Parade Magazine's Chavez Smear: Venezuelan president a terrorist funder?

[paineinthearse]

by email

Please call on Parade Magazine to either provide evidence for its claim that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is "funding revolutionaries and terrorists throughout Latin America" or else issue a retraction of the unattributed charge.

Parade Magazine's Chavez Smear: Venezuelan president a terrorist funder?

10/12/05

On October 9, Parade magazine--the Sunday newspaper supplement with a circulation of 34.5 million, making it the country's most widely distributed magazine--published an inaccurate smear against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. The smear, appearing in the Q&A column "Walter Scott's Personality Parade," was a response to a letter writer who wanted to know "where Fidel Castro gets the dough to shore up his bankrupt regime." Scott's full answer was:

"In the wake of the collapse of the USSR, which bankrolled him to the tune of $4 billion a year, Castro has turned to Hugo Chavez, Marxist president of Venezuela, the world's fifth-largest oil exporter. In addition to shoring up Castro, he's funding revolutionaries and terrorists throughout Latin America."

Scott's two-sentence response managed to misrepresent several issues. Chavez is not a Marxist; asked about his politics by the left-wing publication CounterPunch (8/16/04), Chavez replied: "I don't believe in the dogmatic postulates of Marxist revolution. I don't accept that we are living in a period of proletarian revolutions.... Are we aiming in Venezuela today for the abolition of private property or a classless society? I don't think so." Chavez describes himself as a Bolivarian, a follower of the 19th Century Latin American independence leader Simon Bolivar.

And while Venezuela does provide discounted oil to Cuba, more than 20,000 Cuban doctors are sent to work in Venezuela in exchange; the relationship is mutually beneficial.

As for Scott's claim that Chavez is funding "revolutionaries and terrorists throughout Latin America," Parade should provide evidence for this charge or issue a retraction. The U.S. State Department, hardly a pro-Chavez source, does not include Venezuela among the list of state sponsors of terrorism in its most recent "Country Reports on Terrorism" (4/05). The report's section on Venezuela only alleges that "it is unclear to what extent" Venezuela might support any of the principal combatants in Colombia's long-running civil war. The report goes on to mention, however, that the Colombia and Venezuela governments have cooperated on some terrorism-related cases, and that several Venezuelan National Guard officers were reportedly killed by FARC forces near the border between the two countries.

While some anti-Chavez partisans have claimed that Chavez supports various terrorist groups, they have failed to back up these allegations with evidence. For example, Pat Robertson--the right-wing televangelist who has called for Chavez's assassination (700 Club, 8/22/05)--recently claimed on CNN (10/9/05) that Chavez "sent $1.2 million in cash to Osama bin Laden right after 9/11." When asked for evidence, Robertson could only claim that "sources that came to me" told him of the transaction.

"Walter Scott" is the pseudonym of Edward Klein, the author of the "The Truth About Hillary," a biography of Hillary Rodham Clinton that is riddled with errors (Media Matters, 6/23/05). Klein's book relies overwhelmingly on anonymous sources to make a series of lurid claims and innuendos, asking peculiar questions like, "Were there any telltale signs on the presidential sheets that ever had sex with each other?" Klein's book also floats the suggestion that that Chelsea Clinton was conceived as a result of Bill Clinton raping Hillary while on vacation in Bermuda. Perhaps Parade should consider whether "Scott"'s journalism deserves closer scrutiny.

ACTION:
Please call on Parade Magazine to either provide evidence for its claim that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is "funding revolutionaries and terrorists throughout Latin America" or else issue a retraction of the unattributed charge.

CONTACT:
Personality Parade
[e-mail]

Parade Magazine
Lee Kravitz, editor
[e-mail]

If your local newspaper includes Parade in its Sunday edition, you might want to send your letter to them as well.

[LatinoSocialist]

1. one hot letter sent.

people, the more letters, the more the chance they'll publish an apology.

[niyad]

2. and wasn't it last week that they carried the article about the military

taking charge in major events? looks like they are now openly a mouthpiece for the bushitas.

[paineinthearse]

14. Did some searching on your theory (caution: obscene material)

www.allstarz.org

‘‘We Need To Pay More Attention To Boys’’

By Lyric Wallwork Winik
Published: January 16, 2005

At 58, Laura Bush has had to master the basics of modeling: how to sit with your knees pointing one way and your spine twisting another, how to turn your head and tuck your skirt so no wrinkles show. The woman who bought a tan, two-piece dress off the rack for her own wedding now finds herself checking her teeth for lipstick and looking just over the camera to oblige a photographer. And of course she smiles, even though on this day she has a cold and a cough and probably would prefer to be alone with some hot tea and a warm sweater. But when you are the First Lady with a full public schedule, there are no allowances for a bad day......



others...

PARADE Magazine | (Laura Bush) ‘‘We Need To Pay More Attention To ...
Not only do boys now attend college at lower rates than girls, Mrs. Bush points out
... PARADE SNAPSHOT™. Copyright 2005 ParadeNet Inc. All rights reserved. ...
archive.parade.com/2005/0116/0116_laura_bush.html - 34k - Oct 12, 2005 - Cached - Similar pages

PARADE Magazine | One Idea--January 23, 2005
So, NCLB became one of George W. Bush’s first priorities. Many hopes were attached
... PARADE SNAPSHOT™. Copyright 2005 ParadeNet Inc. All rights reserved. ...
archive.parade.com/2005/0123/0123_one_idea.html - 34k - Oct 12, 2005 - Cached - Similar pages

PARADE Magazine | Personality Parade--February 6, 2005
Bush And Chirac To Talk It Over. In this week’s “Personality Parade,” Walter Scott writes that President Bush and French President Jacques Chirac have not ...
archive.parade.com/2005/0206/0206_personality.html - 25k - Oct 12, 2005 - Cached - Similar pages

PARADE Magazine | Intelligence Report--Jan. 4, 2004
The budget deficit may top $600 billion this year, but President Bush doesn’t seem ... PARADE SNAPSHOT™. Copyright 2005 ParadeNet Inc. All rights reserved. ...
archive.parade.com/2004/0104/0104_intelligence.html - 21k - Cached - Similar pages

PARADE Magazine | Personality Parade--April 17, 2005
Q. You said President Bush’s European trip would not improve relations with French ... In this week’s “Personality Parade,” Walter Scott writes that Clint ...
archive.parade.com/2005/0417/0417_personality.html - 25k - Oct 12, 2005 - Cached - Similar pages

[frylock]

3. hate to piss on your parade, but this rag has been a vehicle for rw..

propaganda for as long as I care to remember. People can write them and ask for a correction or retraction, but I doubt much will happen.

[paineinthearse]

4. Please don't shoot the messenger or piss on my parade

Just passing along some information.

Of course I know it's a rag. Sheesh.

A more effective course of action would be to cancel subscriptions to papers that carry it.

[LatinoSocialist]

5. My letter

Dear Parade,

I am a Doctoral Candidate in Political Science, with a
specialty in Latin American politics. I've followed
the Venezuelan Revolution from its inception, as part
of my own research into the country's interesting
politics. I've delved into Richard Gott's research
into the Revolution and other books on the subjects.

What surprised me about the Parade article was how
Walter Scott labeled Chavez as a funder of
revolutionaries and terrorists. This statement, in my
opinion, was highly irresponsible. In my research,
the closest one can come to criticizing Chavez on the
"terrorism" charge is his supposed support of
Colombia's FALN rebels, and even this is subject to
both opinion and to lack of evidence. There's never
been a concrete and proven link between Chavez and the
FALN, and even if there was, there is mixed opinion on
the legitimacy of the FALN. I happen to believe that
the FALN, because they have engaged in attacks and
kidnappings of Colombian civilians, are rebels using
terrorist tactics, but then again, I'm not a Colombian
who has had to live with U.S-supported corrupt regimes
for the last 50 years. My perspective is different.

In a time when there is ample evidence of how gullible
and malleable is American public opinion (as
exemplified by the absurd belief held by 60% of
Americans that Saddam Hussein was somehow in alliance
with Al-Qaeda or directly responsible for 9/11),
throwing out blanket statements attaching a foreign
leader with terrorism, is disappointing. Many
Americans (myself included) are trying to use our
expertise to help educate our fellow citizens on the
complex context of various political scenarios in the
world. Chavez, whatever one thinks of him, has never
been proven to support Al-Qaeda, muslim terrorists, or
even the local Latin American rebel groups (the FALN
in Colombia).

Furthermore, he's won several elections in a fair
manner, receiving outstanding support from his people.
He has constructed a regime of openness, the press is
free to publish (and usually publish against him, as
they are owned by the opposition), the people can
assemble for and against him, and speech is free. He
has diverted Venezuela's revenue toward social
services, finally gotten tough on foreign companies
who like to evade Venezuela taxes, and initiated a
long-awaited (and necessary) agrarian reform, to use
the land in a more efficient manner. I don't see
where President Hugo Chavez represents a threat to
the U.S. population. In fact, during the Katrina
crisis, Chavez set aside the animosity between him and
the Bush administration to send millions of barrels of
oils to be distributed freely or at discount prices in
poor areas of the United States. Hardly the actions
of an unelected, terrorism-sponsoring tyrant, which is
the caricature of Chavez that Walter Scott's article
helped to promote in the American mindset.

The absurdity of the charges being leveled against him
reach their logical conclusion when you have
individuals such as Pat Roberston (who has VERIFIABLE
and PROVEN ties to REAL Third World tyrants,
murderers, thieves, and terrorists in Africa) claiming
that he's allying Al-Qaeda terrorists with communists.
Think of the absurdity of this claim for a moment.
Left-wing communists allying themselves with
reactionary, traditionalist, Islamic jihadists who
hate all modern, Western ideologies (including
Marxism, a modern Western socio-politico-economic
ideology). Absurd, totally absurd. And yet, it's
these "critics" that form the basis for such as
articles as the one that Walter Scott wrote.

I think Parade owes it to the people of Venezuela to
correct the situation by making it clear that there is
no evidence linking Hugo Chavez to terrorism, or at
least, provide such evidence, so that it can be put up
to the test of analytic rigor. Let us academics have
a chance to look at the evidence and agree or rebut
the claim. I also think Parade owes it to the
American people to provide more sound reporting. In a
time when the media has often self-censured and been
AWOL in its duties of being the 4th estate, monitoring
and challenging government assertions about foreign
dignitaries, Parade should be doing its best to
restore the reputation of the American press as being
rigorous, impartial, and honest.

I would hope Parade can do more articles on Venezuela,
but articles that truly capture the essence of today's
Venezuela.

Walter Scott owes Parade's readers an apology and a
retraction. What better way than to have him do
another article on Venezuela, but to consult academics
like Richard Gott on the subject? How about it? Will
Walter do another article?

Sincerely,

LatinoSocialist (I put my real name on the letter, but I want to keep my anonimity on DU).

And I'm really a Doctoral Candidate with a focus on Latin America.

[annabanana]

7. MUCH smarter than they deserve!

The clowns that paste the fluffy bits together won't have a clue. Good letter.

[LatinoSocialist]

8. thanks

I figure that if I'm getting a Doctoral degree in the field, I might as well put it to use...

Right now, my master's hasn't gotten me much. Such is the fate of academic degrees. I'm a professional musician on the side, and I do different higher education administrative tasks for full-time employment.

[paineinthearse]

12. Yes, but will they publish it?

Lightyears beyond the comprehension of the average freeper reader.

[mountebank]

6. Another letter sent. God how I hate Parade Magazine and especially

Marilyn Vos Savant.

[no_to_war_economy]

9. my favorite PARADE cover

[paineinthearse]

13. brilliant

Interesting website, too.

[Toucano]

10. It doesn't even answer the question, though does it?

The U.S.S.R. broke up some time before Chavez took over in Venezuela.

Chavez isn't the reason for Cuba's survival by a long shot.

So, not only is it a rotten smear against Chavez, it's also completely inaccurate and doesn't answer the question in any fashion.

My email has been sent!

[KansDem]

11. If you want to go after terrorism, start with the Saudis!!!

Look, look and read from you own goddamn right-wing rag, The National Review (2003):

NRO: Why do you think the attacks this week were in Saudi Arabia?

Dore Gold: There has been mounting evidence that Saudi Arabia has become one of the main areas of refuge for al Qaeda, along with the Pakistani-Afghani border, and the Iraqi-Iranian border, since the American victory against the Taliban. Through the first half of 2002, Saudi Arabian officials denied that there were any al Qaeda cells. Saudi security efforts against al Qaeda were minimal, in comparison with the efforts made in the West and in some Arab states, like Jordan and Morocco. Moreover during 2002, al Qaeda suspects wanted by U.S. and German authorities sought sanctuary in Saudi Arabia.

NRO: What was the message of the Monday attacks and who was sending it?

Gold: The al Qaeda message, with the latest attacks, was that the war on America is not over even after Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld announced the withdrawal of American troops from Saudi soil, after the threat from Saddam's Iraq was removed. The U.S. withdrawal announcement threatened al Qaeda's support base in the Arab world, by removing the primary grievance against America articulated by Osama bin Laden in the 1990s. But if the U.S. completes its withdrawal while its troops are under fire, then in the mind of al Qaeda leaders, that will create a situation like the U.S. pullout from Somalia (where bin Laden was active) or from Lebanon, and can be viewed as a great al Qaeda victory, that will broaden the organization's popularity in the Middle East with potential recruits.

NRO: Do you think the Saudi government had a role to play in the attacks this week, direct or indirect?

Gold: After the King Fahd's 1995 stroke, there has been a struggle for power and succession in Saudi Arabia between Crown Prince Abdullah and his half brother Defense Minister Prince Sultan (as well as his full Sudairi brothers). Neither side can afford to alienate the powerful Wahhabi ulema (religious leadership) which has shared power with the Saudi royal family since the kingdom was founded. The ulema were also instrumental in succession crises in the past. Many of the ulema are sympathetic with the worldwide jihad of al Qaeda against the West. Many have leading positions in Saudi Arabia's huge global charities, like the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO) or al-Haramain, that have funneled millions of dollars to al Qaeda in the past. The royal family regularly makes contributions to these charities, using them as a conduit to bin Laden. By failing to crack down on terrorist financing, despite its pronouncements, Saudi Arabia shares responsibility for attacks of this sort.

...and the final paragraph

NRO: Why such soft-pedaling with the Kingdom?

Gold: Saudi Arabia has been soft-pedaled because it has succeeded in its p.r. efforts in Washington (but not with the wider American public). Crown Prince Abdullah succeeded in diverting attention away from the Saudi role in 9/11 by introducing a peace initiative in 2002, that contained no new concessions; he even dropped his reported idea of "normalization" with Israel. Moreover, Saudi Arabia hired top Washington p.r. firms and utilized its "old boys" network well, particularly with the American media. Even many of the op-ed writers of the New York Times, who don't even write on foreign affairs, like Maureen Dowd, were hosted by the Saudis in the last year. The New Yorker did a puff piece on Prince Bandar, more recently. The Saudis have tried to peddle the line that terrorism in the Middle East emanates from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to cover their own central role in inciting and funding the global jihad of al Qaeda, which is directed against the West and for which Israel only has a minor role. It is doubtful that President Bush, who has made the war on terrorism one of the main themes of his presidency, will not address the Saudi role in terrorism, at some point.

http://www.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/interrogatory051403.asp

FACT: 15 of the 19 terrorists on 9/11 held Saudi passports;
FACT: The Bush Family and the Saudi Royal Family have been business partners for decades;
FACT: The US Secret Service provides security for the Saudi Embassy in DC (see M. Moore's "F 9/11")

And "Parade" goes after Chavez?!?!?

I'm sooooo tired of this shit!!! :grr: