Friday, June 02, 2006

Chavez Trumpets “Friendship” With Carlos the Jackal

Chavez’s mate, Carlos Ramírez Ilich, has been blamed for more than 80 deaths. He was declared guilty of murder by a French court and is serving a life sentence in Paris.

Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez doesn’t hide his admiration for notorious pre-Al-Qaeda-terrorist Carlos Ramírez Ilich, better known as the Jackal. In a recent speech to Opec ministers in Caracas Chavez offered a public remembrance of his buddy:

“I remember that tour [a presidential visit to Opec countries]; a good Venezuelan friend who is in Europe called it hair-raising; I am referring to Carlos Ilich Ramírez, nicknamed The Jackal” …“During those days he wrote to me from his Paris jail saying that the tour was hair-rising. I will never forget those words by Carlos”, Chavez said.

Ironically, Carlos the Jackal gained world notoriety after kidnapping 70 hostages precisely during an Opec ministerial meeting in 1975.

In March 1999, a recently inaugurated president Chavez responded to a letter by Ramirez with a delirious, apologetic text. Some fragments of Chavez’s letter taken from a Harper Magazine translation follow:

“Citizen Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, Distinguished Compatriot,

Swimming in the depths of your letter of solidarity I could hear the pulse of our shared insight that everything has its due time.”

“Our liberator Simon Bolivar, whose theories and example are fundamental to our doctrine of revolution, whispered briefly this question before he passed away: “How will I find the way out of this labyrinth”?"

“With profound faith in our cause and our mission, now and forever!”

They say a man is known by the company he keeps.


At 8:00 PM, Anonymous Debbie said...

What a 'suck up' letter that is. Chavez is a growing threat to the free world. I feel sorry for the people of Venezuela. Very nice post and thanks for sharing at Right Truth.

At 8:43 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Do people in Venezuela ever really hear about half the stuff this jackass says and does?


At 3:29 PM, Blogger J.D. Ryan said...

Do people in the United States hear about thalf the stuff our retard of a president does? You'd think so...

Although I admire Chavez's defiance against American imperialism, I'm not necessarily a supporter, although I have no problem with the nationalization of the nation's resources. The problem here seems to be getting accurate information, because you're nmot goig to get it from the US State Dept. any more that you're going to get it from Chavez.

The statistics you quoted over on my blog that came from the Universidad Católica Andrés Bello were IDENTICAL to the ones in the CIA World Fact Book. Considering how much damage the CIA has done over the years in Latin America in terms of sneaky shit (like propping up US friendly dictators and such), they are hardly an accurate source of information. The bullshit has been rather thick on just about everything coming out of the Bush adminsitration, wheter it has to do with Chavez, Iraq, torture, etc, so where can one go to get bullshit-free information? I'm not asking to be a wise-ass, I'm asking a serious question.

I suspect Chavez is playing the populist card and instead of using the money for ending poverty, it's going elsewhere. If he were telling the truth, I'd support him, but I don't thinkhe is. But I certainly won't trust the U.S. to give me the truth, either.

At 9:05 PM, Blogger Camilo Pino said...

"so where can one go to get bullshit-freeinformation?"
Getting objective information on Venezuela is not easy. I always look for third parties who do not have local interests. International organizations like the United Nations for poverty figures. Reputed intelligence institutions for economic figures (EIU). I consider the Universidad Católica to be reliable. I tend to distrust official information. What kind of info are you looking for?

At 6:53 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To JD Ryan;

While I agree with you on the Bush administration, I don't on the CIA factbook. Remember that there is a good bit of the CIA that is merely data-gathering bureaucracy. They don't care about the politics of anything.

Personally, I would be more concerned about certain news agencies....

I've compared numbers from the CIA factbook on latin american (and other) countries to figures from the UN and other sources such as universities - they are very similar. While I wouldn't swear they are the end-all, be-all of information, I believe they are quite reliable and accurate.


At 9:35 AM, Blogger J.D. Ryan said...


I guess I'd be looking for the kinds of information that you posted on my blog last week.. the kind of stuff that would let us know if Chavez is really doing anything to end poverty or if he's just blowing smoke up our ass.

I really have to strongly disagree with anonymous' comment that 'there is a good bit of the CIA that is merely data-gathering bureaucracy. They don't care about the politics of anything.' That could not be further from the truth. The CIA was behind much of the Pinochet debacle, the happenings in Guatemala and such. And even recent history will show you that when Porter Goss was selected as head of the CIA, there was a conscious effort to purge the CIA of staff that didn't tow the Bush administration line. So please don't say the CIA isn't political. It may not be in its original intent and theory, but it certainly is in real life. And that's the problem with the Universidad Catholica stats.. they are identical to the CIA's. A fellow blogger of mine figured this out when seeing this statistic...
Venezuela’s revenue for 1998: US$ 35 billion
Venezuela’s oil earnings for 2005: US$ 81 billion.
The first stat is 'revenue' , the second is 'oil revenue'. Now unless it's a typographical error, those aren't the same thing.

Over at my blog, if you go through the archives, you'll see I've been struggling with this whole Bolivaran revolution. As an American liberal, very liberal, I am often frustrated by other American liberals who seem to idolize Guevara, Castro and the like, and seem to overlook the fact that they killed a lot of people. It's really hypocritical, and it makes us look a dumb as the right-wingers. I see that idolization with Chavez, too, so I'm really trying to get the story straight. In theory, I support what he is doing, but I'm not quite convinced he's doing what he says he is. It's easy to be attracted to someone who is so Anti-Bush. I mean, come on, we're currently living under one of the most corrupt, anti-progress, anti-intellectual, downright stupid and dangerous administrations in American history here. But I'm smart enough to not blindly support someone just because he's anti-Bush. And also smart enough to know that when the American gov't talks about a situation in the name of 'spreading freedom', etc. there's usually something deeper going on that is not on the level, usually protecting big U.S. monied interests. Bush doesn't give two shits about the well being of the Venezuelans any more than he does about the Iraqis, or Americans who aren't obscenely rich. He cares about the oil and his buddies making the money of it.

Any of your readers who can shed some light on this for me would be greatly appreciated. If you click on my name above this post you can dig around on my site and hopefully give me some input(it's not all politics- there's also film, music and atheism there).

Thanks for the conversation!

At 10:01 PM, Blogger Camilo Pino said...

A couple of articles on Venezuela that I think have that balance you are looking for.
The first is the most recent. It was published in the past issue of Foreign Affairs. The New York Times has it online here:

The other article is a bit more critical but I consider it particularly insightful. I am referring to “Hugo Boss,” a Chavez profiled published by Foreign Policy and available here:

Let me know what you think.

By the way, your blogger profile is down.

At 1:30 AM, Anonymous Mousqueton said...

You just got to be kidding me!

At 1:20 PM, Blogger J.D. Ryan said...

mousqueton- who's gotta be kidding about what?

Those aricles were great, Camilo, especially the NYT one. It seemed pretty objective, not a bunch of propaganda coming from either side. I have reservations about the Foreign Policy one, it did have a bit of a right-wing slant to it.
Yeah, my profile isn't visible. I'll just give you all a link to my blog:
Five Before Chaos

At 12:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:27 AM) "El Chacal" pide ayuda a Chávez para evitar su "muerte programada"

' ) { document.getElementById("addsHeader").style.display = ''; } -->

París.- El más famoso terrorista de los años 70, el venezolano Ilich Ramírez Sánchez, "El Chacal", lanzó hoy un llamamiento, a través de su abogada, al presidente Hugo Chávez, para sortear su "muerte programada" en Francia, reseñó Efe.

Isabelle Coutant-Peyre quiso hacer llegar ese mensaje a Chávez nada más conocer hoy el dictamen del Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos que desestimó la denuncia del terrorista venezolano contra Francia por mantenerle en aislamiento penitenciario más de ocho años.

"Pido al presidente Chávez que intervenga formalmente para salvar a su conciudadano de una muerte programada", dijo a Efe la letrada y también esposa de "Carlos" desde 2003 por el rito islámico, la cual se mostró "enfadada" por ese dictamen "vergonzoso".

La Gran Sala de la citada Corte, con sede en Estrasburgo (noreste de Francia), dictaminó -por doce votos contra cinco- que las autoridades francesas no han violado en el caso de "El Chacal" el artículo 3 (prohibición de la tortura o de tratos degradantes) del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos, como denunciaba el interesado.

En su caso, los magistrados consideran que "su mantenimiento en aislamiento no alcanzó el umbral mínimo de gravedad necesario para ser considerado como trato inhumano (...) teniendo en cuenta la personalidad y la peligrosidad fuera de lo común del interesado".

Arrestado en Jartum y trasladado a Francia en el verano de 1994, "El Chacal" fue condenado tres años después a cadena perpetua por los tribunales franceses por el asesinato el 27 de junio de 1975 en París de dos agentes del contraespionaje francés y un allegado.

"El Chacal" fue puesto en régimen de aislamiento desde su ingreso en la cárcel parisiense de La Santé el 15 de agosto de 1994 hasta su traslado el 17 de octubre de 2002 a la prisión de Saint-Maur (centro de Francia). Este ha sido el periodo examinado por la Corte.

El 18 de marzo de 2004, después de conceder una entrevista telefónica a una televisión en la que defendió el terrorismo y consideró inútil pedir perdón a las víctimas, fue trasladado sucesivamente a tres prisiones de la región de París: Fresnes, Fleury-Mérogis y La Santé, en las que fue puesto de nuevo en régimen de aislamiento hasta el 5 de enero de 2006, en vísperas de que el tribunal de Estrasburgo analizase su denuncia.

Desde entonces está en el centro penitenciario de Clairvaux, en el este del país, en un régimen normal, algo de lo que la Corte de Estrasburgo, "preocupada" por los periodos "especialmente largos" de aislamiento a los que ha sido sometido, "toma nota" y espera que no vuelva a ser aislado en el futuro.

El tribunal precisa que no ha entrado a analizar ese segundo periodo de aislamiento -desde el 18 de marzo de 2004 al 5 de enero de 2006- ya que el demandante no lo pidió, pese a que podía hacerlo.

Con este dictamen, Coutant-Peyre consideró que "los jueces del Consejo de Europa animan a los Gobiernos europeos a despreciar los derechos humanos" y confirman "la deriva de Europa hacia los métodos criminales practicados por Estados Unidos".

Coutant-Peyre había hablado telefónicamente con "El Chacal" esta misma mañana y, según dijo, éste le había expresado su temor a que el tribunal desestimase -como así ha sido- su denuncia, ya que eso supondría, en su opinión, "dar carta blanca a Francia para hacer todo lo que quiera".

En su dictamen, el tribunal "admite" y "comprende" que las autoridades penitenciarias francesas hayan adoptado "medidas extraordinarias de seguridad" contra "Carlos", que "en los años 70 estaba considerado como el terrorista más peligroso del mundo y que nunca ha lamentado sus actos".

Las condiciones materiales de su detención eran "correctas y conformes a las reglas penitenciarias europeas", añade la sentencia.

Señala que "El Chacal" tenía una celda "bastante grande", de 6,84 metros cuadrados, con una cama, una mesa, un aseo y una ventana con luz natural. Disponía de libros, periódicos y una televisión y tenía derecho a dos horas de paseo diarias y a una hora más de gimnasio.

Recibía la visita de un médico dos veces por semana y de un cura una vez al mes, así como múltiples encuentros con sus 58 abogados que se fueron sucediendo a lo largo de su permanencia en La Santé.

Como ejemplo, el tribunal cita que Coutant-Peyre le visitó 640 veces en casi cinco años y los otros abogados más de 860 en casi ocho años, por contra -señala- que su familia nunca ha ido a verle, pese a que no tiene ninguna restricción de visita.

El tribunal estima, por tanto, que su aislamiento sensorial y social ha sido "parcial y relativo".


Post a Comment

<< Home