There's been an upswing in pro—Chavez and pro—Castro propaganda in the mainstream media that is getting a little disturbing.

Two instances are obvious from the past day. Today's New York Times, in an atrocious news "analysis"  makes an effort to downgrade a very serious visit to Paraguay and Peru by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, his third visit in a year.

The Times dismisses the Rumsfeld visit as olde—tyme Cold War nostalgia. But Rumsfeld is visiting those two fragile but authentic democracies to discuss how to head off the Castro—Chavez axis that is attempting to strangle the region. Defense officials warn that Castro has "a big plan" for extending his influence there, a terrifying admission. And no one is more aware of it than the presidents of Peru and Paraguay, who are taking visits from Secretary Rumsfeld quite gratefully and who completely share Secretary Rumsfeld's concerns about the growing threat from Castro and Chavez. The Times claims that Rumsfeld has no influence in the region. The very fact of those meetings says something quite different.

The Times tries to trivialize Rumsfeld as living in the past. Its writer, David S. McCloud, gives no recognition of the new efforts to foment riots and unrest in Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay, Colombia and Peru from a revitalized Castro and Chavez. In fact, this "analyst" takes Chavez's claim that he is no threat to the region at face value.

But the news itself tells something different.

Paraguay has just thrown out 700 "free" Cuban doctors for attempting to subert the democratic government. If anything is olde—tyme nostalgia for the Cold War, that is. Chavez has abused Paraguay all year long, and the Marxist FARC guerrillas from Colombia Chavez sheltered in Venezuela were implicated this year in the murder of a former president of Paraguay's kidnapped daughter — the story is here. 

Now, the U.S. is sending troops to Paraguay to protect it and to be onhand near Bolivia from this dangerous threat of Marxist takeover.

The Times mockingly trivializes the whole effort by claiming that a scrum of protestors heckled Rumsfeld in Paraguay. To McCloud, this proved that the whole Rumsfeld effort was "controversial." The protestors were waving Abu Ghraib pictures. What McCloud left out is that waving Abu Ghraib pictures is something Castro already has done  against U.S. embassy personnel. The likelihood is real that the protestors were the very Cuban agents that Rumsfeld is seeking to eliminate from Paraguay's affairs. This Times account is nothing more than boldfaced Castro propaganda effort in the full recrudescent spirit of Herbert Matthews. My more detailed criticism of this dirty game is here.

Over in Caracas, there is more effort to distort the news. It's the BBC that's playing the dishonest propaganda game. Miguel Octavio exposes phony distorted film shots, in photos, of an Irish BBC film venture glorifying Chavez called 'The Revolution Will Not Be Televised.' It's a "documentary" of the April 2002 coup effort against Hugo Chavez, something he managed to swing out of. It attempts to smear the Venezuelan opposition as violent, when the facts and photos from those who were there show that it was Chavez's snipers (probably Castroite Cubans) who shot to kill into the crowds in the street who opposed Chavez. There is blood on Chavez's hands now that the facts are known. And Miguel also convincingly shows that the coup events the Irish filmmakers just coincidentally happened to be around for in their film footage, in reality was Venezuelan government film footage that these liars claimed as their own.

That movie, 'The Revolution Will Not Be Televised' — which got critical reviews and influenced countless people on the left, is nothing more than a lie. Read Miguel's whole news account with photos here and here.

A.M. Mora y Leon   08 19 05