United States unleashes dogs of war in Venezuela

Biased media coverage on Venezuela is a slippery slope

I have been following media coverage of the situation in Venezuela and would like to offer my opinion on the subject. Independently of how one feels about the ruling government in Venezuela now, I think the media coverage has to be fair to the government as well as to their opposition. From what I have seen so far, there is an overwhelming amount of coverage on the opposition marches, but next to no coverage of the large marches in support of Nicolas Maduro, disputed president of Venezuela.

Our media also reports on how terribly the government has run the economy and how much people are suffering, but this again is biased. Let us make some comparisons between the United States, Canada, and Venezuela.

According to an article in The Atlantic, for the first time since the early 1960s, “the death rate of people between the ages of 25 and 34 increased by 10 per cent between 2015 and 2016,” mainly due to an opioid epidemic among young white men.  

Here in Canada we have many of our Indigenous populations living in third world conditions, many of which lack drinkable water. Given these circumstances and using the same criteria we use for Venezuela, should our regimes be changed based on our economic ineptitude leading to the suffering of our citizens? Should we declare humanitarian crises in the United States and Canada? I think we would open up Pandora’s box if we use economic hardship as a criterion for changing a government.

As to Maduro not accepting humanitarian aid, that is another blatant lie. Venezuela is accepting humanitarian aid from other countries, one of them being Russia. Maduro is not accepting aid from the U.S. since it is politicized, the International Red Cross has also refused to deliver aid since it is illegal as per international United Nations aid legislation, as reported by Venezuelanalysis.

The reason Venezuela is not accepting U.S. aid is because the person in charge of the aid operation is Elliot Abrams, the man who was convicted for lying to Congress over covert arms sales money to Iran funnelled to the Contras in Nicaragua in the 1980s under the guise of humanitarian aid, according to the New York Times.

Now, I don’t know about you, but I am a little skeptical of any aid coming from the U.S., particularly that which is led by Abrams who was also once convicted for trying to overthrow the government of Nicaragua using aid as an excuse!  

Our mass media talks about how corrupted the last elections in Venezuela were and accepts this at face value in spite of the election having international monitors (most recently, former U.S. president Jimmy Carter) as did the 23 previous elections in Venezuela, according to Global Research.

If electoral corruption is used as a criterion for regime change, shouldn’t we take a look at changing the regime in the United States of America? I am speaking of gerrymandering practices, voter suppression of minority and poor voters, and simply stealing the election as was done with George Bush’s election. Let us remember that Donald Trump also received three million less votes than his opponent Hillary Clinton and still won the presidency.

The Canadian government argues that Maduro is a dictator who has to go. Yet Canada does business with another dictatorship in Saudi Arabia, which recently dismembered reporter Jamal Khashoggi and routinely decapitates and crucifies, yes, crucifies people, and has no elections to boot!

Even as I am writing this, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government is involved in a scandal that may have serious consequences of interference with the rule of law his own government seems to criticize Maduro for violating.

Our media coverage has to be more balanced when it comes to covering the ongoing Venezuelan situation.

Photos obtained via Wikimedia Commons