Oscar Heck: Chavez is NOT like Bush ... Venezuela is NOT like the USA ... Venezuelans are NOT like Americans!

VHeadline commentarist Oscar Heck writes: There is a man called Austin Bay, who has had two commercial wargames published, who served for four years as a consultant in wargaming at the Pentagon and who has the rank of Colonel (Armor) in the U.S. Army Reserve. He is now retired from the US Army Reserve, but was recalled to active duty and served in Iraq in 2004 and was awarded the Bronze Star for meritorious service (whatever that is).

Austin Bay has a B.A. from Rice University and a Ph.D. in English and Comparative Literature from Columbia University ... and is a graduate of the U.S. Army War College. He also teaches at The University of Texas (Honors Program). I wonder what he teaches? But who is this person, really?

One can often tell about a person by what he or she writes ... so let us begin.

The Houston Chronicle published one of his articles on March 7, 2008, entitled, "Colombia offering a democratic alternative to Chavez," where he states amongst other things:
"The real news behind South America's latest border fracas is Colombia's looming victory in its own narcotics-powered civil war.This is a victory Colombia's chief international antagonist, Venezuelan caudillo Hugo Chavez, fears — for several calculating reasons."

Then further into the article, he states: "Seven years ago, Colombians were being kidnapped, murdered and blown to shreds. In the dark year 2001, rebels kidnapped over 2,500 people. Rebel groups of the left (FARC) and right (AUC, United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia) fought one another and the government. Six thousand people died in the crossfire. The Colombian Army remained, for the most part, on the strategic defensive."

Now, I have a question for the reader. What do you, as a reader think the AUC is? Is it a rebel force such as the FARC? Say, another group with the same or similar aims as the FARC?
No it isn't ... but Austin-powers here appears to clearly want you to think that the FARC and the AUC (both classified by the US as "terrorist" groups) are the same or similar. Far from it. I will explain.

The AUC was created as a paramilitary/mercenary armed force to protect the Colombian elite, their ranches and their businesses ... and, by coincidence, the Colombian elite also control the Colombian government ... the same government that is fighting the "evil" FARC.

Furthermore, according to Wikipedia: "The AUC asserted itself as a regional and national counter-insurgent force. Former AUC leader Carlos Castaño Gil in 2000 claimed 70 percent of the AUC's operational costs were financed with drug-related earnings, the rest coming from "donations" from its sponsors."

Who are those "sponsors?"

According to Wikipedia: "In March 2007 the international fruit corporation, Chiquita, admitted to having paid the AUC from 1997 to 2004 $1.7 million in order to protect its workers and operations, in Urabá and Santa Marta, of which at least $825,000 came after the AUC was designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the U.S. State Department in 2001."

What else can be said about Chiquita Banana?

First, their headquarters are at: Chiquita Brands International, Inc., 250 East Fifth Street, Cincinnati, OH 45202, USA.

Then, according to Democracy now: "Chiquita, formerly known as the United Fruit Company, is the world s largest banana producer. Among the illegal Chiquita practices uncovered by the Enquirer's investigation: Chiquita secretly controls dozens of supposedly independent banana companies. It also suppresses union activity on the farms it controls.

Despite its pact with environmental groups to abide by pesticide safety standards, Chiquita subsidiaries have used pesticides in Central America that are banned in the U.S., Canada, and the European Union. Chiquita also released harmful toxic chemicals into farms, killing at least one worker in Costa Rica according to a coroner’s report.

• Chiquita’s fruit transport ships have been used to smuggle cocaine into Europe. More than a ton of cocaine was seized from 7 Chiquita ships in 1997. (The Enquirer story says the illegal shipment was traced to lax Colombian security rather than to Chiquita)
  Chiquita executives bribed Colombian officials
• Chiquita called in the Honduran military to evict residents of a farm village; the soldiers forced the farmers out at gunpoint, and the village was bulldozed.
• An employee of a competitor filed a federal lawsuit charging that armed men hired by Chiquita tried to kidnap him in Honduras."

Now ... I have a question.

• Why is it that Chiquita Banana is still in existence if Chiquita Banana financed an organization labeled as a "terrorist" group by the US government?
• This means that a US-based corporation is/was indeed financing a terrorist organization in another country. Bizarre, no?
• How come the heads of Chiquita Banana aren’t in Guantanamo or in some CIA torture chamber?

Austin Bay is hiding critical and very relevant information from the reader. Can you now really believe anything that Austin-the-war-guy says?

But wait ... there is more.

According to Wikipedia, the AUC, financed by at least one US corporation, financed by drugs and protecting the Colombian elite and the Colombian government: "According to the Colombian National Police, in the first ten months of 2000 the AUC conducted 804 assassinations, 203 kidnappings, and 75 massacres with 507 victims. The AUC claims the victims were mostly guerrillas or sympathizers. Combat tactics consist of conventional and guerrilla operations against main force insurgent units. AUC clashes with military and police units are increasing, although the group has traditionally avoided government security forces."

And all this in only 10 months! They have been around for at least 10 years! Do the math.

By the way ... the FARC's record of such violence is minimal compared to that of the Colombian government, the AUC and the Colombian/USA military, mercenary and police forces.

Furthermore, the FARC’s “criminal” activities are aimed mostly at the corrupt Colombian elite and their cronies. The AUC attacks poor rural villages and innocent people or people who refuse to side with them or people who support the FARC. I know some of what goes on because I live a portion of the year along the Venezuelan Colombian borders.

The Austin continues to regurgitate. He says that "Colombians turned against FARC ..."
Not true, Austin. In general, the only Colombians who are against the FARC are the mid-to-upper classes which represent the vast minority of the Colombian population.

Then he says, "Ecuador and its ally, Venezuela, responded by threatening Colombia with war."
Austin, this is a big lie.

Neither Venezuela nor Ecuador threatened Colombia with war. I am here in Venezuela as I write. Where are you? Have you bothered to come and see for yourself? Do you speak Spanish? Have you listened to RNV or VTV or to Alo Presidente? I am sure you haven't, buddy-boy.

Then he misguides the reader by saying, " FARC definitely established a political relationship with Chavez-led Venezuela. Chavez advocates "socialism" (socialist dictatorship), and FARC had Marxist roots. Last year, the connections became overt when Chavez asked Colombia to agree to let FARC use Venezuela as a "sanctuary zone."

Reader, what do you understand by the above paragraph?

Do you assume or interpret that Chavez provided areas of Venezuela for the FARC to hide?

I am quite sure that this is what you, the reader, understand, and what Austin-the-doctor-of-English wants you to believe. The real situation is as follows: Late last year (2007), Chavez volunteered to act as an intermediary between the FARC and the Colombian government in a deal whereby the FARC would release, in good faith, several hostages which they had been holding for several years. To do this, part of the deal was that Venezuela would offer a place on Venezuelan territory to which the FARC would bring the hostages to be released. These are the facts which Austin, through his deceptive writing style, is trying to hide.

(Unfortunately, the dishonest Colombian government, backed 100% and openly by US government, used this good-faith opportunity to hunt down the FARC, which they did, one attack being the recent massacre of about 20 FARC members by special Colombian/US forces on Ecuadorian soil. Basically, Colombia backstabbed the FARC in a show of total dishonesty and cruelty and did this heinous thing on territory belonging to another country. It is as if the USA went into Canada with mercenaries and massacred a bunch of people they didn’t like. They would never get away with it, legally, politically or morally. It is a grave criminal offense … and anyone with any kind of thinking brain can see that. )

Then, Austin-the-know-it-all-from-Rice-University (get it!) says, "Despite their blatant thuggery, both Chavez and FARC ..."

Who are the thugs here? Chavez? What has Chavez done but to help liberate hostages who, by the way, are from the Colombian elite. I would say that Chavez is a saint compared to the USA, compared to filth-mouth Austin, compared to the Colombian government, the AUC and Chiquita Banana. They are the real thugs, not Chavez ... and certainly not the FARC, in comparison.

Then the grand Austin-of-Texas says some of the most outrageous things, "Chavez faces domestic troubles. He has brutalized his domestic opponents. He has squandered Venezuela's oil windfall — on populist political schemes and Russian weapons. He suffered a stinging setback in late 2007 in a referendum that would have essentially made him president for life. Oil production is declining. His political supporters have enriched themselves, sparking resentment among poor Venezuelans who once overwhelmingly backed Chavez."

Let me put things straight.

Chavez is not facing any domestic troubles apart from hoarding and speculation of basic foodstuff by major players in industry ... but even so, all products are now available in plenty. Come see for yourself, Austin, and then open your mouth.

Chavez has brutalized domestic opponents? How exactly? For your information, Austin, all political violence in Venezuela has been perpetrated by Chavez' opponents, most of whom were (and probably still are) financed by the USA's National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and USAID. The two major opposing factions were/are FEDECAMARAS and the CTV.

• Coincidentally, FEDECAMARAS (the largest and most corrupt business association) is also the organization behind the hoarding and speculation of basic foodstuff.

Austin believes that spending billions of dollars on healthcare, education and housing is "squandering" money? This tells you something about Austin-the-non-heart. Furthermore, Austin doesn't explain why the Venezuelan government is buying Russian (and other) military equipment, does he? The Venezuelan army's equipment was outdated and almost entirely made-in-the-USA ... and ... then ... the US government put a military-contracts embargo against Venezuela.

So where is Venezuela going to buy the weapons it needs to update their equipment?

Duh?

He would not have "essentially" been president for life. Like in Canada and many other countries throughout the world, Chavez would have been allowed to run for president as many times as he wanted. Sure, if the people would vote him in forever and ever, which could have been the case, then he would have been president forever and ever.

Oil production has declined slightly (slightly, not considerably) since the massive and violent US-government-financed sabotage of the oil installations in 2002 and 2003 ... but it has picked up to a relatively high degree. Furthermore, Venezuelan oil installations are in the process of being upgraded, which accounts for some of the reduction in production.

Yes, some of Chavez' political supporters have enriched themselves and yes, it has sparked some resentment amongst some of Chavez' followers, but not much. In the 2004 referendum against Chavez (also financed by the US government through Sumate), Chavez won with about 59% of the votes. The December 2007 national vote to either go ahead or not with the proposed changes to the Constitution, was lost by the Chavez side with about 49% of the votes versus 51% of the votes for opponents of the proposed changes to the Constitution. However, this does not mean that Chavez is any less popular amongst Venezuelans. On the contrary, he is more popular because he gracefully accepted the results as the choice of the Venezuelan people.

What really gets under my skin are comments such as "Would have made him president for life ... the poor who once overwhelmingly supported Chavez."

Logically, if Chavez has lost that much support, why would anyone be afraid that Chavez could be elected over and over as president of Venezuela? Ah?

The Austin-the-terrible then lies outright. Incredible. He says, "Thus a little border scrap with Colombia could boost Chavez' sagging domestic fortunes. Colombia and Venezuela have had several border demarcation disputes."

What border scrap? There has been no border scrap at all. This is incredible. The only thing that happened is that for a few days, Venezuela closed its borders with Colombia. That's all that happened. There was no "scrap" of any kind, liar.

Austin goes on about war ... "Chavez himself introduces other curious elements that could lead to a larger war. Chavez styles himself as South America's new liberator, a new Simon Bolivar. Chavez's Chavismo (echoing Fidel Castro's Fidelismo) combines machismo, socialism, caudilloism, populism, anti-Americanism and the flamboyant dream of a new "Bolivarian state" in South America. Of course, this delusional superstate — cobbled from Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, parts of Peru, Bolivia and Guyana, and possibly the Dutch West Indies — needs a "great leader": Hugo Chavez."

Austin does not realize that Chavez is not like Bush, that Venezuela is not like the USA, that Venezuelans are not like Americans.

Contrary to the USA, Venezuela is a peaceful country, with peaceful people and Chavez is a peaceful leader. Come see for yourself, Austin ... that is, if they let you in to this wonderful country. (Anyone can verify this by spending a few months in Venezuela.) It is Colombian president Uribe who is the violent one, the war-mongering imitator of the USA. It is he who ordered the recent massacre of FARC members, while they slept on non-Colombian territory. It is Uribe who broke all the rules of sovereignty ... as the OAS openly and conclusively declared. It is Uribe who sought to start a "scrap" with its neighbors, Ecuador and Venezuela. It is the Venezuelan and Colombian elite, financed by the violent US government, who are the violent ones.

Then he has the gall to say, "Colombia, however, demonstrates that political thugs and terrorists can be beaten."

Yeah ... sure, "they" can be beaten, with US military force, with massacres, with mercenary forces ... by real thugs like US-based Blackwater and other mercenaries who operate in and from Colombian territory ... and by real thugs like the Colombian government and its twin, the AUC, and its father, the USA.

So who is this Austin Bay character?

A manipulative liar, that is what he is.

Oscar Heck
oscarheck111@yahoo.com