Slowly The World Turns
The move by Hugo Chavez to shutter a television broadcaster that has criticized him and his dictatorial rule over Venezuela has apparently alerted more than just the Venezuelans to his megalomania. Nations that didn't get the clues from his bizarre behavior at the UN or when he demanded and received dictatorial powers have suddenly awoken to the fact that Chavez is an imbalanced dictator who means to quash all opposition to his aspirations of Castro-like rule:
While condemnation from the Bush administration, an ideological foe of Venezuela, was expected, criticism has come from many quarters around the world, some of them surprising.Spain's Socialist government, in a joint declaration with the United States, called Friday for Chávez to renew RCTV's license. The European Parliament voiced concern, and Brazil's Senate passed a resolution calling on Chávez to reconsider, drawing a sharp rebuke from the Venezuelan leader.
"A head of state who doesn't know how to live with democratic manifestation, such as that of the Brazilian Senate, is probably against democracy," the president of that body, Renan Calheiros, said in response.
The previous cluelessness didn't just apply to nations, either. Some NGOs have suddenly found themselves on the Damascus road, albeit reluctantly:
Reporters Without Borders, the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists, the Chilean Senate and the Atlanta-based Carter Center have said freedom of expression could be in peril in Venezuela. "I think this weakens the Chávez government's argument that it furthers free expression," said Carlos Lauria, who has studied the case for the Committee to Protect Journalists. "It debilitates that argument."
Note the weasel words Lauria uses in this statement. He thinks that using government force to shut down critics in the media weakens the argument that Chavez supports free speech. It debilitates that argument. Well, what would it take for Lauria to say that it negates it entirely? Does Chavez have to line journalists up against the wall and shoot them before Lauria will admit that Chavez is a tyrant?
It's not as if Chavez has any subtlety to his position at all. The last independent broadcaster, Globovision, got the word from Hugo yesterday in this warning: "I recommend that you take a tranquilizer, that you take it easy, because if not, I'm going to make you take it easy." And yet, all that Reporters Without Borders, the CPJ, and the Carter Center can do is issue mealy-mouthed statements about how this course of action could possiblymaybeperhapsundercertaincircumstances be construed as an attack on free speech.
Unbelievable.
Meanwhile, thousands of university students bravely take to the streets to fight for their freedom. They show courage and defiance. The nations of the West have finally noticed the danger in Venezuela, no thanks to Hugo's pals in the media and the NGO community.
Posted by Ed Morrissey on June 2, 2007 7:45 AM | Comments (24) | TrackBacks (0)
Comments (24)
Posted by Keemo | June 2, 2007 8:25 AM
Exactly right CE... Oh, and how about the Hollywood crowd that has been kissing up to this monster for the past several years; Sean Penn, Danny Glover, Alec Baldwin, Harry Belafonte, Rosie O'Donnell, Al Gore, Leonardo DiCaprio, George Clooney, Michael Moore... The list is lengthy...
Then we have the political party that is guilty of kissing up to this monster...
Posted by Fausta | June 2, 2007 8:32 AM
Don't miss also the http://youtube.com/profile?user=elobservadorenlinea RCTV channel on YouTube (in Spanish)
Posted by Fausta | June 2, 2007 8:33 AM
Don't miss also the http://youtube.com/profile?user=elobservadorenlinea RCTV channel on YouTube (in Spanish)
Posted by MikeD | June 2, 2007 9:13 AM
This comes as no surprise. How many times and repetitions are required? A despot or dictator does what any fool could anticipate and the left/liberal/apologists here and in Europe feign dismay, search for the weasel words, and make excuses. I could say that it disgusts me but not any longer. Any student of history or sentient being would recognize Hugo Chavez as just another example of what we have witnessed too many times. These human failures will never impact the delusions of the left. Why don't we just acknowledge this as another perfect definition of shallow, feeble-mindedness and be done with it .
Posted by Tom | June 2, 2007 9:16 AM
Only when journalists/media are attacked by Chavez do these anointed journalists/media notice and question his multiyear totalitarian assaults. Pinheads.
Posted by Angry Dumbo | June 2, 2007 9:45 AM
Hot headed, selfish, egomanic from Venezuala.
Sounds a lot like Carlos Zambrano. : ))
Posted by patrick neid | June 2, 2007 10:17 AM
stated by the capt:
"The move by Hugo Chavez to shutter a television broadcaster that has criticized him and his dictatorial rule over Venezuela has apparently alerted more than just the Venezuelans to his megalomania. Nations that didn't get the clues from his bizarre behavior at the UN or when he demanded and received dictatorial powers have suddenly awoken to the fact that Chavez is an imbalanced dictator who means to quash all opposition to his aspirations of Castro-like rule"
all true enough. however anyone that claims a late conversion to reality is either a moron or a disingenuous "useful idiot". there is no way anyone with more than a double digit IQ can state now or in the past that they didn't know what chavez was and is.
all his supporters, except for the honestly ignorant, knew exactly what he was up to and supported it. their hope, as in all previous times in history, was that chavez would be the smooth chameleon that would dupe the the world into socialism(marxism) without having to resort to fascism as humanity's rights were taken away.
i maintain my prediction. chavez like so many before him, will end his time hanging from a lamp post.
Posted by Del Dolemonte | June 2, 2007 12:27 PM
Keemo said:
"Exactly right CE... Oh, and how about the Hollywood crowd that has been kissing up to this monster for the past several years; Sean Penn, Danny Glover, Alec Baldwin, Harry Belafonte, Rosie O'Donnell, Al Gore, Leonardo DiCaprio, George Clooney, Michael Moore... The list is lengthy...
Then we have the political party that is guilty of kissing up to this monster..."
It's nit just the Hollywood crowd, either. PJ Gladnick, who blogs over at Newsbusters.org, also has his own blog called "Dummie Funnies", where he publishes and then dissects threads from Democratic Underground. The other day, the "DUmmies" were tripping and falling all over themselves, defending Chavez for shutting the station down.
Posted by Cynic | June 2, 2007 2:20 PM
Keemo, You should have included Carter, Sheehan and that Kennedy kid in the list.
Posted by Joe | June 2, 2007 5:37 PM
Keemo, you've spent years kissing up to Bush who's turned out to be the biggest moron ever.People are jealous that we have to buy oil fromChavez , sure he's a tinpot dictator but I love when he rips Bush, Bush needs to be put in his place, just like all the braindead neo-cons need it. I guess its all right for Bushco to ILLEGALLY wire tap innocent Americans. You people don't think papers are shut down in Egypt or Saudi Arabia? Oh thats right there our "allies".good grief conservatives live in their own little world.
Posted by AnonymousDrivel | June 2, 2007 5:47 PM
"Unbelievable," Ed? Maybe so. Maybe typical, too.
I'm just waiting for them to insist that Washington do something! to help their colleagues and the newly discovered oppressed and then b*tch and moan about how slow Washington is to respond or what a terrible job it's doing responding.
Nothing matters in the world until it's happening to them. Ox, meet abattoirs.
Posted by jr565 | June 2, 2007 6:10 PM
and Joe, you and your ilk have been kissing up to Chavez and his fish lips for so long you've forgotten or ignored the fact that he's nothing but a tin pot socialist dictator.
Enjoy his zings at Bush. But doesn't it say something about you and your side that you're willing to ignore the stench emanating from Chavez because he zings Bush every now and then. We can smell the stench emanating from Chavez on you Joe. And it stinks!
Bush, as all presidents do, will leave office very shortly. But Chavez will still be there. Then we'll get to look back fondly at you Joe and note that while Bush is no longer in power, you still support socialist dictators and make excuses for them. And of course we'll fondly note that your side was up in arms about the faux dictatorship that your fevered minds imagined Bush was conjuring up, while ignoring and praising the genuine dictatorship right under your nose.
Posted by MikeD | June 2, 2007 7:04 PM
Thanks jr565 for your comment about Joe, the socialist half-wit. I was going to try to curb my outrage at his disgusting and slimy comment long enough to post a reply. You have saved me the effort. Joe represents everything that is wrong with this country and the left. Dinosaurs disappeared because they had brains the size of a walnut. Joe probably does not rise to this level. May he rot in hell!
Posted by Steve Skubinna | June 2, 2007 7:46 PM
"Well, what would it take for Lauria to say that it negates it entirely? Does Chavez have to line journalists up against the wall and shoot them before Lauria will admit that Chavez is a tyrant?"
You're joking, right? It's a rhetorical question, isn't it? I think it's safe to say that were that to happen, Lauria would remark that it was "unhelpful" and "not conducive to free debate." Then he'd blame Bush, cheered on of course by fellow travelers like Joe. Hey Joe, is there any murderer, thug, or tyrant so odious that you won't give him a free pass if he sneers at the President? If Charles Manson were to slam Bush (for all I know, he probably has) would you be outside the prison waving a "Free Charlie" sign?
Posted by Keemo | June 3, 2007 7:15 AM
BTW Joe, the wire tapping you referred to just stopped the bad guys from blowing up the Kennedy airport, and killing thousands of civilians...
Idiot...
Posted by dave | June 3, 2007 7:54 AM
If NBC participated in a violent coup attempt against our government, what would people on this blog want the punishment to be? I think this is a good prediction on what would happen:
“The U.S. government probably would have shut down RCTV within five minutes after a failed coup attempt — and thrown its owners in jail.”
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-jones30may30,1,5553603.story?ctrack=1&cset=true
What is the “correct” government response to a private television company participating in a coup attempt against the government?
“The last independent broadcaster, Globovision…” -Captain
I guess the Cisneros-owned Venevision does not qualify as an independent broadcaster? Televen is not an independent broadcaster?
Posted by Rose | June 3, 2007 3:39 PM
Alan Colmes, when confronted with the Hollywood hypocrisy of actors bloviating for Chavez and gaining $18 Mill filming contracts from him, even after the TV stations were closed and the riots were blazing, declaimed AIRILY that IN THIS NATION, WE HAVE FREEDOM OF SPEECH and they can say whatever they want to!
He never heard himself at all!
No, not at all!
Posted by Rose | June 3, 2007 3:46 PM
"Unbelievable," Ed? Maybe so. Maybe typical, too.
I'm just waiting for them to insist that Washington do something! to help their colleagues and the newly discovered oppressed and then b*tch and moan about how slow Washington is to respond or what a terrible job it's doing responding.
Nothing matters in the world until it's happening to them. Ox, meet abattoirs.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at June 2, 2007 5:47 PM
Why??? Their solution for Daniel Pearl and other murdered and/or kidnapped journalists is for America to GO HOME - e don't hear from them about the ones CASTRO puts in prison with out trials! We don't even hear from them over the Russian Journalist killed by Putin with radiation poisoning!!! - and we are NOT IN Venezuela TO BE SENT HOME FROM?
So what is there for the American Liberal propaganda machine to demand we do about it?
SO VERY LOL!!!
Posted by dave | June 4, 2007 9:09 AM
Supposedly, polls indicated that 70% of the people did not want to see RCTV go off the air. If that is true, the opposition had a constitutional route to keep them on the air. A petition with only 10% of the voter’s names would have forced a referendum. If the polls are correct, the referendum would have passed, and RCTV would have remained on the air. The opposition did not do this, because the only responses they seem to be able to come up with are violent.
Posted by Immolate | June 4, 2007 9:24 AM
I wonder, Joe, what blanket excuse you'll hide the sins of liberals and their pet projects like Hugo behind once Bush is gone. Bush doesn't need to be brought down a peg. He's at the bottom peg as it is.
I think we'll all breath a sigh of relief when he moves out of the big house, but in truth, the problems that drive the debate will not have gone away or even become simpler. We'll still have a billion-four Chinese beligerants with access to American technology. We'll still have hundreds of millions of Muslims longing for an imagined past where an Islamic caliphate ruled the world. We'll still have tens of millions of Mexicans either in our country illegally or patiently waiting to be rewarded for their law-breaking.
Posted by dave | June 4, 2007 12:15 PM
The FCC has not renewed the licenses of over 90 broadcasters during its existence, mainly due to obscenity violations. If it is OK for the US not to renew a license of a broadcaster for saying bad words or showing boobs, why is it not OK for Venezuela to not renew a license when a broadcaster is involved in a violent coup attempt against the government? Isn't that a more serious violation than showing a boob?
Posted by runawayyyy | June 4, 2007 1:26 PM
Truly unbelievable....these leftists are actually defending chavez for doing something they would impeach bush for even suggesting....and parroting chavez' own talking points in the process....let me give you leftists (dave) a clue....a television station broadcasts....they send electromagnetic emissions out over an antenna....to accuse them of being "involved in a violent coup attempt against the government" based on nothing more than the word of a known communist dictator shows what a lackey you are....tell me, did they hand out guns? Did they coordinate communications for the resistance (remember, tv is one-way)? Perhaps you're upset that they had the audacity to critisize chavez at the same time the coup attempt was going on, but that hardly qualifies as involvement, considering they had been making these same noises for some time....but you just keep spouting whatever your master chavez tells you to say, because I know all that thinking for yourself can cause even the dumbest of leftists to have headaches.
Posted by dave | June 4, 2007 2:24 PM
runawayyy:
“Did they coordinate communications…”
Actually, they were very much involved in organizing the march that initiated the events that led to the coup, and Granier was at Miraflores with the coup leaders. One of the coup leaders even thanked both Venevision and RCTV. The issue was covered extensively in the press at the time. Here is an example:
http://mondediplo.com/2002/08/10venezuela
This issue is acknowledged by all reasonable parties. For instance, the Washington Office on Latin America realizes that RCTV was involved. The only issue that they have is that they believe the government should have pursued the matter through the courts instead of not renewing their license. This is a joke. Not renewing RCTV’s license is the most benign action the Venezuelan government could have taken, and the hysteria is still way over the top. Imagine if the government had arrested and jailed those responsible (which is what any other country in the world would do):
http://www.wola.org/media/WOLA%20Statement%20on%20RCTV%20May%2030%202007.pdf
If the exact same events happened in the US, do you seriously believe that your stance would be for the government to take no action whatsoever against the media organizations that were involved? I find that hard to believe.
Posted by dave | June 4, 2007 2:41 PM
runawayyy:
Here's a couple more articles about the media coup:
The Guardian (London)
April 29, 2002
SECTION: Guardian Media Pages, Pg. 5
HEADLINE: Media: It's a coup: your sets will adjust accordingly: When Venezuela's president was deposed earlier this month, it was claimed the media were behind it. And when his supporters returned him to power, there was a news blackout.Duncan Campbell reports
BYLINE: Duncan Campbell
St. Petersburg Times (Florida)
April 18, 2002, Thursday, 0 South Pinellas Edition
SECTION: NATIONAL; Pg. 1A
HEADLINE: Media accused in failed coup
BYLINE: DAVID ADAMS; PHIL GUNSON
So your position is that the media had nothing to do with it?