Posted on 02/19/2006 6:58:15 PM PST by Thunder90
"Venezuela, by sending heating oil free of charge for poor and homeless people and at very low prices for those that can pay, is giving a great example of cooperation and solidarity with the American people; and the whole world is bearing witness to it," said the outstanding scholar, historian and university professor Noam Chomsky during a presentation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The event brought together professors, researchers, politicians, scholars, journalists, and social leaders from that city.
Chomsky, who is also well-known in the field of linguistics, has lashed out the Bush administration foreign policy through his books and speeches in international events.
He explained that the majority of Americans receive little or no information at all about the achievements of the Bolivarian revolution led by President Hugo Chavez, because the mass media only highlight the negative side and remain silent about the positive.
The writer and MIT linguistics and philosophy professor –who dedicates a great part of his activities to giving lectures at universities, trade unions and organizations– announced that he will visit Caracas in late October to participate in conferences and forums on how the Latin American situation is being viewed from the US perspective. He said that in his presentations he will approach the Venezuelan situation from the angle of its achievements, accomplishments, targets and programs.
On this occasion, Chomsky took part in a panel discussion on the origins and consequences of terrorism. Also participating were British priest Geoffrey Bottoms, a defender of humans rights and activist for world peace and justice, as well as journalist and moviemaker Bernie Dwyer, who lives in Havana.
Before the panel opened, there was a screening of the documentary "Mission Against Terror," which denounces the detention of five Cubans in the United States for fighting terrorism. At the same time it investigates the terrorist activities of Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carriles – the masterminds of the mid-air bombing of a Cubana Airlines DC-8 off the coast of Barbados on October 6, 1973 that killed all of its 73 passengers and crew members.
Throughout the discussion, Chomsky referred to the Venezuelan political process as an example for Latin America and the rest of the world, underscoring the policies that have achieved countless successes, especially in the educational and healthcare fields. These have strengthened the Venezuelan people's dignity, he said.
"Venezuela has successfully challenged the United States, and this country does not accept challenges – much less if they are successful. That's the heart of the matter," said the writer.
On the other hand, he pointed out that according to Bush's foreign policy, the United States believes that it has the privilege of labeling any country or person as terrorist. "And by following that precept we would have to accept that our own air force might bomb Washington, as the US government is harboring Luis Posada Carriles and has turned a deaf ear at Venezuela's request for the extradition of one of the most notorious terrorist in this continent, who is about to be released," said Chomsky.
He went on to say that "Posada Carriles, a former CIA operative, escaped from a Venezuelan prison where he was being held while facing trial for the attack on the Cuban plane and other charges. He was later admitted into the US and sent to El Salvador, where, among other activities, he organized Nicaraguan Contras along with Captain Oliver North." "Now," said the US scholar, "the Cuban-born terrorist is in a jail in El Paso and the Venezuela´s request for his extradition has not been responded to. Everything seems to be in a limbo; and probably Posada will show up tomorrow in Miami, walking around freely. So there is a remarkable contradiction between what is said and done in this country with regards to terrorism."
He actually does teach.
What no one realizes (or cares) is that his subjects have nothing to with politics but with linguistics.
What amazes me is that his credibility in one subject somehow translates into other subjects.
Even worse is that he is a proven hypocrite.
"He explained that the majority of Americans receive little or no information at all about the achievements of the Bolivarian revolution led by President Hugo Chavez, because the mass media only highlight the negative side and remain silent about the positive."
I would argue the exact opposite really.
Chavez has done very little for the poor in his country, poverty has increased nearly ten percent during his tenure (until he had the measures changed). Public housing builds are at an all time low in comparison to former regimes, (who did not have the luxury of ultra high oil revenues and complete control of the oil). I have personally seen the food that Chavez sells at a discount to people and it is of substandard quality compared to the normal market goods. In addition, critical infrastructure such as bridges and highways are falling apart...and certainly the poor cannot afford the cost of using the alternate routes to the coast and airport areas.
Has anyone else here even heard of the small sample of negative things that I just wrote above? Probably not. Because the majority of US media only cover Hugo Chavez when he makes a wild claim like "the us is going to invade" (for the millionth time).
Read the local Venezuelan newspapers and you will find a HUGE amount of information that is not reported here.
http://www.vcrisis.com
http://daniel-venezuela.blogspot.com/
http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/
Read the articles in these blogs and you will be chilled as to the inevitable direction in which Chavez is taking a beautiful country. Read the details on the recall referendum, read the countless stories of corruption and political purges. Read the details of the destruction of liberty and free speech.
Chavez is the next Castro and probably worse, but the left in this country and others are so caught up in their hatred of Bush that they are willing to embrace ANYONE as long as he represents some form of opposition to Bush.
What a sad standard to have. How can one call themself a "liberal" and still be willing to embrace someone who is knifing liberty in the spine in Venezuela?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.