Bush, Haiti & Venezuela: A Children's Tale
The March 1 edition of the Caracas daily, Ultimas Noticias, has a photo of the ambassador of the United States to Haiti, Brian Foley, with his hands open and an interesting look on his face. I cannot see the words that are coming out of his mouth but "no fui yo" would seem very suitable for the moment. And he would be speaking the truth. He is only a part of the machine that crushed Jean-Bertrand Aristide.
The night before I received an email from a reporter friend whom I respect very much. He is a young hard-working journalist and graduate of the first Narco News School of Authentic Journalism, Reed Lindsay... The email was a copy of an article that he had written from Haiti. But he had a preface. He said his article was:
An unfortunate postscript that hopefully provides some context that is absent from the images of Haitians (in reality, a small minority who sympathize or belong either to the nation's wealthy elite or the drug traffickers, gangsters and murderous thugs now converging on the capital) celebrating the removal of Aristide...
I sense that the U.S. government is setting a similar stage for this country.
Here it is the elite and the old political leaders whose corrupt parties were thrown out of power by Chavez who want to celebrate his ouster. It is the wealthy (yes, the wealthy) mischievous youth in their twenties, thirties and forties who are in the streets. (Please, don't call them "thugs." They are the "elite" of Venezuela.) And it is in the affluent parts of the city (yes, the affluent parts) where they are burning trash and tires in the streets while the police who serve as their bodyguards do nothing to stop them.
While President Chavez was surrounded by hundreds of thousands of people in the center of the city, these fine citizens were expressing their unhappiness because the National Electoral Council (the CNE) has called into question over a million signatures they received to call for a presidential referendum. The opposition seems to be asking, why shouldn't the dead be able to vote? Or, why can't one person sign other people's names? How dare anyone call into question the activities of these members of the "civil society," as they like to call themselves. After all, their organizations were worthy of receiving millions of dollars from the United States for their activities. (Take a look at the work of Jeremy Bigwood at www.venezuelafoia.info.)
To better understand this world situation and the United States' role in it, for the past few days I have been carefully reading "Captain Underpants and the Perilous Plot of Professor Poopypants." The book, published by Scholastic Inc., is "The Fourth Epic Novel by Dav Pilkey." It is a well-known book in the United States, widely read, studied and enjoyed by elementary school children at about the fourth or fifth-grade level.
Professor Pippy P. Poopypants is a very intelligent and creative scientist who comes from a country where everyone has funny names. But as a result, when he tries to present his inventions to the international scientific community, all his peers laugh at his name and don't take his work seriously.
Lacking money and frustrated, he encounters a job as a science teacher in an elementary school. He takes the position with the idea that children are kind and don't pay attention to incidentals, such a funny names. He is wrong as the children laugh for a week without stopping after he introduces himself.
Finally, he quiets them down by showing the children one of his inventions. But when a child asks him his middle name, he reveals that it is "Pee-pee" and the roaring laughter begins again.
As a result, Professor Pippy Pee-pee Poopypants becomes very angry and decides to take over the world. He begins by using his machine to shrink the school and everyone in it. He then decrees that all people must change their names in accordance with a system he has prepared.
Now, let me move from Pilkey's book and to the real world dominated by another mad scientist: George W. Bush. According to Professor Poopypants, his name would now be Fluffy Toiletshorts and the vice president, Richard Cheney, would be Loopy Gigglebrains.
It is not hard to imagine how angry they would become if they had to go through the rest of their lives with these names. Having a funny name can cause people to act in irrational ways. But, wait! This brings us to an important question: Was it a terrible mistake for the press to call the president "Dubya?" Could that be what started him on the maniacal course of trying to take over the world?
In the book the school principal, Captain Underpants, saves the day and
Professor Poopypants, from his prison cell, even says he is sorry for what he did.
Unfortunately, I don't think we can expect such a happy ending to what is going on in the world today. Some day when all the truth surfaces about Afghanistan, Iraq, Haiti and Venezuela, my only expectation is to see a photo of President Bush with his insidious smile, hands open, and saying in his best Spanish accent, "No fui yo."
And, lest I forget: for those of you who are wondering what name the Professor would have given me, you will have to buy the book to find out. However, I have been called much worse names through the years and, above all, don't worry. I have always lived far enough from Washington D.C., Texas and Halliburton that I don't think there is much chance that I will ever have the Bush-Cheney-takeover-the-world syndrome.
Email this page
And reporting from Port-au-Prince...
Submitted on March 7th, 2004 by Al GiordanoReed Lindsay has a story in Sunday's Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reported from Haiti:
Aura of calm in Haiti hides turmoil below
Yep. Reed is wiping the floor with most of the scualid U.S. correspondents.
Lindsay: Cold War returns to US backyard
Submitted on March 8th, 2004 by Dan FederNo other way to say it - Reed is simply kicking ass right now.
Sachs on "the Keystone Kops Coup"
Submitted on March 7th, 2004 by Al GiordanoSachs, in looking at Colin Powell's unconvincing denials about the coup, quotes one of my favorite marxists - Groucho - who once said: "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"
Rap Sheets: Phillippe & Chamblain
Submitted on March 7th, 2004 by Al Giordanoand...
These guys are fugitives from Justice, with old charges still pending. And yet Colin Powell freely admits that he is "in contact" with them, with no effort to bring them in.
That says it all.
Arresting Phillipe
Submitted on March 7th, 2004 by Erik SiegristThe more interesting statement was from new national police chief Leon Charles, who ordered a ban on personal weapons. Is this going to apply to Phillipe's forces? Or just the remaining pockets of Lavalas supporters?
I haven't been able to find out much about Charles. He was trained in the US and until becoming police chief was the head of Haiti's Coast Guard. I'd be curious to find out where he was trained.
Marines to Start Disarming Haitians
Submitted on March 10th, 2004 by Erik SiegristMajor Crusen's quote lacks the context to tell whether he's talking about Haitians getting more aggressive towards the Marines, or vice versa. But I suspect the vice versa never even occured to Polgreen.
Again -- who gets disarmed first? Phillipe's supporters, or Aristide's? 'Militants' could include, or exclude, just about anybody.
US Amb. Sue Cobb's War on Jamaica
Submitted on March 7th, 2004 by Al GiordanoI'll offer an informed speculation as to exactly what she wants to say to the Jamaican Prime Minister in that meeting: To watch his back, and that of his democracy, because part of the intent behind Washington's support of the Haiti coup was to threaten other nations, like Jamaica, which just happens to be, as we reported to you eight days ago, on the verge of decriminalizing marijuana.
That's an important subtext to what has been occurring in Haiti, and the response of the Caribbean Community of nations, that has declined to sign up for duty with Washington's anti-democracy campaign.
Memo to the next president: Sue Cobb is another anti-democracy hack that must be thrown out of the State Department on her ass.
Aristide Remains President of Haiti
Submitted on March 8th, 2004 by Al GiordanoYesterday, as we reported on Narco News, his attorney and a delegation of observers blew the whistle on the fact that Aristide was being "kept under lock and key." Well, their attention and willingness ot make noise about that apparently led, later in the day, to some kind of public appearance or statement - details are not overflowing yet - but with a few words Aristide began to get back onto the field.
According to the Bloomberg news agency, Aristide used a set of words that I recognize as carefully chosen in terms of the Democratic Charter of the Organization of American States:
Associated Press, meanwhile, quotes Aristide as having made essentially that statement not on a phone or radio interview, but at a "press conference." AP reports:
All of this leads me to question: Was there, in fact, a press conference? Did any press attend? Is there any free press in the Central African Dictatorship where the French and the US airdropped Aristide to isolate him? And if AP wasn't there, what is its source that there even was one?
Bloomberg cites AFP - Agence France Presse - as its source and also gives us emails of the reporter and editor, so give 'em a try:
If any readers or copublishers get more info, post it here, or email me. So little media attention on such a significant political event!
Aristide: Trying to Speak
Submitted on March 8th, 2004 by Al GiordanoIt gets very complicated when your keepers are themselves in power as a result of their own coup and limits on speech and press freedom.
Here's a Reuter's report on how the bosses of the Central African Republic have been "spinning" the Aristide situation...
Aristide must have a lot of patience. If I were in the same position, I'd be screaming at these assholes and they would probably have killed me already.
Washington's whole point in dumping Aristide in that sorry excuse for a "republic" was to make it difficult for him to speak clearly.
A lot of congratulations must go to the delegation that yesterday morning went there and blew the whistle. That's the only reason he got to hold his first press conference later in the day. It was a very brave thing that those folks did. I want them in my foxhole!
Aristide on Democracy Now this a.m.
Submitted on March 8th, 2004 by Al GiordanoAn excerpt:
And this...
You can listen to an audio recording at that link, too.
MSNBC's Boneheaded Caracas Photo
Submitted on March 8th, 2004 by Al GiordanoMSNBC (Spanish language version) ran a story on Saturday with a Reuters photo of a large pro-Chavez demonstration but misrepresented the crowd by claiming it was a demonstration against Chavez!
Check it out!
Yeah, there are "hundreds of thousands" marching in the crowd represented by the photo... but they're marching on the other side of the matter that MSNBC claims they are marching for... Oy vay.
Another Haitian scene from the Caracas playbook?
Submitted on March 8th, 2004 by Jeff SimpsonAristide Calls for Calm After Six Killed in Haiti
Sunday's shooting by suspected militant Aristide loyalists in front of the National Palace prompted U.S. troops to open fire for the first time since they landed in the impoverished Caribbean nation at the start of an international mission to restore order following Aristide's flight to Africa last week.
"Marines engaged the gunmen. One of them was killed," Col. Mark Gurganus, commander of U.S. forces in Haiti, told reporters. Gurganus said Marines returned fire from within the National Palace grounds after two gunmen shot at the palace.
Shame on me for suspecting foul play when the powers that be have been acting in such good faith, but does this remind anyone else of the events of 2 April, 2002, transposed?
We have an opposition "celebration" instead of "march" (because Aristide has already been kidnapped), we have "suspected militant Aristide loyalists", also known as "Aristide thugs" (compare "Chavez goons"), there was a crossfire and six people were killed.
Thankfully, an objective witness in the person of a US Marine colonel was on the scene to describe the events.
I'm probably just paranoid.
Whoa, I just saw the AP article
Witnesses said Aristide militants fired from the roof of a movie theater across the plaza as thousands of people gathered in front of the National Palace. U.S. spokesman Maj. Richard Crusan said it was unclear who the gunmen were.
And, whadya know, two journalists were among the victims.
African Union joins the call for an investigation
Submitted on March 8th, 2004 by Jeff SimpsonAU urges nations to grant Aristide asylum
"The African Union supports the call by CARICOM for an investigation under the auspices of the United Nations to clarify the circumstances leading to his relinquishing the presidency,"
Now where the hell is the OAS?
OAS process
Submitted on March 8th, 2004 by Al GiordanoThe "Organization of American States" has its main offices in... guess where?
Washington DC.
The secretary general, former Colombian president Cesar Gaviria, is a US-installed bat boy (do a Narco News search on him for details), and I'm sure is rooting for the coup as he did in Venezuela.
What OAS requires to move is a motion from any one of its member states. That could come from any Caribbean island nation member of CARICOM, or it could come from Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, or even some tiny country, but it requires a motion to invoke the "Democratic Charter."
My guess is that nobody has done that yet because everyone is still counting votes to figure out how it would go, and Roger Noriega of the State Dept (former ambassador to OAS, who lost some big battles there over Venezuela policy) has probably made it known to all OAS states that the Bush administration will screw any country that either offers Aristide sanctuary in this hemisphere or that makes the motion.
I think this will take another week or two to surface, given that it's taken Aristide himself 8 days to appear in public and declare himself the still legitimate president.
If I were to take book, my guess is the motion, when it comes, will be a joint Caricom-Venezuela motion, with Chavez taking the lead because, well, after you've called Bush a "pendejo" there's not much more you can do to piss him off than you already have.
The other group to watch are Lula's foreign policy team out of Brasilia - Celso Amorim and Marco Aurelio Garcia - because they're the guys who, if they move, have the ability to bring Bolivia, Argentina, some of the smaller countries, and start to box Mexico (a key swing vote) into it. At some point a critical mass can get achieved, Chile, Peru, even Colombia start to drift away from the US position, in the end even Canada bolts, and, viola, it could be a whole new ball game.
Which is why Noriega and Gaviria are doing EVERYTHING in their power to keep it from happening... threats, bribes, you name it... defending this Haiti coup is going to prove very expensive and probably futile in the end.
The Arming of the Mercenaries
Submitted on March 8th, 2004 by Al GiordanoWe really need more info out of the Dominican Republic, too, in putting together this jigsaw puzzle.
In general, I've been contacting some of our friends throughout the Caribbean putting out the word that we're especially looking this year for Caribbean journalism scholars for the upcoming sessions of the Narco News School of Authentic Journalism.
So, readers, if you know talents out there in the islands, send them our way!
Operation Sweatshop
Submitted on March 8th, 2004 by Jules SiegelSubject: [NEWSROOM-L] Operation Sweatshop
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 12:52:47 -0500
From: Preston Peet <ptpeet@NYC.RR.COM>
To: NEWSROOM-L@LISTS.NETSPACE.ORG
http://www.tmtmetropolis.ru/stories/2004/03/05/120 .html
Operation Sweatshop
Jean-Bertrand Aristide's move to raise Haiti's minimum wage was the last straw for American corporations and elitist U.S. factions. By Chris Floyd This week, the Bush administration added another violent "regime change" notch to its gunbelt, toppling the democratically elected president of Haiti and replacing him with an unelected gang of convicted killers, death squad leaders, militarists, narcoterrorists, CIA operatives, hereditary elitists and corporate predators -- a bit like Team Bush itself, in other words.
Although the Haiti coup was widely portrayed as an irresistible upsurge of popular discontent, it was of course the result of years of hard work by Bush's dedicated corrupters of democracy, as William Bowles reports in Information Clearinghouse.
Bushist bagmen funded the political opposition to President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, smuggled guns to exiled Haitian warlords and carried out a relentless strangulation of the county, cutting off long-promised financial and structural aid to one of the poorest nations on earth until food prices were soaring, unemployment spiked to 70 percent and the broken-backed government lost control of society to armed gangs of criminals, fanatics and the merely desperate.
Meanwhile, Haiti was forced to pay $2 million per month on debts run up by the murderous U.S.-backed dictatorships that ruled the island for decades after the American military occupation of 1915-1934.
The ostensible reason for Bush's deadly squeeze-play was Haiti's disputed elections in 2000. That vote, only the nation's third free election in 200 years, was indeed marred by reports of irregularities -- although these were not nearly as egregious as the well-documented hijinks which saw a certain runner-up candidate appointed to the White House that same year. There was no question that Aristide and his party received an overwhelming majority of legitimate votes; however, out of the 7,500 offices up for grabs, election observers did find that seven senate results seemed of dodgy provenance.
So what happened? The seven disputed senators resigned. New elections for the seats were called, but the opposition -- two elitist factions financed by Washington's favorite engines of subversion, the Orwellian-monikered "National Endowment for Democracy" and "International Republican Institute" -- refused to take part. The government broke down because the legislature couldn't convene. When Bush came in, he tightened the screws of the international blockade of the island, insisting that $500 million in desperately needed aid could not be released unless the opposition participated in new elections -- while he was simultaneously paying the opposition not to participate.
The ultimate aim of this brutal pretzel logic was to grind Haiti's destitute people further into the ground and destroy Aristide's ability to govern. His real crime, of course, was not the Florida-style election follies or the reported "tyranny." Bush loves that stuff -- witness his eager embrace of the nuke-peddling dictatorship of Pakistan, the human-boiling hardman of Uzbekistan, the torture-happy tyrant of Kazakhstan, the drug-running warlords of Afghanistan and so forth.
No, Aristide did something far worse than stuffing ballots or killing people -- he tried to raise the minimum wage to the princely sum of two dollars a day. This move outraged the American corporations -- and their local lackeys -- who have for generations used Haiti as a pool of dirt-cheap labor and sky-high profits. It was the last straw for the elitist factions, one of which is actually led by an American citizen and former Reagan-Bush appointee, manufacturing tycoon Andy Apaid.
snip-
The 'Brains' Behind the Rebels
Submitted on March 9th, 2004 by Erik SiegristA couple of choice quotes:
Phillipe -- "I get calls from people telling me to watch out, and they call my family and friends, too," he said, his boyish face breaking into an impish grin. "Everybody loved Jesus, too, but they killed him. They killed Martin Luther King; they killed Gandhi."
Because those are the first people I think of when I think of Guy Phillipe: Jesus, Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr.
And here's Paul Arcelin's confession:
"Two years ago, I met Guy Philippe in Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic) and we spent 10 to 15 hours a day together, plotting against Aristide," Mr. Arcelin said in an interview at the rebel headquarters at the Hibo Lele Hotel on the outskirts of Port-au-Prince.
"From time to time we'd cross the border through the woods to conspire against Aristide, to meet with the opposition and regional leaders to prepare for Aristide's downfall."
Just to reinforce his credibility (not to mention morality), later in the article Arcelin casually lies to a hotel clerk about being the Canadian ambassador to Haiti.
Now whether Arcelin has the influence he claims isn't, to me, the important point. He's confirming the fact that Phillipe has been in the DR for years planning this coup.
That's at least some starting point for tracking down who else Phillipe might have met with to get this ball rolling.
The Oligarch Slate
Submitted on March 9th, 2004 by Jeff SimpsonThree businessmen and a former dictator!
The candidates are former prime minister and businessman Smarck Michel, retired Lt. Gen. Herard Abraham and Gerard Latortue, a former U.N. official and an international business consultant, both based in Miami, and Axan Abellard of the Center for Free Enterprise and Democracy.
Michel was the IMF's man in Haiti
Abraham is Washington's favorite, according to the Economist, and possibly a documented human rights abuser (sorry, this isn't much - the LCHR report seems to be unavailable online and the HRW report {scroll to bottom} costs money - anybody got the goods?)
I can't find much on Abellard, but when I see the words "Free Enterprise and Democracy" together in the context of developing countries, I cringe.
Latortue collects rare books and is on record as supporting the idea of France paying reparations to Haiti. What do you think that does for his chances?
The envelope please...
Submitted on March 9th, 2004 by Jeff SimpsonFrom Reuters:
Latourtue's Boss
Submitted on March 9th, 2004 by Al GiordanoUS-Installed "Prime Minister" Latortue works for Claude Mancuso, owner of Haitian Television Network, who recently cheered the coup d'etat on Miami's Channel 7 News:
In sum, the capital of Haiti has been moved from Port-au-Prince to Oligarch Alley in Boca Raton.
Soon, all the Latin American coup dictatorships will be run from Florida!
Aristides and 'protection' companies
Submitted on March 12th, 2004 by Ezio Cusihttp://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/ch ronicle/archive/2004/03/12/BUGLV5IM1D1.DTL&typ e=business
The "Protection" Racket
Submitted on March 12th, 2004 by Al GiordanoI read that article this morning and thought "what a crock! I would never hire those guys to protect me or anyone I cared about!"
First off, the guy violated all ethics of confidentiality by speaking to the press about details of his company's work in the Haitian government. Do you think, for example, that a Secret Service agent would ever speak to the press about what goes on behind closed doors involving the President or his family members? And, if he did, would he still have his job come Monday? Of course not!
So the first thing we know is that this Mr. Kurtz is unethical, that he doesn't take his vow of confidentiality seriously or professionally.
The second thing is that he clearly has too many conflicts of interest - that is, dependence on the U.S. government to do his work abroad - for anyone to trust him as a reliable source as to what did go down in Haiti. This article boasts of work his firm supposedly does or might do in Afghanistan, in Iraq... jobs that can only be done with the support and permission of Washington. Thus, if he were to speak any truth that runs counter to the "official" version of what happened with Aristide, his business would probably go bankrupt by Tuesday, losing all his other work across the globe.
Thirdly, as has been reported throughout this Haiti coup storyline, the U.S. government prohibited his firm from answering a call by Haitian President Aristide to send 30 more security guards at the precise moment when they were needed. This is evidence that he can't do squat unless it is with US permission.
Thus, the guy is a kind of wholly owned subsidiary of US policy. His company was in Haiti at the precise time that Washington had imposed an embargo on Haiti! That says it all. Aristide was foolish to trust them with his safety, and now he's paying the price, and I'm sure that other world leaders are looking and learning from this episode, because these are the last guys who can be trusted with anybody's security or safety.
They betrayed their client in Haiti. In my opinion, that was their job.
that Lazarus link
Submitted on March 12th, 2004 by Judith Gipsmy first reaction was similar to Al's, with the realization that there are at last three types of conflicting interest, and thus variant vresions of "rality" in the story: Haiti's, the US State Department's, and corporate spookers' (the "security industry's") interests. these guys like Steele Foundation (even the name sounds like a weak joke from a Grade B spy movie) are mercenaries, "loyalties" strictly based on who's crossed their palms with silver. Kurtz says as much toward the end of the article. all this makes me think that there are competing interests, sometimes, paying these folks off. Jurtz may be "gossiping" to covr up the part he's NOT telling us about who authorized what in Haiti. it's an old con-manthing to appear to be revealing, and the guy may be shrewder than it happers; he IS in the cloak-and-dagge business, according to this article to the tune of some substantial share of the $100 billion the "handful" of such businesses get.
I just have to take umbrage at Lazarus' assertion, about 2/3rds of the way through the article, that "This is the third time
since 1915 that US soldiers have landed in the troubleed Carribbean nation to try to stop Haitians from killing each other." oh, those natives are restless again, time to send in our trrops to quell them! is this a puff piece for the US government "peacekeeper" role, or what?
I don't mean to sound paranoid, nonetheless, I must point out that we have no reason to believe these people aren't among the operatives who foment coup attempts, other rebellions, political assassinations, and quiet disappearances and strange "accidents." there's no reason to believe private operators can be held to a higher standard of watching someone's back than the agencies that play footsie with them.
the whole thing reminds me of the Winged Monkeys of Wizard of Oz, when they claim that they would gladly have done Aristide's bidding but the Cap of power passed to, uh, someone else.
there's a crypto-government operating here, and it;s hard to say whether corporte or national 9somebody's national)n intersts are paramount here. just intersting that Kurtz' version differs so strongly from both Aristide's an Powell's.
Judith
UK Independent: US funding opponents of Chavez
Submitted on March 13th, 2004 by Steve YoungWashington has been channelling hundreds of thousands of dollars to fund the political opponents of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez - including those who briefly overthrew the democratically elected leader in a coup two years ago.
Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act reveal that, in 2002, America paid more than a million dollars to those political groups in what it claims is an ongoing effort to build democracy and "strengthen political parties". Mr Chavez has seized on the information, telling Washington to "get its hands off Venezuela".
Read the rest here:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story .jsp?story=500711
Steve Young
Should have mentioned Bigwood quotes
Submitted on March 13th, 2004 by Steve YoungExcellent work, Jeremy.
Steve Young
Reed Lindsay on Argentina vs. IMF
Submitted on March 13th, 2004 by Al GiordanoHere's the lede:
Here is an Authentic Journalist, Reed Lindsay, who arrived in Latin America just a little over two years ago, learned Spanish, lived in popular barrios of Mexico City and Buenos Aires, among real people and not the oligarchy elites that most US and British correspondents run with, applied for and received a scholarship from the Narco News School of Authentic Journalism, attended the ten day program in Mexico last year, headed from Mexico to Bolivia with Narco News South American bureau chief Alex Contreras, walked through coca growing country and talked with the farmers, went to Venezuela, hosted by our own professor and blogger Charlie Hardy, walked through the barrios of Caracas, always learning, always asking questions, rising at six a.m. each day and working non-stop until he slept...
And now, Reed Lindsay is setting the gold standard for how to report correspondence for daily newspapers on events in Latin America without pandering to the prejudices and myths that guide most U.S. correspondents down here.
Reporting on something as complex as Argentina's relationship with the International Monetary Fund has great potential for confusion, but look at how he explains it in plain language, and accurately.
Lindsay reports the facts that tell a story of a nation that was once obedient to the impositions of US-backed market policies, and saw its economy crash as a result. Now it is one of the only countries on earth that is winning concessions from the International Monetary Fund, and is doing so by standing tall, by not cowering, by telling the IMF that it had better be more responsive to Argentina's needs, or it can forget about getting past loans paid off. Lindsay shows us how Argentine President Nestor Kirchner plays brinkmanship with these financial abusers from above, and is winning, for the good of his country, its people, and their economy.
The story is just that: as simple and plain as Lindsay explains it.
Now, why do other U.S. and British correspondents with more years of "experience" fail to report such stories coherently and accurately?
How is it that this young man is doing a better job?
He did attend the J-School, but we can't take credit for anything more than an occasional helping hand. This is Lindsay's work on display. The difference between him and most "first world" correspondents in Latin America? I believe it has been his willingness to live among the people, and to avoid the trappings of the oligarchies who invite us reporters into their cliques as a very effective form of co-optation.
The other thing that Lindsay is doing right is he's not letting the US Embassies guide his coverage. Too many reporters down here simply call the Embassy press flaks, many of them daily, to receive spoon-fed "news stories" always tailored to the propaganda interests of the wealthy minorities and the policies that outsiders want to impose on these lands.
In sum, Reed Lindsay is practicing journalism, not dictation. And he's getting a response. By my count, this is his tenth news story in a U.S. or Canadian daily newspaper in the past two weeks.
Well, I'll let y'all in on an early secret: When we announce, in the coming days, the next round of Authentic Journalism scholarships and the dates and locations of the next Narco News J-School in July and August in South America, and the names of our faculty members, Reed Lindsay will be in that number. So, if you apply and get a scholarship, you can come and ask him how he does it, in person.
Why does Chavez bother with the New York Times?
Submitted on March 18th, 2004 by Jeff SimpsonA Bitter Chávez Castigates U.S., Saying It Misjudges Him
There's a lot here to tear apart if I had the time. You autenticos who really know this beat I'm sure could do a much better job.
But this really pisses me off. Marquis out-and-out lies when he writes:
Bullshit!
Here's the HRW press release:
Venezuela: Investigate Charges of Abuses Against Protestors
Nowhere does HRW allege anything! They report allegations made by members of the opposition and call for an investigation. That's it!
Is Marquis referring to another report? As you can see here HRW's last release on Venezuela was in October, 2003.
Grrrr...
So this is the gruel they feed us. The affable human rights abusing president who is so self-absorbed that he gave you a four hour interview.
Oh, I see Marquis didn't cook this up by himself:
cqan we dig around a bit on Forero?
Submitted on March 18th, 2004 by Judith Gipsgotta go dig my kid outta the Central Berkeley Public Library before they close and call the cops on me for child abandonment, but someone please take it up when ya can...Judith
that NYT interview
Submitted on March 19th, 2004 by Andrew Grice (not verified)That's inexcusable to put words in HRW's mouth like that. They obviously gave this some thought because they allowed the fact that Chavez says the torture allegations were made up into the article. If the readers knew it was the Venezuelan opposition and not Human Rights Watch themselves making the accusations, Chavez's denial would sound more credible.
Instead, we get treated to a real Forero-ism in the crack about Chavez "thumb[ing] through dog eared revolutionary texts." The phrase is calculated to conjure images of Chavez governing straight out of some "communist" manual. Whatever books these were, we can be sure they weren't written by the like of Marx or Lenin, because that specific information would have been reported gleefully.
"If Mr. Chávez's ambitions include totalitarian control, even an infrequent visitor to Venezuela can see that he has fallen short after five years in power." My, my. Fallen short of totalitarian control. What an odd way to describe the state of freedom in Venezuela. Unless of course you are more interested in smearing Chavez than reporting on reality.
Also, note the NYT contradicting itself. First, the redistribution of the oil wealth can "scarcely be seen." But later, we read that "Mr. Chávez is clearly beloved by the working class, who tell of small improvements in their daily lives — a paint job for a dilapidated home or free access to roaming clinics staffed by Cuban doctors." So, not a few people, but the "working class" are telling of improvements in their daily lives, and the NYT reporters can scarcely see it? Maybe it's because they don't want to look much past their hotel suites.