Open letter to Larry Rohter re Oliver Stone

Dear Larry,

Your article about Hugo Chavez's latest propaganda film by Oliver Stone & co. has so nailed it, that a chorus of apologists -paid and otherwise- of the Venezuelan Supreme Leader, are foaming at the mouth, and have come out of their barracks to 'dispute' your views. Expect further 'clarifications' from Noam Chomsky et academics for totalitarianism, and, from the people in this list. Be confident that as soon as some 'evidence of US imperialism' is presented to Venezuela's elected and appointed authorities, the very Eva Golinger will publish yet another point by point 'rebuttal' in her officially funded Correo del Orinoco. Maybe even Ken Livingstone will write something for the Morning Star. That will, in chavista land, settle the score and forever discredit you and the New York Times. They'll write thousands of words, but will never address the points every sensible person and institution is raising about Chavez galloping fascism.

As a Venezuelan following the politics of my country, much before the Stones, Weisbrots, and Wilperts of this world knew the existence of Pequeña Venecia, I can only say a big thanks for taking these harmful imbeciles to task. Mind you these are the kind of people who are yet to condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the association of a democratically elected president, Chavez that is, with the leaders of America's longest and most brutal dictatorship. They are, as a matter of fact, infatuated with Fidel Castro. These fundamentalists have gone so far into the deep end, that no report containing even the slightest hint of criticism is credible, or indeed acceptable. For some people believe in god, others in Allah: this lot believes blindly in whatever Chavez tells them to.

So kudos on a job well done. Next time you speak to Stone, Ali, Weisbrot, etc., do ask them who funded the film, and the trips around LatAm, and the visits to Venezuela, and the promotional tours, and the websites where they publish their bullshit. Ask them about their credentials, their relationship with the government of Venezuela, in fact ask whether they would be willing to demonstrate that they are not on the take by showing their tax returns. I am confident they'll carry on accusing you, rather than proving you wrong.

With best wishes,
Alek Boyd

Gregory Wilpert 'clarifies' position

Gregory Wilpert has written to let me, and my readers, know that he has not misrepresented himself. His 'clarification' follows:

Just to let you and your readers know: To say that I work for Brooklyn College is not a misrepresentation. The Graduate Center for Worker Education is a part of Brooklyn College. My department chair is Sally Bermazohn, of BC's department of Political Science. The people you spoke to merely clarified that the physical location where I teach is not in the Brooklyn College campus, but I am still am employee of CUNY's Brooklyn College. The only reason I do not provide the full name of where I teach is that it's awfully long: Brooklyn College's Graduate Center for Worker Education.

Frankly, I don't know where to begin. Since becoming involved with Venezuela in or around 2002-2003: 

1. Gregory Wilpert is yet to admit that he is married to a chavista official (Carol Delgado de Wilpert, Hugo Chavez's Consul in NY); 
2. Gregory Wilpert is yet to admit that he edits a website created by a chavista official (Martin Sanchez, Hugo Chavez Consul in San Francisco, formerly in Chicago). 
3. Gregory Wilpert is yet to admit that said website is funded with Venezuelan public money. 
4. Gregory Wilpert is yet to admit that he acts as a propaganda agent for Hugo Chavez in US soil. 
5. Gregory Wilpert is yet to admit that every single one of his opinions, with regards to Venezuela, is compromised by his marital and professional relations. 

However, Gregory Wilpert wants us to believe that he is not misleading, and that is not misrepresenting himself. Gregory Wilpert wrote to me once saying he was doing what he did "because he believed in it". At my repeated questioning of his true motives, he is a German-American after all, he kept mum about his personal and professional relations with the Chavez regime. That to me is indicative of utter intellectual dishonesty. Besides, I still fail to understand why is it so difficult for these bloody advocates of Chavez to admit their relations to their paymaster, lest of course to maintain a pretence of independence and individuality in order to lend credibility to their propaganda. Were HRW to receive a letter from a bunch of people that, having no official relation to Chavez, are protesting a report that exposes the gross human rights violations that take place in Venezuela, it would surely address it on its merits, as it has done. But that wasn't a letter written out of genuine concern, it was a concerted effort led by propaganda agents, such as Gregory Wilpert, similar to the many instances whereby "upset readers" would write letters to editors of media outlets to criticise coverage, when in fact it was a response to emails sent from the Venezuela Information Office to its "rapid action" team, instructing to do so.


These people are very vocal in their support, but they will deny to the death, unless evidence pops up, that they are in any manner related to Hugo Chavez's regime. This has been the case with Eva Golinger, Michael Shellenberger and his sidekick Ted Norhaus, Roy Carson, Eric Wingerter and all of the propagandists of the now defunct Venezuela Information Office, Ken Livingstone (until evidence emerged that he was working as a consultant for Hugo Chavez), Calvin Tucker, Mark Weisbrot, Joe Kennedy, Sean Penn (until he admitted that he traveled around in PDVSA planes), mind you, all of them deny having anything to do with Chavez, yet the evidence shows that they have all, in one way or another, benefitted from Venezuelan taxpayers money, be it plane rides, salaries, expenses-paid trips, hospitality, funds, donations, energy deals, publishing, publicity, etc.


Is it fear to demonstrate friendship, admiration, and support to a man that calls terrorist Carlos The Jackal a national hero? Is it fear to the maxim "guilty by association" or "tell me who your friends are..."? Do these people dread the conclusions that any rational individual would arrive at, upon discovering their fanaticism about a warmongering, militaristic dictator that supports and befriends terrorists and rogues, has run Venezuela to the ground, and takes his cues from one of the world's most brutal dictators?

Gregory Wilpert of Venezuelanalysis married to Chavez's official

In 2004, an investigative report about the Venezuela Information Office (VIO) was published. Public records, from the Foreign Agent Registration Unit of the US Department of Justice, demonstrate that VIO is nothing more than Hugo Chavez's propaganda arm in US soil. Since, it remains a proven fact that most of the benign literature and positive coverage that has been written and published about the Venezuelan pustchist comes either from employees of the Venezuela Information Office, such as Eric Wingerter of BOREV.NET, or from people with suspect relationships with VIO, such as Mark Weisbrot of CEPR.

These propagandists, none of whom are Venezuelan, feed and quote from each other in an attempt to present a coherent, objective and detached image. More often than not, when defending Chavez's stance in international media, they are presented as "independent analysts," in order to dupe the public. This controversial case of misrepresentation is especially significant in the case of one Gregory Wilpert of Venezuelanalysis.com.

Gregory Wilpert is a German-American sociologist, who landed in Venezuela sometime in the early years of this decade. In May 2002, right after the coup of April in which Hugo Chavez was removed from power for three days, a site called Aporrea (http://aporrea.org) was registered by Martin Sanchez, a Venezuelan who was, purportedly, studying IT in the USA (Chicago) at the time. Aporrea came to be Chavez's voice in internet, reason for which it received public funding, however it is published in Spanish. Therefore an English site was also required, and thus Venezuelanalysis.com was registered in August 2003, probably by Martin Sanchez. Gregory Wilpert would soon join Sanchez in Venezuelanalysis, who since November 2004, is quoted in various online publications, among which his own, as Venezuelan Consul in Chicago. Venzuelanalysis is also funded by the Chavez regime, according to another apologist.

There is an evident conflict of interests here, accentuated by the fact that Wilpert is yet to come out of the revolutionary closet and explain his relationship with the Chavez regime. While in Venezuela, Wilpert married, literally, into the revolution. Carol Delgado Arria de Wilpert has had a rather interesting, and meteoric, rise. Mrs Wilpert has performed different roles for the revolution, from International Relations Coordinator for the National Council for the Rights of Children in Venezuela and local contact of pollster Evans & McDonough, where she shared responsibilities with another VIO contractor 'environmentalist' Michael Schellenberger, to PDVSA representative and special advisor to the Venezuelan ambassador to Colombia

In the footsteps of Sanchez, Carol Delgado Arria de Wilpert has recently been appointed as Venezuelan Consul General in New York, where Wilpert is meant to be Adjunct Professor of Political Science, Brooklyn College. Each and every opinion of Greg Wilpert about Venezuela, whether speeches, online articles or books, need to be appraised under this light, that is to say, he is married to a Venezuelan public servant and his work in Venezuelanalysis has been funded with Venezuelan public funds. As any other individual, Wilpert is entitled to his opinions. What is truly despicable, intellectually dishonest and unbecoming of someone in academia, is to cloak clearly compromised views under a mantle of independence. Alas this seems to be a treat of chavistas: the case of tax fraudster Eva Golinger, who misrepresented herself until evidence emerged, springs to mind. Oddly, while evidence of the official appointment of Mrs Wilpert suggests disregard to Venezuelan and American legislation, there does not exist one single reference, official or otherwise, about the designation of Martin Sanchez as Venezuelan Consul in Chicago. Further, it is highly probable that both Martin Sanchez and Carol Delgado Arria de Wilpert have violated US travel regulations for Diplomats and Foreign Government Officials.

There is nothing wrong with being an apologist or a political hack. Gregory Wilpert can present himself as an independent all he wants. It remains factual however that, beyond Wilpert's marriage to a Venezuelan official, his work is geared at extolling a regime led by a putschist militaristic caudillo that funds and protects narco-terrorists, and whose disregard for human, civil and political rights is amply documented.