Yes, Phil…the Interwebz iz laffing at yew. Especially a certain auburn-haired lady in THIS widdle corner. And here is why.
Oh me, oh my. Sure smells to me like Philsy-wilsy has been smoking the wacky tobacky. Or something more crack-y. I’m not the only one to have noticed how quick he is to reach for the glass-pipe-o-stoopidity. Here’s a key snippet from Narco News about him…
The surprise electoral defeat last month of Hugo Chávez’s candidate for mayor of Caracas — and the consequent change of city government — has helped cast light on some of the more unsavory activities that went on under outgoing Mayor Juan Barreto.One result is that a large, though so far undetermined, number of hired gunmen may suddenly be out of a job.The gunmen, belonging to armed political organizations loyal to the leftist government, are thought to be among some 4,000 city employees who have failed to show up for work since the new mayor, Antonio Ledezma, was sworn in two weeks ago.”Altogether, we’ve found more than 9,000 employees on short-term contracts,” said Richard Blanco, a top city official. “We’re carrying out an investigation to find out who and where they all are.”
You really MUST read the whole piece; it’s hilarious, and Gunson (egotize much?) gets hung out to dry big-time. I wonder if this Ledezma woman he was boinking back then could be one of his “undisclosed” sources for this one, too. Seeing as she shares a surname with the new mayor of Caracas, whose alias among locals is “Grandpa Munster” (or, less kindly, “The Vampire”), the likelihood is high. Certainly the political proclivity is the same; both are putschists. As is, for that matter, Phil Gunson!BTW, it’s also ever so nice of Phil to mention that there are criminals in the Metro Caracas police. Yes, there certainly are…and were on April 11, 2002, as well, when an opposition mayor (i.e., one of the same political persuasion as the current mayor-elect) was in control of the force. He ordered them to fire on people demonstrating peacefully. As luck would have it, those peaceful demonstrators were Chavistas…demonstrating on and below Llaguno Bridge. In fact, most of the casualties of that day’s violence were Chavistas. A fact I’m sure Phil Gunson finds too inconvenient to be worth mentioning, since he is a known partisan with known partisan ties.Oh dear, was that a pwnage? Yes, dear reader, it was. And there’s more to come, too…If Gunson is serious about his crack-brained contention that there were “armed thugs”, i.e. Tupamaros, on the police force in Caracas, maybe he should read this piece in Venezuelanalysis. It seems that the actual Tupamaros are not actually cops on the payroll of city hall; they’re freelance vigilantes, unaffiliated with any gummint, defending and policing areas where the uniformed cops won’t go, namely the po’ folks part of town. (Maybe it’s no surprise that uniformed cops won’t go there; those are the same parts that said cops used to go into and beat people to death with impunity, back in the good ol’ “democratic” days of the Fourth Republic. They can’t get away with that shit there anymore, especially not with Tupamaros keeping an eye on things.)I found this passage particularly instructive. See if you can tell me why, dear reader:
…Gunson has an undisclosed conflict of interest, or at least the appearance of a conflict of interest (all journalistic codes of ethics prohibit such nondisclosure), with the key source that he quoted last April 11th to blame the still unsolved sniper assassinations of that day on supporters of the government of President Hugo Chávez in Venezuela: His source for that uncorroborated statement – part of the justification for the coup d’etat – was Eurídice Ledezma, who Gunson has told sources (but did not disclose in his article) was his former girlfriend; a rapidly pro-coup reporter in Venezuela, also – coincidentally? – a vocal defender of Dictator-for-a-day Pedro Carmona.
Oh, fuck. I think I just blew Phil’s whole thesis right out of the water there with that one.Pwnage accomplished. ‘Bina calls it a night!
Among Chavez opponents, the Tupamaros are viewed as Chavez’s armed thugs who indoctrinate residents at political meetings. But most observers agree that the Tupamaros have their own agenda and are difficult to rein in. Chavez’s loosely-defined “Bolivarian” movement is inspired by South American liberator Simon Bolivar. Chavez has focused on U.S. imperialism, Latin American integration and peaceful social justice. The Tupamaros, on the other hand, prefer a rapid and radical nationalization of the country’s resources.“We are Marxist-Leninist. He is Bolivarian,” said Chino, in describing their differences.To be sure, the Chavez government maintains an ambiguous relationship with the Tupamaros and other ultra-leftist groups. Far-left views have often been criticized by Chavez for their lack of “revolutionary discipline,” which he says feeds the media images that help the political opposition.At the same time, there are signs of rifts between the Tupamaros and the government over their illegal role as neighborhood vigilantes.Since the slums are overrun with crime and the police force is too ineffective, corrupt and overstretched to control them, the government has tolerated vigilantism, observers say. But the government has recently showed the willingness to send in the military when Tupamaro members clash with the police.