Hugo Chavez Outed!!

This is an interesting article from www.redstate.com to send to your friends who are enamored by Che or Chavez and think that Cuba may be a "bad country" but at least they have universal health coverage and follows this previous article here. To read more about Hugo Chavez's vision of Latin America click here. And if you want to forward this to the Secretary of State of the United States, Hillary Clinton, click here.


The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights outs Hugo Chavez
Has Secretary Clinton read this report?
Monday, March 1st at 10:18AM
From the give credit where credit is due file: The Washington Post editorializes today on the damning Inter-American Commission on Human Rights report on Venezuela that was issued last week. The evisceration of Venezuela’s democracy is laid out in dispassionate detail–the judicial and media crackdowns, the elimination of the private sector and the targeted use of violence against any and all opposition. Our tendency has been to dismiss Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez as a minor annoyance–a buffoon who bumbled his way into power and would bumble out again at some point, or, worse, to embrace him as a modern day Che Guevara who channels low-cost heating oil through the kindly auspices of Joe Kennedy and Bill Delahunt to underprivileged Americans. But this report paints a very different and ugly picture of a canny, ruthless manipulator who has over the last decade effectively consolidated power the power of this once-vibrant democracy into his despotic hands.
The response so far has been a resounding so what? Why should we care, and even if we could summon the energy to care, what can we do about it? Unfortunately, the answers to these questions are now we should care very much and there is precious little we can do–although if Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would read this report it would be a start.
From a purely self-interested viewpoint, we should care because Venezuela is a large, potentially productive, resource-rich country that would be a valuable friend if it were not headed in the direction of being a deadly foe. Hugo Chavez can see the attention commanded by his nuclear allies Iran and North Korea. He has been arming up–can there be any doubt that he has nuclear ambitions as well? And if we are so concerned about the damage that could potentially be done by North Korean or Iranian missiles, how much more concerned should we be about the potential placement of such weapons much closer to our own borders? Chavez has demonstrated that he’s not squeamish about using violence on a small scale, and if history be our guide that generally translates into a reliance on larger-scale violence as an acceptable way to settle disputes. Chavez is also familiar with the tactical use of terrorism as he is quite cozy with the Colombian FARC and may well be harboring terrorist camps on his own soil. So by ignoring his activities we are enabling the rise of a trigger-happy thug with small regard for collateral damage in our own backyard. I think this merits our attention.
Now to the second point–what is to be done? Unfortunately, by delaying action for so long we have left ourselves few options. Chavez has made hating the Yanquis into an article of patriotic faith, so attempts to domesticate him are probably a fool’s errand. We have squandered the opportunities to support the opposition, and Chavez has taken advantage of our inaction to hector and intimidate these groups into ineffective submission. It has become fashionable to express solidarity with pro-democracy dissidents in Iran, which is of course a good thing, but it would be encouraging if we could rally similar support for those enduring the sickening grind of repression in our own hemisphere. But somehow Chavez, not those he oppresses, has emerged as the romantic hero of this story.
The much criticized U.S. intervention in the 2002 coup attempt against Chavez was another wasted opportunity. The episode has been held up as evidence of cynical American support for anti-democratic forces, but as Honduras has demonstrated there are coups–and then there are coups. It looks now as if that was the last chance to oust Chavez without substantial upheaval in the region and he has turned it into a public relations bonanza.
That upheaval now appears increasingly unavoidable. The sort of repression documented in the Inter-American Commission Report is not generally the recipe for a contented and prosperous state that co-exists peaceably with its neighbors. Chavez responded, predictably, by calling his critics names and threatening the body that issued the report. But words can only take him so far. Given his disastrous economic policies, Chavez is going to face increasing unrest from his once-docile population, and one of his options is provoking conflict with the American imperialists he has so successfully demonized in his country. By lashing out at us with more than fiery rhetoric Chavez could rally support that would encourage him to ever greater aggression in the region and beyond.

It is an unsavory circumstance, but the Inter-American Commission Report may provide something of an opportunity. With all eyes focused on Latin America in the aftermath of the Chilean earthquake, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is embarking on a six-nation trip through the region today. Rather than engaging in one of the Obama administration’s favored “listening tours,” it might be that this is Secretary Clinton’s opportunity to speak. With the report in hand she can demonstrate the fallacy of the Chavez-as-Robin-Hood myth, and point out to Venezuela’s neighbors the likely consequences of consorting with this violent and repressive regime. Clinton might recommend robust, coordinated action by the OAS, which is, after all, supposed to defend democracy in the region–action that could isolate and contain Venezuela. Clinton is ostensibly travelling to Latin America to consolidate Brazilian support for sanctions against Iran–while she’s at it, she might want to consider enlarging the issue to include Venezuela as well. With the evidence now before us, she could make a persuasive case if she finds her voice

Rage Against the Marxist Machine

This is an interesting article from Humberto Fontova of http://www.townhall.com/ to send to your friends who are enamored by Che or Chavez and think that Cuba may be a "bad country" but at least they have universal health coverage. To read more about Hugo Chavez's vision of Latin America click here.

Rage Against the Marxist Machine

Hugo Chavez’ inspirational debt to Ernesto “Che” Guevara is such that he titled his regime's socio-economic model, "Mision Che Guevara." Don't look for much of this in the MSM--but as I write Venezuela's youth are hitting the streets in the tens of thousands and with raised fists--AGAINST Castro/Che brand- socialism (having gotten a taste.)
In response, Chavez' police and brownshirt goon-squads (some mimicking their national leader by wearing Che T-shirts) bludgeon, tear gas, shoot and arrest hundreds of rebellious Venezuelan youth.

In fact, nothing could be more fitting. In a famous speech in 1961 Che Guevara denounced the very “spirit of rebellion" as "reprehensible." "Youth must refrain from ungrateful questioning of governmental mandates" commanded Guevara. "Instead they must dedicate themselves to study, work and military service."
Youth, wrote Guevara, “should learn to think and act as a mass." Those who “chose their own path" (as in growing long hair and listening to Yankee-Imperialist Rock & Roll) were denounced as "delinquents." In his famous speech Che Guevara even vowed, "to make individualism disappear from Cuba! It is criminal to think of individuals!" he raved.
As luck would have it, this very month GQ magazine modestly crowned itself the crowner of the “25 Most Stylish Men in the World.” Based on their cover, the top contender for the top spot seems like cheeky free-spirit Johnny Depp, who appears shirtless--all the better to display his Che Guevara pendant.
On top of jailing political prisoners at a higher rate than Stalin’s and murdering more people in its first three years than Hitler’s in its first six, here’s an (abbreviated) list of the things prohibited under penalty of jail and/or forced labor by the regime co-founded by the gentleman cheeky free-spirit Johnny Depp flaunts on his t-shirts, kerchiefs and pendants:
1. To say "Down with Fidel!" or “Che Sucks!” Cuba’s constitution” mandates 18 months in prison for anyone overheard cracking a joke against Castro or Che. If the neighborhood CDR (Committee for the Defense of the Revolution, imported to Cuba by the East German STASI, who grandfathered it from Hitler’s Gestapo) overhears any such deviation from “ideological purity” the regime “will want a word with you.”
2. Travel abroad without permission from the government. (which is granted mostly to regime toadies and hacks.
3. Switch jobs without regime permission.
4. Switch homes without regime permission...
5. Publish anything without regime permission.
6. Own a personal computer, a fax machine or a satellite antenna.
7. Access the Internet. Cuba’s Internet is under constant regime “surveillance.” By the secret police. Only 1.7% of the population has access to the web, a lower percentage than in Papua New Guinea. This is a nation that pre-Castro/Che had more telephones and TV’s per-capita than most European countries
8. Send your children to a private or religious school. All schools belong to the Communist party.
9. Tune in to any free radio or television station. In Cuba all media is property of the Stalinist regime.
12. Read books, magazines, or newspapers, not approved by the regime. All books, magazines, and newspapers in Cuba are published by the Stalinist regime.
13. Receive publications from abroad or from visitors. This is punishable by jail pursuant to Law 88.
14. Openly communicate with foreign journalists.
15. Visit or stay in hotels, restaurants, beaches or resorts for tourists. (regime permission is granted to a tiny number of regime hacks and toadies)
16. Accept gifts or donations from foreign visitors.
17. Seek employment with foreign companies allowed to do business in Cuba. (regime permission is required for employment with these accomplices with Stalinism.)
18. Own your own home or business.
19. Earn more than the wages established by the regime for all employees: $7-12 monthly for most jobs, $15-20 monthly for professionals, such as doctors and government officials.
20. Sell any personal belongings, services, homemade foods or crafts without regime permission...
21. Fish along the coastline or board a boat without regime permission.
22. Belong to any independent trade union. The regime controls all unions and no individual or collective bargaining is permitted; neither are strikes or protests.
23. Organize any artistic performance without regime permission. (Don’t look for this announced at the Sundance Film Festival but before Robert Redford released the Motorcycle Diaries he was mandated to travel to Cuba and give a special screening for approval to one of the film’s co/producers: Fidel Castro. So in effect, this Castroite provision can actually extend beyond Cuba’s borders.)
24. Select a doctor or hospital. The regime assigns them all.
25. Seek medical help outside of Cuba.
26. Hire an attorney. All are assigned by the regime.
28. Refuse to participate in an event or mass demonstration organized by the Communist Party. (Turn down such an “offer” and watch your food rations shrink and employment status crumble.)
29. Refuse to participate in "voluntary" work for adults and children. (see above)
30. Refuse to vote in a single party election featuring only Stalinist candidates nominated by the Stalinist regime.
31. Transport any food products for either personal or family consumption between provinces.
32. Slaughter a cow. This "felony" is sanctioned by five years imprisonment.
33. Purchase or sell real estate or land.
34. Select a career. In the selection process for universities (all of which belong to the Stalinist regime), regime apparatchiks select it for you, closely reviewing your record of “ideological purity,” as reported to them by regime snitches.
35. Invite a foreigner to spend the night at your home.
36. Buy milk in a regime outlet for any child older than seven years. Only Cuban children up to seven years of age have the right to pay a quota for milk. After that, parents can only obtain milk in the black market—if caught and their “ideological purity” (as reported by regime snitches) is in question, jail time is usually in the offing for the hapless Castro subject.
Today the world’s largest Che Guevara image adorns Cuba’s headquarters and torture chambers for its KGB and STASI-trained secret police. And cheeky free-spirit Johnny Depp seems delighted to flaunt this emblem from his pendants, shirts and kerchiefs. In a Vibe Magazine interview a few years back, Johnny Depp boasted of “digging” Che Guevara.
On the other hand, Venezuela’s youth see what’s coming with “Mission Che Guevara.” And as we saw in harrowing detail above—want no part of it.
“I bet you were expecting a Hollywood putz," boasted Depp to his obsequious Vibe magazine interviewer who seemed dazzled by Depp's penetrating sagacity. "Bet you expected some f**cking commodity without a brain in his head!"
Nothing of the sort, Mr Depp. In such as Hollywood and Cannes, you tower as an exceptional intellectual commodity.

About The Author
Humberto Fontova is the author of four books including Exposing the Real Che Guevara and the Useful Idiots Who idolize Him and Fidel; Hollywood's Favorite Tyrant. Visit http://www.hfontova.com/

What our President Should have read instead of Chavez's book!

This list comes from an article by Thomas Sowell of one of his reading lists. You can read his full article here http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell071403.asp.

To review what misfortuned happened at the Summit of the Americas read here http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/barack-stick-up-for-us-also-please.html

A detailed account is William McNeill's "The Rise of the West," which is about more than the West and in fact begins with the earliest known civilizations in the Middle East. (Click HERE to purchase).

For those interested in the economic problems of less developed countries, there is "Equality, the Third World, and Economic Delusion" by Professor Peter Bauer of the London School of Economics. He spent years living in poor countries and more years trying to talk sense to the foreign aid establishment in Western nations. (Click HERE to purchase).

Once dismissed as someone outside the mainstream, Peter Bauer was part of the mainstream by the time of his death last year. He hadn't changed. The mainstream had moved over to where he was, after decades of bitter experience had proved him right.

One of the reasons for the many disappointments of foreign aid programs has been that some cultures do and some do not promote the kind of behavior that produces economic development. This is particularly apparent in a book on Latin America by Lawrence Harrison titled, "Underdevelopment Is a State of Mind." (Click HERE to purchase).

Institutions -- or lack of institutions -- can also hold back development. "The Mystery of Capital" by Hernando de Soto explores why capitalism works in Western nations but not in most non-Western countries. (Click HERE to purchase).

The non-judgmental notion that "all cultures are equal" is unlikely to survive reading "The Character of Nations" by Professor Angelo Codevilla of Boston University. It is a grown-up's demolition of childish ideas that have become fashionable in our times. (Click HERE to purchase).

Commentary: Embracing a trio of anti-American dictators won't advance U.S. foreign policy interests

A big hat tip to www.heritage.org for this article by Ray Walser about the Summit of the Americas to follow up this post http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2009/04/barack-stick-up-for-us-also-please.html

Commentary: Embracing a trio of anti-American dictators won't advance U.S. foreign policy interests

By Ray Walser The Heritage Foundation

The Obama administration says it's in the process of altering our nation's policies in Latin America. It promises modest steps to allow Cuban-Americans to travel more often, for example, and seems to be leaning toward further diplomatic overtures elsewhere. But "change" isn't always an improvement.

Simply put, now is not the time to return U.S. ambassadors to Bolivia or Venezuela or extend full diplomatic recognition to Cuba.

Begin with our ambassadors to Bolivia and Venezuela, both career foreign-service officers expelled last September on flimsy pretexts. President Evo Morales accused the U.S. ambassador of fomenting division in Bolivia. In Caracas, President Hugo Chavez swiftly followed suit.
An outspoken leader of Bolivia's coca growers, Morales once promised to become the United States' "worst nightmare." He's busily dismantling decades of U.S. drug cooperation and employing anti-U.S. rhetoric to consolidate his political power base. Until his government shows it's ready to lower its anti-American tone and conduct serious talks about coca production and control, a charge d'affaires in La Paz is quite capable of handling business.
President Chavez, meanwhile, sells the U.S. large amounts of oil. That makes Venezuelans good commercial partners. This aspect of the relationship works with or without an ambassador.

The problem with Chavez is his three-pronged strategy: 1) establishing a permanent Chavez-dominated political system in Venezuela; 2) developing a Latin American union to exclude U.S. interests; 3) fostering a global coalition of anti-American forces.

Even the most liberal American should blanch at the prospect of cozying up to a leader who literally hugs Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Sudan's Omar al-Bashir and proudly calls them friends.
It would be nice to push the reset button with Venezuela, but that all depends on Chavez. Given the mounting flow of cocaine through Venezuela, enabling the DEA to work with Venezuelan police would be far more important than installing an ambassador. Expelling leaders of the FARC (currently camped on Venezuelan territory) would be another positive step. Again, actions - not rhetorical overtures - would speed the return of an ambassador to Caracas.

Cuba, of course, stands apart.
Freedom House www.fredomhouse.org calls it "repressive" and ranks it with Burma, North Korea and Sudan for its disdain of human rights. Since 1959, the Castro brothers have crafted a nation devoid of votes, free media, free speech or political opposition.
Earlier efforts to normalize relations with Cuba have always failed. Over the years, the island has: been a proxy of the Soviet Union, exported revolution to Central America, launched the Mariel boat lift and shot down unarmed Brothers to the Rescue aircraft. For a small, inconsequential nation, Cuba is adept at tossing sand in our eyes.
Only one party is allowed in Cuba. It holds some 200 political prisoners. Travel freedom, media freedom and labor freedom are denied. The Cuban secret police watch for any dissident.
Perhaps for some Americans, free speech and media freedom matters less now that Cubans are allowed to buy cell phones or own personal computers (without access to the internet, of course). Perhaps the press for "change" at home has driven the U.S. to offer stimulus to an economy that's in shambles and a regime that's out of ideological gas.
President Obama says his pace of reform will be gradual and is predicated on political change inside Cuba. Right now, though, any further loosening of sanctions beyond those announced on April 13 would be more likely to benefit the Castro regime than the Cuban people.
And since Presidents Morales and Chavez seem uninterested in talking through important issues such as cooperation in curbing the Andean drug trade, prevention of international terrorism or working together to improve the global economy, there's little hope we can improve relations. Sending ambassadors would only paper over differences.
In Latin America, "change" must begin at home.

ABOUT THE WRITER
Ray Walser is a retired foreign service officer and senior analyst for Latin American policy at the Heritage Foundation. Readers may write to the author in care of The Heritage Foundation, 214 Massachusetts Avenue NE, Washington, D.C. 20002; Web site: www.heritage.org. Information about Heritage's funding may be found at http://www.heritage.org/about/reports.cfm.
This essay is available to McClatchy-Tribune News Service subscribers. McClatchy-Tribune did not subsidize the writing of this column; the opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of McClatchy Newspapers, McClatchy-Tribune or its editors.