Theos-Talk Archives (August 2005 Message tt00214)

[IMAGE]

"Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said,
What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone,
all [men] will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away
both our place and nation. And one of them, [named] Caiaphas, being the
high priest that same year, said unto them, Ye know nothing at all, Nor
consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the
people, and that the whole nation perish not."

- John 11:47-50

[IMAGE]

"There was a popular coup that overthrew him [Chavez]. And what did the
United States State Department do about it? Virtually nothing. And as a
result, within about 48 hours that coup was broken; Chavez was back in
power, but we had a chance to move in. He has destroyed the Venezuelan
economy, and he's going to make that a launching pad for communist
infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent.

You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he
thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to
go ahead and do it.

It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war ... and I don't think any
oil shipments will stop. But this man is a terrific danger and the United
... this is in our sphere of influence, so we can't let this happen.

We have the Monroe Doctrine, we have other doctrines that we have
announced. And without question, this is a dangerous enemy to our south,
controlling a huge pool of oil, that could hurt us very badly.

We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that
we exercise that ability.

We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know,
strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert
operatives do the job and then get it over with."

- Pat Robertson, August 22, 'The 700 Club' broadcast

[IMAGE]

Chavez ALBA

Latin Petroleum Analytics
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez moved Thursday to augment his nation's
already
close ... of this new commerce regime, which has as its basis Chavez's
ALBA. ...

The differences between the FTAA and ALBA were established clearly by
Chávez at a recent meeting in Havana. ALBA, his personal creation, would
not be at the service of capitalism, as the FTAA is. It would be an
entity devoted to developing trade and financial transactions between
states, not between private enterprises.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/opinion/11606467.htm

Venezuela IMF

Chavez coup CIA involvement

Documented Proof:
The CIA Was Involved In the Coup Against Venezuela's Chavez
Monday, Nov 22, 2004

By: Eva Golinger - VenezuelaFOIA.info

On April 12, 2002, White House spokesperson Ari Fleischer stated:

“Let me share with you the administration's thoughts about what's
taking place in Venezuela. It remains a somewhat fluid situation. But
yesterday's events in Venezuela resulted in a change in the
government and the assumption of a transitional authority until new
elections can be held.

The details still are unclear. We know that the action encouraged by
the Chavez government provoked this crisis. According to the best
information available, the Chavez government suppressed peaceful
demonstrations. Government supporters, on orders from the Chavez
government, fired on unarmed, peaceful protestors, resulting in 10
killed and 100 wounded. The Venezuelan military and the police
refused to fire on the peaceful demonstrators and refused to support
the government's role in such human rights violations. The government
also tried to prevent independent news media from reporting on these
events.

The results of these events are now that President Chavez has
resigned the presidency. Before resigning, he dismissed the vice
president and the cabinet, and a transitional civilian government has
been installed. This government has promised early elections.

The United States will continue to monitor events. That is what took
place, and the Venezuelan people expressed their right to peaceful
protest. It was a very large protest that turned out. And the protest
was met with violence.”[i]

On that same day, U.S. Department of State spokesperson Philip T. Reeker,
claimed:

“In recent days, we expressed our hopes that all parties in
Venezuela, but especially the Chavez administration, would act with
restraint and show full respect for the peaceful expression of
political opinion. We are saddened at the loss of life. We wish to
express our solidarity with the Venezuelan people and look forward to
working with all democratic forces in Venezuela to ensure the full
exercise of democratic rights. The Venezuelan military commendably
refused to fire on peaceful demonstrators, and the media valiantly
kept the Venezuelan public informed.

Yesterday's events in Venezuela resulted in a transitional government
until new elections can be held. Though details are still unclear,
undemocratic actions committed or encouraged by the Chavez
administration provoked yesterday's crisis in Venezuela. According to
the best information available, at this time: Yesterday, hundreds of
thousands of Venezuelans gathered peacefully to seek redress of their
grievances. The Chavez Government attempted to suppress peaceful
demonstrations. Chavez supporters, on orders, fired on unarmed,
peaceful protestors, resulting in more than 100 wounded or killed.
Venezuelan military and police refused orders to fire on peaceful
demonstrators and refused to support the government's role in such
human rights violations. The government prevented five independent
television stations from reporting on events. The results of these
provocations are: Chavez resigned the presidency. Before resigning,
he dismissed the Vice President and the Cabinet. A transition
civilian government has promised early elections.

We have every expectation that this situation will be resolved
peacefully and democratically by the Venezuelan people in accord with
the principles of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. The
essential elements of democracy, which have been weakened in recent
months, must be restored fully. We will be consulting with our
hemispheric partners, within the framework of the Inter-American
Democratic Charter, to assist Venezuela.”[ii]

Why re-cite these statements here? These statements from the highest
levels of the U.S. Government show the prepared version of the events
that took place during the April 11-12 coup d’etat against Venezuelan
President Chávez. Moreover, these revealing statements now prove, in
light of documents recently obtained from the Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), that this prepared
version of events was knowingly false and made with the intention of
deceiving the international community in order to justify a violent
overthrow of a democratic government.

The White House and the State Department both claimed that the Chávez
government had provoked violence and actions that resulted in the
President’s alleged resignation. They also asserted that the Chávez
government had fired on unarmed, peaceful protesters and that the
Venezuelan military and police had refused orders to “support the
government’s role in human rights violations”. The U.S. Government
referred to the protests and actions of that day as though they were
spontaneous, unplanned events. The U.S. Government has also continued to
deny to this day any involvement whatsoever in the April 2002 coup
d’etat.

However, there is a vast amount of evidence that has surfaced since the
coup demonstrating that the events on April 11, 2002 were entirely
premeditated by a sector of the opposition intent on overthrowing the
Chávez government. Furthermore, my own investigations have provided a
plethora of evidence proving the U.S. involvement in the coup on various
levels. Most revealing on the Venezuelan front was a news program on
Saturday morning, April 12, 2002, “24 Horas” with host Napoleon Bravo. On
that program, Bravo interviewed Vice-Admiral Carlos Molina Tamayo, a
professed coup leader, and Victor Manuel Garcia, Director of the polling
company CIFRA who claimed to have represented the “civil society” during
the coup. Both Molina Tamayo and Garcia gave a jaw-dropping, detailed
account of the events leading up to the coup and those key Venezuelans
involved, including crediting the private televisions stations for their
complicity and aide. Their testimony, along with Chacao municipal mayor
Leopoldo Lopez of the Primero Justicia political party and Napoleon
Bravo’s own admissions of complicity in the coup, provided plenty of
proof that the overthrow of Chávez was a premeditated event.

Later, an extraordinary and award-winning documentary by filmmaker Angel
Palacios, “Puente Llaguno: Claves de un Masacre”, revealed how the
Venezuelan private media had manipulated and distorted the events that
unfolded on April 11, 2002 in the opposition march, which resulted in
widespread violence and death. The documentary also provided sufficient
proof that snipers unrelated to the Chávez government had provoked the
violence in the opposition march that justified the forced removal of
Chávez from office. Furthermore, the documentary succeeded in proving
that a well-planned military-civilian coup d’etat had taken place that
day and that those involved were connected to the highest levels of the
U.S. government.

But the evidence of actual U.S. involvement in the coup itself remained
scarce up until recently. On www.venezuelafoia.info, I have posted
hundreds of documents that evidence the intricate financing scheme the
U.S. government has been carrying out in Venezuela since 2001, that
includes financing well over twenty million dollars to opposition
sectors. The funding of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a
quasi-governmental entity in the U.S. financed entirely by Congress and
established by congressional legislation in 1983, has provided more than
three million dollars since late 2001 to opposition groups, many of which
were key participants in the April 2002 coup. And in June 2002, the U.S.
Agency for International Development (USAID), set up an Office of
Transition Initiatives (OTI) in the U.S. Embassy in Caracas, allegedly
for the purposing of helping Venezuela to resolve its political crisis.
The OTI in Caracas has counted on more than fifteen million dollars in
funding from Congress since June 2002 and has recently requested five
million more for 2005, despite the fact that it was only supposed to be a
two-year endeavor. All evidence obtained to date shows that the OTI has
primarily funded opposition groups and projects in Venezuela,
particularly those that were focused on the August 15, 2004 recall
referendum against President Chávez.

I have written other articles explaining the intervention model applied
through NED and USAID in Venezuela. This method of intervention is very
sophisticated and complex, as it penetrates civil society and social
organizations in a very subtle way and is often either undetectable or
flimsily justified by the concept of “promoting democracy”, which is what
the NED claims to do around the world, despite evidence to the contrary.
The mere fact in Venezuela that the NED has financed exclusively
anti-Chávez groups and those very same organizations that were involved
in the April 2002 coup shows that “democracy” is far from the NED’s
intention.

But the CIA intervention in Venezuela is of the crudest, simplest kind.
Top secret documents recently obtained and posted on
www.venezuelafoia.info show that in the weeks prior to the April 2002
coup against President Chávez, the CIA had full knowledge of the events
to occur and, in fact, even had the detailed plans in their possession.
An April 6, 2002 top secret intelligence brief headlining “Venezuela:
Conditions Ripening for Coup Attempt”, states, “Dissident military
factions, including some disgruntled senior officers and a group of
radical junior officers, are stepping up efforts to organize a coup
against President Chávez, possible as early as this month, [CENSORED].
The level of detail in the reported plans – [CENSORED] targets Chávez and
10 other senior officers for arrest…” The document further states, “To
provoke military action, the plotters may try to exploit unrest stemming
from opposition demonstrations slated for later this month…”[iii]

So the CIA knew that a coup attempt would take place soon after April 6,
2002, and moreover, they knew the plan would include Chávez’s arrest and
an exploitation of violence in the opposition march. In other words, they
knew the plans before the coup occurred and surely they knew the actors
involved, many of whose names are probably in the censored parts of the
top-secret documents. One could assume that if the CIA had the detailed
plans in their possession in the weeks prior to the coup it was because
they were associating and conspiring with the coup plotters. So, when Ari
Fleischer and Philip Reeker made those statements on April 12, 2002 on
behalf of the U.S. Government, they did so with full knowledge that a
coup had taken place, Chávez had been arrested and the violence in the
opposition march, which they attributed to Chávez, had actually been a
premeditated part of the coup plot. The top secret documents that prove
this information show they were sent to the U.S. Statement Department and
the National Security Agency, which means frankly, the White House knew
what was happening all along.

Furthermore, the CIA documents make no mention of any attempts to have
Chávez forcibly resign from office. The CIA warnings indicated as early
as March 5, 2002 (which is the date of the earliest document provided)
that a coup was on the rise and even hinted that prospects for a
successful coup were limited. The CIA rightfully felt the opposition was
too disperse and divided to successfully overthrow Chávez. But the
concept that Chávez had “resigned” as the White House and State
Department “confirmed” on April 12, 2002 was merely a set-up, a false
claim made with the intention of deceiving the U.S. public and the
international community. Remember that the U.S. stood practically alone
in the world in its endorsement of the coup-implemented Carmona
Government, which it later weakly condemned but only after the coup came
tumbling down and the U.S. realized it needed to save face quickly.

A top secret CIA document from April 14, 2002 shows concern that Latin
American governments will view U.S. foreign policy as “hypocritical”
because of its sole endorsement of the Carmona coup government. The CIA
also seems surprised that the region of Latin America so quickly rejected
the coup in Venezuela and that the Carmona government “stunningly
collapsed”, which demonstrates a possible out-of-date view of the
hemisphere and a failure in intelligence gathering and analysis. In fact,
the CIA never imagined the coup would buckle because of support for
Chávez – their analysis all along showed possible failure due to lack of
opposition unity and hasty actions. This is a very important point,
because it demonstrates that although the CIA was involved in the coup
plotting and the collaborations with dissident military factions and
opposition leaders, it was fairly detached from the reality of Venezuelan
society.

The CIA’s intelligence failures in Venezuela were apparently repeated
during the oil industry strike later in 2002 and the guarimba
destabilization attempt, an old-school CIA tactic applied in Chile and
Nicaragua. Both of these harsh actions injured the Venezuelan economy and
affected the government’s international image, but failed in their goal
to oust President Chávez. The NED’s and USAID’s tens of millions of
dollars in financing to build and maintain the opposition movement and
finance the recall referendum campaign against President Chávez also
failed to achieve their mission. In fact, all of these bungled attempts
by the U.S. government and its marionette opposition movement have served
to strengthen Chávez’s support within Venezuela and paint him as a strong
and solid international leader. 

Now that some of the top-secret documents have surfaced that show the
CIA’s complicity and involvement in the April 2002 coup, it leaves one to
wonder what is next on the agenda. In September 2001, shortly after the
attacks on the World Trade Center in New York, President Bush
unconditionally authorized former CIA Director George Tenet’s “Worldwide
Attack Matrix”, which targets leaders and prominent figures in 80
countries around the world for assassination. The authorization of the
Worldwide Attack Matrix provided the CIA with a virtual carte blanche to
conduct political assassinations abroad, justified under the “war against
terrorism”. The “Attack Matrix”, a top secret CIA document, authorizes an
array of covert CIA anti-terror actions that range from “routine
propaganda to lethal covert action in preparation for military attacks”.[iv]
The plans give the CIA the broadest and most lethal authority in history.
Some analysts have indicated that Venezuela is possibly included in the
plans.

The recent assassination of Venezuelan Prosecutor Danilo Anderson,
conducted in a style reminiscent of CIA operations, could be setting the
stage for future political murders. History shows that when the CIA fails
to remove a target via non-lethal means, more desperate measures are
taken. Despite the fact that the Venezuelan government and its supporters
appear to have foiled the CIA numerous times already over the past few
years, vigilance, intelligence and increased security measures should
become a priority.


------------------------------------------------------------------------

[i] http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/04/20020412-1.html

[ii] http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2002/9316.htm

[iii] http://www.venezuelafoia.info/CIA/
SEIB_04-06-02-pre-Coup-conditions_ripen/CIA-04-06-02.htm

[iv] http://www.i2osig.org/cia.html

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1321

Thursday, October 21, 2004 Iraq Notebook
The Rev. Pat Robertson's comments create stir


[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]AP, 2000
The Rev. Pat Robertson did not back away from comments that he said the
president made about U.S. casualties in Iraq.
WASHINGTON — The Rev. Pat Robertson said President Bush dismissed his
warning that the United States would suffer heavy casualties in Iraq and
told the television evangelist just before the beginning of the war that
"we're not going to have any casualties."

Robertson related the conversation during an interview with CNN late
Tuesday. He said he spoke to Bush before the invasion of Iraq in March
2003 and urged him to prepare the nation for heavy casualties.

Traveling with Bush in the Midwest, campaign adviser Karen Hughes said
political adviser Karl Rove was in the Feb. 10, 2003, meeting with the
president and Robertson in Nashville, but Bush never said there wouldn't
be casualties in Iraq.

"He must have misunderstood or misheard it," Hughes said of Robertson's
comments.

Robertson did not back away yesterday from his comments. While Bush's
response was a mistake, Robertson said, God has blessed the president
anyhow.

Sen. John Kerry's campaign pounced on the remarks yesterday.

"We believe President Bush should get the benefit of the doubt here, but
he needs to come forward and answer a very simple question," Kerry
adviser Mike McCurry said in a statement. "Is Pat Robertson telling the
truth when he said you didn't think there'd be any casualties, or is Pat
Robertson lying?"

Robertson, a Republican who made a bid for the party's presidential
nomination in 1988, has repeatedly suggested on his "700 Club"
cable-television show, which has an estimated audience of 1 million, that
God favors Bush's re-election.

In January, Robertson told viewers that God had told him Bush would win
re-election "in a blowout." In the CNN interview, Robertson said he
thinks Bush will win by a "razor-thin" popular-vote margin but by a
substantial Electoral College victory.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002068714_iraqdig21.html

[IMAGE]

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week633/pics/p-news-crucifixion.jpg

http://www.vheadline.com/graf/Chavez_Frias_124.jpg

http://www.usawa.com/crucifix.jpg

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Quotes_of_the_Imperium

-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]