March 28, 2006

9/11 Tribulations,...

 
Government Gaffes Shock 9/11 Trial

 

 

The death penalty trial of Zacarias Moussaoui was meant to mete out justice to an Al-Qaeda "soldier" -- but has so far served largely as an embarrassing showcase for US government bungling and disfunction ahead of the September 11 attacks.

The trial enters what could be a decisive week on Monday, with Moussaoui determined to testify, despite misgivings from his lawyers, who appear to have emerged on top after three weeks of courtroom drama.

Prosecutors rested their case for the execution of Moussaoui, who says Osama bin Laden told him to fulfill his dream of flying a civilian airliner into the White House, late last week.

They maintain that Moussaoui's "lies" while in jail in August 2001, gave his Al-Qaeda "brothers" time to pull off the world's deadliest terror attack.

"Had Moussaoui told the truth on August 16 and 17, 2001, it would all have been different, and those 2,972 people, or at least some of them, would be alive today," said Prosecutor Robert Spencer in his opening statement.

Though they ended with a strong showing by their key witness -- ex-FBI agent Aaron Zebley, who maintains that truthtelling by Moussaoui could have led investigators to 11 of the 19 hijackers in the 2001 attack -- much prosecution testimony seemed to end up aiding the defense.

Courtroom stunned

FBI agent Harry Samit for instance, testified he had warned his bosses a stunning 70 times, after nabbing Moussaoui at a flight simulator school, that he could be a terrorist planning to hijack an airliner.

The next day, defense lawyer Edward MacMahon sparked more disbelief in the courtroom, when he mentioned Samit's testimony to former FBI officer Michael Rolince, who asked : "I am just curious as to what document it was?"

MacMahon shot back : "Mr Samit's communication to your office dated August 18, 2001."

Defense lawyers promised back at the start of the trial of the only man charged in the United States in connection with the September 11 attacks, that they would not put the US government on trial.

But mistakes by officials, miscommunications between the CIA and the FBI, and gaffes by US federal aviation authorities which allowed the 9/11 suicide teams to stay undetected, have formed the central theme of the effort to spare the Frenchman of Moroccan descent from the death chamber.

9/11 ringleader's rookie mistakes

On one occasion, a flying school instructor testified last week, 9/11 ringleader Mohammad Atta and fellow hijacker Marwan Al-Shehhi stranded a small single-engined plane on a taxiway at the busy Miami International Airport -- forcing a large jet to take avoiding action.

Their transgression earned the flight school that rented them the plane a telling off from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) -- but no follow on action.

It was a similar story when the pair decided to buzz a Florida airstrip to practice take-offs and landings after it was closed for the night.

Another Al-Qaeda suicide pilot, Hani Hanjour, was meanwhile attracting suspicion across the country in 2001, at a flight simulator school in Phoenix, Arizona.

When the school's manager Peggy Chevrette told the local FAA supervisor that Hanjour's bad English and appalling flight skills could end up hurting himself or others, the jury heard the official suggested providing him with a translator -- in contravention of his own agency's rules.

Other entries in the catalogue of government incompetence revealed at the trial, included the story that another of the hijackers lived in a California house with an FBI informant.

The Defense started its case on Thursday by highlighting the fact that the Central Intelligence Agency knew that two of the eventual hijackers -- Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al Mihdhar -- were linked to a senior Al-Qaeda figure behind the US embassy bombings in Africa in 1998, dubbed a "major league killer."

But the CIA did not tell the FBI for over a year that the two men had entered the United States.

That prosecutors even got to the point of resting their case, and presenting a witness as strong as Zebley, may be seen as a qualified success -- as a week earlier, Judge Leonie Brinkema had been on the verge of throwing the case out.

In the end she dismissed seven federal aviation witnesses, after it emerged that Transportation Security Administration (TSA) lawyer Carla Martin, had funnelled them trial transcripts and briefed them.

Defense lawyers are expected this week to introduce evidence -- probably in the form of a stipulation -- a statement agreed by both parties and read in court -- from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, presumed mastermind of the September 11 attacks, who is being held by the United States in an undisclosed location.

They are likely to portray their client as a marginal figure, regarded by the "real terrorists" in Al-Qaeda as a nuisance.

Jurors are being asked to decide whether Moussaoui is responsible for a single death on September, 11, 2001, and therefore is eligible for the death penalty.

If they decide unanimously that he is, there will be a second stage of the trial, at which September 11 victims will testify as to the devastating impact the attacks wrought on their lives.

Should the jury decide Moussaoui will live, he will remain in prison for the rest of his life.

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse

 

CHOICE AMERICA NETWORK

 

Posted by ChoiceAmericaNetwork at 09:07:40 | Permanent Link | Comments (0) |

March 26, 2006

Sticks,...

 

Where Are the Sticks?

Monica Benderman

 

Maybe it's not such a bad thing that protests, signs; banners and the like are now being contained.  Maybe it's not such a bad thing that "freedom of speech" is being withheld.  Think about it.  All these years of chanting "freedom of speech" all these years of yelling out "we all have rights" through bullhorns and microphones, and what have we gotten from it?  Look where we are. 

 

Maybe it's time to stop the speech.  Maybe it's time to put our actions where our mouths have been.

 

Maybe there's another side to the downside of the controls being forced upon us.  Wherever there's a bad - there's always a good to counter. 

 

Maybe it's time we started closing our mouths and looking for the good - and then moving toward it.

 

Protests are as meaningless as the rhetoric of so many useless politicians, if the words spoken at the protest are not followed by actions.  So - where are the actions?  What is the point?  Talk is cheap. 

 

Politicians at every level have given us speeches and campaign promises for years, but never seem to get the work done until the threat of re-election comes.  Then in a whirlwind of supplemental spending, gifts are given - purchased on credit the politicians give themselves.  I have bills to pay, some overdue - I think I will wait and pay them from my grandchild's paycheck; I can give myself a higher line of credit, can't I?   "What, I can't do that?"  Imagine that. 

 

Yelling, "Bring the Troops Home Now" for the past three years has not gotten us any closer to ending the war.  Shouting obscenities at politicians who are only partly to blame for the mess we are now in has not gotten us any closer to ending the war.

 

Banging on doors to the White House, the Capitol offices and the US Missions has certainly not brought us any closer to ending the war. Nor has any of this presented any viable alternatives to what we now face - nor any functional solutions to not only the issue of war, but concerns of Americans across this country; healthcare, social security, border control and the wholesale distribution of American jobs to foreign workers. 

 

We are closer to reaching the truth about many things our government has done, and many corrupt actions members of our government have taken. It is not because people have taken to the streets and demanded their rights that we are making this progress.  It is because there are real people behind the scenes, people whose names are rarely mentioned, people who rarely make appearances on nightly news broadcasts touting their next adventures, or the glories of their latest accomplishments; people who are consciously, and conscientiously, acting on their rights.  

 

The truth is closer to us because there are actually people who are doing the work to bring it to the open.  There are investigators carefully going over every detail of questionable practices.  There are whistleblowers with definitive evidence to contribute to these investigations; who are willing to sacrifice their own personal safety and freedom to see that their knowledge of the truth is brought to the attention of those who can use it to make a difference. There are real people working to show that the system works, when it is used as it should be, and in their quiet ways, with little fanfare, they are fighting against the threats of real repression, retribution and jail time that is not self-imposed, simply to see that the truth of what they know is not covered up, is not shredded and is added to the stockpile of evidence growing everyday in real terms - evidence that will one day prove without doubt all that others now only talk about. 

 

As more people come to terms with the truths that are showing themselves, many wonder what it is that they can do to contribute.  It seems so easy, make a sign, find a corner and speak out.  But it's been done.  For years that has been done, and where has it gotten us?  More of the same.  Listen to what we are hearing as veterans both military and pacifists alike recount the similarities between these times and the times of another era thirty years ago. 

 

Civil disobedience didn't work then - if it had, we would not be where we are now - so why will it work now?  

 

Demanding that our government settle its debts with veterans and with citizens of this country, who have yet to see campaign promises brought to fruition, will not solve our problems.  Our government is bankrupt, in case you haven't noticed, and money is not the only thing missing. 

 

Protest - but do it in a way that generates real capital.  Take a stand - but use the time wisely, and use it to make a change that can become permanent.  Take steps to add your brick to a foundation that will grow strong from the first construction, because it is laid with solid facts, with proven truths. 

 

Speak softly - and carry a big stick.  Where are the sticks?? 

 

CHOICE AMERICA NETWORK

 

Posted by ChoiceAmericaNetwork at 09:27:05 | Permanent Link | Comments (0) |

March 21, 2006

Time to blow the whistle,...

 
Iran: Time To Leak
 
by Katharine Gun
 
Where are the whistleblowers about Iran?

It is exactly three years since the United States and Great Britain invaded Iraq, and a little over three years since Martin Bright and his colleagues at the London Observer quietly tested the veracity of an e-mail passed to them anonymously, whilst I nervously waited to see if the e-mail I leaked would appear in a newspaper. All this for the purpose of slowing down, if not derailing, a war that many felt was being rushed into by gung-ho politicians Bush and Blair.

Looking back, we have an ever-clearer picture of what was going on behind the scenes. Since my leak, there have been more; all because civil servants are disgusted by the manipulation of truth, even outright lies. Yet, here we are, three years on, with all the knowledge we have about the lack of WMD in Iraq, about the intent on regime change all along, about the lives destroyed, the untold misery of thousands, the renditions, torture, secret prisons and beatings—and still we remain silent about U.S. intentions toward Iran. Do we believe that the Bush administration is too bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan to dare go anywhere near Iran?  Or do we just not care about the mini-nukes, so called low-yield, ground-penetrating nuclear bombs that Bush and his advisers are ready to unleash on its next Middle East target?  Even if Bush does not declare all-out war on Iran, the bombing of key installations, with or without a nuclear payload, is an act of aggression and threatens to plunge an already angered and turbulent Middle East into further chaos.

Iran may be saber-rattling, it may even have an extremist government, but so does North Korea, yet we choose the diplomatic route with them always. Of course, North Korea doesn’t have that precious commodity, oil. Iran is surrounded by nuclear powers, no wonder she twitches nervously. Little mention is made of India, Pakistan, China or Israel; these countries can arm themselves to the hilt, but it is absolutely out of the question for Iran to possess sources of nuclear energy, let alone means to defend herself.

We must face facts; nuclear nonproliferation as a practical solution is defunct and useless. A blind eye is turned to those we call friends, whilst our foes face the threat of war. A true solution would be gradual decommissioning of all nuclear weapons globally, so why is that never advocated by the leaders of our ‘peace-loving’ nations?  How ironic is it that the solution to Iran’s nuclear ambition is the threat of nuclear weapons? Since when did two wrongs make a right?

Truth telling and whistle blowing are crucial after a war as ill advised as Iraq—at least it allows us to piece together the facts—but it’s too late to save lives. Where are the memos and emails about Iran now?

I urge those in a position to do so to disclose information which relates to this planned aggression; legal advice, meetings between the White House and other intelligence agencies, assessments of Iran’s threat level (or better yet, evidence that assessments have been altered), troop deployments and army notifications. Don’t let ‘the intelligence and the facts be fixed around the policy ’ this time.

Such government activities are not paper-free endeavors. It is not unreasonable speculation to assume that documents are being drafted now or already exist. As the political momentum builds towards a military ‘solution’, it would be wrong to wait until bombs have fallen on Iran and families destroyed before finally informing the public.

I was asked recently about how I chose between the public interest and the national interest when I made my disclosure. I believe there was no choice, because in essence, the two are the same. The Iraq war has cost the United States and Great Britain dearly, in both financial and human terms. It has cost us credibility around the world. Not only does the majority of world opinion believe the invasion of Iraq was illegal; it also sees us, through the medium of video footage, acting aggressively and cruelly during the occupation of Iraq. Surely, avoiding all of the above would have been in the public and national interest. As Vietnam War whistleblower Dan Ellsberg said, “Like so many others, I put personal loyalty to the president above all else—above loyalty to the Constitution and above obligation to the law, to truth, to Americans, and to humankind. I was wrong.”  Don’t put your loyalty above truth and the law; help us avoid this unnecessary evil.

Five years into the 21st century and there has been little but conflict and destruction. Is this how we envisaged the new millennium?  Is this the future we want for our children, one of fear and conflict?  It is time to turn the course of events and start building a new consensus, a consensus of peace and dialogue, of truth and understanding. We cannot and must not rely on others to speak truth to power. There are many brave and honest individuals working for the U.S. and U.K. governments. This message is directed to you. Look at the enormous deficit your government has created, the billions of dollars used to dominate countries in the Middle East, would this money not have been better spent on education, health, communities and the environment?  I urge you to contact the National Security Whistleblowers Association in the United States or other alternative media organizations such as TomPaine.com. Know that you are not alone.

Katherine Gun was a translator at the Britain's communications spy agency, General Communications Headquarters. In 2002, she leaked a top-secret memo to a British newspaper, revealing the U.S. was spying on U.N. Security Council members before their vote on the Iraq war.

© 2006 Tom Paine.com

 

 CHOICE AMERICA NETWORK

 

Posted by ChoiceAmericaNetwork at 03:15:39 | Permanent Link | Comments (0) |

March 19, 2006

The TeenScreen SmokeScreen,...

 

TeenScreen Shuns Medical Science

 

TeenScreen clearly shuns standard medical care

in favor of the psychiatric model of brain disorders and chemical imbalances

though these have never been scientifically proven.

 
 
By Mary Collins
 
 
TeenScreen is a “mental health” screening system. Using a computer program, teenagers are asked questions to root out the symptoms of “mental illness”. Those students giving the right (or wrong) answers to the questions are then delivered to persons trained to spot psychiatri “disorders”, usually employees of a local “mental health” treatment facility.
 
TeenScreen claims to be funded mainly by private foundations, the identities of which are carefully kept secret. For reasons that might be made clear if only their identities were known, the hidden supporters of TeenScreen are in favor of widespread mental health screening and referral to treatment. TeenScreen’s critics claim that the operation is nothing but a slick marketing tool designed to bring new customers into the multi-billion-dollar psychiatric “mental health” industry. Whatever the reasons for screening, there is no doubt that TeenScreen and all other screening programs are good for business, and could potentially deliver hundreds of millions in profit to the makers of psychiatric drugs.
 
David Shaffer, TeenScreen’s author, recently refused to appear in a public forum to present TeenScreen and answer the public’s questions.  TeenScreen executives Laurie Flynn and Leslie McGuire earn their pay singing the praises of TeenScreen at every opportunity yet refuse to honestly address the serious questions and controversy.
 
TeenScreen officials attempt to distance themselves from any connection with treatment, claiming that their responsibility ends with flagging those who admit to having certain symptoms. Yet, TeenScreen is intimately connected to treatment of those testing positive. Each TeenScreen site is partnered with a local mental health treatment provider. Only “mental health” facilities are permitted as TeenScreen’s partner. Standard medical care is excluded, as are nutritionists, allergists, tutors and any form of religious counseling.
 
The shunning of all other forms of treatment is significant and telling in light of the fact that the exact symptoms that TeenScreen labels “mental illness” are known to be caused by genuine, verifiable physical illness and other factors, not subjective psychiatric “disorders”.  TeenScreen needs to confront and answer the question of why they ignore true, accepted medical science and forward the agenda of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and pharmaceutical companies. At least one TeenScreen site openly accepted money from Eli Lilly Corporation, a drug company which makes billions from the sale of psychiatric drugs for children. Signs of Suicide, another mental health screening outfit using the same screening instrument as TeenScreen, has openly accepted millions in funding from drug companies to implement their program.
 
Mental Illness versus Medical Illness
 
TeenScreen does not specifically look for illness; they look for a certain list of symptoms. These are generally feelings, emotions, behaviors or physical sensations, highly subjective in nature. The purpose of the screening instruments is to find out if a teen will admit to any one of a long list of these symptoms that the APA defines as “mental illness”.
 
These symptoms can be very real and even disturbing. No one is denying that the symptoms exist. The question is what causes the symptoms and what can or should be done about it. Some of the symptoms certainly fall into the category of “normal teenage angst” though TeenScreen does not have a diagnosis category for that. TeenScreen’s positive results always lead toward specific psychiatric “mental disorders”, like Depression Disorder or Anxiety Disorder. If a teen answers yes to a question like “has there been a time when you felt you couldn’t do anything well or that you weren’t as good-looking or smart as other people?”, he or she will be flagged as a potential case of “depression” and carted off to a psychologist, psychiatrist or social worker for the diagnosis. Though no objective medical or laboratory testing can prove its existence, that diagnostic label, may be applied to that child for his entire life.
 
TeenScreen’s scheme is evident when you come to understand that the symptoms called “depression” in psychiatry have different diagnoses and causes in the field of medical science. On its own website, the American Psychiatric Association states the following "Also, a medical condition (e.g., a brain tumor or vitamin deficiency) can cause depression, so it is important to be evaluated... to rule out general medical causes". Why then can millions be diagnosed without benefit of proper medical evaluation?
 
These are the symptoms of “depression” from the APA’s documents entitled
"Lets Talk Facts About Depression":
 
1. Changes in appetite that result in weight losses or gains unrelated
to dieting
2. Insomnia or oversleeping
3. Loss of energy or increased fatigue
4. Restlessness or irritability
5. Feelings of worthlessness or inappropriate guilt
6. Difficulty thinking, concentrating, or making decisions
7. Thoughts of death or suicide or attempts at suicide
 
Each one of the above symptoms of "depression" can also be found listed as a symptom for known physical illnesses, other conditions and/or reactions to drugs by the National Institutes of Health or its references: Medline Plus, US National Library of Medicine, etc.
 
For example, lead poisoning is known to cause the following symptoms:
 
1. Irritability
2. Insomnia
3. Loss of energy or increased fatigue
4. Difficulty thinking
 
If a child with lead poisoning were screened, and answered yes to “has there been a time when you had less energy than you usually do?”, or any question related to irritability, insomnia, or difficulty thinking, he would likely test positive for “depression”. Once screened, he will be forwarded on to the psychiatrist who will officially diagnose him with “depression” and prescribe treatment. As statistics show that as many as 9 out of 10 children are given drugs as treatment after being labeled; this child would likely be given drugs for his "mental disease". His real problem is lead poisoning, and because his symptoms are covered up with dangerous, mind-altering drugs, the true cause is never addressed. According to the data from the US Library of Medicine and the National Institutes of Health and Medline Plus, lead poisoning can increase if not addressed and this child may develop seizures or lapse into a coma from the unhandled medical condition.
 
If the child is given true help from a competent medical doctor who was willing to test him for physical troubles, the real answer to his trouble can be found and addressed. Without competent medical care, the only action is to drug away symptoms, which is the inevitable result of TeenScreen’s operation. Without medical care, any child labeled with "depression" may be a ticking time bomb that will eventually result in a tragedy.
 
Numerous other diseases and conditions can be confused with mental diseases or disorders. According to the National Institutes of Health- Medline Plus, "Hyperthyroidism can mimic other health problems, which may make it difficult to diagnose. It can also cause a variety of signs and symptoms, including difficulty in sleeping, fatigue and irritability." Again, these are also defined as symptoms of  "depression". According to the Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, anemia causes symptoms that would seem like "depression" if the anemia were not detected by a medical doctor.
 
Hypothyroidism, hypoglycemia, allergies, adrenal problems, and anemia all result in some of the same symptoms that are used to "diagnose" depression as mental, not physical illness. If the real physical illness or problem is not detected and treated, these illnesses can get worse.  Even a child with a brain tumor can be labeled with "depression" and may never get the medical care and treatment that will save his life.
 
Dr. William Crook in his book, "Detecting Your Hidden Allergies" says those bothered by irritability, depression, and fatigue ... "need an immediate full medical, physical examination and complete test for food allergies that could cause massive mental changes in a person."
 
Respected leaders and doctors – experts in the fields of medicine, neurology, education and government have spoken out against the methods used by psychiatry and TeenScreen. Recent FDA warnings about the dangers in psychotropic drugs have drawn attention to the issue. Many of the drugs which will be ingested by TeenScreen’s target market carry “Black Box” warning labels, indicating that they have been found to cause violent episodes and suicide in young who never exhibited such behavior before.
 
Kenneth W. Thomas, a registered nurse who has for 29 years worked in psychiatric units, critical care units and emergency rooms, says "A friend of mine, also a nurse, was sent home recently from work because she was "acting erratically" and didn't seem to know where she was. After thorough medical testing, she found out that she has hypoglycemia. She had been suffering with that undetected condition on and off for 15 years. She had been through the whole regimen of expensive anti-anxiety medications in attempts to treat it. After the actual cause of her symptoms was located, she changed her eating habits, the symptoms did not return and no drugs were needed to handle this condition."
 
Even many psychiatrists and psychologists have brutally criticized their own group for ignoring the deaths, murders, addiction, loss of memory, etc. incurred by standard psychiatric treatment. Parents whose children died from psychiatric "treatments" have been outraged and are speaking out.
 
In summary, we know that TeenScreen will result in more children labeled as “mentally ill”, possibly for their entire life, with no proof of its validity. We know that TeenScreen shuns genuine medical treatment and care in favor of unproven psychiatric diagnoses. We know that the use of TeenScreen results in increased revenue for psychiatric drug manufacturers.
 
Parents, teachers, school administrators and legislators must be made aware of TeenScreen’s true purposes and activities. No one should fraudulently sway parents away from proper medical care or limit their options in addressing their child’s wellbeing. TeenScreen, its creator, its executives and its backers must be fully investigated and the truth must be made public. TeenScreen should come clean and reveal the secret foundations that are supporting it and why.
 
TeenScreen clearly favors and supports “mental health” treatment over any other option. TeenScreen clearly shuns standard medical care in favor of the psychiatric model of brain disorders and chemical imbalances though these have never been scientifically proven. The public needs to wake up to this fraud so that our children can get true help, if they need it, while at the same time they are protected from unwanted and unneeded intrusions into their lives.
 
 
© 2006 Mary Collins
 
 
Mary Collins is a 72-year-old grandmother living in New Hampshire.
She attained a BA in English Literature with a minor in History in 1954
from Millsap’s College in Jackson, Mississippi and was involved in
education for over 20 years. She can be reached at:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Posted by ChoiceAmericaNetwork at 10:10:22 | Permanent Link | Comments (2) |

March 10, 2006

Venezuela,...

 
The Failure of Hugo-Bashing

Despite U.S. efforts,
the Venezuelan leader is winning friends
 across Latin America.

 
by Mark Weisbrot
 

It was yet another public relations coup for Venezuela: Vila Isabel, the samba club sponsored mainly by the Venezuelan government, won the parade competition in Rio de Janeiro's Carnaval last week. A float with a giant likeness of Simon Bolivar, combined with thousands of ornately costumed participants parading down the avenue, trumpeted the winning theme: Latin American unity.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice just last month called for "a united front" against Venezuela, continuing a long-term policy of trying to isolate the country. But Washington has been spitting into the wind. Venezuela's influence in the hemisphere has continued to rise while the U.S. has succeeded only in isolating itself more than at any time in at least half a century. It might be worth asking why.

First, Venezuela is a democracy — despite the best efforts of the Bush team to use President Hugo Chavez's close relations with Cuba's Fidel Castro as evidence to the contrary. Its elections are transparent and have been certified by observers from the Organization of American States, the Carter Center and the European Union. Freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly and of association prevail, at least as compared with the rest of the hemisphere.

In fact, most of the media remains controlled by the opposition, which attacks the government endlessly on all the major TV channels. It is the most vigorous and partisan opposition media in the hemisphere, one that has not been censored under Chavez.

Like all of Latin America, Venezuela has governance problems: a weak state, limited rule of law, corruption and incompetent government. But no reputable human rights organization has alleged that Venezuela under Chavez has deteriorated with regard to civil liberties, human rights or democracy, as compared with prior governments. Nor does the country compare unfavorably on these criteria with its neighbors in the region. In Peru, the government has shut down opposition TV stations; in Colombia, union organizers are murdered with impunity.

From a Latin American point of view, Venezuelans should have the right to choose their own president — even one who sometimes insults the American president — without interference from the United States. And Chavez's anger at Washington, from Latin Americans' point of view, appears justified. U.S. government documents released under our Freedom of Information Act indicate that Washington not only supported but was involved in the military coup that temporarily overthrew Venezuela's elected government in April 2002. Here in Washington, there is a "Monty Python" attitude toward the coup: "Let's not argue about who killed who." But in Latin America, a military coup against a democratically elected government is still considered a serious crime. To top it off, Washington continued to finance efforts to recall Chavez and, having failed miserably, still regularly presents him as a threat to democracy in the region.

With oil at nearly $60 a barrel, Venezuela has used its windfall proceeds to win friends in the hemisphere, providing low-cost financing for oil to Caribbean nations. When Argentina needed loans so that it could say goodbye to the International Monetary Fund, Venezuela committed $2.4 billion. Venezuela bought $300 million in bonds from Ecuador. Washington has historically had enormous influence over economic policy in Latin America through its control over the major sources of credit, including the IMF, the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. Venezuela's role as a new "lender of last resort" has reduced that influence.

Chavez's opposition to the "Washington consensus" on economic policy has fallen on sympathetic ears in a region that — since 1980 — has suffered its worst long-term economic failure in a century. Over the last 25 years, income per person in Latin America has grown by a meager 10%, according to the IMF. This compares with 82% from 1960 to 1980, before most of Washington's economic reforms were adopted. And Venezuela's government has kept its promise to share the oil wealth with the poor. The majority of the country now has access to free healthcare and subsidized food, and education spending has increased substantially.

Meanwhile in the U.S., while Vila Isabel was winning the Rio Carnaval, Connecticut became the eighth American state to participate in the program by which Citgo Petroleum Corp. provides discounted heating oil for poor people. Citgo is owned by the Venezuelan government. In the contest for the hearts and minds of the hemisphere, Venezuela is clearly winning.

Mark Weisbrot is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington.

  

 

CHOICE AMERICA NETWORK

 

Posted by ChoiceAmericaNetwork at 11:19:41 | Permanent Link | Comments (0) |