It's those neocons over at Amnesty International who falsely paint Chavez as autocratic and brutal.

"...[media] stations deemed to 'condone or incite' public disturbances or publish messages 'contrary to the security of the nation' are subject to heavy fines and can be ordered to suspend broadcasting for seventy-two hours; on a second offense they may forfeit their broadcasting license for up to five years."

Such a measure is surely not optimal for freedom of speech, but one must remember that this is a country which experienced a coup d'etat, sponsored by outside forces, just three years ago---and that those same forces are still angling for "regime change" (including assassination of the elected leader) and inciting violent demonstrations that include tire burning, rock throwing and molotov cocktails.  Sorry, but that isn't free speech.  It would be extraordinary if such a country did not take measures against blatant incitement by its media, which are owned by the opposition.  Notice there is no mention of imprisonment for that offense.

Regarding the "disrespect laws", it says the changes "increased penalties for disrespect, criminal defamation, and libel."  The Venezuelan Supreme Court last fall ruled that a case brought by the Attorney General against a newspaper for an editorial did not constitute "institutional insult" prohibited by law, but it did caution that the Venezuelan constitution prohibits "the use of freedom of information and opinion to destabilize democratic institutions"---a position which is not far off, I think, from where our own Supreme Court would stand these days---and we haven't suffered a coup d'etat recently.

Make no mistake, I am a strong supporter of free expression, and Human Rights Watch is a good organization whose advice should be heeded.  But what they are doing with their report is holding each nation to a high standard and urging it to be better than it is.  Venezuela had a long history of police brutality, unequal distribution of wealth, and human rights violations before Chavez ever came on the scene.  It's hard to change those institutional problems, especially when the wealthy and powerful are fighting you tooth and claw the whole way.  The mayor of Caracas (the capital city) is a Chavez opponent who has facilitated the violent clashes between factions and presided over some of the atrocities.  

Haven't we watched boys being groomed for military service as we were growing up -- in many subtle ways, GIJoe, video games, cowboy and indian, all those and more were/are not coincidental.  I know for a fact that much of what we are fed, and eagerly devour, are lies.  But I am called a nut and ridiculed by people who have never "been there."   So be it.

Good luck to you.  The future will be even more difficult for those caught unawares than for people who have had some time to prepare, at least mentally if nothing else.  But it will be a difficult time for all of us.   You have been lied to, Shakell, and I wish you well as I do all of us.

Glenn Beck isn't my kinda guy, though I do agree with him that political correctness has made us superficial.  I think he's a dope about the environment and I wonder what possible qualifications he could think he has to spout the TOTAL crap that he does in that regard.  He also agrees with Bush too much for my tastes, as I agree with Bush about nothing.  Bush is a puppet, and does not deserve all the attention he gets.  But, distractions are there for a very good reason.

I'm not into religions, so I can't be persuaded as to any benefit they might hold, other than as manipulations, controls, and a brilliant mechanism to keep people fighting.  I am against war, every one of them, throughout time.

Yes, some weird diaries go up -- some good ones go up (and too many diaries altogether makes for lousy, fragmented discussions, but that's another subject).  Some comments are excellent and enlightening -- some make you want to cry, or pull your hair out.  That's everywhere.  If you had been around TO longer, you'd know that I am more out on a limb than some (many?) people here.  If you want to ridicule anyone, go ahead on, but I've heard the party line before.  I was never in the military, but was raised by a career military officer dad, and I also have a sharp tongue.  But, as I said before, I'm tired of arguing with people who have never once listened to what we've had to say.  You ridicule us, we ridicule you, and we're all stupid for not seeing what's as plain as the noses on our faces and doing something about it.

Look, there are military officers here with long and distinguished service records.  There are PhDs and other graduate degrees.  Many of us are accomplished, broadly traveled, and wise from long life experience.  To speak to us of your undergrad GPA is just puerile.  Do you think you're the only one who ever made an A in college?  I'm sure you've heard the expression, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.  What you're suffering from at the moment is a little bit of knowledge, and it's got you all excited and frankly, overconfident.  But just because you've got a 101 textbook in front of you doesn't make you an expert on any subject.  Even the guy who wrote the textbook may not be an expert on the subject.  The best and brightest in a given field don't write textbooks!

Give it some time Shakell.  Read.  Think.  Listen to others.  Keep in mind that the full range of truth does not reside in any one book.  When you have a genuine command of a field of study, then you can speak authoritatively.  Until then, you just look callow---whatever your age.