military-industrial complex in a deeply prescient way. Even though he was "a military man", he was a man first.

Perhaps this is also true of Chavez.


Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 07:55:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Chavez is spending a far greater portion of national revenue on social programs than anyone has ever done before in Venezuela, and there is only so much that can be accomplished by throwing money at a problem in the short run

But if you call it "micro credit" and LOAN it to people then that is defined as "lifting them out of poverty".

Debt Good: Grants and (non-"Corporation")investment, Bad.

by ChrisCook (cojockathotmaildotcom) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 08:07:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
How much of his budget is it?
What portion of his country's GDP is it? How does it compare to the US's? European countries?
Without such a point of reference, what you're citing is rather quite inconsequential.
The amazing thing about Chavez is that the more I hear about his supposed abuses, the more I find out he's been way better than I thought. Look back at the RCTV bullshit: I first hear that he's closing down the station, then I find out that not only is he merely failing to renew their broadcast licence, but they are still broadcasting on cable and satellite, and on top of that, they weren't arrested and shot in 2002 as they should have been like the fucking traitors they are.

A 'centrist' is someone who's neither on the left, nor on the left.
by nicta (nico@altiva․fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 09:24:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
nicta:
What portion of his country's GDP is it?

CIA - The World Factbook -- Venezuela

Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 1.2% (2005 est.)

nicta:

How does it compare to the US's? European countries?

CIA - The World Factbook -- Rank Order - Military expenditures - percent of GDP

28 United States 4.06 2005 est.

60 France 2.60 2005 est.

70 United Kingdom 2.40 2005 est.

109 Germany 1.50 2005 est.

128  Venezuela 1.20 2005 est.

by A swedish kind of death on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 09:45:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Have I mentioned how much I love TribEXT? Makes these cut and paste comments so easy.

European Tribune - Of version numbering and convergence

So, are you running Firefox? (If not, you really should get it here) If so, would you consider downloading and installing the new version of TribExt? To do this, download the file to your computer. (Annoying anti-bot download page, sorry!) Then open it with Firefox ("File" - "Open File" == Ctrl-O) which will install it in the appropriate place.

The new version comes with lots of new goodies. The goal, however, is not to provide an ever expanding set of features in an unbounded way. But to converge towards the ideally working extension for the optimum EuroTrib experience.

by A swedish kind of death on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 09:49:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks a lot. So now we have our answer: he's buying weapons, and not that much of a lot. Yet another check mark in that "neocon propaganda" column.

A 'centrist' is someone who's neither on the left, nor on the left.
by nicta (nico@altiva․fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 11:24:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]
<mouthbreathing>But he's not buying weapons from the US or its allies, and he's buying weapons from the Russians!</mouthbreathing>

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 11:41:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Interesting also that Israel was way up there at number 6...Iran came in at number 66.

"People never do evil so throughly and happily as when they do it from moral conviction."-Blaise Pascal
by chocolate ink on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 04:43:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The first thing one is driven to do when studying Venezuela under Chavez is to crawl into one's crap armor, apply a liberal dose of bullshit repellent --and learn what's really happening there. Suitably attired, it's not too hard.

http://www.borev.net/

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/

http://oilwars.blogspot.com/2007/12/making-sense-of-venezuelas.html

I've been doing this for so long that I tend to forget that not everyone has.
Oil wars has some good photos.
Enjoy!

 

Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 12:51:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The massive weaponry he bought is peanuts for the US to blow away in case of armed conflict.
Venezuela's neighbours are not his enemy's.

If that argument is true, then you've just invalidated the arms spending of just about every government on the face of the planet.

Life should consist in at least fifty percent pure waste of time, and the rest doing what you please.

by ceebs (bunchofwankers (at) gmail (dot) com) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 10:19:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Indeed, I consider 90% of the world's arms spending as theft.
Every gun that is made,
every warship launched,
every rocket fired,
signifies in a final sense a theft from those who hunger and are not fed--those who are cold and are not clothed.

This world in arms is not spending its money alone-
-it is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.
Dwight Eisenhower, Speech (1953)



The struggle of man against tyranny is the struggle of memory against forgetting.(Kundera)
by Elco B (elcob at scarlet dot be) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 10:55:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Talking with someone from the Commission last week, he said that when the US tells Europe they are not spending enough on the military, they reply "we know you have the biggest hammer in the toolbox, but we also know that not every problem is a nail".

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 11:37:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Having bush and our new Sec. of Defense actually running around telling other counties, even castigating them for not having bigger military and more military hardware is just another sickening aspect of bushco mentality..where war=peace.

"People never do evil so throughly and happily as when they do it from moral conviction."-Blaise Pascal
by chocolate ink on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 04:52:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The Commission's counterpart is actually the State Department in this case.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 at 05:22:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Real or not, the memo meets the emotional needs of the large contingent of left wingers who feel that "the enemy of American foreign policy is my friend." As such I'm extremely skeptical, even with the CIA's known history. Remember the now debunked similar "policy memos" in reference to Iran that have the exact same tone - "the world would be on the track to peace and democracy, if it weren't for those meddling imperial overlords."

I'm skeptical of all leaders because of the self-selecting psychological profiles of all people that make it to the top in the modern era of nation states. Chavez demonstrates, I think, that there are certain needs that have to be fulfilled before the citizens demand the "dictionary" definition of democracy. Food, fuel, and shelter come first. At best our (westerntm) definitions of freedom come second on the list of demands.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Sat Dec 1st, 2007 at 07:35:49 PM EST
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here other than:

  1. The authenticity of the memo is not proven - can it ever be ? - we can only judge it in relation to the CIA's known modus operandi - which you do not dispute

  2. some musings on leadership psychology allied to Mazlovian psychology - i.e. a hierarchy of needs - which can be said to apply everywhere - not specifically to the Venzuaelan situation

  3. I share your scepticism about the real purpose of the constitutional changes and fear personality cults of all kinds - Castro/Mugabe come to mind.  But Chavez's paranoia seems to be well founded not only in the US's well documented attempts to over throw him and in the very limited tradition of democracy in Latin America - and the huge class divides endemic there

The US has done more than anybody to undermine those democratic traditions and exacerbate those class divides.  A policy of respect for the democratic decisions of the Venezuelan people and non interference in internal Venezuelan affairs - especially when they are being conducted constitutionally is the least one could expect from a well-intentioned big neighbour.

Unfortunately Chavez may be falling into the trap of allowing his paranoia to turn him into what he has always despised - a despot beyond democratic control.

Vote McCain for war without gain

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot dotty communists) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 08:08:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'll ask the same question you did - what is the point you are trying to make here? You subtly recast my arguments leading up to a typical self-congratulatory swipe at the US that assumes I'm pro-interference.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 02:18:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You implied that leftwingers had a need to believe the veracity of the memo but gave no supporting evidence.  I haven't seen anyone here giving it unconditional credence.  Skepticism has been the general tone.

You then accused me of implying that you supported US interference - again can we have some evidence for this please?

I also don't know what's so self-congratulatory about noting that the US has a history of such interference - and that there may be reasons for Chavez' apparent paranoia.

I don't know you, your nationality, or your political views.  I find your approach to argument puzzling as you seem make a lot of assumptions about others without providing any supporting evidence.  

I do not find such ad hominem argumentation very useful and so I propose to leave our discussion at this point.

Vote McCain for war without gain

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot dotty communists) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 04:36:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You implied that leftwingers had a need to believe the veracity of the memo but gave no supporting evidence.  I haven't seen anyone here giving it unconditional credence.  Skepticism has been the general tone.

The various notes/papers/purported intelligence interceptions on Iran we've seen over the past year were my evidence. People have gone bonkers over them on daily kos and here. This sort of hysteria is endemic, and not just among lefties, I think primarily due to so much of the modern world being unknowable (opaque policy), out of public control (the "risk" having been removed from democracy as Chomsky puts it), and dangerous (our capacity for destruction is orders of magnitude higher than any previous civilization).

The tone has not been skepticism - it has been that "it doesn't particularly matter if it's true, because the CIA has a history of exactly this." I don't disagree so much as think we can be much more rigorous. Elco B's comment is a good example.

I also don't know what's so self-congratulatory about noting that the US has a history of such interference

Because you replaced my claims by with a different framework through a quick bit of hand waving. I'm all for generalizations when we're writing 200 word comments, but I think you can come up with something more rigorous.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 05:01:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]
OK one more time (sigh) and please let me be my own judge of rigour.  (As my comments are generally less than 200 words perhaps I can invoke your generalisation opt out).

  1. Let's not switch the topic to Iran - the question was whether the Venezuelan Memo was likely to be authentic.  To argue that it might or might not be but that it is consistent with past CIA practice is hardly adopting a very credulous approach on its authenticity.  (I personally find it extraordinary that such a memo was leaked - it should be relatively easy for the CIA to find the whistle blower if it were)

  2. To make my argument within my own framework is hardly being self-congratulatory and I'm not sure where I am supposed to have waved my hand (or at whom).

Finally, as I am a newcomer here I would be interested to know on what basis you appear to assume that I am a left-winger interested only in taking a swipe at Uncle Sam.  If I recall my conclusion was that Chavez was in danger of becoming a despot beyond democratic control - hardly a ringing endorsement!

Perhaps it is you who has an emotional need to label those who query your argument as rigour-less left-wingers.

Vote McCain for war without gain

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot dotty communists) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 06:37:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
and let's toss out a possibility here: Chavez planted this himself.

Venezuela votes on Chavez's sweeping reforms

CARACAS (Reuters/BBC) -- Voters have been turning out in numbers in Venezuela's referendum on far-reaching constitutional changes sought by President Hugo Chavez.

Venezuelans voted Sunday on whether to allow Chavez to stay in power for as long as he keeps winning elections or hand him his first defeat at the polls.

...

"Whoever votes `Yes' is voting for Chavez and whoever votes `No' is voting for George W. Bush, president of the United States," Chavez told supporters at a massive rally in Caracas on Friday.

...

Chavez says the Bush administration of planning to meddle with the referendum vote and has threatened to halt oil exports to the United States. Citing a confidential memo, the Venezuelan government is claiming the CIA is fomenting unrest to challenge the referendum.

"Vote for me or the terrorists Americans win."

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 02:32:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Clearly, that's a possibility. We can't know for sure - the U.S. is not exactly going to come out and admit it, are they? But I agree with this writer when he says,

"In a sense, it matters little whether the memo is genuine or not, since it offers no surprises, only a reminder. What it describes is simply standard procedure for US covert actions in Latin America (and elsewhere)."

We know from the historical record the U.S. will have no qualms whatsoever about subverting Venezuelan democracy, and we know roughly how it'd go about doing it.

By the way, the Venezuelan government has uncovered a video of the opposition planning to cry "fraud!" should they lose the election.

As for Chavez' "with me or with the imperialists" rhetoric - yes, I agree with you about that. It's demagogic and stupid, and a sign that he knows victory in the referendum is not a sure thing.

The Heathlander

by heathlander on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 03:40:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That possibility is at the heart of the original question about authenticity- it's too late to "toss out" that idea. I think everyone here considers that possible, and reserves judgment.
However, history supports it, and events since the memo hit the public datastream have given it more credence. Still a question that will be hard to answer definitively.

A last note: Of all the news sources, Reuters has been the most incredibly biased, in my opinion, for the last couple years.
Ask yourself- if you were writing a news piece to inform, --how would you do it differently?
It's the old "Attack the Messenger" instead of reporting the issues. Jeez- almost as bad as what WE like to call an election.  

Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 at 02:10:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Real or not, the memo meets the emotional needs of the large contingent of left wingers who feel that "the enemy of American foreign policy is my friend." As such I'm extremely skeptical, even with the CIA's known history.

Jeez. Seems like you're saying that if it "meets the emotional needs" of us lefties it's automatically crap, regardless of historical support.

If one of us weirdos had written the news story, that might have some relevance,--provided he or she was an unethical propagandist---
This just gets deeper.

It is fair to attack the facts, not the messenger, if you can.

Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 08:14:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]
What facts are on display here? You posted a completely unverified document. The burden of proof is not in my court.

you are the media you consume.

by MillMan (millguy at gmail) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 01:23:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Are you discounting most of the CIA's post-war operational record?

What are the odds that Washington is sitting back and thinking 'Chavez - whattaguy - let's leave his country alone because we just love that socialist democracy thing he has going there'?

If the US had absolutely no record of this kind of thing, it would make perfect sense to dismiss the document.

But since the US has a well-documented recorded of exactly this kind of thing, and since Chavez is hardly up with - say - Musharraf in the Washington popularity stakes, and since there was a very obvious Washington hand pushing the last coup attempt, it's hardly a stretch to wonder if there may be an operation of some sort under way.

Given the history, it would be a lot less plausible to suggest there isn't.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 08:02:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Just ran across this:

Apart from the deep involvement of the US, the primary organization of the Venezuelan business elite (FEDECAMARAS), as well as all the major private television, radio and newspaper outlets have been engaged in a campaign of fear and intimidation campaign. Food producers, wholesale and retail distributors have created artificial shortages of basic food items and have provoked large scale capital flight to sow chaos in the hopes of reaping a 'no' vote.

I was in Jamaica at the end of the CIA destabilization effort when Michael Manly , a socialist, was elected. Same tactics- spread rumors of nationalization of small businesses, confiscation, gulags-- precipitating capital flight. Arm the bandits, so power drifted into the hands of the guys with the most guns-- Jamaica disintegrated into feudal bandit fiefs, and it took a decade to reconquer the country and bring it back into central management by elected government. I got a job removing steel plates from the backs of the front seats of cars-- placed there to stop bullets from highwaymen armed by ---Our Guys.

Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 08:47:15 AM EST
Just ran across this:

Could you give us the source/link, please?

"Ne te courbe que pour aimer..." René Char

by Melanchthon on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 08:56:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Sorry- trying to put up the christmas tree as well as manage some discussion here.

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2007/11/intercepted-cia-memo-on-attacking.html

Found the link to Professor Smartass on the morning open mike- thanks again, Fran.

Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 10:35:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The quoted description of "Operation Pliers" sounds a lot like the CIA operation against Chile's Allende.

Henry Kissinger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

U.S.-Chilean relations remained frosty during Salvador Allende's tenure; following the complete nationalization of the partially U.S.-owned copper mines and the Chilean subsidiary of the U.S.-based ITT, as well as other Chilean businesses, the U.S. implemented partial economic sanctions, claiming that the Chilean government had greatly undervalued fair compensation for the nationalization by subtracting what it deemed "excess profits." The CIA provided funding for the mass anti-government strikes in 1972 and 1973; during this period, Kissinger made several controversial statements regarding Chile's government, stating that "the issues are much too important for the Chilean voters to be left to decide for themselves" and "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go Communist due to the irresponsibility of its people." These remarks sparked outrage among many commentators, who considered them patronizing and disparaging of Chile's sovereignty.

In September 1973, Allende died during a military coup launched by Army Commander-in-Chief Augusto Pinochet, who became President.[20]

We have been warned.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 08:56:46 AM EST
As I said, ---vintage covert op.

Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.
by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 10:36:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]
and abides by it. It will be extra hard to label him undemocratic then.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (jeromeguillet@yahoo.fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 09:07:07 AM EST
Thought of that point of view too. But the task of uprooting an oligarchy as entrenched as that in Venezuela is a herculean task. After reading a good description of the actual amendments, I can get behind most of them, and I can see that it just might not be do-able without them. I am, honestly, undecided.

I am also not nearly as much of a theological democrat as some-  I think a good case can be made for a constitutional monarchy/dart board toss/lottery/whatever with a good legal code solidly central as at least as functional as what passes for democracy in much of the world.

Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.

by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 10:49:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Greg Wilpert has an informative take on the reforms, here.

The Heathlander
by heathlander on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 03:41:40 PM EST
First exit polls show that he's winning the referendum, by a margin of 6 to 8 points. Should these be confirmed, that would be the smallest margin he ever won elections with.

That's not necessarily good for Chavez - what he has just done is turn a semi-permanent blowout majority in his favour, into a beatable majority.
From what I see, some of the constitutional changes proposed were quite good, some seem pointless, and a few don't seem that great, frankly. Anyway the people have spoken...

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom - William Blake

by talos (mihalis at gmail dot com) on Sun Dec 2nd, 2007 at 06:25:28 PM EST
Great link to Znet summary.


Useful talking follows experience, the more experience the better. Talking that precedes experience is known as bullshit.
by geezer in Paris (risico at wanadoo(flypoop)fr) on Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 at 03:28:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Well OK, 50% of my links contained true statements :-)

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom - William Blake
by talos (mihalis at gmail dot com) on Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 at 06:59:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"Chavez loses constitutional vote"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071203/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_constitution

I told Bush; don't play chess with the freakin' Russians.
by LEP (rafifoon@yahoo.com) on Mon Dec 3rd, 2007 at 04:28:58 AM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]