House Resolution designates Venezuela a state sponsor of Terrorism
At a time of growing US poverty, hunger, homelessness, and despair, imperial wars without end, and the Obama administration even worse than its predecessor, Venezuela ...
more...
Showing posts with label venezuela. Show all posts
Showing posts with label venezuela. Show all posts
Thursday, November 05, 2009
Monday, June 18, 2007
Youtube and Antena 3 TV censor Bolivarian videos
Hands Off Venezuela
Wednesday, 13 June 2007
For the last few weeks we have been subjected to a barrage of propaganda in the media about the so-called "attacks on freedom of expression" in Venezuela. Facts? A TV station, RCTV, which actively participated in the coup against president Chávez in April 2002, did not get its licence renewed.
Acres of print paper have been filled with this story. However, one that you are not likely to see reported is this other story: Yesterday, June 12, Youtube decided to close down the account of Venezuelan Bolivarian activist Luigino Bracci. The reason? A complaint over copyright by Spanish Antena 3 TV station ...
... In an interview in VTV, former Minister of Education Aristóbulo Izturiz put it very clearly: "this shows that the campaign around RCTV is not about freedom of expression, but the freedom of the owners of capital to control the media and the contents".
Read the story here
Hands Off Venezuela
Wednesday, 13 June 2007
For the last few weeks we have been subjected to a barrage of propaganda in the media about the so-called "attacks on freedom of expression" in Venezuela. Facts? A TV station, RCTV, which actively participated in the coup against president Chávez in April 2002, did not get its licence renewed.
Acres of print paper have been filled with this story. However, one that you are not likely to see reported is this other story: Yesterday, June 12, Youtube decided to close down the account of Venezuelan Bolivarian activist Luigino Bracci. The reason? A complaint over copyright by Spanish Antena 3 TV station ...
... In an interview in VTV, former Minister of Education Aristóbulo Izturiz put it very clearly: "this shows that the campaign around RCTV is not about freedom of expression, but the freedom of the owners of capital to control the media and the contents".
Read the story here
Interview with Luigino Bracci and Aristóbulo Asturiz
(in Spanish)Link
HANDS OFF VENEZUELA, homepage
Tuesday, May 08, 2007
Is Venezuela's TV channel RCTV being closed?
By Hands Off Venezuela
Friday, 04 May 2007
The non-renewal of the licence to RCTV on the part of the Venezuelan government on May 27, has unleashed a campaign in the international media alleging that there is no freedom of expression in Venezuela. This 25 minute documentary explains the background to this decision.
See also the Venezuela Information Office Fact-Sheet on RCTV
By Hands Off Venezuela
Friday, 04 May 2007
The non-renewal of the licence to RCTV on the part of the Venezuelan government on May 27, has unleashed a campaign in the international media alleging that there is no freedom of expression in Venezuela. This 25 minute documentary explains the background to this decision.
See also the Venezuela Information Office Fact-Sheet on RCTV
La no-renovacion de la licencia a RCTV de parte del gobierno venezolano de mayo el 27, ha destraillado una campaña en los medios internacionales que alegaban que no hay libertad de la expresión en Venezuela. Este documental de 25 minutos explica el fondo a esta decisión.
The deepening of Venezuela’s Bolivarian revolution: why most people don’t get it
Read it here
Sunday, April 22, 2007
BBC = Blair's Broadcasting Corporation
In the Blue-Pill Matrix world, the BBC is a news service which disseminates an impartial view of daily events. In the real world, it is nothing more than a shameless and servile tool of the British capitalist state and, in recent months, a mouthpiece for Tony Blair's neocon, very-British form of fascism.
This message has to be repeated over and over until the public out there are disabused of the lies perpetuated by the BBC that it is a benign teller of truths. If it tells the truth then it is very much a western capitalist, Blue-Pill version meant to accomodate the views of Britain's ruling elites. It is very much a minority truth, totally out-of-step with the vast majority of Brits who do not support its warmongering propaganda.
Far from being the benign, somewhat avuncular, cricket-loving animal it is so often portrayed as, the BBC is a very nasty, well-organised, international mouthpiece for genocide and the repression of true democracy. In other words, it remains true-to-form, a remnant of Britain's imperial past; a remnant which was taken over sixty years ago to serve the old imperialists' successor, the United States.
Hence the BBC line is more or less Washington, DC's line. A line which will change according to whoever might be occupying the White House at any given time. And when it comes to British affairs, you can be sure that there is a hotline between 10 Downing Street and the BBC Newsdesk. You and I are simply at the receiving end of this news-by-diktat.
Today, the BBC's vitriol is reserved for Hugo Chávez and the Bolivarian revolution. The BBC is giving extensive coverage to a protest that took place in Caracas over the Venezuelan government's refusal to renew the broadcasting licence of right-wing Radio Caracas TV (RCTV).
RCTV played a significant anti-Chávist role during the failed 2002 coup when it deliberately broadcast misinformation about what was going on.
During the April 2002 coup attempt RCTV was one of the main protagonists in the organization and execution of the coup. It was the first to broadcast the false claim that Chavez supporters were shooting at opposition demonstrators, which then served as a justification for high level generals to declare their disobedience to the government, also on RCTV.
RCTV then had exclusive interviews with coup plotters and the talk show host Napoleon Bravo read Chavez’s supposed resignation letter on RCTV. Later it turned out that the letter was never signed by Chavez and that he had actually not resigned at all, but had been taken into custody.
When the coup began to falter and thousands of demonstrators took to the streets in support of Chavez, RCTV refused to provide any news coverage of the developments and switched from 24-hour news coverage to the broadcasting of old cartoons and movies instead.
(Venezuelanalysis.com, 3 January 2007)
Of course, the BBC report doesn't mention any of the above. In its news release on the Net it presents the demonstration as a popular uprising of "thousands" countered only by a pro-Chávist demonstration of "hundreds." Well, anyone who has been on an anti-government march in Britain will know how good the BBC is at misreporting numbers so I, for one, will reserve my judgement on the BBC's 'hundreds' v. 'thousands' in Caracas.
The report was then carried on BBC News 24 which is satellite broadcast all over the planet. That report conspicuously omitted any mention of a counter-demo and concentrated, instead, on what appeared through the magic of the editor's cutting-room to look like the beginnings of an anti-Chávist uprising. All in the BBC's dreams.
Now, imagine the failed coup had taken place not in Caracas but --as in my own dreams-- in London. Not against Chávez but Blair and not with RCTV but the BBC. How would Tinpot Tony feel about renewing the BBC's licence?
In fact, the comparison is not far wide of the mark. The BBC, under Greg Dyke's directorship, did challenge Blair about his serial WMD lies which legitimised the invasion of Iraq. For having dared to do so, Dyke 'resigned' (he had no choice) and was replaced with one of Blair's toadies, Michael Grade. Ever since that time the BBC has been reduced to playing the part of the neocons' whoring mouthpiece.
All that took place in the Red-Pill world which the BBC is prohibited from reporting. Unlike the BBC's reactionary bosses who would find themselves out of work in an anti-capitalist revolution, Greg Dyke commented significantly on his 'resignation' that, being financially independent, he hadn't taken the director's job for the money. You can be sure that no British government will ever make a mistake like that again!
Meantime, spare a thought for all the poor souls who continue to languish in the BBC's dark satanic mills, their consciences compromised by a state not very different to the Soviet Union against which it used to rail so self-righteously during an earlier Cold War.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
The BBC's Neocon Propaganda War
The BBC's approach to war and world affairs is, first and foremost, a reflection of the British puppet state's viewpoint. It is questionable that the BBC was ever an independent organization. But, along with the widespread damage to civil and judicial freedoms caused by the noxious Blair de facto dictatorship, the BBC's reputation has dropped to an all-time low of news-whoring.
Regular readers of this blog will know that I am constantly warning them that the Mainstream Media (MSM) in both the US and the UK --or USUK for convenience-- is deliberately fuelling speculations that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon and that, for this reason, the US and possibly Israel might carry out a 'preemptive' attack on that country.
The BBC's approach amounts to blatant warmongering. No amount of complaints appear to make the slightest bit of difference. Financed by a compulsory tax in the form of a licence fee, payable by anyone owning a television receiver in the UK, the BBC has huge resources to hand and is a major international satellite broadcaster.
BBC 24 News is received across the planet and many viewers mistakenly believe that it practises a balanced reportage. This is nothing more than a myth which the BBC is, itself, responsible for having perpetuated. The reality is that, particularly under the oppressive Blair regime, the BBC has become a servile tool for the broadcasting of USUK war propaganda.
This was reflected some time ago in comments made by Professor Professor Geir Lundestad, secretary of the Norwegian Nobel committee, when he observed that "media organisations could receive the Nobel peace prize in future."
Prof Lundestad mentioned several contenders, such as CNN, the New York Times, Le Monde and El País.
However, he made a notable exception of the BBC. "Some years ago, the BBC would have been an obvious candidate because it was the international model for news organisations. Nowadays, it is more debatable." He added: "We all know about the problems the BBC has had in recent years," without elaborating.
(The Guardian, 7 October 2006)
What he wouldn't elaborate on was the manner in which Tony Blair had fired the then BBC Director, Greg Dyke, for his daring to criticize Blair on the Irak War and the --to say the least-- dubious circumstances surrounding the 'suicide' of the ex-IAEA inspector, Dr David Kelly, who was scapegoated by the Blair regime.
Ever since Dyke's 'resignation' (he was fired on Blair's instructions) the BBC has taken an extreme lurch to the neocon right and the promotion of the Bush-Cheney-Blair-Zionist war party. Greg Dyke was replaced by a leading zionist, Michael Grade.
Two recent instances of the BBC's highly propagandistic news coverage has been its anti-Chávez reportage on Venezuela and a complete news-blackout on the arrest and trial of two members of the neo-nazi British National Party who were caught with what was reported locally as the largest weapons-haul ever made by the British police.
Not to be unfair, that news-blackout affected the entire British MSM and appears to have been at the behest of Blair.
The above are just two instances taken at random. The actual list of the BBC's right-wing bias would be unending.
PUBLIC HEALTH WARNING!
The BBC is preparing Britain and the rest of the world for US military aggression on Iran. Ever since Bush started his vicious propaganda campaign against Iran, the BBC has meekly followed suit. No doubt, on Blair's insistence.
Just last night on its News 24 programme it screamed out that the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) had 'leaked' a document proving that Iran was 'secretly developing weapons-grade' fissile material. It conspicuously failed to say anything more about this document so I conducted my own search and found this Reuters press release.
Can anyone find any evidence here that the IAEA is warning of Iranian nuclear weapons development? The Reuters/Yahoo article goes on to make the customary speculations but evidence there is none.
That didn't stop the BBC in its headlong rush to serve its neocon bosses in Downing Street and Washington, DC. Not only is the BBC sure that Iran is developing a nuclear bomb but that it threatens the continued existence of that famously peaceable nation, Israel, with the nasty terrorist proxy, Hezbollah, provocatively flying its flags along the Israel-Lebanon frontier.
The BBC then interviewed several Israeli 'experts' who, naturally, spoke in the most objective manner of how Israel was victim to threats from Iran and why a 'pre-emptive' attack against its nuclear reactors would, therefore, be the most sensible thing to do.
Of course, no mention was made by the BBC's jejune reporter, Matthew Price, of the terrible radioactive aftermath to which such an attack would lead, making Chernobyl pale into significance, or the even greater holocaust of a US-led attack using so-called 'low-yield' tactical nuclear weapons.
To get things into perspective, these 'low-yield' tactical nukes are capable of anything between a third to six times the destruction caused by the Hiroshima-Nagasaki bombs. The US Military now considers this level of destruction to be "acceptable." And so does the BBC apparently which keeps its lips sealed about the US nuclear option.
The BBC has, so far, failed to report on another significant statement from Iran that that country is reluctant to exit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to which it, unlike Israel, is a signatory.
So much for its 'balanced' reporting.
The BBC's approach to war and world affairs is, first and foremost, a reflection of the British puppet state's viewpoint. It is questionable that the BBC was ever an independent organization. But, along with the widespread damage to civil and judicial freedoms caused by the noxious Blair de facto dictatorship, the BBC's reputation has dropped to an all-time low of news-whoring.
Does it care? I doubt it. It and its employees now see themselves sliding down the slippery slope to privatization so, in the meantime, will do anything to ingratiate themselves with Britain's rulers. It's a very sad day when a well-known British dissident (himself a victim of Blair's tyranny), ex-Ambassador Craig Murray, admits to better treatment from Rupert Murdoch's SKY News than from the BBC.
Those in Britain who are concerned at the rapidity their country is being turned into a police state should, without any further delay, launch a popular campaign to expose the BBC's dirty warmongering. A vital part of such a campaign should be the promotion of a countrywide non-payment of the annual licence fee, the BBC's life-blood.
The BBC should also be subject to a mass letter-writing campaign in which it is warned that it and its employees would be held to be war criminals for their further promotion of illegal military occupations by the USUK and for their gleeful promotion of a possible upcoming war against Iran.
The BBC's approach amounts to blatant warmongering. No amount of complaints appear to make the slightest bit of difference. Financed by a compulsory tax in the form of a licence fee, payable by anyone owning a television receiver in the UK, the BBC has huge resources to hand and is a major international satellite broadcaster.
BBC 24 News is received across the planet and many viewers mistakenly believe that it practises a balanced reportage. This is nothing more than a myth which the BBC is, itself, responsible for having perpetuated. The reality is that, particularly under the oppressive Blair regime, the BBC has become a servile tool for the broadcasting of USUK war propaganda.
This was reflected some time ago in comments made by Professor Professor Geir Lundestad, secretary of the Norwegian Nobel committee, when he observed that "media organisations could receive the Nobel peace prize in future."
Prof Lundestad mentioned several contenders, such as CNN, the New York Times, Le Monde and El País.
However, he made a notable exception of the BBC. "Some years ago, the BBC would have been an obvious candidate because it was the international model for news organisations. Nowadays, it is more debatable." He added: "We all know about the problems the BBC has had in recent years," without elaborating.
(The Guardian, 7 October 2006)
What he wouldn't elaborate on was the manner in which Tony Blair had fired the then BBC Director, Greg Dyke, for his daring to criticize Blair on the Irak War and the --to say the least-- dubious circumstances surrounding the 'suicide' of the ex-IAEA inspector, Dr David Kelly, who was scapegoated by the Blair regime.
Ever since Dyke's 'resignation' (he was fired on Blair's instructions) the BBC has taken an extreme lurch to the neocon right and the promotion of the Bush-Cheney-Blair-Zionist war party. Greg Dyke was replaced by a leading zionist, Michael Grade.
Two recent instances of the BBC's highly propagandistic news coverage has been its anti-Chávez reportage on Venezuela and a complete news-blackout on the arrest and trial of two members of the neo-nazi British National Party who were caught with what was reported locally as the largest weapons-haul ever made by the British police.
Not to be unfair, that news-blackout affected the entire British MSM and appears to have been at the behest of Blair.
The above are just two instances taken at random. The actual list of the BBC's right-wing bias would be unending.
PUBLIC HEALTH WARNING!
The BBC is preparing Britain and the rest of the world for US military aggression on Iran. Ever since Bush started his vicious propaganda campaign against Iran, the BBC has meekly followed suit. No doubt, on Blair's insistence.
Just last night on its News 24 programme it screamed out that the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) had 'leaked' a document proving that Iran was 'secretly developing weapons-grade' fissile material. It conspicuously failed to say anything more about this document so I conducted my own search and found this Reuters press release.
Can anyone find any evidence here that the IAEA is warning of Iranian nuclear weapons development? The Reuters/Yahoo article goes on to make the customary speculations but evidence there is none.
That didn't stop the BBC in its headlong rush to serve its neocon bosses in Downing Street and Washington, DC. Not only is the BBC sure that Iran is developing a nuclear bomb but that it threatens the continued existence of that famously peaceable nation, Israel, with the nasty terrorist proxy, Hezbollah, provocatively flying its flags along the Israel-Lebanon frontier.
The BBC then interviewed several Israeli 'experts' who, naturally, spoke in the most objective manner of how Israel was victim to threats from Iran and why a 'pre-emptive' attack against its nuclear reactors would, therefore, be the most sensible thing to do.
Of course, no mention was made by the BBC's jejune reporter, Matthew Price, of the terrible radioactive aftermath to which such an attack would lead, making Chernobyl pale into significance, or the even greater holocaust of a US-led attack using so-called 'low-yield' tactical nuclear weapons.
To get things into perspective, these 'low-yield' tactical nukes are capable of anything between a third to six times the destruction caused by the Hiroshima-Nagasaki bombs. The US Military now considers this level of destruction to be "acceptable." And so does the BBC apparently which keeps its lips sealed about the US nuclear option.
The BBC has, so far, failed to report on another significant statement from Iran that that country is reluctant to exit the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to which it, unlike Israel, is a signatory.
So much for its 'balanced' reporting.
The BBC's approach to war and world affairs is, first and foremost, a reflection of the British puppet state's viewpoint. It is questionable that the BBC was ever an independent organization. But, along with the widespread damage to civil and judicial freedoms caused by the noxious Blair de facto dictatorship, the BBC's reputation has dropped to an all-time low of news-whoring.
Does it care? I doubt it. It and its employees now see themselves sliding down the slippery slope to privatization so, in the meantime, will do anything to ingratiate themselves with Britain's rulers. It's a very sad day when a well-known British dissident (himself a victim of Blair's tyranny), ex-Ambassador Craig Murray, admits to better treatment from Rupert Murdoch's SKY News than from the BBC.
Those in Britain who are concerned at the rapidity their country is being turned into a police state should, without any further delay, launch a popular campaign to expose the BBC's dirty warmongering. A vital part of such a campaign should be the promotion of a countrywide non-payment of the annual licence fee, the BBC's life-blood.
The BBC should also be subject to a mass letter-writing campaign in which it is warned that it and its employees would be held to be war criminals for their further promotion of illegal military occupations by the USUK and for their gleeful promotion of a possible upcoming war against Iran.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)