Hugo Chavez's control of CITGO fuels IFAPSA ( Islamo-Facist And Paleo-Stalinist Alliance) anti-liberty, anti-American, and anti-Semitic hatred disguised as "social responsibility" in ad narrated by Danny Glover.

About Archives (Old Archives) Contact Search PoliticalxRay/PoliSat.Com News Troops

News in war on terrorism Frequent-flyer miles for troops Salute America's Heroes Fallen-Heroes-Fund Thanks-to-Troops Katrina-Aid

August 4, 2006--

Hugo Chavez's control of CITGO fuels IFAPSA ( Islamo-Facist And Paleo-Stalinist Alliance) anti-liberty, anti-American, and anti-Semitic hatred disguised as "social responsibility" in ad narrated by Danny Glover.·

The latest CITGO commercial on television narrated by Danny Glover attempts to cast a "social responsibility" disguise over the effects of Hugo Chavez's control of CITGO and the use of its huge revenues to fund Chavez's role as Maximum Leader of the CACASAPS component of the IFAPS Alliance. ("CACASAP" stands for "Central American, Caribbean And South American Paleo-Stalinists," and "IFAPSA" stands for "Islamo-Fascist And Paleo-Stalinist Alliance.") To view a parody of the CITGO commercial, use the "play" button in the video-box to the left.

The smooth voice of Glover in the commercial belies the virulently anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-liberty, anti-Western and (yes) anti-Semitic ideology of Paleo-Stalinism, of which Chavez seeks to be the international leader, and likewise funds his collaborative, supportive relationship with leaders of Islamo-Fascism, such as Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. CITGO's revenues have already made Chavez the "Maximum Leader" of Paleo-Stalinists in Latin America (Cuba's Castro, Bolivia's Eva Morales, Nicaragua's potential "come-back" commie, Daniel Ortega-- for links about these Paleo-Stalinists, go here) and have well-positioned him to export Paleo-Stalinist "revolution" throughout Latin American (including Mexico). His recent purchase of advanced fighter-planes and military equipment and supplies from Russia further enhance his capabilities as well as exposing the shallowness of Vladimir Putin's claim to be a friend of the United States. Meanwhile, Castro's Cuba is on the verge of becoming a Caribbean "Venezuela" via contracts with China for oil-drilling in the Caribbean near Cuba. Meanwhile, China's control of the ports at both ends of the Panama Canal provides China with a potentially valuable choke-hold on American interests.

Not only is Chavez using CITGO's huge revenues to catapult him into unchallenged leadership among the Paleo-Stalinists in Latin America, but he's also using the economic and political clout derived from such revenues to lend tactical and strategic support to Islamo-Fascists such as Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Given Chavez's cozy relationship with Ahmadinejad as well as a potential alliance with his ideological soul-brother, Kim Il Jung of North Korea, how long will it be before Chavez will have nuclear weapons to supplement the advanced weaponry Putin has agreed to sell him?

We need to determine a way to make it too costly to Putin for him to complete the proposed arms-deal with Chavez. What can we do? Perhaps we should announce our potential willingness to sell (give, if necessary) advanced American fighters to a number of Eastern European countries bordering Russia. (Would that create an incentive such as Kennedy's giving up missiles in Turkey in exchange for Khrushchev's missiles in Cuba?)

Regarding Chavez's cash cow, the only thing I can do as an individual is the same that I do with respect to the likes of Danny Glover-- I make sure that none of my money ends up in their pockets. However, there's a lot that American politicians can do: (1) immediately enact legislation for oil-drilling in Alaska and the Gulf of Mexico and within other territorial waters controlled by the United States; (2) immediately enact legislation to create strong incentives for construction of more refineries; (3) immediately enact legislation to create strong incentives for new nuclear power plants; and (4) immediately enact legislation creating strong incentives for converting coal, shale and sand-tar into fuels. Opponents of such actions would claim that it would be "years" before any such actions could significantly reduce our dependence on foreign oil. That is correct, but what they ignore is that the very acts of passing such legislation would depress the price of oil. Why? At present, it isn't insufficient supply compared to demand that is keeping the price of oil so high. Instead, it's what anyone with a rudimentary understanding of the marketplace knows-- i.e., that a large portion of the current price of oil is dependent upon fear and uncertainty. When suppliers (and middle-men) realize that the processes have been set in motion to change the balance, such realization will in and of itself create downward pressure on prices.

--Jim Wrenn, Editor at PoliSat.Com.

Note: The permanent link to this installment is http://PoliSat.Com/CITGO.htm where there are other versions of the video for other sizes/connection-speeds.

Sites that Feature PoliSat.Com: