Dear @RichardHass -- Here are some reasons for the reaction against your support of US intervention/coup in Venezuela 1) It is illegal under the UN Charter, the OAS Charter, and conventions which the US government has signed (see thenation.com/article/trumps… <thread continues>
2) The Trump financial embargo against Venezuela, also illegal under international law , is actively worsening the shortages of medicine and food and preventing most measures that would be needed to allow the economy to recover or alleviate these shortages
3) This is being done as part of a deliberate strategy to increase suffering in Venezuela so as to cause people there (including the military) to overthrow the government, which as been a goal of US policy for most of the last 16 years
4) The US Executive Order which authorizes the sanctions against Venezuela declares that Venezuela poses "an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security" of the US, which is absurd and therefore makes it of dubious legality under even US law
5) Most people in the world, if not in Washington DC, would see all of this as wrong and immoral
6) If any of the people who support such intervention really cared about people in Venezuela, they would propose/provide more humanitarian aid to refugees and also to Venezuela through e.g. Bolivia. And they would oppose the US financial embargo that is killing people.
Sorry I tagged the wrong Richard -- I meant @RichardHaass
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1) No one should underestimate the change that the anti-racist protests sweeping the country are capable of producing. (Map below from New York Times):
2) The protests are already beginning to change how some of the media looks at the problem of institutionalized racist violence by police, e.g this from MSNBC:
They never did find any evidence of fraud in the October 20th election, but the media repeated the allegation so many times that it became "true," in this post-truth world. Thread:
The latest OAS "audit", repeats a major falsehood from their previous reports, pretending that there was an "unusual" jump in Evo's vote margin towards the end of the quick count. But the change was in fact gradual, as later-reporting areas were more pro-Evo than earlier ones:
THREAD: Bolivia held its presidential election on October 20th — and since then, there has been a lot of confusion around the vote tallying process, which is still ongoing. 1/x
There are two main candidates: Evo Morales, the current president, and Carlos Mesa, a former president.
Morales generally has higher support in rural areas, whereas Mesa has higher support in urban areas such as Santa Cruz de la Sierra. This is important to keep in mind. 2/x
There are potentially two rounds in the election. In the first round, if any candidate has either 1) more than 50% of the vote or 2) at least 40% of the vote, and a vote total that is 10 percentage points higher than the next highest candidate, they win outright. 3/x