Monday, February 25, 2008
UK Judge may rule on PDVSA asset freeze next week
Magnitude-4.9 earthquake struck of Venezuela's western Zulia state this morning
Venezuela to Announce Economic Policy
The government official said at the Jose Vicente Hoy TV show, the plan is well articulated, and will allow increasing confidence in the national economy, and boost domestic production.
He said there will be a clear, forthright dialogue, without fear of recognizing mistakes, thus enabling to jointly organize the economic, social agenda the country needs.
Despite the complex international panorama, Venezuela has dynamic economic growth, corroborated in the 8.4 percent increase achieved in 2007.
More than 1 million acres of land have been recovered by the Venezuelan State in Apure alone
Venezuelan finds parallels in diplomacy, acting
Sunday, February 24, 2008
16-year-old boy from Venezuela has died in hospital after a fight involving 25 people
Small bomb explodes outside the headquarters of Venezuela's leading business chamber
Venezuela considered swap in Exxon dispute
The Failure of Human Rights Watch in Venezuela and Haiti
Kenneth T. Tellis: International Victims of American Skudlluggery
The first to be killed was Augusto Sandino in Nicaragua in the early 1930s, then they went on to Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam in 1963. From there they went to Bolivia and killed Dr. Ernesto Che Guevara-Lynch de la Serna in 1967.
- Then they got President Salvador Allende Gossens of Chile assassinated in 1973. After which they went to El Salvador and murdered Archbishop Oscar Romero.
This is a record for a nation of criminals that poses as a democracy and breaks all international covenants and laws, treating them as mere hindrances.
For the record and by its own admission the government of the United States of America has publicly admitted to carrying out assassinations throughout the world. But worse still they have also admitted to making 400 attempts to assassinate Cuban President Fidel Alejandro Castro Ruz of which they are not even ashamed.
But that is not the end all of their skullduggery, because they still have plans to assassinate the Venezuelan leader Hugo Rafael Chavez Frias in the near future.
Kenneth T. Tellis
kenttellis@rogers.com
Moved back to Latin America ... Cárdenas had been a controversial choice for UN ambassador
As ambassador to the UN, he led an ultimately failed battle to earn a place for Venezuela in the Security Council. No replacement for him has been announced.
Cárdenas' nomination as UN representative in 2006 was met with reluctance by some Chavistas, who considered him a traitor. Luis Tascón, for one, withheld his vote.
Cárdenas, a career military officer and politician, held a position in the second government of Rafael Caldera, and then ran for governor of Zulia on his own account. Then he was considered as an opposition candidate for the presidency against Chávez.
Since then, he has clearly gained the trust of Chávez, or can be considered an example of the Chávez government's certain degree of plurality. In his role at the UN, there is no reason to believe he operated against the interests of the government, despite the controversy.
However, it is unclear if this change-up is a promotion or demotion, or simple a change-up. Many have argued that Venezuela's shot at a security council seat was hurt by Chávez calling Bush "the devil" at the UN...
FARC: Relatives of hostages have been awaiting news in Caracas ... one more hostage promised
"I have just received a call from Senator Córdoba, in which she told me that I can announce that Jorge Eduardo will be freed very soon and that I should wait for news in the coming days," said Lucy de Gechen, wife of ex-congressman Jorge Eduardo Gechen.
According to his wife, Córdoba called her from Caracas and told her that on Thursday she would go to Colombia to meet with her personally. "As soon as I am authorized by the Venezuelan government we will be travelling (to Caracas) with the family" to await the handover of her husband, she added.
The release of Gechem would be added to the already-promsied ex-congresspersons Gloria Polanco, Luis Eladio Pérez y Orlando Beltrán, whose relatives have been in Caracas awaiting their release. This would be in addition to the unilateral release of Clara Rojas and Consuelo Gonzales de Perdomo on January 10th, which was offered as an "apology" for the cancellation of negotiations by Uribe.
The Colombian government has announced that they have been intercepting communications from the FARC leader that has been watching over high-profile French-Colombian hostage Ingrid Betancourt since 2005. According to authorities, Gerardo Antonio Aguilar, alias "Caesar," also watches over the American hostages, has had some of his telephone conversations taped, with the help of the CIA.
- These recordings allowed them to get more information about the hostages, they said, as well as to locate a network that supplied the FARC. They said they captured 39 of its members earlier this year.
Meanwhile Zulia Mayor and opposition leader Manuel Rosales continues to use his position to attack Chávez and affirm controversial claims that the FARC operates in his state. Chávez denies this, and says that much trouble can be attributed to Colombian ex-paramilitary groups sent into the border region by Colombia and the United States.
Rosales accused military groups of training the underworld in the border that someone is protecting them from persecution of crimes. This is approximately the exact opposite of statements Chávez made last week. Colombian authorities announced Tuesday that Fidel's resignation would not effect support for peace processes received from Cuba.
Election date not clear ... National Electoral Council (CNE) stalls again
Technicians at the CNE were still preparing the timetable, and any plan would first have to be submitted to the National Electoral Board (JNE) -- the agency which actually runs elections -- for revision and then returned to the CNE for final approval, Díaz said. Lucena, by the way, heads the JNE as well as the CNE.
- Be that as it may, she may have a problem on her hands with Díaz. While the CNE board is viewed with suspicion by the opposition, Díaz has emerged as its resident stickler for the rules.
Caracas Metropolitan Fire Department ... Mayor says funds not insufficient; pay raise, lingering problems
He said the funds had been made available by the transfer of the Metropolitan Police to the Federal Government. In this election year, it seems that the government is concentrating less on grand ideological projects and more on day-to-day governance, and the wage increase is a swift and likely popular political reaction.
But the wage increases won�t happen until March, and even then the problems of supplies look to be serious problems. According to the firemen, only three of the 90 ambulances actually work, so they have been using their regular trucks. In some cases they have used neck braces made of cardboard. And, three hundred firemen have left their posts due to criticism of the working conditions. Bomberos, in Spanish, do not only put out fires, but deal with emergency health situations and other urban disasters.
Barreto would like to put some of the blame on the opposition. "But we would have more funds if the mayors of Chacao, El Hatillo, Sucre and Baruta would pay the debt they have to us, like the mayor of Libertador has done," he said.
Chávez mulls police plan; proposals have now been handed over to the president for his consideration
But even as President Hugo Chávez mulls the proposals, a member of a committee which has been looking at the problem warned that it could take up to five years before the plan really starts producing results.
The warning came from from Andrés Antillano, a criminologist who was on the Police Reform Commission (Conarepol).
- The commission has now been disbanded even before work begins on turning a tentative plan into the law of the land – and one that applies to law enforcers as much as everybody else.
Antillano's statement implies one of two things: either the National Assembly (AN) will rush through legislation on a highly complicated issue; or the president will use his special powers under the Enabling Law to decree the reforms into law.
When it first emerged that Chávez might go it alone, rumblings of discontent were heard at the Assembly. Legislators argued that the issue was simply too big to be treated in full fell swoop by decree, and that it required substantial discussion and modification in parliament.
Some outspoken souls even went as far as to point out that police reform had not been included in the areas of policy designated as eligible for being treated by decree under the Enabling Law.
That said, in private, one legislator conceded that he and his colleagues "have been sitting on our haunches for too long, and the people want results."
The nub of the proposal is the creation of a single national police force, but this poses questions about what would happen to the myriad forces now policing the country in one capacity or another. Each state has its own force, and so do municipalities.
Overlying this mosaic, there are a few law enforcement agencies at the national level such as the scientific and investigative police (Cicpc), the state security service (Disip) and the Military Intelligence Directive (DIM). This threatens to complicate the plan.
Kenneth T. Tellis: U.N., The Hague, I.C.C. and the I.C.S.I.D. are all controlled by International corporations
When Serbia was being bombed by NATO and U.S. Air Forces in 1999, the U.N. permitted that carnage. Because the U.N. was party to that violation of international law. But, when U.S. President, Bill Clinton ordered U.S. AIR FORCE planes to the bomb the Embassy of the People's Republic of China there was no such demand by the U.N. or invocation of the Vienna Convention. It must have been deliberately overlooked by the U.N. which is controlled by the U.S. Here again, we see how the U.N. applies double standards even in the area of justice.
Almost every world body today, has people in its employ who are hirelings of the U.S. Under such circumstances what country can put any trust in them?
Why is the U.S. allowed to meddle in the make-up of these international bodies?
Even the present case regarding the issue of the property of Exxon-Mobil which was nationalized by Venezuela has gone before such a body as the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes. But can a body which is suspected of direct links with the U.S. government and corporations mete out justice, or bring prejudice to bear on the issue? Surely, such a body cannot mete out justice, by the simple fact that it is not neutral in any way or form. So, even in so-called international bodies the U.S. controls the result. So, I ask, can there be an justice in such a venue?
What is now needed is a NEW body run by neutrals, that will bring justice to bear on every country including a SUPER POWER like the U.S., otherwise the world is simply dealing with KANGAROO COURTS, operated by the U.S. and its allies.
Kenneth T. Tellis
kenttellis@rogers.com
Oil Wars: Heinz Dieterich and the path to oblivion
Oil Wars Blogspot writes: Heinz Dieterich, the German expat professor who resides in Mexico, has long been one of the key theoreticians who has advised president Chavez.
In the past few weeks he has penned two important theoretical articles describing what he views as the most important problems facing the Bolivarian Revolution and the way to fix them:
These articles are at once very insightful and give an accurate assessment of many of the failings of the Chavez administration yet at the same time over dramatize some of its problems and propose "solutions" that will likely solve nothing.
To start I'll review what Dieterich gets right in his analysis.
He correctly notes that the Bolivarian movement lacks internal democracy. It is led, he states, by Chavez himself with assistance from the New Political Class (NPC) which Dieterich is calls the "Bolivarian right" and is personified by Miranda state governor Diosdado Cabello. Dieterich explains that Chavez had an opportunity to democratize and broaden the movement in the wake of the April 2002 coup and was even pressed by some cabinet members to do so but instead solidified his rule based only on himself with the support of the "Bolivarian right". Further, according to Dieterich, this "Bolivarian right" is more interested in its own survival and privileges than any transformation of Venezuelan society.
The "Bolivarian right" has tried to maintain its grip on power by disqualifying anyone who critiques it as we have seen clearly in what has happened with the attacks on Tascon referring to him as a "false" revolutionary and a CIA agent.
Chavez himself tries to maintain public support via "management by crisis" whereby the population is presented with some crisis, real or imagined, generally from the oligarchy or the United States which will cause them to rally around the government. As Dieterich correctly notes this strategy for managing public perceptions and maintaining public support generally loses effectiveness over time as the population tires of the constant agitation and the president loses credibility when many of the crisis never materialize.
Dieterich also correctly analyses at least some of Venezuela's current economic problems. He points out that whatever economic problems Venezuela faces are domestic in origin and not created by the United States.
The members of Chavez' cabinet, most all of whom are part of the "Bolivarian right", are incapable or unwilling to explain what is possible and what is not with the Venezuelan economy.
To counteract this Dieterich recommends that Chavez convene an international panel of leftist/progressive economic experts to advise him encompassing such people as Julio Boltvinik, Paul Cockshott, and the Nobel prize winner Joseph Stiglitz.
This is in my view a very worthy idea and one that should actually be implemented.In another part of his economic analysis Dieterich points out that the government has communicated to the population on economic issues very poorly and that rather than giving people accurate explanations that elevate their understanding and consciousness they are given false and distorted explanations or even just "mystification". For example he criticizes Chavez who responds to shortages by calling producers who fail to produce or send products to Colombia (where they can avoid price controls) as "traitors".
As Dieterich rightly points out in market economies economic activities are driven by profit rates not by values such as patriotism. So Chavez' appeals to patriotism will go nowhere. So we can see that Dieterich does grasp many of the important problems facing the Chavez government and how they are caused by very real failings of that very same government.
However, in other and even more important respects Dieterich has some very big flaws in his analysis which leads him to make recommendations which if followed will ultimately only make matters worse.
- This begins with what provoked his two essays in the first place -- the defeat of the constitutional reform referendum last December 2nd.
Dieterich views that as a major blow to the government akin to the April 2002 coup and shows that the governments support has dropped significantly.I believe Dieterich attributes far to much to that referendum. Many people who otherwise support the government viewed the proposed reforms as deeply flawed. Hence they voted against the reforms, but not necessarily against the government itself.
Further, Dieterich believes the government faces an important political crisis from which it must recover immediately. He quotes Chavez as saying that if the opposition wins many of the local elections this coming fall it will gravely damage the "revolution" and bring about a near "civil war" putting the country back to where it was in 2002. Dieterich clearly shares Chavez' beliefs on that.
I believe this is a huge misrepresentation of the political situation facing the government. In point of fact the local contests are minor as those offices have little power and even less ability to impact the national government. State and local governments are almost entirely dependent on the national government for their funding so the central government would still exercise tremendous power over them. Further, most of their functions, such as picking up garbage, maintaining streets, and dealing with other local quality of life issues are all rather pedestrian.
In fact, I would state that it has actually hurt Chavismo that it has won control over so many local governments. Many of these Chavista office holders have been notoriously inefficient in their jobs which has simply served to sully the image of the Chavez government as a whole.
Given the lack of internal democracy within the Chavez-led movement the party base has no way to try to select better local candidates so their is no obvious way for this to be remedied internally.
Yet if opposition candidates were to win a significant number of these offices then they get the privilege and responsibility for making sure the garbage is picked up and the roads are repaired. Either they do a good job, in which case Venezuelans have a better quality of life, or they also fail in which case they, not Chavez, face the political consequences of their failure.
Given that, the elections this year are not nearly as important as either Chavez or Dieterich make them out to be nor are they likely to be decisive to the future of this government. In fact, the next truly important elections are not scheduled until 2010 when the National Assembly would be up for re-election (a presidential recall vote could happen sooner but given Chavez' huge vote total in the last election this is probably not a major threat).
So rather than facing an emergency that needs to be fixed this year the government most likely has at least two or three years to more fully address problems.
Yet because Dieterich thinks the government has to fix the economic problems immediately he proposes very short term fixes to the most obvious problems which will likely only exacerbate the economic situation over the longer term.
The only economic problem that he addresses are high inflation and shortages of key foodstuffs. And he actually proposes that the government fix these problems BEFORE the end of the year so that he can win the local elections. His proposed fix is for the government to import large quantities of food and distribute to the population at fixed low prices -- sort of as is done through the Mercal food stores, only on a larger scale. So much food would be imported that the shortages would be eased.
Further, the government would tamp down inflation because the government would in effect assume the high costs of the food for itself. That is, the government would pay the international market price for the foodstuffs, import them, and then distribute them at a much lower cost to the population. These subsidized imports will cost the government billions of dollars but given the current sky high oil prices they will probably be able to afford it. The hope is this will reduce the food shortages, hold inflation in check by keeping the prices on these staples low and consequently boost Chavez' popularity enough to win the upcoming elections.
It is possible such a strategy will work.
In fact if implemented quickly and efficiently it probably will. And the government has already begun this with the new PDval food distribution centers of which there will soon be thousands giving out very inexpensive food.
However, this is a solution which only APPEARS to fix a problem while in reality not fixing it at all. In fact, it is only a temporary elixir meant as a response to an imaginary immediate political crisis which will only serve to increase economic problems over time and create a REAL economic crisis a few years down the road.
A big part of the problem is that Dieterich doesn't fully analyze the economic problems, he limits himself to only dealing with inflation, shortages, and to a certain extent price controls and his solutions are developed with only those issues in mind.
Yet looking at the Venezuelan economy more broadly there are many other problems: an overvalued exchange rate that favors imports over domestic production; siphoning off of many Venezuelan products to be sold in Colombia or on the black market; far to much of Venezuela's oil revenues being used to support a consumption binge and too little invested in building new industries; far too little productive economic growth outside the oil sector; the consequent dearth of new jobs in productive sectors of the economy; the low educational and skill levels of the Venezuelan work force.
Dieterich essay's never mention those problems and therefore propose nothing to address them. Rather, his quick fix scheme for food shortages would just cause the government to use even more of its limited resources to fund consumption further squeezing out investment in new industry. Worse still, all the same inefficiencies and distortions that currently exist in the food sector would still be there and would cause much of this new food to also wind up on the black market or outside of Venezuelan making this a very inefficient solution. Finally, it has the government try to fix through the brute force of its spending what could much more efficiently be resolved by Venezuelan industry if the perverse incentives its faces were simly eliminated.
And while this may work for 2008 it will surely fail longer term.
Without adequate growth in productive sectors the Venezuelan economy will never truly improve and will continue to be held hostage to the price of oil. Once the price of oil even stopped rising, not to even consider go down, the government would no longer be able to employ these methods. It is very clear that while this "solution" may boost the government's fortunes in 2008 it is sure to hit a brick wall in the near future which will lead to even more dire consequences for the Venezuelan government and the economy as a whole.
And of course, if the crisis then hits in 2009 or 2010, which it likely would, Dieterich's solution would blow up in Chavez' face with an impact much greater than anything he has faced to date.
In this sense, Heinz Dieterich's flawed analysis of the current problems faced by Venezuela paint an overly dire picture of the situation and lead to "immediatismo" -- that is proposing short term fixes that only serve to make problems worse in the longer term.
Here, in brief, is what I propose as a counter analysis of the current problems and how they should be solved:
The Chavez government does not face an immediate political crisis. The impact of the referendum defeat should not be overestimated nor should it all be attributed to a decline in support for the government. More importantly the government faces no important political contests for at least two years and more likely three years. This means that the government has a reasonable time frame in which to come up with and implement real solutions to problems -- it doesn't need to resort to immediate band aid fixes.
Here is what some of those fixes would be.
First, the immediate problem of food shortages could be largely fixed by eliminating price controls. With food able to be sold at full market rates domestic production will be stimulated over the next two to three years. This will lead to a spike in food prices but the government can insulate the popular classes at least partially from this via its sales of discount foodstuffs. To do that they don't need massive amounts of new food imports -- they simply need better control and accountability over what they currently sell through Mercal much of which is stolen.
Secondly, the Venezuelan currency needs to be devalued to market rates either in its entirety or at least for non-essential items (cars, electronics, consumer goods, etc.). This will make Venezuelan exports more competitive on international markets and even make local production more competitive with imports. If this devaluation is maintained (ie new devaluations are done as needed going forward) local production will increase and there will be new investment and new jobs over the course of the next few years. This will shift the benefits from the oil boom from imports to local industry and will make the economic growth more wide spread, balanced, and more sustainable.
Third, the government should then devote more of its booming revenues from the oil industry to investment in productive industries. This will likely not produce results within a three year time span but it is necessary if Venezuela is to progress in the longer term.
Fourth, the issue of crime needs to be effectively addressed. Although Dieterich for some reason never mentions it, all polling data I have seen shows this to be a greater concern to most Venezuelans than inflation or shortages. Getting it at least somewhat under control in the next two to three years is possible and would reap tremendous political dividends for the government.
Fifth, the panel of international economic experts that Dieterich proposes should be convened with their proposals very carefully examined and adopted whenever possible.
Finally, the government has to change its rhetoric. As Dieterich correctly notes, Chavez' continuous crisis mongering and gratuitous belligerence is accomplishing little. Worse, the government's patently false explanations of economic problems are steadily destroying its credibility.
To change that the government needs to shift to educating the population about the nature of the problems the country faces and what the solutions are. This is extremely important as some of the above solutions will create short term pain for the population which unless they understand why it is necessary will likely lead to an over reaction against the government.
In doing this the government, in particular Chavez himself, will have to admit to having made mistakes in policy. Only by coming clean about this and presenting coherent and accurate explanations about what those mistake were and how they are to be fixed will he be able to persuade his supporters, who are still the largest segment of the Venezuelan population, to go along. The bombast has to be out, to be replaced by enlightened explanations which elevate people's consciousness and understanding.
If this was all done without delay it is possible that enough positive results would be seen in the next two to three years to allow the government to regain enough popular support to win the really important elections. Of course, it is also possible that while the pain of these changes would be immediate and high the positive results would be too slow in coming to help the government in 2009 and 2010. But that is simply a risk the government can't avoid running as these problems can't be wished away nor fixed with band aids.
The reality is these measures should have been adopted immediately following the 2006 presidential win when the government had more time and Chavez had an immense store of political capital. Instead, the government has simply acted, as Dieterich notes, in ways that make the problems worse and Chavez himself has spent too much time tilting at windmills fighting imagined enemies.
- Still the government needs to not over react and fall into the "immediatismo" trap as Dieterich himself does. That will no more solve any of these problems over the intermediate term than the governments current policies will.
Finally, it needs to be kept in mind what the larger purpose of all this is, something which I think Professor Dieterich may have lost sight of. The point of all this is NOT just to have Chavistas win all the elections down to dog catcher in every little town. While this revolution is of course political it can't be about politics simply for the sake of winning political contests.
Rather it has to be about improving peoples lives -- improving them economically, culturally, environmentally, and in every other respect. If it doesn't do that then all the political victories in the world would serve no point.
For this reason when developing policies the first criteria always has to be will this policy over time improve the lives of Venezuelans.
How the policy will impact you at the next election is a consideration but it should always be a secondary consideration.
If you lose sight of that and devise your policies with only the goal of winning the next election in mind, as Chavez and Dieterich appear to be doing, then you've lost sight of what this revolution is supposed to be all about!
Oil Wars Blogspot
petrowars@yahoo.com
Chavez cancels foreign trips over Colombia hostage mediation
Saturday, February 23, 2008
Kenneth T. Tellis: Lord Muck of Roguehaven
I was not too impressed by the article, since it came from a person who has been tried in a court of law in the very U.S. for embezzlement.
The article is filled with innuendoes from top to bottom. Cuba under Castro was never a vassal state of the Soviet Union. Yes! Cuba under constant threat of a U.S. invasion had to have an ally, so it was an alliance of necessity.
The Soviet Union never ruled Cuba as Lord Muck made out in his article.
While his article points out that Cuba permitted the deployment of Soviet intermediate-range nuclear missiles in 1962, he makes no mention that this was done to off-set the missiles that U.S. had in Turkey, which were aimed at the Soviet Union and other COMINTERN States. What is really being derided here is that Fidel Castro did not cozy up to the U.S. as other Latin American leaders of the time did. But, he does not mention the fact that President Richard Nixon had asked U.S. Secretary of State Heinz (Henry) Kissinger to draw up plans for the assassination of Chilean President Salvador Allende Gossens. That plot was hatched at the U.S. Embassy at Santiago, Chile.
Here U.S. Ambassador Nathaniel Davis, Heinz Kissinger, General Augusto Pinochet Ugarte and a team of CIA men met and set the dayte for the assassination of Allende.
Under the U.S. puppet Fulgencio Batista Cuba was not the third most prosperous state in Latin America, but the most destitute state in Latin America, because its riches were being sent to its U.S. owners. The Cuban people were not of Cuba, but peons working on the land, which was owned, lock, stock and barrel by U.S. crime syndicates etc.
What Lord Much means by prosperous, is that it was in hock up to its neck to U.S. corporations. All that changed with the Castro administration taking over the country in January 1959. That is the very reason that the U.S. began its embargo.
What we are seeing today, is that same story being played out in Venezuela.
The U.S. wants control of the oilfields there, and is livid that a Venezuelan has taken the step of nationalizing them. That is what makes the Bush regime mad as hell. But never you mind the people of Venezuela and its leader, Chavez will weather the storm and bring prosperity to all of Latin America and the Caribbean as times goes on.
Today, we are seeing the result of how an ordinary person like Chavez is giving the U.S. a run for its money.
The Yanqui power is no more, and Latrin Americans can hold their own in the present day world.
Kenneth T. Tellis
kenttellis@rogers.com
Kenneth T. Tellis: Some people never give up....
Judit Kovacs begins her letter mocking Lynn Pecknold's accounts of her recent trip to Cuba, who praised her Cuban guide, because he was satisfied with his life in Cuba.
When Judit Kovacs spoke of Hungary, where she claimed that the people had to repress their opinions in order to survive, because Hungary then was a Communist State. But Judit Kovacs did not tell you that the Capitalist Hungary of today is far worse then the Communist Hungary of yesterday. Why does she not visit present day Capitalist Hungary and see for herself what suffering this NEW system has brought on the people of Hungary. Where in the past, people had food, shelter and work, they now are without shelter, food and work. The streets of Budapest, and other urban areas now have the homeless and beggars. Welcome to the NEW victims of Capitalism, which exploits the weakest of Hungarian society. There is garbage to be found on the streets and black-marketing is in full swing, because the GREED of Capitalism has infected the masses through the news media, which now controls the minds of people.
Let Judit Kovacs cross the border into the U.S. to see for herself how Capitalism has made people not only destitute, but starving and homeless. This is the U.S.A. where you cannot have an opinion, without the POLICE arresting you for violating the law set down but the NEW WORLD ORDER or loosely the BUSH REGIME.
Where the U.S. Constitution is not worth the paper it is printed on.
Dream on Judit Kovacs, because you live in la la land, and cannot face reality. The way you praised CAPITALISM, is a joke, because it speaks of the mindlessness of some people, who refuse to challenge the mess that Capitalism has brought upon our safe peaceful world.
Today, both Socialist Cuba and Venezuela have been called Communists by the Bush regime and its stooges. Why?
Because they have alleviated the suffering of the common people and brought EDUCATION, HEALTH, EMPLOYMENT and a standard of living far out-pacing anything in the U.S., where even war veterans are out on streets of New York begging.
That maybe good enough for Judit Kovacs, but sure as hell, isn't good enough for most of us with any intelligence.
Kenneth T. Tellis
kenttellis@rogers.com
