- Reports keep
surfacing about new threats against Hugo Chavez. Given past
ones, they can't be taken lightly. Chavez is alerted and
reacts accordingly. Case in point: revamping Venezuela's
decades old intelligence services. It's long overdue and
urgently needed given the Bush administration's tenure
winding down and its determination in its remaining months
to end the Bolivarian project and crush its participatory
democracy.
-
- CIA, NED, IRI,
USAID and other US elements infest the country and are more
active than ever. Subversion is their strategy, and it shows
up everywhere. Violence is being encouraged. Opposition
groups are recruited and funded. So are members of
Venezuela's military. Student groups as well and anti-Chavista
candidates for November's mayoral and gubernatorial
elections.
-
- The dominant media
are on board in Venezuela and America. They assail Chavez
relentlessly and are on the warpath again after his May 28
announced intelligence services changes. The Interior and
Justice Ministries will oversee a new General Intelligence
Office and Counterintelligence Office in place of the
current Directorate of Intelligence and Prevention Services
(DISIP). Similar military intelligence and
counterintelligence components will replace the Military
Intelligence Division (DIM) and will be under the Defense
Ministry. Why was it done and why now? To counter stepped up
US espionage and destabilization efforts when it's most
needed.
-
- New tools will be
used and current personnel retrained and vetted for their
Bolivarian commitment. DISIP and DIM are outdated. They've
been around since 1969 to serve the "capitalist vision" of
that era. Ever since, they've been "notoriously repressive"
and closely aligned with the CIA. Therein lies the problem.
Chavez intends to fix it. The dominant media reacted.
They're hostile to change and showed it their reports.
-
- The New York Times'
Simon Romero has trouble with his facts. He headlined
"Chavez Decree Tightens Hold on Intelligence." He referred
to the new Law on Intelligence and Counterintelligence that
passed by presidential decree under the
legislatively-granted enabling law. He failed to explain
that the 1969 law passed the same way, and that Venezuela's
Constitution then and now permit it.
-
- Instead, he noted a
"fierce backlash here from (mostly unnamed) human rights
groups and 'legal scholars' who say the measures will force
citizens to inform on one another to avoid prison
terms....The new law requires (them) to....assist the
agencies, secret police or community activist groups loyal
to Mr. Chavez. Refusal can result in prison terms of two to
four years (and up to) six years for government employees."
-
- Once again, Romero
falls short on credibility. Hyperbole substitutes for truth
as in all his reports. No country more respects human rights
than Venezuela, and Chavez is committed to them. To the rule
of law as well and social justice. The country's
Constitution mandates it, and government officials are bound
by it. Appointed officials with other aims have no place in
it. They need to be exposed and replaced but need fear no
recrimination unless they violate the law.
-
- The new one won't
create "a society of informers" as one of Romero's sources
stated. Nor will it imprison Venezuelan citizens or let
Chavez "assert greater control over public institutions in
the face of political challenges following a 'stinging'
defeat in December('s) constitutional (referendum) that
would have expanded his powers."
-
- It will insure
greater "national security" and protect against "imperialist
attacks" as Chavez explained. It's to preserve Bolivarianism
against persistent attempts to destroy it. It's to serve all
Venezuelans, advance a new 21st century vision, and put
people ahead of privilege. It's to counter Bush
administration efforts to restore neoliberalism, return the
old order, and destroy social justice in the region's most
model democracy.
-
- Without explaining
Venezuelan law or its legislative process, Romero states
that the "law (was drafted and passed) behind closed doors,
without exposing it to....public debate (and that)
contributed to the public uproar and suspicion." His
"public," of course, are elitists. They target Chavez for
removal, denounce all his beneficial changes, and falsely
accuse him of governing dictatorially.
-
- "They" claim
"justice officials, including judges, are required to
actively collaborate with the intelligence services rather
than serve as a check on them." According to Americas
director for Human Rights Watch (HRW), Jose Miguel Vivanco:
"This is a government that simply doesn't believe in the
separation of powers....(It requires) the country's judges
(to) serve as spies for the government." Vivanco knows
better and damages HRW's credibility with comments like
these. Romero uses them with relish to aid the imperial
project.
-
- Venezuela's
internal threat is unmentioned. Rogue elements infest the
government and military. They oppose democracy and social
justice. Washington supports them. They must be found and
removed. Venezuelans demand it. Better intelligence will
help. Romero won't report it. Instead, he inverts truth and
sides with forces trying to destabilize and undermine a
government of, by and for the people.
-
- He quotes "a
prominent legal scholar" (in fact, right wing lawyer Rocio
San Miguel) saying "This is the most scandalous effort to
intimidate the population in the 10 years this government
has been in power. Under the new law (information I have)
could be considered a threat to national security and I
could be sent immediately to jail." Indeed she could if she
violates the law or tries to subvert the government.
Otherwise, she's entitled to all benefits and protections
Venezuelan law affords everyone. No comment from Romero.
-
- AP echoed The New
Times in its headlined May 31 report: "Venezuelan
intelligence law draws protests, seen as potential tool
against dissent." Again, it's false and misleading and part
of the imperial plot against Chavez. AP unfairly equates the
new law to the USA Patriot Act, when, in fact, it's totally
dissimilar. The US law violates constitutional civil
liberties. Venezuela's respects them, but it's easy for
protesters to claim otherwise.
-
- Justice Minister
Ramon Rodriguez Chacin explained the difference. US law
spies on Americans and denies them legal protection.
Venezuela's law enlists responsible citizen participation in
preserving their government. They have a stake in "state
security and resolving crimes. If (they) witness (wrongdoing
and) hide it, then (they) are an accomplice to that crime."
It doesn't require people to spy. It wants them to cooperate
and be engaged in preserving Bolivarianism and to report
threats against it. It's to make them responsible citizens
united for their common self-interest.
-
- That's not how BBC
sees it as part of its anti-Chavez agenda. Its June 3 online
report highlighted: "Venezuela 'spy' law draws
protest....among groups who say it threatens civil
liberties." One of them is HRW's Vivanco again voicing the
same false and misleading statements about "judges serving
as spies." Another source, with a clear anti-Chavez agenda,
says the "law may be used as a weapon to silence and
intimidate the opposition."
-
- In fact, Chavez
champions free expression in all forms unlike in America
post-9/11. Repressive laws and presidential executive orders
stifle it. Activists are targeted, harassed and imprisoned.
Illegal spying is institutionalized. So are repression,
torture and disdain for the rule of law. Where are BBC, AP,
The New York Times and other dominant media voices? Why
aren't they exposing police state justice? Instead they
denounce democracy, ally with despotism, and acknowledge no
hint of hypocrisy.
-
- Chavez is mirror
opposite his media critics and counters them correctly. He
calls the USA Patriot Act "dictatorial law." In contrast,
the new Venezuelan one upholds freedom, seeks to preserve
it, and is within "a framework of great respect for human
rights." It will combat US subversion that dominant media
sources ignore. They blame victims instead and are willing
co-conspirators against Venezuela's model democracy. Their
latest efforts show why Chavez needs all the defense he can
marshal against them, and for all the right reasons.
-
- Stephen Lendman is
a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on
Globalization. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
-
- Also visit his blog
site at
www.sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to
The Global Research News Hour on
www.RepublicBroadcasting.org Mondays from 11AM to
1PM US Central time for cutting-edge discussions with
distinguished guests. All programs are archived for easy
listening.
Source:
http://www.rense.com/general82/chavb.htm
|