Impunity reigns! No to Impunity! You can kill people, burn down health
centers, government buildings and food markets, create shortages, lockouts
and conspire against the government with coups etc. and it seems you can
get away with it!
*
*
* my thoughts, Cort *
*--------------------------------
*
*
*
*U.S. citizen linked with conspiracy of the right is expelled from Venezuela
*

Caracas, Jun 05 AVN.- The American citizen Timothy Tracy, who was linked to
the conspiracy of the right against the Venezuelan democracy, is in the
process of leaving the country after being expelled from, said Wednesday,
through his Twitter account, the Minister for Internal Affairs, Justice and
Peace, Miguel Rodriguez Torres.

'The gringo Timothy Hallet Tracy captured doing espionage in our country,
has been expelled from the national territory', wrote Rodriguez Torres in
his account @MRodriguezTorre.

The American was arrested in Caracas after be related to the extreme right
groups that wanted to destabilize the country with street attacks after the
presidential elections of last April 14.

On that occasion, the minister Rodriguez Torres said that the objective of
the plan was to generate chaotic situations in the country to attack the
governance, with the creation of a scenario violent after the elections.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Venezuelan Opposition Give the Game Away on Electoral Fraud Claim

Jun 4th 2013, by Ewan Robertson - Venezuelanalysis.com
[image: Ramon Guillero Aveledo, executive secretary of the opposition MUD
coalition (archive)]

Ramon Guillero Aveledo, executive secretary of the opposition MUD coalition
(archive)

Since April’s presidential election Venezuela’s conservative opposition
have been desperately trying to convince both the country and world opinion
that the 1.5% win by Nicolas Maduro was a fraud, and that the real winner
was Henrique Capriles.

Although this claim has been met with
skepticism<http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleadershipforum/2013/05/14/venezuelas-election-system-holds-up-as-a-model-for-the-world/>
 and outright dismissal <http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/8697> by informed
observers and  regional leaders alike, it has been treated
seriously<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/nicolas-maduro-shoves-aside-democracy-in-venezuela/2013/04/16/4edf4bd2-a6c4-11e2-8302-3c7e0ea97057_story.html>
by
mainstream Western press and the U.S. government, with the latter so far
refusing to recognise the Maduro presidency. Yet curiously, recent
statements made by opposition politicians have undermined Capriles’ stance
and risk giving the game away over the fraud claim.

*Preparing to cry fraud*

Suspicions that the opposition would attempt to claim fraud in the 14 April
election began shortly after the death of late President Hugo Chavez. In
the weeks running up to the election the opposition began to prepare the
ground through a campaign <http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/8563> to
delegitimise Venezuela’s voting system as untrustworthy and the National
Electoral Council (CNE) as biased toward the government.

Then, following Maduro’s pronouncement as winner by the CNE, Henrique
Capriles refused <http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/8626> to recognise the
election result, demanding a 100% re-count. The next evening the opposition
leader went further, calling on supporters to “vent their rage” over the
result by going out onto the streets to bang pots and pans. Along with
peaceful protest, this provoked
attacks<http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/8652> by
far-right opposition supporters, resulting in 11 deaths and damage to
Cuban-staffed health centres and other government social programs.

To accommodate the opposition and calm the political situation, on 18 April
the CNE agreed <http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/8683> to audit the 46% of
the votes not already audited on voting day. Henrique Capriles initially
accepted the deal, thenrejected <http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/8837> it,
and now awaits the likely failure of his challenge to the result in the
country’s Supreme Court in order to take his claims to international
bodies<http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/9000>
.

*The evidence stacked against the opposition*

Now, whatever one may think of the politician in question, the charge of
electoral fraud is serious, and if true would be a major setback for
democracy in Venezuela and the region. Yet observers well informed on the
nature of Venezuela’s voting system and National Electoral Council (CNE)
reject the fraud claim as a near-impossibility. There are several reasons
for this:

1) The functioning and safeguards<http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/7315> of
Venezuela’s electronic voting system, which would make successfully
committing electoral fraud almost inconceivable. It is worth repeating that
Venezuela’s electoral system has been described as the “best in the world” by
former US president Jimmy Carter <http://venezuelanalysis.com/news/7272>,
the head of the Carter Centre electoral NGO. Following the 14 April
election, even pro-opposition journalist Eugenio Martinez
argued<http://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesleadershipforum/2013/05/14/venezuelas-election-system-holds-up-as-a-model-for-the-world/>
that
the checks and safeguards of the process “leave little room for
questioning” of the result.

2) The flimsy “evidence” presented by the Venezuelan opposition to support
their fraud claim. This evidence has been cataloged and
examined<http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/8702> by
VA.com’s Chris Carlson, who concluded that “every single example is either
demonstrably false, or extremely implausible”.

3) The results of the CNE’s audits of the vote, both on and after voting
day. The audits check that the electronic vote made by the elector matches
against the paper vote emitted by the voting machine after voting. The
paper vote is used as a kind of “receipt” by the voter to check that the
machine has recorded their vote properly. So far, with 95% of ballot boxes
audited the CNE
reports<http://www.noticias24.com/venezuela/noticia/171835/lucena-anuncia-ante-la-uniore-que-se-audito-95-de-las-mesas-de-votacion/>
99.98%
accuracy between the paper receipts and the corresponding electronic
tallies.[i] <http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/9660#_edn1> Furthermore,
a 
study<http://www.cepr.net/index.php/publications/reports/a-statistical-note-on-the-april-14-venezuelan-presidential-election-and-audit-of-results>by
the Washington-based CEPR of the “hot audit” (the audit conducted on voting
day itself) of 54% of ballots found that the statistical chance of the
remaining un-audited votes containing enough errors to change the outcome
of the election to be “less than one in 25 thousand trillion”.

None of this has prevented the opposition to continue to argue that the 14
April election was “stolen” from them. Indeed, Capriles has begun to embark
on trips abroad to seek greater international support for his
non-recognition of Maduro’s presidency.

*Giving the game away?*

However, in the midst of the proclamation of fraud, recent statements by
the opposition themselves risk giving the game away.

Last week the CNE announced that municipal elections will be held on 8
December. Despite Henrique Capriles’ challenge to the 14 April presidential
election being still lodged in the Supreme Court, opposition politicians
responded to the CNE’s call for local elections with gusto, calling on
their supporters to turn out to vote and predicting electoral victory.

Here’s what Carlos Ocariz, mayor of the Sucre municipality in Miranda state
and a political ally of Henrique Capriles, had to
say<http://www.noticias24.com/venezuela/noticia/171394/ocariz-en-sucre-a-quien-nos-pongan-como-contrincante-le-daremos-una-paliza-el-8-d/>
about
the municipal elections.

“*From here we pronounce ourselves and we say with emphasis that we’re
ready for this new electoral process just around the corner*. Although the
CNE has shown itself as not very transparent in taking balanced decisions,
as it always looks to benefit the political actors of the government, we
have a leadership that we’ve achieved through our work and the figure of
Henrique Capriles Radonski. This gives us strength to confront this new
challenge and because of that *we put out the call to exercise the right to
vote*, to keep fighting for the truth that Venezuela needs so much. *We’ll
thrash whoever they [Chavismo] put against us in Sucre as we’ve done in
other electoral processes*”.

If that statement comes as a surprise, the comments made by Ramon Guillermo
Aveledo, executive secretary of the opposition’s MUD coalition, went even
further. Of the municipal elections, Aveledo
said<http://www.noticias24.com/venezuela/noticia/171703/la-mud-esta-lista-para-las-elecciones-municipales-vamos-a-participar-con-todos-los-hierros/>
“we’re
going to participate with everything we’ve got” adding that “participating
is the best way to show the bias of this power [the CNE]”. He then went on
to affirm that “there, where the citizen votes, *that vote cannot be
substituted,* *no one changes that vote*”.

Aside from the now-obligatory comments from opposition politicians that the
CNE “favours” the
government,[ii]<http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/9660#_edn2> there
is a strikingly contradictory approach developed here by the opposition. On
one hand, opposition politicians claim that the presidential election was
“stolen” and that the CNE committed fraud in favour of the government. On
the other, they ask their supporters to continue participating in elections
organised by the CNE, demonstrate their confidence in electoral victory,
and even defend the trustworthiness of the vote. So which is it? Do the
opposition really think the electoral system is fraudulent and that they
could be denied a legitimate victory, but are happy to participate anyway?
Or are the opposition conscious that Venezuela’s electoral system is
trustworthy and accurate, and therefore are aware that their fraud claim
is, in fact, fraudulent?

Once again it is the opposition’s own conduct which is most revealing. Only
sixteen months ago the MUD coalition asked the CNE to help organize the
opposition’s own internal primary elections. At the time, Aveledo
called<http://www.eluniversal.com/nacional-y-politica/111205/cne-presta-asistencia-tecnica-a-la-mud-para-proceso-comicial>
the
CNE “an excellent indication of democratic institutions in the country”.
Further, before the presidential election last October, Aveledo hastened to
assure<http://www.ultimasnoticias.com.ve/noticias/tuvoto/noticiaselectorales/ramon-aveledo-asegura-que-voto-es-secreto.aspx>
opposition
supporters that “in reality, the vote is secret”, a “reality” also voiced
by Henrique Capriles on the
eve<http://www.observatorioelectoralamericano.com/?p=577> of
the 14 April election.

As such, it appears that the opposition’s strategy is not about overturning
an election result that they know to be accurate. Rather, their aim is to
de-legitimise the government and help provoke a political and economic
crisis in which Maduro is either forced to resign or loses a recall
referendum in three years. Seeking international pressure over supposed
electoral fraud will be part of this strategy. Capriles said as much when
he spoke to Reuters
recently<http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/02/us-venezuela-capriles-idUSBRE95109K20130602>:
“I think this government, in the current conditions of illegitimacy added
to a deep economic crisis it's showing no intention of addressing, is going
to cave in. What does that mean? Well, all the mechanisms are in the
constitution: referendum, new election, resignation”.

Time will tell whether the opposition’s strategy is successful or whether
the government and the Chavista movement will manage to steer a successful
course in the coming period. In the meantime, global mainstream media
should accurately inform on the opposition’s contradictory discourse behind
their fraud claim…but don’t hold your breath.

------------------------------

[i] <http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/9660#_ednref1> It should also be
highlighted that the 0.02% inconsistency between the electronic vote and
the paper receipt is not because the voter’s choice is recorded
inaccurately, but due to a range of incidents such as voters destroying the
paper vote by mistake instead of depositing it in the CNE’s ballot box.

[ii] <http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/9660#_ednref2> The charge that
the CNE lacks transparency and is closed in its attitude toward the
opposition was addressed by Dan Beeton in an article for the CEPR
here<http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/the-americas-blog/venezuelan-election-audit-nears-its-finish-with-9998-clean-results-so-far>.
In it, he writes: “Contrary to his (Capriles’) characterization of a biased
and obstructionist CNE, as we have *previously
noted*<http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/the-americas-blog/media-fails-to-inform-public-about-shifting-opposition-demands-in-post-election-venezuela>
the
CNE has made many concessions to the opposition, including 18 different
audits, all of which involve witnesses from both parties. Capriles talks of
numerous opposition observer complaints from throughout Venezuela on
election day, yet our *election
live-blog*<http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/the-americas-blog/venezuelas-presidential-elections-2013-live-blog>
on
April 14 included numerous live reports from election monitors who talked
to opposition representatives at dozens of voting centers in several
states; few had any complaints, even less that could be considered serious.
Capriles has shifted the focus of his attack *to the electoral
registry*<http://elpais.com/elpais/2013/05/09/inenglish/1368110042_157428.html>,
but demographers from the Catholic University had *reviewed the electoral
registry*<http://venezuelablog.tumblr.com/post/47954662730/assessing-venezuelas-electoral-playing-field-part-iii>
prior
to the election and found it trustworthy”.
------------------------------
*Source URL (retrieved on 04/06/2013 - 10:17pm):*
http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/9660


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:laamn-unsubscr...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:laamn-subscr...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:laamn-dig...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:laamn-ow...@egroups.com?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:la...@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/laamn@egroups.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    laamn-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
    laamn-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    laamn-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to