Skip to content
Home » The Guardian’s Complicity in Censoring Dissent Exposes Deep-rooted Bias in Reporting on Venezuela

The Guardian’s Complicity in Censoring Dissent Exposes Deep-rooted Bias in Reporting on Venezuela

A phone call from the ITV News office yesterday morning jolted me back to the reality of Venezuela. To be honest, I was completely unaware that the bus driver and Venezuela’s Foreign Secretary, Nicolás Maduro, would be signing the embarrassing oil deal with London Mayor, Ken Livingstone, at City Hall. So, I quickly searched online and uncovered the entire charade. Some clauses in the “propaganda” oil agreement made me think, as dictator Chávez will provide up to $32 million a year in oil subsidies to comrade Red Ken, yet the latter and the Greater London Authority have no legal obligation to offer any services in return for Venezuela. What a fantastic deal, surely Red Ken must be one of the most expensive advocates Hugo has hired. As expected, The Guardian had something in the works; almost simultaneously with the signing of the agreement, an article by the former KGB Richard Gott was published in Comment is Free (CIF). Within minutes, the brigade of racist leftist idiots – what a redundancy… – started posting comments about how great the deal was, how the poor in Venezuela would benefit, how it would improve traffic and waste management, etc.
Not wanting this kind of nonsense to go unchallenged, I posted, as the only Venezuelan in the comments section, that the deal was nothing but a farce. This led to a tirade of attacks against me from the usual English ‘experts’ who pretend to know better than I do what’s best for Venezuela, people so far removed from reality that they dare to argue that I am not a representative of Venezuela; they are, even though they probably have never set foot in the country, don’t speak the language, don’t understand the culture, have no relatives from Venezuela, and most likely didn’t know of the country’s existence before 2002. However, not everything was bad in the eye for an eye situation. For instance, an exchange with a CIF user who posts as Zambini. This Zambini falsely claimed that my past comments about removing Chávez from power by violent means had been deleted from this site. Frankly, the episode reminded me of Dan Burnett, the Chávez apologist behind the oilwars blog, who once said that if he discovered my true identity, he would buy me a ticket to Caracas from London. It took me half an hour to figure out who this arrogant idiot was; needless to say, I’m still waiting for his promised ticket… Nevertheless, stupidity seems to be a trait of public employees on both sides of the Atlantic. By ‘blowing the whistle,’ Zambini must have thought he was ‘exposing’ me to The Guardian’s readers, as if I needed to expose myself to such a radical group. Ironically, I managed to determine that he is a GLA official and spends endless hours online defending Red Ken’s actions and attacking anyone opposing his policies, in this case, me. Zambini’s attempts to visit this site from a GLA server like gate.london.gov.uk were unsuccessful, prompting his comment; I know he was trying to access Vcrisis some time ago. I blocked access to GLA servers from this website.

But the most interesting aspect of this matter is that CIF has removed my comments regarding Zambini’s public servant personality and possible connections to Red Ken and, by extension, the entire propaganda he runs with GLA staff at City Hall. So there you have it, dear readers, censorship is not exclusive to third-rate dictators like Hugo Chávez, as their European comrades at The Guardian are equally quick to disregard uncomfortable truths.