Chavez to CNN: “Please, tell the truth, if they let you"

[Billy Burnett]

“Please, tell the truth, if they let you"
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/3998

November 27th 2008- The president asked a CNN correspondent and anchor of that channel to clarify that he never said that he "would bring tanks into the street" if the opposition won. He also requested that Glenda Omana straighten out that the government did not order any "information prohibition" in Venezuela.
The president of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuelan, Hugo Chavez Frias, criticized the position taken by the chain CNN in the days leading up to the regional elections of November 23.

In a press conference with the international media, and after the CNN journalist and known anchor of the channel, Patricia Janiot, asked a question, the president wanted to, before responding to her, to ask her for explanations about an accusation that she made on that channel, relating to idea that Chavez "would bring the tanks into the street" if some of the opposition candidates won.

"That Chavez threatened to bring out the tanks! You saw it, Patricia, right?" Chavez asked Janiot. The journalist confirmed it. "CNN said it?" Chavez asked. The journalist confirmed it again and replied with something that couldn't be heard by those following the event on television. "You said it, but taking it out of context, which is one of the problems with you all! It was totally taken out of context."

Decontextualization describes the act of quoting or showing only a fragment of the declarations of a person, omitting the rest in order to make the onlookers believe that that person said something that in reality they didn't say.

"I know that you said it because I heard you, and it makes me sad," said the Venezuelan leader later to Janiot. The journalist responded, but her words weren't heard because there wasn't a microphone nearby.

"I think that you are a good journalist, and I believe that you are an honest woman, but I think that you are a victim of the speed that you all have there, of talking to the world and telling them things." The journalist again responded with something that couldn't be heard, to which Chavez responded, "But you must take responsibility. In order to say something so serious as that, you should say ‘wait a minute, find the complete declaration for me'...you committed the serious error of decontextualization and of manipulation," which he classified as a "a serious error for a journalist."

He asked Janiot to clarify her words. "I ask you to clarify to the world, I ask you for this, if they let you." The journalist indicated that they would allow her to, to which Chavez responded, "If they indeed allow you to, Patricia, because you don't run CNN. Up to a certain point you are in charge, but they order you things."

Chavez reiterated again that her words about the war tanks were taken out of context. "What I said was that, in a situation where the opposition won state governor positions and tried to convert states into bases for coup plotting, violence and (separatism), well I would have to bring tanks into the street. I said it like that, Patricia, I ask it of you, in honour of the truth and morality. But I never threatened to bring out tanks if we lost."

"And you should know, if you already know me a little, that I'm incapable of doing something like that. I'm not some crazy person. A year ago, I lost a referendum for constitutional reform by 10 or 15,000 votes and I came out immediately to call the people to go home and accept defeat."

"I've been here for almost 10 years. I have won, I have lost state governments and local governments. And what I have done each time that there is an electoral process and some opposition party wins, what I do is I present them my hand and my good will to ask them to forget the craziness, to not allow themselves to be manipulated and to spur on paths of craziness and destabilization to fill the country with violence."

"Information prohibition"

Similarly, Chavez referred to another assertion made by a journalist for CNN, Glenda Oman, who said on Sunday that the Venezuelan government had ordered an ‘information prohibition' a week before the elections.

Omana stated on CNN, "We want to take advantage of this report to inform you that, under the order of the Venezuelan government, an information prohibition has been applied during the week prior to these elections, which prohibits the distribution of material promoting candidates and the results of polls and opinion surveys.

To this, Chavez responded, "How can you (CNN) state something that you haven't investigated? It wasn't the government of Chavez who prohibited the distribution of political propaganda days before the elections. This is in the law and the Electoral Power stipulated this," Chavez explained. He continued, "But the intention is to make my government seem disrespectful and like a curtailer of political rights." Janiot responded that the statements by Omana were rectified afterwards, but Chavez replied that the damage was already done.

Chavez asked Andres Izarra to give "Patricia (Janiot) all my telephone numbers, including my one, mine," and also the number of the minister of the presidential office, Hector Rodriguez, so that CNN can verify any information that it needs. "Lets see if CNN changes a little its evaluation, not about me but about this people, this country and this government, that deserve respect, and that they always disrespect."

And he brought tanks into the streets

Chavez said that on one occasion he did have to bring tanks out into the street, in November 2002, "I took the war tanks out straight away, in order to take the Caracas Metropolitan Police headquarters that were in the hands of the city mayor," he said. "And what did I want to do as president? Cross my arms and allow those fascists to keep massacring a people?" he said.

In those days, there were continuous protests by Chavez sectors in Bolivar Plaza and its surroundings, which were repressed by the PM with lethal arms, leaving many dead. Active militia, but without soldiers, had taken Altamira Plaza in ‘legitimate disobedience' and it was rumoured that the city mayor, Alfredo Pena, who participated in the coup of April 2002, would use the 15,000 police for a new attempt at a coup de etat.

Currently, some 12 police of this police body are being tried for their participation in the coup of 2002. Videos and photos show them using lethal arms against a rally of Chavez supporters during the fateful coup, in which 19 people died.

Chavez requested "that the new city mayor not go down the same path of that man who is now fleeing justice (Alfredo Pena) and who used the police force that he had in his hands, with war weapons, tanks and everything, to kill people in the streets."

Translated for Venezuelanalysis.com by Tamara Pearson, video and original document available at http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=76589&titular=%22por-favor-di-la-verdad-si-te-dejan%22

[Judi Lynn]

1. Oh, my god. I've got to save the article you've posted. Just think how much mileage the trolls got

from this misinformation. They operate around the idea that if the words seem to ridicule or impugn Chavez, they are undoubtedly true beyond all doubt.

Before even getting to the end of the article, right after seeing the exchange with Patricia, I had to drop everything and run to see if I could find a photo of her, wanting to know if I could recognize her gnarly, spin-speaking, two-faced image.

Well, this is hilarious.



Patricia Janiot

Was it her flaming desire to make sure
the people of the world are able to know
what's going on politically, historically?

Patricia's images:
http://images.google.com/images?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLD,GGLD:2004-37,GGLD:en&q=Patricia+Janiot



Glenda Umana, CNN
The other one mentioned

I'm coming back later to reread this article.

Thank you very much for posting this, Billy Burnett. Because of these two clowns doing the wingers' bidding, a whole lot of people were able to make asses of themselves on message boards, trying to bash Chavez, and it was, as always, based on pure deceit.

Very cool to get this insight finally. Certainly we knew this kind of speech is TOTALLY unlike Chavez, but our "news" sources have a monopoly on what we're getting and clearly they think they can hand us anything and we have to take it or just drop dead. #### them all. Eventually we DO get the right story. It just takes time.

[JonQ]

2. Ha!

The first CNN interview was ipso facto a lie, evil corporate propaganda because they accurately quoted St. Chavez. This second interview, from the same source the pro-chavez types spent hours discrediting, is now the unfiltered truth.

So the source hasn't changed, I think we can discount that as a factor in the veracity of either story. In an experiment that would be the control element. And presumably the translator is the same, another control element. So the only thing that changed to turn this from a "blatant propaganda piece" to the gospel truth was that this piece was favorable to Chavez, while the other wasn't.

Think about that. Did CNN have a rabid anti-chavez outlook last week, and now they love the guy? Possible, but very unlikely.

Also you'll note that he complains about the quote being taken out of context, so to correct that he *ADDS* words to his speech that were not there in the first place (believe me, I looked). Nowhere in his initial speech did he mention a coup, or violence of any kind directed against his government. He added those after he started getting negative press. If you have to add elements to your speech after the fact to make the case that you were taken out of context that's pretty good evidence that you were not taken out of context.

Really, if your only source that Chavez is a good guy is that Chavez says he's a good guy you may want to reconsider your position.

[EFerrari]

4. And if you buy into the 723rd false statement about Chavez

that bears no relation to his past or present behavior, you may want to rethink how you consume the media.

[JonQ]

5. So you believe CNN now?

[EFerrari]

6. Of course not. I don't "believe" any one. n/t

[JonQ]

7. That's not true, you believe chavez

when he says he's a swell guy.

[Bacchus39]

9. in her defense, she doesn't believe Chavez said he would take out the tanks

if the opposition won, or she denies that Chavez said it although its right there in that video link.

[EFerrari]

11. Pobre. n/t

Trans: That's just sad.

[Bacchus39]

12. si, que triste, its very sad when people won't accept the truth

its right there, no media interpretation, spin, or filter. just Chavez being being an asshole for you to see.

[EFerrari]

13. Not a single one of your predictions has turned out to be true.

If you were a major league baseball player, you'd be a very free, out of work, agent.

But don't let the facts or your batting record get in your way. :)

[Bacchus39]

14. what predictions?? n/t

n

[EFerrari]

15. A short summary.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=405x10071

[Bacchus39]

16. umm....what??? I never even posted on that thread

again, what predictions of mine were wrong?

however, I did predict that Chavez would again try to circumvent the Ven. people by trying to run again.

I also "predicted" the US and/or Colombia would not invade Ven. and the US would not assassinate Chavez.

but all of the above are simply givens, not predictions really.

[EFerrari]

10. Edgar Cayce, is that you?

No, I don't "believe" politicians.

We live with a corrupt media. So, how do we fight back in order to get real information?

- We can use common sense. We can bring our experience to bear. (Gee, Chavez gets accused of jackbootery all the time. But, he's never done any. In fact, if anything, he hasn't reined in violent protest enough. Maybe this story is bullshit. Ya think?)

- We can cross check sources. Even two corrupt outlets show cracks between their hyped stories. Sometimes, even the same one does. That's how I figured out that Bruce Ivins couldn't be in Frederick, MD AND in Princeton mailing anthrax AT THE SAME TIME, and that the FBI was just snowing us. Glen Greenwald eventually picked up that point and, as a result of the support from skeptics, there is now a group of experts getting together to sue the FBI for their obvious bullshit about Dr. Ivins.

- We can check for talking points. Remember, Howard Dean is angry, Kerry is an elitist and Obama is inexperienced. We know that because our media told us so, over and over and over again. Talking points. Not to mention, the day Keith Olbermann held up the White House fax he'd gotten of questions they wanted him to ask Joe Wilson.

- We can ask, qui bono? Who benefits from treating Chavez in the press just as our liberal Democrats are treated -- just as Bill Clinton was treated -- with disrespect, with constant smears, innuendo and dire predictions. Who benefits?

I don't read these stories to find some positive thing to post. I read them to find out what is going on. And usually one or more of the above steps are necessary to clarify anything printed in the American press. I'm not interested in pie fights on DU very much. I'm interested in Latin America. But in order to find out anything about the left or about democracy in Latin America, first you have to deconstruct the bullshit.

I should actually thank the jackasses in the corporate media, especially Authorized Propaganda and Reuters, for helping me get my chops up spotting bs a mile away. I owe them.

[Judi Lynn]

17. Great post, stexpat2000. The best. Your "qui bono" point is clear, and accurate.

This pattern has been repeated thousands of times in our lifetimes. It's what they do.

Democrats don't stoop low like this. Never have. Republicans have been attacking, smearing, lieing about Democrats, about leftists, about "lib'ruls" from the time of FDR, at least. They've attempted to destroy every significant Democratic politician, to destroy the progress Democrats have made, and have NEVER had any decent ideas on their own, they stand for NOTHING worthwhile.

How can anyone not recognize the timeworn pattern when it's all they've got, all they've ever had? Only one of them.

[Bacchus39]

8. self delete

s

[Bacchus39]

3. here are Chavez's remarks stating that he would take out the

tanks if the opposition won the elections in Carabobo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooVlAa3Y53s&feature=channel