A bit of history: originally military dictators ran Venezuela. Chavez overthrew them, and created a democracy. (The corporate media told you this, right? Right?) Then he was re-elected, which is why the corporate media calls his a “dictator”. His main flaw is that he thinks that Venezuela’s oil does not belong to George W Bush.

Quote from indymedia:

"Those who have lived in South America, esp the basin of El Caribe (Venezuela-Colombia) know that the population is predominantly Mestizo, mixed race, partly Black, White, and Indian.

...Check out this photo and you will see that those "celebrating" the coup are members of a very elite group in Venezuela, white skinned almost pure-blooded descendants of the Spaniards...

I lived in the region for two years, and can say with near certainty that the people in these photos are very elite members of society. Look carefully, you will see they are all White, and not a single "Moreno" (brown) or Mestizo amongst them, much less any Blacks, who are about as numerous in that region as in the US."

Aryan elite proudly admits it is a junta:

Note the "junta" sign. And the makeup. And the earrings. These people are not starving peasants.

(Side note: the caption on this photo was wrong. It said Venezuelan workers holds national flags and a poster which reads: "Chavez is enough"" Even someone who knows now Spanish can figure out the word "Chavez" appears nowhere - my crude translation reads: "Enough is enough [Says the] Patriotic Junta of Venezuela". I know it makes no difference, but it's important to point out once again how trustworthy the corporate media is.)

Popular uprising, boiling over with rage? Why are nearly 100% of the participants white and rich in a mostly poor and brown city? And why are they having so much fun? Caption: "People wave Venezuelan flags during a Mass to honor the people who were killed during the recent protests..." they are not mourning the dead, they are dancing on their graves! To these pampered aristocrats coups are some kind of fun-filled tradition.

They may look cute with their lipstick and makeup, but look who is mingling and collaborating with them: the same military that the corporate media claims shot them!

Still think these people are cuddly? One reason they are so outraged is because the Supreme Court wanted to bring to justice a CIA-trained right-wing Cuban terrorist, who murdered 67 innocent people in cold blood. Needless to say these people are close to the ex-Cuban ex-aristocrats, who invented plane bombings, highjackings, and modern terrorism in general.

Here is a your typical "violent" Chavez supporter. Note that he, like the majority of the population, is darker. Note that he is being arrested by the police who are supposedly helping him shoot people. Note also how peaceful the rally is, they are not even interfering with the arrest. Nobody is even yelling or going limp or anything.

Chavez ordered his police to commit suicide? Apparently that’s what the corporate media is saying! Are you as stupid as they think you are?

Caption: "A Venezuelan presidential guard is seen dead behind Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas, Venezuela, Thursday, April 11, 2002. Clashes broke out between supporters of President Chavez and the opposition after an opposition march that arrived at Miraflores. (AP Photo/Fernando Sanchez, El Universal)"

(Note: it did not "arrive" as if magically transported by a wizard, the riot was directed straight to the palace and into supporters, obviously with the sole intent of violently attacking them and then overthrowing a democratically elected government.)

Compare this man to the Aryans with the junta signs. Clearly a Chavez supporter.

More dead. While the photographer was careful not to show a single face in this photo, the arms give it away - these are non-white Chavez supporters. (There is a second photo of this scene without even the arms visible.

Let’s not forget the injured. Was this a "transition" or a KKK race riot?

Another dead. Again, no Aryans in sight.

(Warning: next photo has brains splattered all over. You might lose your lunch.)

Two things to point out here. Notice the cleaning crew - they are locals, non-white and working class. The "uprising" all came from the suburbs.

Point two: according to the media, civilian supporters with pistols did the killing.

Though the race of the victim is not visible, you can see he was hit with a headshot by something very powerful - ie. a rifle fired by a trained sniper.

Caption: "EDITORS NOTE GRAPHIC CONTENT People walk by a young man killed in clashes in Caracas April 11, 2002. At least six people were killed and more than 80 injured as shooting broke out during a massive street protest by opponents of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. REUTERS/Kimberly White"

What do they mean, massive street protest? When a single window is broken at a left-wing rally, it is labelled a "violent riot". Even the corporate media showed the coup participants pelting unhelmeted police with stones and bottles, yet it is still just a "street protest".

In fact, when I did a yahoo photo search for "Venezuela riot" all I got was two pictures of "riot police". When they attacked an embassy, which by most definitions is legally and technically TERRORISM they are still called "protestors" and "demonstrators": "Demonstrators vandalized at least three cars in front of the embassy, breaking windows, puncturing tires and pouring white paint inside — thinking the vehicles belonged to the former members of Chavez's government."

All of these photos prove the accuracy of this first-hand report from Venezuela

http://www.zmag.org/content/LatinAmerica/wilpertcoup.cfm

Imagine if this happened in America: Every ten minutes, on every TV station, an anti-Bush rally is advertised. Then all the businesses in America dismiss their workers for the day, and the media calls it a "general strike". Dispite this, only a hundred thousand people show up. Then the military direct the march onto the White House, and starts shooting Bush supporters. Then Bush is arrested and blamed for shooting his own supporters!

The media then calls Bush "a failed dream" (AP). Another headline reads "Clashes mar transition". In fact, the entire coup is just a "clash" according to yahoo news. Others call the coup an "interruption in democratic rule."

Oh and the whole thing is organized by another country:

"The International Monetary Fund has indicated it supports a "transitional government" for Venezuela. The Caracas daily El Nacional says the IMF is willing to bankroll those who remove Chavez from office. James Petras, a professor at New York State University, who was in Chile in the early 1970s and has studied the subversion of the Allende government, says that "the IMF and financial institutions are fabricating a familiar crisis. The tactics used are very similar to those used in Chile. Civilians are used to create a feeling of chaos, and a false picture of Chavez as a dictator is established, then the military is incited to make a coup for the sake of the country."

Even the corporate Associated Press admits that Chavez was always more popular than his opponents.

Why? Because Chavez:

"cracked-down on corruption; promoted educational reform which schooled over 1 million children for the first time and doubled investment in education...reduced official unemployment from 18% to 13%; introduced a large-scale micro-credit program for the poor and for women; reformed the tax system which dramatically reduced tax evasion ...lowered infant mortality from 21% to 17%; tripled literacy courses; modernized the legal system..."

The Lav Vegas sun admits "Shortly after he took office in 1999, Chavez issued a decree requiring all public hospitals to attend to people without insurance. Under previous governments, the poor often were turned away."

And, as the corporate media Reuters admits, his economy has "one of the highest growth rates in Latin America."

The corporate media, who claim to be capable of seeing the future, have called it an "interruption in democratic rule" and the IMF calls it a "transition". In fact:

"...elected mayors, governors, and legislators have been detained...Military officers supportive of the president have also been arrested. Assembly member Tarek William Saab, the official "defender of human rights" has been detained on grounds of "delitos de opinion" (crime of opinion). The entire Supreme Court of Justice, all members of the National Assembly, the National Electoral Council, the Attorney General, and the Controller General of the Republic have all been removed from office. There is no rule of law except that based on the junta’s initial decree upon seizing power. While not yet at the extremes reached in Chile under Pinochet, the situation is eerily reminiscent of that era."

Sometimes they end their outrageous claims with "military officers said." And which military officers would that be?

Oh right, the ones that just illegally seized power and took the elected president of Venezuela hostage at gunpoint? THOSE military officers?????

Now that the truth about Chavez supporters being shot is coming out, suddenly leaders are not to blame for police shootings, as claimed by the Bush administration:

"Police [my insertion: at the time controlled by the "interim government"] fired at protesters in various Caracas slums [Which means the victims are pro-Chavez] Saturday, wounding several. "We have every right to protest, but they are gunning us down out there," said Edgar Paredes, his clothes soaked in blood as he brought his wounded brother to a hospital. He didn’t know who shot Luis. [Did the media expect him to ask their names?] Like most violent demonstrations here, gunfire can erupt from any side." Eh? According to the Bush doctrine, if people are shot, you have to overthrow the leaders. Maybe he only means ELECTED leaders.

More on who did the killing.