Venezuelans 'lost faith in polls' (US )

The US has called for electoral reform in Venezuela after
supporters of President Hugo Chavez swept all 167 seats in parliament.Venezuelans showed a "broad lack of confidence in the impartiality and transparency" of the process, the state department said in Washington. The five main opposition parties boycotted the election, accusing the electoral body of bias.

Only about 25% of registered voters cast a ballot on Sunday.
About 56% turned out in the contested 2000 parliamentary election.
The opposition says the low turnout deprives the election of legitimacy. Mr Chavez needs a two-thirds majority in parliament to remove the current constitutional limit of two presidential terms in office.

The US has in the past been a harsh critic of Mr Chavez's autocratic style and he in turn has accused America of trying to assassinate him, BBC state department correspondent Jonathan Beale reports.
There were no words of congratulation for Mr Chavez from Washington this week either, our correspondent notes. Mr Bush's administration continues to see the Venezuelan president and his leftwing rhetoric as a destabilising influence in the region.

Instead, the state department noted the high abstention rate among Venezuelans - though it stopped short of condemning the way the election was held. It said it would await the report of electoral monitors from both the European Union and the Organisation of American States. Whatever the final verdict, our correspondent notes, this result will not see an improvement in the poor relations between the two countries.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4501890.stm
guess it's a little hard for them to like democracy

CARACAS, Venezuela, Aug. 16 -- Voters turned out in overwhelming numbers Sunday to decide whether to recall President Hugo Chavez, a populist whose rule has bitterly divided this major oil-producing country and strained relations with the United States.

The heavy turnout appeared to reflect a widespread desire by Venezuelans to end a three-year standoff between Chavez and his opponents that has periodically exploded in violence, including a short-lived coup in 2002.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3089-2004Aug15.html

From a great, informtive post on the election already posted this afternoon by Peace Patriot:

My quick scan of other articles indicates that the other articles are also more neutral in the text (as well as in the title), but all the corporate news sources tend to leave out some important information (such as the Venezuelan gov't minister's data on past by-elections, which reveal that by-elections always have low turnouts, and that this one had a BETTER turnout than the last two, despite the oil elite's boycott and wretched weather. See www.venezuelanalysis.com .)
(snip/)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1966067#1967052

From this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1966067

--and it will probably change in a day, or a week. Could you post a direct link to the article on prior turnout history? Thanks.

Possibly Peace Patriot will see your request and drop off the info.

but the Venezuelan Interior Minister says 1998 was the last time legislative elections were held as stand-alone elections, and this turnout was better than the last two. (2000 was a presidential election year.)

------------

"Chavez’s Party Wins 68% of Seats in Venezuela’s Parliament
Sunday, Dec 04, 2005
By: Gregory Wilpert – Venezuelanalysis.com

"...Jesse Chacon, the Minister of the Interior and of Justice, also held a press conference, in which he argued that the last time parliamentary elections were held separately from presidential elections was in 1998. The party Acción Democrática (AD) won that vote, with the support of merely 11.24% of the total population registered to vote. During the 2000 parliamentary elections, Chavez’s MVR party received support from 17% of registered voters.

"According to Chacon, any result in these elections where the MVR obtains support from more than 11% of those registered to vote would give the MVR greater legitimacy to control the National Assembly than AD had in 1998 and anything greater than 17% would give it greater legitimacy than the last National Assembly had. In accordance with such a calculation, the MVR coalition obtained the support of about 22% of all registered voters during this election (about 3 million votes out of 14 million registered voters).

"Education Minister Aristobulo Isturiz explained on TV talk show that this type of calculation is the only calculation that makes sense for establishing a reference point because the several key opposition parties called for a boycott of today’s vote. In the course of the day, it was clear that opposition strongholds had extremely low turnout, of perhaps 10% of voters, while pro-Chavez neighborhoods saw much stronger participation.
CNE President Rodriguez cited another factor that influenced turnout today, besides the boycott, which was "severe" weather conditions in several states, including the capital, which made voting more difficult than usual."

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1837

From the article you provided:

Many voting centers had to open late, though, because citizens who were asked to staff the centers did not show up, particularly in upper middle class neighborhoods, where the opposition parties that called for a boycott, are especially strong.
(snip)

Idiots! They are lucky they have _Bush and his U.S. taxpayers' funding and his personal Chavez-hating schemers to assist them, like the previous ambassador, Charles Shapiro, who entertained Venzuelan dinner guests with a comedian doing crude jokes about Chavez.

US Ambassador to Venezuela Makes Ass of Self
author: Arrecha
United States Ambassador to Venezuela, Charles Shapiro, hosted a party in which used "freedom of expression" as an excuse to ridicule President Chavez and to express a desire for "better relations" between Venezuela and the government of George W. Bush.

Last Tuesday, the United States Ambassador Charles Shapiro hosted a party at his residence. The occasion of the gathering was to commemorate "World Freedom of Expression Day." Venezuelan corporate media chiefs, journalism associations and unions, ambassadors, the director of the Unesco, and other personalities were also invited.

As part of the entertainment, Charles Shapiro invited a comedian to divert his guests. The show began with the humorist dressed up as a Marta Colomina (a well-known anti-Chavez journalist) holding a puppet of Chavez—criticizing his government and ridiculing the president.

I found it very cynical that the next day, Shapiro apologized for the show, when witness said that he was applauding vigorously after the show. Shapiro, a puppet himself, said that the embassy did not know in advance the kind of show that they were getting. Meanwhile, the comedian expressed in one of the newspapers, that he actually met with embassy members in advance to discuss his performance at Mr. Shapiro's party.
(snip/...)

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2003/05/264864.shtml

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thanks for adding the article.

they should call it the CIA (Chavez Information Agency)

It isnt' a good way of getting creds. Is Bacchus the guy who ratted out Moses to Ramses with the former then having to wander in wilderness? If so, why do you name yourself after him?

Bacchus is the Roman god of wine.

but heavy in the working class neighborhoods.

This cry baby shit is Bush regime's bullshit!

Ironically, they probably had a relatively fair election using our computer voting machines and the rightwing is trying to spin a bad loss into a challenge to the legitimacy of an elected government. In 2008, we may have to signal to the world that computer voting is illegitimate.

They should decertify any party that is illegally receiving foreign aid, and any civil servants who support coups and plots should be dismissed. The capital holdings of traitors should be seized and distributed to the whole people. Media that support fascism and US subversion should be strenuously opposed by the people. Absolute freedom must be maintained. This is a fascist coup plot. I hope Chavez and his supporters have the fortitude to thwart it and deepen the revolutionary process.

why doesn't Chavez make this illegal?
Primero Justicia (PJ), a Venezuela opposition political party, for example, received financing from the US government's money-laundering organization, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), an organization that basically bribes wealthy pro-US people in countries outside the USA ... people who co-collaborate with the USA to push US interests abroad.

(Note: The NED uses US taxpayers' hard-earned money for their subversive activities.)

You can find the information quoted here below by going to the NED website and clicking on grants, then democracy projects database, then type in Venezuela in the search box.
http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=47285

"They should decertify any party that is illegally receiving foreign aid, and any civil servants who support coups and plots should be dismissed. The capital holdings of traitors should be seized and distributed to the whole people. Media that support fascism and US subversion should be strenuously opposed by the people. Absolute freedom must be maintained."

What a bunch of authoritarian bullshit.....

Love that last line, its a favorite of tyrants everywhere.

I hope to God Chavez does not become that.

So it's "fascist" to oppose foreign meddling in your political system? If, say, the Republican party was receiving a major portion of its funding and support from China, should it be tolerated? Should coup de etat plots within the government be tolerated? Illegally receiving aid is just that -- _illegal_.

And that last line is priceless "Absoulte freedom must be obtained".

"So it's "fascist" to oppose foreign meddling in your political system?"

I guess Joe McCarthy was right, since the CPUSA took money from the USSR. Based on the poster I was responding to, we should have held inquiries to determine whether party members were civil servants, fired their asses, seized their assets etc.

"Should coup de etat plots within the government be tolerated?"

Ironic considering Chavez also lead a coup attempt.

While I have reservations about Chavez, I cringe at the cheerleading for further authoritarian actions that hopefully he will not enact.

The opposition was going to be trounced, so the pulled out of the election. Now we get to say they don't value democracy.

Fuckers.

"lost faith" in th voting process - and the State Department is worried about venezeuala? :grrr:

and it's in sharp contrast to the distinct lack of democracy we now have.

You know, with their hackneyed wisecracks about us "liberals" always losing elections, and how the Great American Majority fully supports them?

Well, the majority has spoken in Venezuela, and good patriots will support President Chavez, or keep their mouths shut.

because I have a general lack of confidence in the impartiality and transparency" of the process here. I guess we're the shining example of electoral corruption in our hemisphere.

fucking cabal better butt out of Venezuela's business.

Clean your own fucking filty house first.

delete please.

I guess he must have been looking into that dang burned mirror again.

electoral reform" in Venezuela. One of these days, they're going to open their mouths and snakes and spiders are going to crawl out.

Venezuela has THE most audited elections in Latin America (according to an OAS spokesman), with HUNDREDS of international election monitors from the OAS, the EU, and groups like the Carter Center. They have been time and again declared honest and open. There were over 200 such monitors watching this election alone with NO REPORTS of ANY problems thus far, according to election monitors (report still to be issued).

The Bush Cartel's statements about Venezuela are in the same vein as their statements about Iraq: TOTAL AND COMPLETE 100% !@#$% LIES!

We should be so lucky as to have objective observers assess OUR election system and monitor our COMPLETELY NON-TRANSPARENT vote counting--with BUSHITE corporations owning and controlling the new electronic voting machines and running them on 'TRADE SECRE', PROPRIETARY programming code!--and the UTTERLY DISGUSTING activities of Bush shill Kenneth Blackwell in Ohio and bro Jeb in Florida, to suppress black, minority, Dem, poor and student voters, in blatant violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Well, I'm sure of one thing. The Cartel will be STANDING ALONE--it will have NO Latin American support for questioning Venezuela's elections, nor any from the EU. They KNOW these elections were transparent and aboveboard. They did the work!

Note: Venezuela uses electronic voting but they have OPEN SOURCE CODE--that is, anyone may review how the votes are tabulated. (--unlike in the "land of the free, home of the brave").

This rightwing election boycott was an ORCHESTRATED event--orchestrated by Washington DC-- to throw propaganda points into the newsstream afterwards, with, of course, the US war profiteering corporate news monopolies picking up on every one.

Anyone got a good, accepted source to confirm or deny this turnout percentage?

"Our major line of defense, the major contribution of this new National Assembly will be consolidation of the revolution and enactment of laws allowing (President Hugo) Chávez to rule not until 2021 but until 2030."
Parliament chair Nicolás Maduro

Then that's not far-removed from being leader for life. That would confirm in my mind that he has dictatorial ambitions.

he is well on his way. some here don't want to see it.

and vice versa of course.

First of all, 25% is a horribly low turnout rate, even by our rather abysmal American standards. Second, I cannot help but always be suspicious of ANY one party that wins such an overwhelming majority. Single party states always make me nervous, no matter how much I would or wouldn't agree with them idealogically.

if you want to know why the opposition is doing so poorly, read Richard Gott's recent book on Chavez.

The opposition on the right in venezuela is deluded, incompetent and ham-fisted, and they don't understand the poor at all.

I would agree with you about the one party state issue especially if that one party is looking to rewrite the Constitution in terms of abolishing term limits for the President.

to abolish term limits for Hugo Chavez? We could use a direct credible source.

...and reading between the lines of Chavez and fighting his "revouliton" is it really that hard to believe his party may try and eliminate the term limit he faces soon? Even the people calling for it is a real possibility.

As far as sources go, considering how VA (Chavez's state run news service) tends to be the only thing you accept as credible, why bother?

Would you provide a link, please, to buttress your claim about a party in Venezuela attempting to remove term limits for Hugo Chavez?

Provided they are supportive.

You've dismissed HRW, Reporter W/out Borders and AI complaints about Chavez.

But we'll give it a whirl with sources:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051202/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_elections_10

"Leaders of Chavez's Fifth Republic Movement party have said they hope to reform the constitution to extend term limits, a change that would allow Chavez to stay on as president beyond 2012 — the current limit if he is re-elected next December."

Here's basically the same article

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10287235/

Adding this line:

“There is a majority consensus within the Fifth Republic Movement to extend the number of terms for the president, governors, and mayors — all those officials who are popularly elected,” party leader Willian Lara told The Associated Press in an interview.

was given. No surprise there:

Abolish term limits?
Leaders of Chavez’s Fifth Republic Movement party have said they hope to reform the constitution to do away with term limits, a change that would allow Chavez to stay on as president beyond 2012 — the current limit if he is re-elected next December.

“There is a majority consensus within the Fifth Republic Movement to extend the number of terms for the president, governors, and mayors — all those officials who are popularly elected,” party leader Willian Lara told The Associated Press in an interview.
(snip)

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10287235

As for your other article, it also indicates altering, not removing term limits for the President and other officials.

Again, as I stated I was adding my own opinion. You aksed what I based it upon and I gave you the source.

And saying the word alter vs. abolish is smart politics. Also extending the limits(its six year terms correct?) to say 4 terms is a long time, especially if one consider the age a President would be when assuming office. While not a lifetime appt, 24 years is pretty close.

n/t

Extending.

Reporters Without Borders appears swayed by government funding
posted by rtm on Thursday March 24 2005 @ 12:18PM < Govt/War/Propaganda >

by Diana Barahona, The Guild Reporter

Over the past year, U.S. news stories about press freedom increasingly have cited the work of a Paris-based organization, Reporters Without Borders (Reporters sans Frontières, or RSF). Indeed, despite its small size and lack of high-profile principals, Reporters Without Borders has achieved nearly the same name-recognition as the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists, which can boast of having Walter Cronkite, Dan Rather and Tom Brokaw on its board of directors.

To be sure, RSF has embraced many causes near and dear to American journalists. For example, it was among the more outspoken organizations demanding a Pentagon investigation of the shelling of the Hotel Palestine, in which two journalists were inexplicably killed. More recently, it has lambasted federal prosecutors for targeting Judith Miller, Matthew Cooper and other journalists in an effort to force them to disclose their sources.

But RSF, unlike the CPJ, is heavily funded by government grants, raising questions about its objectivity. And a closer examination of the battles RSF wages—and those it ignores—strongly suggests a political agenda colored by its choice of patrons. Unfortunately, the organization appears unwilling to address such concerns: RSF’s New York representative, Tala Dowlatshahi, terminated a telephone interview when asked if the organization had applied last year for any U.S. government grants other than one received from the National Endowment for Democracy.
(snip/...)

http://www.reclaimthemedia.org/stories.php?story=05/03/24/4687391

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In the meantime, you can give yourself a fair education coming to terms with the reports on the U.S.

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/usa/index.do

...they are what they are, a critical look at the US.

Also I have to laugh that RSF is tainted by some gov't money but an org run by a government/party is given near unassailable cred.

stay home?

When Iraqis boycott an election it's called a victory for democracy, when Venuzuelans boycott an election it's called a deeply disturbing fraud.
This is very surprising coming from the re-selected President of US.
Chavez has weathered Big Oil's wrath for some years now and will probably ride out this squall without too much trouble. The people boycotting the election aren't the majority or his core support.

The irony notwithstanding.

Democracy under threat

Chávez will only gain from the US-backed opposition's ploy to undermine elections

Richard Gott
Tuesday December 6, 2005
The Guardian

The people of Venezuela have gone to the polls 11 times in seven years. Almost a superfluity of democracy, some might think, and signs of electoral fatigue could be detected in Sunday's elections for the National Assembly when only 30% of the electorate bothered to vote. The rest perceived the result as a foregone conclusion since in earlier elections President Hugo Chávez, or the candidates he backed, had stacked up substantial majorities. Sunday's poll followed the trend, and the Chávez list wiped the board.

Article continues
This time, however, the once vocal opposition was strangely absent. Four of the small opposition parties decided to withdraw at the last minute, in a cynical manoeuvre designed to upset the hard-won stability achieved since the recall referendum in August 2004 (engineered by the opposition to try to secure the president's resignation). Handsomely won by Chávez with a margin of 59 to 41, the referendum was certified as free and fair by observers from the Organisation of American States (OAS) and the Carter Centre, but some of the opposition parties refused to accept the result. Their rejection did little to enhance their authority or popularity and when they withdrew from Sunday's poll they knew that they faced defeat and humiliation.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/venezuela/story/0,12716,1659309,00.html?gusrc=rss

It's a delight to see some writing NOT hatched somewhere in _Bush's administration. From the article:

..... The opposition then turned turtle and announced its withdrawal. It was not acting alone. In the background, at private meetings on the island of Aruba in the Dutch Antilles and in public declarations by Thomas Shannon, the US secretary of state for Latin American affairs, the opposition had been elaborating a strategy to overthrow Chávez. Its plan was to make people believe that "democracy in Venezuela is in grave peril", as Shannon put it to a Washington subcommittee two weeks ago.

It is indeed in peril, threatened by a tiny ragbag of opposition groups given disproportionate international influence through the support of the US. By their irresponsible electoral abstention, they hoped to undermine the credibility of the parliamentary system.

The US-backed strategy is to use apparently neutral non-governmental organisations to tell the world that the elections are not free and fair, that press freedom is under threat, and that human rights are not respected. These allegations are then exaggerated and amplified in Washington.

The complaints are nonsense. The opposition still owns most of the newspapers and television stations. The judiciary has been comprehensively reformed after the scandals of the previous decade when half the judges were found to be corrupt or incompetent. Elections have been endlessly vetted and human rights have been extended to the great mass of the people.
(snip/...)

Thank you for posting this excellent article.

Gives a much better perspective than the crap we get in the US.

I think the old state department has become so accustomed to lying that it doesn't doesn't recognize when their lies don't make any sense (to anyone who knows anything about Venezuela the article that started this thread is plainly ridiculous). Then again I suppose the State Department just wants to get rid of a Democratically elected leader of an oil rich nation because he can not be bought (not by our side anyway).

...its like asking Rush Limbaugh to explain what happened in 2004.

Edit: changed chavez worshipper to old school Bolivarian because I thought the former was harsh and uncalled for.

Richard Gott has reported on Latin America for more than four decades. In the 1960s he worked at the University of Chile, where he wrote Guerrilla Movements in Latin America. He is a former Latin America correspondent and features editor for the British newspaper The Guardian and author of Cuba: A New History, among other books. His most recent book is entitled Hugo Chávez and the Bolivarian Revolution (Verso, 2005).
(snip/...)

http://redpepper.blogs.com/venezuela/2005/11/an_interview_wi.html

Reference to his Cuba book:

Cuba: A New History by Richard Gott - 19/02/2005
Cuba: A New History by Richard Gott,
Yale University Press
2004, 384 pages, hardback
£18.99
ISBN 0-300-10411-1

Steve Wilkinson reviews a new history of Cuba

Long awaited and much needed, this new history of Cuba is, unlike the huge Hugh Thomas ‘bible,’ of manageable proportions at just 384 pages. Thus it serves as a sound introduction as well as a handy reference for the more initiated.

Richard Gott, formerly of The Guardian comes to Cuba with an experienced eye and as someone who was himself not an insignificant part of the story – being the man who helped to identify the body of Che Guevara after his murder in 1967. Gott, then a young reporter was in Bolivia doing a documentary when the hero was captured and killed. A case of being in the right place at a wrong time, but nonetheless one that has equipped him well for this task.

This is not a book that many on the other side of the Atlantic will like, simply because Gott has no brook with the mistaken assumptions about the revolution that prevail over there. Fidel is not a tyrant, says Gott, and does not rule without the consent of the people. It should be compulsory reading in all Miami high schools.
(snip)

But Gott, to be fair, is a fair man. He painstakingly builds towards the understanding that because of racism, because of imperialism, the Cuban nation was not really formed until after 1959.
He is also the first commentator of note from outside Cuba, as far as I know, to venture an opinion on what is likely to happen after Fidel dies. While I cannot agree that Fidel is preparing Cuba for a return to capitalism or that today he is largely absent from the scene, I can applaud Gott for arguing that nothing will happen when the great man dies – the revolution will carry on much as it is right now.
(snip)

http://www.cubanlibrariessolidaritygroup.org.uk/news.asp?ID=81

Richard Gott on Anthony Seldon, Blair. As ‘Iraq’ joins ‘Munich’ and ‘Suez’ in the lexicon of British foreign-policy disasters, does the Labour Prime Minister have his own neo-imperial programme?

RICHARD GOTT

THE THIRD CRUSADE

Elections in Britain on 5 May 2005 brought a third victory to Tony Blair’s New Labour party, though with a much reduced majority in parliament, only 35 per cent of the popular vote, and barely a fifth of the overall electorate—the lowest percentage secured by any governing party in recent European history. ‘When regimes are based on minority rule, they lose legitimacy’, Blair had told an audience at the Chicago Economic Club in April 1999. He was thinking at the time of the former Yugoslavia of Slobodan Miloševic´ and of apartheid South Africa, but his warning could now be applied to his own regime. More people abstained from voting in May 2005 than voted Labour. Disgust, rather than apathy, was the root cause of the abstention.
(snip/...)

http://www.newleftreview.net/NLR26710.shtml

A Guardian article on Tony Blair:
The drive to intervene
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Kosovo/Story/0,2763,207293,00.html

ETC.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

His interests are rather too broad to place him in the category you devised. I think he has a somewhat larger understanding of the world than some.

and it looks pretty good.

in a way few others are. He's been making it his business to know for so long. I'd trust his judgement over the New York Times reporter, Juan Forero, for chrissakes!

Hope the Chavez book will be interesting. Looks like it's been a big one for him.

Typical Washington "logic."

If the opposition thought it could win it would not have boycotted.

Posted on Tue, Dec. 06, 2005
Observers say Venezuela vote was fair
JORGE RUEDA
Associated Press

CARACAS, Venezuela - European observers said Tuesday that Venezuela's congressional elections were fair and transparent despite opposition claims of irregularities and a low voter turnout.

President Hugo Chavez's party and allies claimed to have swept Sunday's balloting after five opposition parties pulled out, saying they did not trust the electoral system. Partial, regional results issued so far showed candidates aligned with Chavez taking a commanding lead.

While official results were not yet in, ruling party lawmakers have said candidates of Chavez's Fifth Republic Movement party won 114 seats and that allied parties won all the rest in the 167-member chamber.

Jose Silva, head of the European Union team, said the vote was clean and praised the elections council.

"For us, there was transparency in the electoral process," said Silva, who oversaw about 160 observers.
(snip/...)

http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/breaking_news/13344564.htm

It's a wonder the Us hasn't rented another right wing dictator to do a coup there?

n/t

I am a Chavez supporter and believe in what he's trying to do, but this is very suspicious. Is it true?

He's said in the past that he would not stay past 2012.
He's made no comment on this initiative that I'm aware of at present.
It does seem like a foolish idea to me.

But is likely that he will seek a 3rd term, I really don't think it is much to worry about, since with some safeguards like referendums it will still stay democratic, and reviewable every 3 years. I have never been a fan of term limits, it is random and came to be because of FDR's presidency. Parlimentary systems don't have them either.

Not because it's intrinsicly bad.

Well, I have never heard him say that. What I have heard him say is that he was going to stay until the year 2021, although he hasn't said this in a long time.

What I remember is statements to that effect in the wake of the 2002 coup attempt, not recently, but you are right, I may well have it muddled.

It certainly seems to be the case that his supporters want to keep him around indefinitely now.

PROPOGANDA folks, that's all this is.

Dangerous, villifying U.S. Propoganda .

This coming from a country where it's Governing body STOLE the last election ??????????

A country that could not even save it's citizens from Katrina, whereas Venezuela a tiny speck of a country, can even save it's chickens from such catastrophies .

A country that's prepared to allow it's citizens to FREEZE to death this winter ??????

Pointing the finger at others, accusing them of wrong doing, when the biggest wrong doing is goin on right under your noses ??????

Nearly forgot, the CIA TERRORIST that blew up the air liner and killed 75 Venezuelans being given sanctuary by the U.S. contrary to Bushe's claim of fighting anyone giving sanctuary to such rubbish.

Ah, the HYPOCRISY emanating from the U.S. never ceases to astound us .
And the country wonders why they are not the World's most favourite people. DUH !