Kindasleezy Explains it All

My friend Jeff absolutley tears up Condi Sleazy Rice.

On February 9, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza
Rice said, "I do believe that the president of
Venezuela is really, really destroying his own country
economically,politically (sic)." Rice also claimed
that the Venezuelan Catholic church was "under fire"
from the Venezuelan government and that U.S.
government officials had met with Venezuelan church
authorities. In response, Venezuela's Foreign Minister
Nicolas Maduro said, "No U.S. official has the
morality to qualify Venezuelan democracy or the
democratic leadership of President Chavez and life in
our society." Maduro might have added that as well as
being morally deficient, Rice is also without
credibility because she is demonstrably dishonest.
As
Bush's National Security Advisor, Rice was a key
figure in the administration's disinformation campaign
aimed at gaining public support for launching its war
on Iraq, hyping Iraq's "weapons of mass destruction"
and "connections to Al Qaeda" in contradiction to what
the administration's own intelligence sources were
reporting.

In late 2001, Libyan Al Qaeda military trainer Ibn
al-Shaykh al-Libi was captured in Pakistan. He told
his CIA debriefers that Al Qaeda operatives had gotten
training in Iraq in manufacturing chemical agents and
poisonous gases. However, al-Libi could not name any
Al Qaeda members who had gone. Nor could he name any
chemical or biological material used, or where the
training supposedly occurred. Consequently,in February
of 2002, military intelligence warned the Bush
administration in a classified Defense Intelligence
Agency Report (DITSUM No. 044-02)that al-Libi was
"intentionally misleading the debriefers". Moreover,
"the source was not in a position to know if any
training had taken place." The report also speculate
that al-Libi "might have been subjected to harsh
treatment". Nevertheless, seven months later, on
September 22, 2002, Rice said (on the PBS program News
Hour), "We know too that several of the detainees, in
particular some high-ranking detainess, have said that
Iraq provided some training to Al Qaeda in chemical
weapons development."

According to a Senate Intelligence Report, a CIA
report of September 23, 2002 stated that Iraq had no
past or present contact with Osama Bin Laden and that
Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein considered Bin Laden an
enemy. This was learned from a high-level member of
Saddam Hussein's inner circle (Walter Pincus, "CIA
Learned in '02 that Bin Laden had no Iraq ties,Report
Says" Washington Post: September 15,2006)
NEVERTHELESS, two days later, on September 25, 2002,
on the same program Rice said, "We clearly know that
there were in the past and have been contacts
(sic)between senior Iraqi officials and members of Al
Qaeda going back for actually quite a long time...So,
yes, there are contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda."

Let's turn to the infamous "sixteen words" of Bush's
January 28, 2003 State of the Union speech. He said,
"The British government has learned that Saddam
Hussein recently sought significant quantities of
uranium from Africa." In reality, two
government-commissioned investigations into the
allegations of Iraqi uranium purchases (from Niger)
had already belied this statement. One was by General
Carlton Telford, Jr., head of the U.S. European
Command, and another by former Ambassador Joseph
Wilson IV. A CIA official told Knight Ridder
newspapers in March of 2002 that the Niger allegations
could not be confirmed. In September of 2002, CIA
Director George Tenet told members of Congress that
the CIA had doubts about the credibility of the
report.
On October 2, 2002, the CIA sent two memos to the
White House expressing strong doubts about the uranium
from Africa claim. The CIA had a reference to Iraq's
uranium shopping deleted from Bush's October 2002
speech in Cincinnati. NEVERTHELESS, Rice told
reporters in July 0f 2003, "If the CIA, the director
of central intelligence, had said,'Take this out of
the speech', it would have been gone, without
question."

In February of 2001,the CIA delivered a report to the
White House that said, "We do not have any direct
evidence that Iraq has used the period since Desert
Fox to reconstitute its weapons of mass destruction
programs."
On July 21, 2001 Rice was speaking of the sanctions
against Iraq. She wished to portray them as
successful. She said, "We are able to keep arms from
him (Saddam Hussein). His military forces have not
been rebuilt." In January of 2002,CIA director George
Tenet gave his annual review of global weapons
technology. He made NO MENTION of a nuclear threat
from Iraq. YET on September 8, 2002 Rice made her
infamous comment, "there will always be some
uncertainty about how quickly (Hussein) can acquire
nuclear weapons, but we don't want the smoking gun to
be a mushroom cloud." In October of 2002, the
Inelligence and Research Department (INR) of the State
Department published a classified report that stated,
"The activities we have detected do not add up to a
compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what
INR would consider to be an integrated and
comprehensive approach to acquiring nuclear weapons."
Yet on May 15, 2005 Rice stated, "Saddam's alleged
weapons of mass destruction turned out to be based on
flawed intelligence." She added, "This war came to us,
no the other way around (sic)".


Given Rice's history of rank dishonesty it should come
as no surprise that she also FABRICATES as she sees
fit. She is seldom challenged by the sycophantic
stenographers to power who pose as "journalists". Yet
when she recently made her comments about the
Venezuelan Catholic church being "under fire",
Catholic authorities were quick to repudiate her
comments. Venezuelan Archbishop Roberto Luckert, a
frequent Chavez critic, stated, "This lady was way out
of line when she said such things that are not true.
This is a lie." Luckert added that the CEV (Conference
of Venezuelan Bishops) had met recently and "it has
not talked about the fact that the U.S. Ambassador to
Venezuela (William Brownfield) or any other U.S.
official is concerned about us. I think this lady was
very clumsy to speak otherwise."

Venezuelans might find it disconcerting to have an
American official express concern for the state of
democracy in their country, given the history of
American support for dictatorship there. General Juan
Vicente Gomez was president of Venezuela for most of
the period of 1908-1935. He granted concessions to
foreign oil companies and did so at an accelerated
pace after oil was discovered in Lake Maracaibo in
1918. In fact, former Venezuelan President Romulo
Betancourt wrote that Gomez was "the instrument of
foreign control of the Venezuelan economy, the ally
and servant of powerful outside interests." As such,
Gomez allowed U.S. oil companies to write Venezuela's
oil legislation to their liking, at one point giving a
5% royalty to the state on extracted oil! Speculators
and oil company representatives bid for concessions
from and offered handsome bribes to Gomez.
Gomez used arbitrary arrests, exiles, long prison
terms,and political murder to maintain his control.
Efficient secret police and army organizations relied
on unrestricted use of force to ruthlessly crush
opponents. All political parties and elections were
prohibited. Infoplease calls Gomez "an absolute tyrant
whose secret police ferreted out opposition and
subjected victims to imprisonment and torture. Gomez
became the nation's wealthiest citizen while most
Venezuelans continued to live in poverty." With
burgeoning oil operations in the Maracaibo Lake
region, the U.S. valued Gomez as a stabilizing force.
In the words of author Judith Ewell, "American
governments turned a blind eye to the brutalities of
the Gomez regime and agreed with national and foreign
elites who justified Gomez as necessary." (Judith
Ewell, "Venezuela and the U.S.:From Monroe's Doctrine
to Petroleum's Empire", University of Georgia Press,
1996) Michael L. Krenn, author of "U.S. Policy toward
Economic Nationalism in Latin America 1917-1929"
(Scholarly Resources 1990) quotes a "U.S. diplomat" in
Venezuela as arguing that "the Indian peon" should be
given "a simple and paternalistic form of government,
not formal democracy." He praised Gomez, who had
"wisely decided that a benevolent despotism was
preferable to an anarchical democracy."

In 1952, after a democratic interlude, a military coup
overthrew the elected government of Romulo Gallegos.
The junta appointed General Marcos Perez Jimenez as
president. According to the 2001 Perez Jimenez
obituary in The Independent (UK), Perez ruled alone,
"brooking no opposition nor even criticism from
despised civilian politicians, many of whom were
assassinated or died in prison." Perez Jimenez
outlawed political activity, crushed the labor
movement, and censored the press. The CIA and FBI were
invited to carry out surveillance of Venezuelan
citizens in order to root out "subversives." TIME
magazine described Perez's Venezuela as "a corrupt
police state with lush graft for insiders and
imprisonment and torture for opponents." (August 23,
1963) TIME magazine of February 28, 1955, describes
Perz Jimenez's police chief Pedro Estrada as a
"cold-blooded police expert." Estrada turned the
Seguridad Nacional force into "a crack plainclothes
force with eyes and ears in every cafe, hotel, office,
and oil camp. Estrada's henchmen have jailed
thousands, sometimes learned secrets from captured
suspects by seating them naked for hours on blocks of
ice, by other indignities, or by old-fashioned
beatings." In the same article Perez Jimenez is quoted
as saying, "People may call it a dictatorial
regime,but my country is not ready for the kind of
democracy that brings abuses of liberty." Perez
Jimenez declared himself President for another 5-year
term in December 1957.The ensuing protest
demonstrations were ruthlessly suppressed by the
all-powerful security forces. The South Florida Herald
states that Perez Jimenez embezzled $250 million from
the state treasury. ( Sunday September 24, 2001
edition) The United States, in its role of guardian
and steward of democracy, surely protested the brutal
dictatorial practices of Perez and pressured him to
reform, didn't it? Not exactly. In 1954 the Eisenhower
administration gave Perez a Legion of Merit medal, the
nation's highest award for "exceptionally meritorious
conduct in the performance of outstanding services and
achievements." Perez's "exceptionally meritorious
conduct" included generous concessions to U.S. oil
companies. According to Ewell, Perez also further
opened Venezuela to U.S. imports. The resulting trade
deficit favored the United States, because the oil
money received by Venezuela was circulated back to the
United States in the import of American consumer
goods. Venezuela may have been under the rule of a
harsh dictatorship, but there were no complaints from
Washington about threats to democracy because the
arrangement served American interests well. In fact,
Standard Oil's profits, boosted by the low wages and
no strikes policy of the dictatorship, were $3.79
billion in the period from 1950-1957 (incl.) In the
words of U.S. Minister in Caracas Franklin W. Wolf
(quoted in Ewell), "the people of Venezuela are not
yet ready nor adequately prepared for democracy." When
dictatorship existed in Venezuela, the U.S. government
expediently concurred with the sentiments of dictators
that Venezuelans weren't ready for democracy, and
there was nary a whimper about "human rights
violations" in Venezuela. Today, when there is
democratic, constitutional rule in Venezuela, official
Washington speaks of "threats to democracy" in
Venezuela.

Rice was Bush's National Security Advisor during the
anti-constitutional military/civilian coup in
Venezuela on April 11, 2002. High-ranking elements of
the military, media companies, and members of the
business community affected a coup d'etat in which the
legally elected president Hugo Chavez, his cabinet,
and members of the Venezuelan legislature were
arrested. The coup placed Chamber of Commerce head
Pedro Carmona in power. Carmona decreed the abolition
of the constitution, dissolved the National Assembly,
the Supreme Court, the Public Defender's office, and
the Attorney General's office. He also suspended all
governors and mayors elected during the Chavez
presidency. There fiats were known as the "Carmona
laws".

The Bush administration gave full diplomatic
recognition to the Carmona "government" with no regard
for constitutional government or democracy. Assistant
Secretary of State Otto Reich pressured other
governments of the hemisphere to follow suit, but only
El Salvador complied.The constitution discarded by a
Carmona fiat was the product of lengthy discussion and
debate in a popularly-elected assembly. It was then
submitted to a public referendum, winning approval of
71% of voters in 1999.

U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Otto Reich had met
with the coup plotters at the White House.
Declassified documents reveal that the CIA had
first-hand knowledge of the coup and employed "Special
Operations Group" personnel to help organize it.

The Carmona coup was short-lived. It seems that
subordinate Army officers did not agree with the
abolition of the constitution and all civil
institutions because they believed that that would
really really destroy democracy in their own
country,as did the one million or so Chavez supporters
in coordination with rank-and-file soldiers who
surrounded the Miraflores Palace (the presidential
residence) to demand the return of their president.
Carmona surrendered and left the palace. Chavez
returned that same night, receiving a tumultuous
welcome.

As Chavez returned, Rice, speaking of Chavez, opined,
"He really needs to respect constitutional processes."
It's OK if you want to go back and read that again.
She made the comment shortly after the Bush
administration had supported a coup that had ABOLISHED
that same constitution. This may have been the period
of the apogee of neocon triumphalism, when any
effrontery could be uttered without restraint or
concern about a response from the State Department
stenographers posing as journalists OR reality-based
thinkers.

After the failure of the military coup, Venezuela's
opposition attempted a boss's lockout, "Paro
patronal", misnamed a "strike" in the corporate
media. A primary objective of the paro patronal was to
bring oil production to a standstill in order to
cripple the economy. Their hope was to create a
political crisis that would drive Chavez out of
office. Directors of the national oil company
Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) involved themselves in
the paro. Some oil tanker captains also joined. As a
result, PDVSA was virtually shut down and petroleum
exports were severely diminished: production fell from
2.65 million barrels a day to 250,000 barrels.
Overall, the lockout caused $14 billion in losses and
a quarterly decline of 28% in gross domestic product
at the beginning of 2003. The petroleum industry's
computer systems were also damaged, causing
devastating damage to the industry and the economy. In
response, the government sacked existing directors and
brought retired PDVSA personnel back. Lower-ranking
technicians were promoted to fill the vacated
positions. Additionally, technicians from Brazil's
PETROBRAS lent their services. The new personnel were
able to repair the damage done to the computer systems
and restore PDVSA to fully-functioning capacity.

In reviewing the recent history of Venezuela, it
appears that it is OUR guys, the Venezuelan
opposition, who really really tried to destroy their
own country politically, economically, but were
stopped by a politically conscious people determined
to really really save their own country. As for the
state of Venezuelan democracy, a recent opinion poll
conducted by the Chilean NGO Latinobarometro shows
that a majority of Venezuelans are happy with their
democracy. In the 2006 poll, 57% gave that opinion, as
opposed to 32% in 1998. The average rate in the rest
of the continent was 38%. With respect to the economy,
according to figures from the private Central Bank of
Venezuela (BCV), Venezuela's GDP growth in 2004 and
2005 was 18.3% and 10.3% respectively. The 2006 figure
was 10.2% The positive performance of the economy
comes after the two-month long oil lockout. In the
lockout, the GDP fell by 24.9% in the period between
the first quarter of 2002 and the first quarter of
2003. Recovery of the GDP has been dramatic since
then.

When Rice states that she does not want to get into a
"rhetorical contest" with Chavez, it is easy to see
why. She is much more at ease with pet poodles of the
corporate media: "My FOX guys, I love every single one
of them!" she recently chortled after a TV interview.
She would naturally flee an unflattering encounter
which would shed light on her ignorant and disgraceful
remarks.

Thanks, Jeff.