I don't think anyone should fool themselves. If it comes down to it,

and Chavez is still in power when Kerry takes office, if funding the opposition terrorists hasn't worked, he will have no problem using force to deliver this prize to his masters.
We were discussing this in the group with whom I attended the protests this weekend. I was highly suspicious since he had not released any kind of statement (well it looks like this came out the day we left). Now that he has, it looks much like we expected.
This becomes more and more of a hold your nose experience all the time.

not sure what happened.

Sounds like a bunch of mysterious mumbo-jumbo.


Who is delivering what prize to what "masters?"

moment. I'm sure you can find plenty of links there.

Supports Iraq war, wants troops there for a long time, supports NAFTA, FTAA, WTO, IMF, PATRIOT Act, No Child Left Behind, etc etc etc etc.


Call it whatever you want, I'm calling him a front man for the interests of multi-national corporations.

Are you dismissing our fellow Bonesmen?

A non-militia link would be great.

But I was reading that beautiful list and thought that Skulls and Bones was missing.
It was just a feeling and when I am looking it up in my handbook, I'm quite sure that it should have been mentioned as well.

Let me take a look.
...
"John "Satan" Kerry supports the Iraq war, wants troops there for a long time, supports NAFTA, FTAA, WTO, IMF, PATRIOT Act, No Child Left Behind, elitist, librul, houseowner, had a scandal with an intern, was a filthy Bonesman etc etc etc etc."
...
See, there it is. I was right.

Sorry- I thought you were dissing on Democrats- your sarcasm is welcome!!!

Issues that most voters are not going to have trouble with- we should be using that to our ADVANTAGE- not as apoint to weaken Democrats.

All I see is you just vomitting up the usual media talking points against the Democratic nominee.

And as a matter of fact, there are no links on that thread that show that Chavez is better at supporting Democratic processes than Kerry- I've read the whole thread and it's mostly slogans and smears.

No one is even adressing specific points from Kerry's actual statement- just a huge pile on.

Who are Kerry's "masters" again?

I read your posts in the 500 as well. You admit yourself you have no idea what is going on.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1136

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=45&ItemID=5188

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=45&ItemID=5185

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=45&ItemID=5110


Sad to see democrats tun into the very lemmings they despised a few months ago.

Based on one or two web-sites that I have never seen before.

The article is totally pro-Chavez-

Intersting article, but to biased for me to make up my mind...

National Endowment for Democracy. I'm sorry but I will refer you to the other threads for the excellent documentation of their involvement in funding the opposition.

http://www.international.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=8320

"The President’s budget for the National Endowment for Democracy’s efforts around the world, including the entire Islamic world, is less than three percent of what this Administration gives Halliburton – hardly a way to win the contest of ideas."


---

More on NED from our old (friend?) Ron Paul, etc al.
http://www.e-thepeople.org/article/29904/view?viewtype=best

National Endowment for Democracy or Secret Agent Land


President Bush in his State of the Union Speech promised to double this National Endowment for Democracy's budget. A very pleasant sounding and benign name eh? NED has a history of corruption and financial mismanagement. What the NED does in foreign countries is to inject soft money into the domestic elections of foreign countries. Read Congressman Ron Paul of Tx article on this subject.
http://www.antiwar.com/paul/paul79.html

as far as foreign policy goes. That's the long and short of it.

I was very struck by this phrase from the article:

Condemning Chavez's policies as "detrimental to our interests," Kerry said the United States should lead international pressure to persuade him to allow a recall vote.

Bush might have used the exact same words.

Would Bush* use THOSE words?

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0319d.html

He's simply saying, "I would take the exact same stance, but I (needless to say) would do it better."

Incidentally, Kerry is lying here - in using the word "acquiesced." If he wanted to tell the truth, he'd say that the Busheviks played an ACTIVE role in fomenting that coup - not a passive one. But he doesn't have the courage to say that, because it would violate one of the rules of US propaganda: you're not supposed to reveal to the US public how often our government is busy overthrowing democratically-elected governments abroad. So Kerry tries to hide this.

Similarly, in Kerry's statement about Haiti, he lies again (thanks for providing the link!) :

Having just allowed the democratically elected leader to be cast aside in Haiti...

Again, Kerry makes it sound passive, when it was really ACTIVE overthrow of a democratically-elected government. Kerry covers up the truth, to protect the criminal actions of the US government.

Come on- this is pure conjecture on your part.

It's one thing to draw comparisons to points of policy- but dont say he is lying and covering up for Bush- I doubt you can prove that and I doubt it is true...

view - not to protect Bush, the individual. Kerry's wording on Haiti & Venezuela amounts to covering for the US govt M.O., as it works to extend the global interests of US imperialism. Kerry inevitably winds up sounding very much like Bush - because they both have the same interests at heart.

Which is why Kerry accuses Bush* of acquiescing to a coup in both Venezuela and Haiti. Bush* always attacks Bush*.

Many DUers including me are not familiar with ALL of Chavez's policies-

Kerry mentioned in the statement that Chavez refuses to comply with the Carter Center- that is one of Kerry's reasons...

What is wrong with complying with the Carter Center- they are good guys, right?

Unlike what some are saying, Kerry never said he was going to overthrow the guy, he is saying he disagrees with his policies...

"Throughout his time in office, President Chavez has repeatedly undermined democratic institutions by using extra-legal means, including politically motivated incarcerations, to consolidate power. In fact, his close relationship with Fidel Castro has raised serious questions about his commitment to leading a truly democratic government.

Moreover, President Chavez’s policies have been detrimental to our interests and those of his neighbors. He has compromised efforts to eradicate drug cultivation by allowing Venezuela to become a haven for narco-terrorists, and sowed instability in the region by supporting anti-government insurgents in Colombia."

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0319d.html

...
Sen. Kerry stands in direct contradiction with U.S. government testimony that says that the Venezuelan government has been very cooperative with US drug enforcement agencies. More drugs have been intercepted by the Chavez government than any previous government. While this could reflect in increase in drug trafficking in Venezuela, it proves that Venezuela’s government has far from “compromised efforts.”<1>

Even the head of the U.S. Southern Command, Gen. James Hill, who is directly involved in plan Colombia and the U.S. anti-drug trafficking effort, has denied that there is any evidence of connections between the Venezuelan government and “anti-government insurgents” in Colombia.<2> If Senator Kerry has any evidence of such connections, he should provide them to the U.S. military so that they might be properly informed.
...
Perhaps it would have been good to mention at this point that the recall referendum was proposed by President Chavez and his party when the country’s constitutional assembly wrote the new constitution. This fact directly contradicts Sen. Kerry’s questioning of President Chavez’ democratic credentials.
...
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1136

<1> The U.S. Embassy in Venezuela says the following about the Venezuelan government’s efforts: “Against this upsurge in activity of Colombian narcotrafficking organizations operating in Venezuela, the Government of Venezuela (GOV) has attempted to pass expansive new legislation, refine the focus of its small force of criminal investigators and public prosecutors, and worked with the USG toward the development of improved intelligence, investigative, interdiction, and judicial capabilities. GOV drug enforcement officials are dedicated, professional, and sincere in their efforts to combat narcotrafficking and drug abuse in Venezuela.” The report also states that, “USG narcotics control efforts and programs underwent significant expansion in Venezuela in 2001.” (http://embajadausa.org.ve/wwwh1695.html)

<2> “U.S. General Sites Progress in Colombia”, The Miami Herald, October 9, 2003, Page 16A

I will continue to research both sides of this.

Theses articles are informative, but thet seem biased & pro-Chavez..

Thanx for the emabassy link- informative....

...
Too often in the past, this Administration has sent mixed signals by supporting undemocratic processes in our own hemisphere -- including in Venezuela, where they acquiesced to a failed coup attempt against President Chavez. Having just allowed the democratically elected leader to be cast aside in Haiti, they should make a strong statement now by leading the effort to preserve the fragile democracy in Venezuela.
http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0319d.html

See above.