jps
03-27-04, 10:12 PM
http://www.infoshop.org/inews/stories.php?story=04/03/25/0128532
US Revealed to be Secretly Funding Opponents of Chavez
Sunday, Mar 14, 2004
By: Andrew Buncombe, The Independent/UK
March 13, 2004, Washington—Washington has been channeling 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".
The revelation about America's funding of Mr Chavez's opponents comes as the president is facing a possible recall referendum and has been rocked by a series of violent street demonstrations in which at least eight people have died. His opponents, who include politicians, some labor leaders, media executives and former managers at the state oil company, are trying to collect sufficient signatures to force a national vote. The documents reveal that one of the group's organizing the collection of signatures - Sumate - received $53,400 (£30,000) from the US last September.
Jeremy Bigwood, a Washington-based freelance journalist who obtained the documents, yesterday told The Independent: "This repeats a pattern started in Nicaragua in the election of 1990 when [the US] spent $20 per voter to get rid of [the Sandinista President Daniel] Ortega. It's done in the name of democracy but it's rather hypocritical. Venezuela does have a democratically elected President who won the popular vote which is not the case with the US."
The funding has been made by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) a non-profit agency financed entirely by Congress. It distributes $40m (£22m) a year to various groups in what it says is an effort to strengthen democracy.
But critics of the NED say the organization routinely meddles in other countries' affairs to support groups that believe in free enterprise, minimal government intervention in the economy and opposition to socialism in any form. In recent years, the NED has channeled funds to the political opponents of the recently ousted Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide at the same time that Washington was blocking loans to his government.
The hypocricy here is astounding. In a nutshell: A group called the "National Endowment for Democracy" of all things, who's funding comes entirely from the US government, is working to undermine democratically elected left-wing governments, while the US government is making the argument(which most US citizens accept) that we had to go to war on Iraq to bring them democracy.
Its interesting to note that Chavez is one of several world leaders who refuses to recognize Haiti's new dictator, asserting that the countries democratically elected President is still the rightful head of state, which much be especially annoying given the US governments assertion that their carefully orchestrated military coup is a "triumph for democracy"
Given the US' long history of overthrowing democratic governments and installing brutal dictators in their place, any suggestion by any US president that they are bringing democracy anywhere should be met with great skepticism, if not laughter. Its unfortunate that the media doesn't see fit to report on these things and allows the citizens of the US to base their opinions and votes on all available information.
The fact that most people do accept bringing democracy to Iraq as a justification for war while their country has just overthrown a democratically elected government and is working to overthrow another is a good example of how the corporate media make the US a de facto plutocracy. People watch the news, read the papers, and listen to the radio, and then consider themselveswell informed about current events, and go and vote based on the information they gleaned from those sources, which, more often than not, is so biased that anyone basing their views on them cannot help but have certain opinions.
US Revealed to be Secretly Funding Opponents of Chavez
Sunday, Mar 14, 2004
By: Andrew Buncombe, The Independent/UK
March 13, 2004, Washington—Washington has been channeling 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".
The revelation about America's funding of Mr Chavez's opponents comes as the president is facing a possible recall referendum and has been rocked by a series of violent street demonstrations in which at least eight people have died. His opponents, who include politicians, some labor leaders, media executives and former managers at the state oil company, are trying to collect sufficient signatures to force a national vote. The documents reveal that one of the group's organizing the collection of signatures - Sumate - received $53,400 (£30,000) from the US last September.
Jeremy Bigwood, a Washington-based freelance journalist who obtained the documents, yesterday told The Independent: "This repeats a pattern started in Nicaragua in the election of 1990 when [the US] spent $20 per voter to get rid of [the Sandinista President Daniel] Ortega. It's done in the name of democracy but it's rather hypocritical. Venezuela does have a democratically elected President who won the popular vote which is not the case with the US."
The funding has been made by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) a non-profit agency financed entirely by Congress. It distributes $40m (£22m) a year to various groups in what it says is an effort to strengthen democracy.
But critics of the NED say the organization routinely meddles in other countries' affairs to support groups that believe in free enterprise, minimal government intervention in the economy and opposition to socialism in any form. In recent years, the NED has channeled funds to the political opponents of the recently ousted Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide at the same time that Washington was blocking loans to his government.
The hypocricy here is astounding. In a nutshell: A group called the "National Endowment for Democracy" of all things, who's funding comes entirely from the US government, is working to undermine democratically elected left-wing governments, while the US government is making the argument(which most US citizens accept) that we had to go to war on Iraq to bring them democracy.
Its interesting to note that Chavez is one of several world leaders who refuses to recognize Haiti's new dictator, asserting that the countries democratically elected President is still the rightful head of state, which much be especially annoying given the US governments assertion that their carefully orchestrated military coup is a "triumph for democracy"
Given the US' long history of overthrowing democratic governments and installing brutal dictators in their place, any suggestion by any US president that they are bringing democracy anywhere should be met with great skepticism, if not laughter. Its unfortunate that the media doesn't see fit to report on these things and allows the citizens of the US to base their opinions and votes on all available information.
The fact that most people do accept bringing democracy to Iraq as a justification for war while their country has just overthrown a democratically elected government and is working to overthrow another is a good example of how the corporate media make the US a de facto plutocracy. People watch the news, read the papers, and listen to the radio, and then consider themselveswell informed about current events, and go and vote based on the information they gleaned from those sources, which, more often than not, is so biased that anyone basing their views on them cannot help but have certain opinions.