Procolonial Chronicles


The “procolonial forces.”

That’s how Venezuela’s state news agency, AVN, now describes the Libyan rebels.

Believe it!

Ok, I admit it: I get this weird, dirty pleasure reading the government media’s treatment of the Libyan uprising. It’s just fascinating.

Caracas Chronicles is 100% reader-supported. Support independent Venezuelan journalism by making a donation.


  1. One moment to savour this morning: @evagolinger tweeting that Al jazeera journalists should be tried as war criminals for allegedly fabricating (in a studio in Qatar) images of Libyans celebrating the overthrow of Gadafy in Green Square.

    • She is probably going on which may well be a convenient fabrication of a fabrication by Russia Today (especially in view of the second part), as comments by viewers more observant and better informed than I indicate, I´m clueless, but maybe someone else here can check this out.

      “Aqui podeis ver la demostracion de que esto es un fake con otro video de Rusia Today –watch?v=uchLT0Gkgl0#t=1m27s-­. La explicación la entiende cualquiera que sepa un poco de vídeo, compresión y iluminación”
      “Te felicito, has desenmascarado a estos farsantes con su propio video…… Ahi esta claro en el minuto 1.27 de ese video de este mismo medio RT son LOS MISMOS ARCOS QUE DICEN SON FALSOS!!!! SIN ADORNOS NI NADA ver v=uchLT0Gkgl0#t”
      “Lo que dicen es que no hay molduras.Pero en el 2º que tiene mejor compresion y resolucion, se ve el arco. Es mas, en el video original que usan para la comparacion, mas adelante watch?v=VVzld5C_BrY#t=1m22s ,se ven algunos de los detalles que faltan, como molduras de la puerta donde esta la bandera y la moldura de la zona del arco, pero han usado el fotograma peor posible.”

      • And if you’re really in need of a good belly-laugh, take a look at this (, from Britain’s answer to Eva Golinger – ‘independent journalist’ Lizzie Phelan. Ms Phelan, who is occasionally described as ‘our correspondent’ by Press TV, a satellite channel wholly funded by the Iranian regime, has been a prime mover in the campaign to accuse Al jazeera and others of using fake footage to suggest the rebels were winning in Libya. This particular report, from the same day the anti-Gadafy forces moved into Tripoli, claims reports of their imminent arrival are mere propaganda and that NATO is in fact looking for an ‘exit strategy’ because it’s efforts to produce a military solution are an embarrassing failure. If that’s failure, I’ll take it any day over Gadafy’s resounding ‘success’.

        • I do now. That obviously eliminated the need for footwork though finding where to try Al jazeera journalists for war crimes may require some effort. Maybe Desiré Santos can pitch in.

        • I didn’t know that, but it doesn’t surprise me. That woman was in Russia and Belarus with Hugo last time and I suppose she was networking.

          RT channel is really crap. I would listen from time to time to Radio Moscow when the Soviet Union existed…not for ideological but for linguistic purposes. I remember it was most of the time ideological rubbish but for the few times when they talked about science or the like. They were pathetic, but somehow they were not utterly tacky. RT and Voice of Russia now, in spite of communism being gone, are really trash, incredibly biased, even if ideology is gone. VTV and Telesur are a weird mixture of ideology and tackiness. I reckon Eva will try to bring tacky ideology to the Russian biased trash so that the shit is complete, “non plus infra”

          • A few questions arise: is this the end of the love-affair between Chávez and Al jazeera? Is the Emir of Qatar no longer a ‘pana’? And more importantly: if the whole thing was cooked up in a tv studio, the Libyan people never celebrated the end of Gadafy in Green Square, the rebels never took Tripoli, Neil Armstrong never set foot on the moon .. isn’t all this fuss about ‘el imperio’ taking over the world a bit exaggerated?

          • Hold on your horses, guys. These people manipulate a lot of images. Still, the other side does the same as well…to what extent? We don’t know. It has changed through time and now it is much more difficult because usually – USUALLY- the West has a lot of
            competing sources…thing is they are not always all at a given time at a given place.

            On one side: yes, Gaddafi has lied in the most incredible way. We know that. Now,
            one thing is for sure: the detention of a couple of Gaddafi’s sons at the moment they said was a lie from the rebels. They decided to mention that because it was a matter of time and they wanted to speed it up. I don’t know about when the Green Square was really taken over – taken it was-, one thing is when BBC and Guardian journalists got there and another when the rebels said that (almost a day of difference). Those things can speed up developments. If you don’t believe it, think Venezuela 2002.

            British foreign minister Gates said twice already Gaddafi was on his way to Venezuela and he did not suspect it or something but claimed to KNOW it from intelligence sources and then Gaddafi turned out to be in Tripoli. This was pretty silly of Gates because the fib took away credibility from the rebels and made people more fearful of Gaddafi.

            This is it: most people, really most people, just switch sides out of convenience.
            Remember the 2007 referendum? Shortly after that Chávez’s popularity ratings fell a lot, by any means. They also increase after 99. How could this happen? Most people just want “un gallito ganador”

            Even statements by a serial liar need to be verified sometimes because it turns out that others lie too.

  2. A question that we need to deal with before 2012: are these people lying or delusional?

    To say that they are lying means that they know the truth and choose to hide it for personal reasons To say they are delusional means that their minds exists in a world different from where their bodies exist, it means that and nothing you can say or do will allow them to function in the real world.

    The importance of the question lies on the fact that you can deal with liars; they are aware of reality and can be persuaded to stop lying if the rewards and/or punishments are encouraging enough. But delusional people cannot be dealt with as if they were sane. You either throw them into a mental institution or shoot them, and given the state of mental institutions in Venezuela, the latter would be the more humane option.

    • Third option: application of Antonio Gramsci’s handbook regarding relative truth (in achieving cultural hegemony and producing lower class “organic” intellectuals).

      • So now-when Chavez speaks -we know to we will find lies and more lies.
        His 12 years are framed with lies. What will Chvez say when Assad falls?
        Lies. What will Chavez say when Iran falls? Lies.
        What will Chavez say when Cuba throws out Castro?
        No- the truth He’ll say “I’m getting the hell out of here, now-ha…

  3. Why do I speak here, now? The implications for Venezuelan opposition -lessons
    to learn from Libya. a.The military cannot overcome the people of their own country.
    (If the planes and tanks are taken out of the equation). b. the military will
    disband- and many will join the opposition.c.Venezuelans can overthrow Chavez
    and restore democracy and freedom and justice in Venezuela.
    For this reason-that Venezuelans can do this- the chavista propaganda apparatus
    is activated now in full bloom -hoping that Venezuelans do not learn LEARN the

  4. “A question that we need to deal with before 2012: are these people lying or delusional?”

    The few Chavistas that I have had contact with are delusional. Nothing will change them. It is like trying to reason with an Evangelical or other cult like organization – you can’t. Their reality is different than yours. In order to discuss or reason with someone you have to be in the same reality as they are.

    I don’t believe this about the top people other than his highness himself. While he lies constantly I really believe that he is committed to his beliefs. The other higher ups lie constantly & don’t believe a word of what they are saying.

    • “While he lies constantly I really believe that he is committed to his beliefs.”
      He rationalizes in his head around the pole of “disavowment”-gold, oil, wealth,
      resources, exploited completely with pleasure by Chavez -is following Castro brothers-example from Babalu:
      “Honesty, hard work, property rights and the rule of law repel them.”…
      “In 1959, they could have easily left most of Cuba’s economy in place, made it obedient to their whims, and been versions of Peron, Franco, Mussolini, Assad or Gaddafi. They could have grabbed half of the economy and been Titos. They could have demanded a piece of the action from all involved and mimicked Marcos or Mobutu. But this wasn’t enough for them. They had a golden goose land in their lap — and they quickly and deliberately strangled it.”
      Chavez has and will continue to DELIBERATELY STRANGLE Venezuela until
      it becomes exactly like Cuba.

  5. I believe that Chavez is chasing a feeling… not an ideology, or a political current. He is a feelings-driven person.

    Commited to his beliefs? Think about it… what fucking beliefs?!

  6. Mr. Toro “maybe it pleases you in a wierd way”but,
    this “stuff” written by these so called news agencies
    is worthless. Venezuelans who only read this know
    nothing about what is really going on.
    “A people that want to be free must arm itself
    with a free press.”

      • Another friend “brother of Chavez- Robert Mugabe-
        when he came to power in Rhodesia (renamed
        “the country produced surpluses of every commodity ”
        Practically the same situation when Chavez came to power-
        now we know WE KNOW the rest of the story…
        re. previous story about milk for example…
        Free people can feed themselves- free people can
        make things and sell them and support themselves-
        but not slaves to colonialist/military dictatorships-example
        Chavez and Mugabe. That is IS the truth.

  7. Charles Moore writing in the Guardian today:
    “Watching Gaddafi leave, one can easily imagine horrible things happening later. But it is hard to imagine his type – crazed egotism, huge secret police, international terrorism – replicating itself successfully in the age of the internet and satellite television”-
    How about taking a second look at Hugo Chavez? Mr. Moore, roger that!

  8. Charles C:

    Take a chill-pill, dude. You’re sounding drunkenly histerical. Take deep breaths first, then fast continuous ones. That’s the wat to deliver those triplets!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here