Venezuelan immigrants start lining up at a storage facility in the Miami neighborhood of Doral every Friday afternoon. After they complete a survey, a team of volunteers guides them through a series of storage units, where they can select from toys, sheets, electronics, holiday decorations, clothes, and other household items.
"This is your new house in this country—it's the beginning of your future, and that's why you have to give a touch of love," says human rights activist and Venezuelan expatriate Patricia Andrade, who started the nonprofit that oversees this operation in 2016.
Andrade pays most of the expenses—including rent on the storage units—for Raíces Venezolanas, or "Venezuelan Roots," herself.
"When I come to this place and I meet the families," she says, "I know I'm doing the right thing."
There is no better contrast that demonstrates the contradictory nature of Trumpâs foreign policy than that of Venezuelan and Honduras. What makes the comparison so compelling is the four principal accusations that Washington hurls at Maduro to justify the imposition of crippling economic sanctions: drug trafficking, violation of democratic norms, violation of human rights and widespread corruption. All four could well be cited to justify international measures against Honduras.
So letâs make the comparison. For the sake of argument, weâll accept the validity of the accusations against Maduro coming from detractors, other than those of the most blatant fabricators of fake news. (...)
"Somoza may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch."
There is no better contrast that demonstrates the contradictory nature of Trumpâs foreign policy than that of Venezuelan and Honduras. What makes the comparison so compelling is the four principal accusations that Washington hurls at Maduro to justify the imposition of crippling economic sanctions: drug trafficking, violation of democratic norms, violation of human rights and widespread corruption. All four could well be cited to justify international measures against Honduras.
So letâs make the comparison. For the sake of argument, weâll accept the validity of the accusations against Maduro coming from detractors, other than those of the most blatant fabricators of fake news. (...)
We currently serve 2,185 children and 100 moms in their breastfeeding period, and we have 30 diners around the Municipality Sucre in Caracas, Venezuela.
The idea is to create s network of support and jobs that generates a real help to the families in the community.
When a CIA-backed military coup is attempted by a long term CIA puppet, roared on by John Bolton and backed with the offer of
Blackwater mercenaries, in the country with the worldâs largest oil
reserves, I have no difficulty whatsoever in knowing which side I am on.
Juan Guaido has been groomed for 15 years
as a long-term CIA project. His coup attempt yesterday, which so far
appears to have stalled, was the culmination of these efforts to return
Venezuelaâs oil reserves to US hegemony.
It is strange how the urgent installation of liberal democracy by
force correlates so often with oil reserves not aligned to the USA, as
in Libya, Iraq or Venezuela, while countries with massive oil reserves
which permit US military domination and align with the West and Israel
can be as undemocratic as they wish, eg Saudi Arabia. Venezuela is an
imperfect democracy but it is far, far more of a democracy than Saudi
Arabia and with a much better human rights record. The hypocrisy of
Western media and politicians is breathtaking. (...)
i think the maduro government is going to try and hold on as long as they can
he will probably reach the point where he thinks violence is justified
because control and military
msnbc makes a great point
This mess has all the makings of a civil war. The question is, with world powers' support split between the two factions, is this the spark that lights the fuse?
Our social, economic, and political spheres are deeply broken. Violent 'nationalism' has taken hold in many places, not least of which is the U.S. I really worry Venezuela could trigger a global conflict. Worse, Bolton and the other American neo-cons are all for it, apparently. c.
it simply must accompany a foreign policy that will assist Latino people in their own countries whether the motivation is self preservation or altruism is irrelevant, it must be done or it is all moot.
That sounds like NAFTA!
Another one of those "we're for it, until the other guys implement it, then we're against it". Of course it was also supported by more republicans in the senate at the time.
it simply must accompany a foreign policy that will assist Latino people in their own countries whether the motivation is self preservation or altruism is irrelevant, it must be done or it is all moot.
I am glad that you agree SFW. It must be the answer because the economic and security interests appear to be absent.
You would think we would get that by now, but apparently their is a cabal deeply embedded in our government that have agendas that have very little to do with the true best interest of America and the rest of the world. It has been controlling both parties for some time, but exponentially expanded its power under President Cheney. I thought one of the few, grasping at straws positives of a Trump presidency was that he may be a con artist, but at least he did not seem to be controlled by anyone other than his fleeting fancies. Sadly the neo cons got enough of his ear to perpetuate the same ol' controlling sanction bullshit that seems to dominate our foreign policy regardless of administration. It is just pure lunacy.
Edit: This discussion could actually be held under the immigration thread as well because it is behavior as this as well as supporting brutal regimes in meddling in South and Central America's governments and elections (ironic, no?) that is creating the crisis that drives the migrants northward in the first place. Dealing with the influx to protect our citizens is only step 1 (collect the underwear), it simply must accompany a foreign policy that will assist Latino people in their own countries whether the motivation is self preservation or altruism is irrelevant, it must be done or it is all moot.
Another one of those "we're for it, until the other guys implement it, then we're against it". Of course it was also supported by more republicans in the senate at the time.
