Venezuelan Community Members Explain Opposition Violence
Hands Off Venezuela | March 11, 2014
On Saturday, March 8, Gisella Rubilar, 47, was shot dead and two other people suffered serious gunshot wounds when they were removing an opposition roadblock which prevented safe passage to their working class and poor neighbourhood of Pie del Tiro, in the Andean capital of Merida, Venezuela. You will not have heard about it in the mass media, but this incident was part of a growing trend of opposition violence against working class and poor neighbourhoods fighting back.
It was after 9 pm on Saturday, March 8. Gisella Rubilar Figueroa came out with a group of people from the working class and poor neighbourhood of Pie del Tiro to clear the road blockade in the intersection of the main Avenida Los Proceres and Lomas de los Vientos in Mérida, Venezuela.
After clearing the debris which blocked the access to Pie del Tiro, they remained on site for while. It was then that they were attacked and shot at by a group of masked young men. Three of those who cleared the opposition barricade had to be hospitalised with gunshot wounds: José Rincón, 51; Javier Osuna Briceño, 39 and Gisella who had been shot in the face and died on Sunday, March 9.
Gisella was Chilean, 47 and a mother of 4 who was living in Mérida and studying a masters in education at the University of Los Andes (ULA), where both her parents were teachers. She was a supporter and activist of the Bolivarian revolution.
The working class and poor community of Pie del Tiro had been besieged and harassed by opposition roadblocks for nearly a month and every time they themselves or the National Guard cleared the way, the middle class student protesters would block the roads again. This was making it difficult for the overwhelmingly Bolivarian supporting neighbours to leave their community to go to work, to go shopping, to access public transportation.
In a video produced anonymously in Mérida (where journalists have been threatened by opposition thugs for reporting their violent protests) you can see Giselle and other neighbours from Pie del Tiro describe the situation and express their frustration at being besieged and at what they perceive as the lack of action by the government:
The killing of Giselle has been covered by the media in Venezuela and Chile, but has not even been mentioned by the mass media in Spain or any of the English language mass media in the UK and the US. Of course, the story of working class and poor Bolivarian supporters being shot and killed by violent, armed, masked opposition thugs does not fit in the picture of a “repressive regime” attacking “peaceful student protests” which the mass media internationally has been building over the last month.
Further to this killing, two other people were killed by gunshot coming from opposition thugs on Thursday, March 6, in Los Cortijos, in the East of Caracas. Here, a group of middle class opposition protesters had been besieging the state TV channel VTV Canal 8, for nearly a month, harassing the TV station workers as they were going to and coming back from work, throwing molotov cocktails at the channel’s installations, setting burning barricades, and throwing objects. This had also disrupted the activity of motorbike taxi drivers in the whole area.
Opposition supporters had taken to laying steel wire (guayas) across the streets, at 1.20 m of height, to knock down motorbike riders. On February 21, a motorbike taxi rider, Santiago Enrique Pedroza, 29, was beheaded when he collided with one such guaya, in the same part of Caracas. A woman died in Mérida, Delia Elena Lobo Arias, 40, in the same circumstances.
On March 6, a large number of organised motorbike taxi drivers decided to clear the barricades in Los Ruices, the area around VTV TV channel. When they were removing the debris from the road they were attacked by masked young men from the nearby buildings throwing stones, bottles, incendiary bombs and shooting at them with guns. As a result, a young moto-taxi driver, Jose Gregorio Amaris Castillo and a young sergeant of the National Guard, Acnes López Lyon, were shot dead. It is also very unlikely that you have heard of these four killings in the mass media.
The incidents described here, which resulted in the death of two unarmed Bolivarian revolution supporters, one National Guard sergeant, and two others as the direct result of the actions of violent opposition thugs (three shot dead, two as a result of opposition roadblocks) are an indication of what the real situation is in Venezuela right now.
A small minority of violent opposition supporters are out in the streets with the stated aim of overthrowing the democratically elected government and putting an end to the Bolivarian revolution. In many parts of the country, working class and poor neighbourhoods are starting to fight back and removing roadblocks to ensure their right to safe passage. As they do so they are being shot at by armed thugs in the opposition barricades.

Israeli Soldier Interrogates Palestinian Boy at Gunpoint
By Chris Carlson| International Middle East Media Center | March 13, 2014
The Israeli Haaretz newspaper unveiled, Thursday morning, that an Israeli soldier pointed his gun at a handcuffed Palestinian boy, during an investigation after arresting him in Nabi Saleh village, near the West Bank city of Ramallah.
The Al Ray newspaper pointed out that Israeli forces arrested four boys from Nabi Saleh village three weeks ago, under the pretext of throwing stones.
He (one suspect) was led to Benjamin police station for investigation.
There, one of the soldiers who participated in the arrest attended, and was filmed while directing his gun towards the boy in the interrogation room. The soldier left the room after investigation officers arrived, the newspaper added.
It was noted, by the court, that the documentation of the stone-throwing incident is not professional, and that the boys’ identities are in doubt.

Kiev snipers hired by Maidan leaders – leaked EU’s Ashton phone tape
Update: Estonian Foreign Ministry confirms authenticity of leaked call on Kiev snipers
RT | March 5, 2014
The snipers who shot at protesters and police in Kiev were allegedly hired by Maidan leaders, according to a leaked phone conversation between the EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton and Estonian foreign affairs minister, which has emerged online.
“There is now stronger and stronger understanding that behind the snipers, it was not Yanukovich, but it was somebody from the new coalition,” Paet said during the conversation.
“I think we do want to investigate. I mean, I didn’t pick that up, that’s interesting. Gosh,” Ashton answered.
The call took place after Estonia’s Foreign Minister Urmas Paet visited Kiev on February 25 at the peak of clashes between the pro-EU protesters and security forces in the Ukrainian capital.
Paet also recalled his conversation with a doctor who treated those shot by snipers in Kiev. She said that both protesters and police were shot at by the same people.
“And second, what was quite disturbing, this same Olga [Bogomolets] told as well that all the evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers from both sides, among policemen and then people from the streets, that they were the same snipers killing people from both sides,” the Estonian FM stressed.
Ashton reacted to the information by saying: “Well, yeah…that’s, that’s terrible.”
“So that she then also showed me some photos she said that as a medical doctor she can say that it is the same handwriting, the same type of bullets, and it’s really disturbing that now the new coalition, that they don’t want to investigate what exactly happened,” Paet said.
The Estonian FM has described the whole sniper issue as “disturbing” and added, “it already discredits from the very beginning” the new Ukrainian power.
His overall impressions of what he saw during his one-day trip to Kiev are “sad,” Paet said during the conversation.
He stressed that the Ukrainian people don’t trust the Maidan leaders, with all the opposition politicians slated to join the new government “having dirty past.”
The file was reportedly uploaded to the web by officers of Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) loyal to ousted President Viktor Yanukovich who hacked Paet’s and Ashton’s phones.
94 people were killed and another 900 injured during the standoff between police and protesters at Maidan Saquare in Kiev last month.

Ukraine’s self-proclaimed government is illegitimate – Tallinn mayor
RT | March 04, 2014
The self-declared Kiev authorities cannot solve any political problems and “lack both credentials and power” in the crisis-torn country, said the mayor of the Estonian capital of Tallinn.
“The self-proclaimed Ukrainian government was put into power by people with baseball bats,” Edgar Savisaar told Postimees newspaper. “It lacks both credentials and the capacity to solve the crisis in the country.”
According to him, the situation in Ukraine will begin stabilizing only after it “has a legitimate, democratically elected government at the helm.”
“Only after elementary public order is restored in Kiev and western Ukraine, we can start discussing the issue of providing the country with foreign aid, be it from the EU, US, Asia or from all sources simultaneously,” Savisaar said.
According to the mayor, the current government which is under the influence of radicals lacks the power to even hold free elections in the country – let alone solve other significant questions which are put in front of the nation’s self-declared officials.
“Until the next elections [on May 25] only an integral government which consists of representatives of all Ukraine’s regions may claim any legitimacy,” said Savisaar.
The Tallinn mayor believes even the presence of defense and law enforcement agencies cannot provide stability in the country, because the nation also needs strong democracy and an integrated society.
Following a wave of violent street protests, the opposition-controlled parliament ousted President Yanukovich and appointed a new government. Ten southeastern Ukrainian regions saw massive protests against the developments in the capital. Several of them, including Crimea, announced that they would not take orders from the new government and replaced the appointed governors with elected representatives.
… A group of nationalist-radical group ‘Right Sector’ broke into a City Council meeting where members of the Party of Regions were sitting in the town of Vasilkov, outside the Ukrainian capital, Kiev.
Armed members of the group entered, hinting that members of the Party of Regions should “voluntarily” resign. This was after admitting that they just invaded another local meeting, where they had successfully got other elected members of the Party of Regions to resign. The members replied that they had already done so that morning. […]
The Right Sector movement was formed in November 2013, soon after the anti-government protests in Ukraine began. They were active in the events leading to the ouster of the President Viktor Yanukovich. … Full article
Rule by oligarchs: Kiev appoints billionaires to govern east
RT | March 3, 2014
The self-proclaimed government in Kiev has appointed two of Ukraine’s richest men to govern large industrial regions in the defiant east. One of the reasons for the Maidan protest was the influence the rich have on politics in the country.
The appointments of new governors of Donetsk and Dnepropetrovsk Regions are among 18 made on Sunday by Kiev, which is struggling to consolidate power after the coup which ousted President Yanukovich last month.
The newly-appointed Dnepropetrovsk governor is Igor Kolomoysky, Ukraine’s third-wealthiest man, with an estimated fortune of $2.4 billion. He co-owns the informal commercial group Privat, which includes Ukraine’s largest bank Privatbank, which Kolomoysky heads, as well as assets in the oil, ferroalloys and food industries, agriculture and transport.
A former ally of Yulia Tymoshenko, Kolomoysky reportedly had a falling out with her and refused to finance her election campaign in 2010, which the ex-prime minister subsequently lost to Yanukovich. Kolomoysky was reported to be a principal sponsor of the UDAR party, which is one of the three fueling the street campaign to oust Yanukovich. Kolomoysky has a dual Ukrainian-Israeli citizenship and controls his business empire from Switzerland.
The new governor of Donetsk Region is Sergey Taruta, who is estimated to worth around $2 billion, putting him among the top-10 wealthiest people in Ukraine. He heads ISD, one of the biggest mining and smelting companies in the world, and also own Donetsk-based Metallurg Football Club.
Not a stranger to politics, he used to sponsor Viktor Yushchenko, who came to power in Ukraine after the Orange Revolution of 2004. Among his personal habits is a reputed love for luxurious jewelry and ostentatious gold statues, reports RT’s Peter Oliver.
The appointments will have “a positive effect on the regional aspect,” believes Vladimir Groisman, who was appointed vice-president for regional development in the self-installed government.
“They are well-known and wealthy people. They had a choice – they could buy a plane ticket or fly their own plane and go to another country and wait for the developments there. Or they could take responsibility. I respect their choice,” he said.
Among the accusations mounted on Yanukovich by protesting crowds in Kiev was the charge that he used his presidential power to take over assets of Ukrainian businessmen and make an illegal fortune for himself and his allies. Some Ukraine observers suggested that the oligarchs, threatened by presidential greed, financed the Maidan protests, seeing them as leverage on the government.
After his ouster, photos from Yanukovich’s opulent residence of gilded furniture and a private zoo in suburban Kiev made headlines worldwide. There is little doubt that many of those who sought to topple him for being corruptly enriched would eye the appointment of affluent businessmen to offices of power with a deal of suspicion.
The feeling is palpable in many comments in Ukrainian media.
“That’s good news. I’m tired of those businessmen in power,” said one sarcastic commenter at the site of the Ukrainskaya Pravda a leading online news service.
“It’s OK. The oligarchs have been controlling the regions anyway. I think they will provide order, because only they have the authority, unlike some middle-rank appointees,” soothes another one.
“Are they handing out fiefs? I’m sick of it. Is that what the people died for at the Maidan?” another commenter says.
There is also the regional aspect, which Groisman mentioned. The better-developed industrial east of Ukraine depends on business ties with Russia and would be hurt badly by the EU association agreement, which the new government wants to sign as soon as possible. Mistrust towards Kiev is growing in the east, with several regions already declaring they would not be taking orders from the capital.
The defiant regions seek greater autonomy from the central authorities. Having the right to elect their own governors, as opposed to have them appointed in Kiev, is one of the demands regularly voiced at the protest rallies in eastern and southern Ukraine.

Cop Harasses Photographer, Steals His Cellphone Battery And Attempts To Get YouTube To Pull The Incriminating Video
By Tim Cushing | Techdirt | February 24, 2014
Recording a police officer in public isn’t a crime. Well, it isn’t anything a cop can cite or arrest you for doing. Instead, a bunch of vague infractions are listed in hopes that something will stick and deter future citizen recordings.
Shawn Randall Thomas, a New York photographer, was approached by NYPD officer Efrain Rojas when he noticed Thomas filming another officer’s interaction with a turnstile jumper in a subway station. “Approached” is putting it mildly. Rojas confronted Thomas and got physical when the photographer refused to stop filming.
A New York City cop beat up and arrested a man for video recording him inside a subway station from 30 feet away Saturday night, walking up to him and getting in his face all while claiming the man was invading his personal space…
Thomas also obtained footage from another man who had recorded Rojas with his knees on Thomas’ back as he lay face down on the sidewalk just outside the sub station, seconds after Rojas had bashed his face into the pavement, busting his lip.
The injury was so bad that they had to transport him to the hospital twice during his 24-hour incarceration where doctors described him as a victim of assault.
As if the impromptu “use of force” wasn’t enough, Thomas was also charged with the following:
[Thomas] is still facing charges of resisting arrest, trespassing, disorderly conduct and obstructing government…
Here’s the video:
Note that Rojas had to come over to where Thomas was filming (nearly 30 feet away) in order to be “obstructed.” Note also that Thomas was filming in a public location, where it’s almost impossible to “trespass.” And note that the de rigueur “resisting arrest” is included only because Thomas didn’t apply his own handcuffs, hoof it to the nearest cruiser and slide into the back seat.
Here’s the description of “resisting arrest” from the arrest report itself:
Deponent further states that, at the above time and place, defendant did resist a lawful arrest by crossing defendants’ arm across defendant’s chest while deponent attempted to place defendant in handcuffs.
But it gets worse. Officer Rojas apparently grabbed Thomas’ cellphone and either deleted the footage or removed the battery in order to prevent Thomas from filming any further. (PINAC’s account of this event mentions “deletion” and Thomas using Recuva to recover the deleted footage, but the description of events only says Rojas took Thomas’ phone and pocketed the battery.) Thomas then took out his backup phone (a Blackberry) and tried to continue filming, at which point Rojas “knocked the phone out of [Thomas’] hand” and slammed him to the ground.
Either way, Rojas made an effort to prevent any further filming. The incident report filed by Rojas makes no mention of the fact that he seized a cellphone and either deleted footage or seized the phone’s battery. He also undermines the charge of trespassing by noting the area where Thomas was filming was public, which is contrary to Rojas’ filmed assertion that Thomas was “violating” his “personal space.”
Apparently, Rojas wasn’t done with feeling “violated” by Thomas’ filming. According to PINAC’s Facebook page, Officer Rojas filed a privacy complaint asking YouTube to remove the video. YouTube, fortunately, turned his request down, which means that Rojas will now have to deal with a recording that contradicts (or severely weakens) many of the claims he made in his sworn statements (the arrest report).
As PINAC and Thomas point out, the obstruction charge is especially baseless, given Thomas’ distance from the officers (approx. 30 feet compared to the report’s “close proximity”) and the fact that the entire situation appears to be completely under control by the time Officer Rojas arrives. Rojas seems to be the only cop there who viewed Thomas and his camera as somehow interfering with police business. Rojas then abandons his “partner” — who is presumably dealing with an actual criminal — solely to harass someone with a camera. If nothing else, Rojas has problems with prioritizing, giving the non-criminal (and protected) act of filming precedence over an actual law enforcement work.
Officer Rojas had multiple paths to take when he noticed a citizen filming him performing his public duties in a public place. Unfortunately, he decided to take the well-worn path and violate the rights of the photographer. And like many others, this decision has done nothing more than heap more negative publicity on the police department and the officer involved. The correct response — ignore it and do your job — still remains largely untested.
Related article




