Main opposition parties in Venezuela organized a petition against the
film and garnered 7,000 signatures.
The documentary tells the tale of one of the shortest Presidential
overthrows in Latin American history. On April 11, 2002, Venezuelan
President Hugo Chavez was removed from power by a coalition of military
officials and business leaders. But the attempted coup d’etat failed
and Chavez returned to office two days later.
The documentary’s two Irish filmmakers Kim Bartley and Donnacha
O'Briain happened to be in the Presidential Palace both when Chavez was
removed and when he returned.
Venezuelanalysis.com
TRANSCRIPT
AMY GOODMAN: First we're going to play a clip of the
documentary.
Again, it's called "The Revolution Will Not Be
Televised."
[cheering]
NARRATOR: In February 2002, Chavez announced his plan to
shake up the state oil company and to put his own people on the
Management board. The war had begun.
[speaking in Spanish]
NARRATOR: The privately-owned Media began calling on
Venezuelans to demonstrate, suggesting that Chavez's attempts to
control the oil industry were a direct attack on their prosperity.
DEMONSTRATOR: He wants us to become a Cuba, he wants this to
become a communist country. There is no doubt about it!
NARRATOR: At the head of the opposition to Chavez were two
key figures: Pedro Carmona, the president of Venezuela's largest
business federation, and Carlos Ortega, head of the CTV, a trade union
with strong ties to the old political system. Both men traveled to
Washington to meet with high-ranking members of the Bush
administration and to discuss president Chavez.
GEORGE TENNET: ...of course its important because they're
the third largest supplier of Petroleum. I would say that Mr. Chavez -
and the State department may say this - probably doesn't have the
interest of the United States at heart.
MAN: I'm sure that all of us are going to be watching very
closely to see what goes on in Venezuela and with president Chavez, in
particular.
NARRATOR: That same day, Carmona called an opposition march
to the headquarters of the state oil company.
DEMONSTRATOR: This is a conspiracy by U.S. imperialism --
the C.I.A. and the media are behind this dirty war.
[shouting]
NARRATOR: On the morning of April 11, the opposition
demonstration set out on its march to state oil company. Meanwhile, on
the other sides of the town, thousands of Chavez supporters have
gathered outside the presidential palace in a show of solidarity with
the government.
[shouting]
Back at the state oil company headquarters, the leaders of the
opposition march have decided, in violation of the law, to change the
rules. The plan was to get the crowd to march on the presidential
palace.
[shouting]
DEMONSTRATOR: Chavez is a killer!- [shouting]
NARRATOR: We were outside the palace with the Chavez
supporters when rumors reached the crowd that the opposition march was
on its way and the mood turned to violent.
DEMONSTRATOR (in spanish): This is a conspiracy by U.S.
imperialism by the C.I.A. The Media are behind this dirty war.
NARRATOR: The opposition march was fast approaching and some
in the vanguard seemed ready for a fight. With thousands of Chavez
supporters still surrounding the palace a confrontation seemed
imminent. Then at about 2:00 p.m., we saw the opposition march arrive.
The army tried to act as a buffer between the two groups.
[shouting]
NARRATOR: We moved back into the heart of the Chavez crowds
when all of a sudden the firing started.
[sirens]
NARRATOR: We couldn't tell where the shots were coming from,
but people were being hit in the head.
[gunshots]
NARRATOR: Soon it became clear that we were being shot at by
snipers. One in four Venezuelans carry hand guns and soon some of the
Chavez supporters began to shoot back in the direction the sniper fire
seemed to be coming from.
WITNESS (in Spanish): One of the channels had a camera
opposite the palace that captured images of people shooting from the
bridge. It looks like they are shooting at the opposition march below,
but you can see them, they themselves are ducking. They are clearly
being shot at, but the shots of them ducking were never shown. The
Chavez supporters were blamed. The images were manipulated and shown
over and over again to say that Chavez supporters had assassinated
innocent marchers.
ANDRE CESARA, RCTV (in Spanish): Look at that Chavez
supporter. Look at him empty his gun. That Chavez supporter has just
fired on the unarmed peaceful protesters below.
NARRATOR: What the TV stations didn't broadcast was this
camera angle which clearly shows the streets below were empty. The
opposition march had never taken that route. With this manipulation,
the deaths could now be blamed on Chavez. Back in the palace, there
was total confusion. Nobody seemed to know what was happening or what
information to believe.
Chavez was locked in a meeting with his ministers in the
presidential palace, as they tried to establish what was happening in
the rest of the country. Although rumors were flying that channel 8,
the state TV station had been sabotaged, at around 9:00 p.m., the
ministers were able to broadcast live from the palace to the channel's
Mobile unit.
REPORTER (in Spanish): This is channel 8 state TV. For
officers who may be confused by the media's lies, it was they who
massacred us.
NARRATOR: At 9:30, the signal was cut. We now found
ourselves with a small group of Chavez's minister, cut off from the
outside world. Our only source of information, the private TV
stations. We could see on TV that the palace had been surrounded by
tanks.
TELEVISION REPORT: ...so we ask those protecting the
President not to resist.
NARRATOR: At around 10:00 p.m., members of the military high
command arrived at the palace to demand Chavez's resignation. They
would not let us enter the room. Some time later, the first minister
arrived out from the president's office. Chavez was refusing to sign a
resignation and in response to generals threatened to bomb the palace.
CHAVEZ SUPPORTER (in Spanish): The C.I.A. is behind this.
Everyone knows it. We have proof of plans for a coup. They can't
destroy history.
NARRATOR: By this point, most civilians had been evacuated.
Those who remained knew that if the palace was bombed, there would be
no way out. At about 3:30 a.m., one of the ministers came out to talk
to us. Chavez had decided to hand himself over to the generals to
avoid the bombing of the palace. But he was still refusing to resign
as president.
VENEZUELAN MINISTER FOR THE ENVIRONMENT (in Spanish): It is
finally clear that this is a coup d'etat. The president has refused to
resign.
NARRATOR: With five minutes left until the bombing deadline
expired, Chavez was led away.
[chanting]
NARRATOR: One hour later, Venezuela awoke to a new regime
and to an extraordinary TV moment in which all was revealed.
TELEVISION
REPORTER (in Spanish): Good morning! We have a new
President.
NEW PRESIDENT (in Spanish): I must thank Venevision and RCTV
I must say thanks to all the TV channels.
AMY GOODMAN: And there you have an excerpt of "the
revolution will not be televised" -- and it won't be shown at
this year's film festival of Amnesty International. We are joined
right now by Don Wright, who organized the Amnesty International's
film festival in Vancouver, Canada. Can you talk about Amnesty's
decision to, first, show this film, and then, pull it?
DON WRIGHT: Yes. Thank you for that. We had our committee
review the film, along with dozens and dozens of other films for
consideration in our festival. We did not initially choose it for our
festival, but a film we were interested in was not available to us and
so we did put it in.
But we became aware that the -- That there were concerns about the
film and that, in fact, that unknown to us there had been a lot of
controversy around the content of the film and, in particular, the
polarized and partisan controversy that was following the film and
that, we felt, when we choose films we strive to choose films that are
nonpartisan and nonpolitical to reflect the mandate of our
organization. This one clearly was far more polarized and presented a
particular perspective that moved well beyond what we normally look
for in a film for our festival.
AMY GOODMAN: Now, I just want to clarify. This is Canada
Amnesty International, separate from Amnesty International in the
United States.
DON WRIGHT: Yes, it is. And the festival itself is in
Vancouver. It is actually a very small festival. We're really
surprised by the amount of attention that it has gathered. It's
probably the smallest film festival in Vancouver and the smallest -- A
very small event to attract this much attention. It's really quite
taken us by surprise.
JUAN GONZALES: We're also joined here in our studio by
Alexandra beach, a Venezuelan-American who writes for "The Daily
International Review of Venezuela," which is posted on one of the
main Chavez opposition group's web-sites and she has written
extensively on the flaws of the documentary that Chavez opposition
groups are claiming rewrites history in favor of president Chavez.
Welcome to Democracy Now!
ALEXANDRA BEECH: Thank you very much.
JUAN GONZALES: Could you tell us your perspective on the
film and the concerns you have about it?
ALEXANDRA BEECH: Well, I first of all want to say that --
Well, it is an honor to be here with you guys. I have problems with
the film mainly because of what it doesn't present, which is that the
general that was the chief of the armed forces at the time, Lucas
Lingon, announced a little after midnight that Chavez [speaking in
spanish], Chavez's resignation was requested and he accepted it and
the gentleman is still - Lucas Lingon is - The general is still a
member of Chavez's inner circle, of Chavez's cab nets and, you know,
that wasn't emphasized enough in the film. Also, the fact that the
opposition isn't represented.
And that set off -- His announcement set off a whole set of events,
including the fact that people like me were convinced that Chavez had
resigned. So one of the questions that needs to be explored is why was
a member of Chavez's inner circle that the president had resigned.
That had a huge impact on the country. The other thing it doesn't
emphasize is that Chavez activated something called a Plana Villa,
which gives the military discretionary action over civilians and
protesters and a lot of senior military officials had a big problem
with the activation of Plana Villa because that lets ordinary soldiers
use weapons of war against citizens and that is another issue that the
film doesn't emphasize. The third thing is the fact that the
opposition is presented as either a neighborhood meeting that took
place in June of 2000, women that were concerned for their safety over
getting defense training from this gentleman, the woman who's
obviously really crazy and upset and screaming about Cuba, people that
are only white. I actually brought footage with me of opposition
marches where, you know, where it's a large population. It's a lot of
people of all colors march in our marches that, you know -- And it is
not just whites versus -- And, you know, the other interesting thing
is that, I'm sorry, is the whole issue of oil.
That you have Tennet saying, well, there's always this is sort of
conspiracy about this is all about oil interests when if Bush is
connected to oil, oil interests have never have -- In recent history
not profit so much as they have under Chavez because a lot of --
Because a lot of the production has been handed over to oil companies
at really great rates. Obviously through Chavez's participation in
OPEC oil prices have been increasingly high.
So, to say, well, this is about oil interests, actually needs to be
explored a little further, especially when you look at what Venezuela
receives from oil revenues and how that gets split up.
AMY GOODMAN: Alexandra Beach, we have to break for a minute
and then we'll come back and get comment from the Eva Goliner-Moncaba,
executive director of the Venezuela Solidarity Committee in New York.
Still on the line with us is Don Wright, who organized the Canada
Amnesty International film festival in Vancouver.
Stay with us.
[Music Break]
AMY GOODMAN: Roy Campbell on Democracy Now!, "The War
and Peace Report."
I'm Amy Goodman with Juan Gonzalez. As we talk about the pulling of
the film "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" from the
Canada international film festival in Vancouver, on the line with us
is the organizer of that event, Don Wright in Canada.
In the studio, Alexandra Beach, Venezuelan-American who writes for
the "International Daily Review of Venezuela," which is
posted on the main Chavez opposition websites and the executive
director of the Venezuela solidarity committee in New York. You've
come out strongly against the pulling of this film "The
Revolution Will Not Be Televised" from the amnesty film festival.
Why?
EVA GOLINER-MONCABA: Well, I mean, first of all, this film
is an extraordinary documentary of human rights violations that
occurred during the coup in Venezuela that, in fact, were suppressed
internally in Venezuela as well as in international media due to a
media blackout internally in Venezuela, since the Media have control,
the private media have the primary monopoly on information. So, during
the actual events of the coup, which the film itself shows, what was
going on during the time periods when people were coming out into the
streets to support Chavez and their Constitutional president and
government, the media was showing cartoons and old movies. They
weren't even letting people within Venezuela who weren't in Caracas,
in the center of the capital, to know what was actually happening in
the country. So, I mean, when this documentary came out, it was very
revealing and insightful to people, to Venezuelans as well as the
international community who, in fact, to this day, are still confused
about what exactly went on in Venezuela. So, I mean, the fact that
Amnesty International until Canada, independently chose to include the
film in their festival and that they would pull it due to pressure
from petitions from opposition groups to Chavez and actually their
petitions outline errors they allege in the film itself, which really
aren't valid arguments, I mean, we find this to be outrageous, pretty
much. That Amnesty, which is a supposed organization that is
promoting, you know, human rights in internationally and that they
would consider themselves -- Well, they would consider the film not to
be about human rights, which is what we were told by them in Venezuela
and in Canada and the fact that they would say that they don't want to
get involved in any kind of a controversy or politics.
But I mean, I would venture to say that human rights issues are
highly political.
JUAN GONZALES: Well, you know, I'd like to ask Mr. Wright,
as a journalist, I'm well aware that in the days after the coup,
probably the single most televised image around the world in
Venevision and American media was that image of those, quote, Chavez
supporters on the bridge firing, supposedly, into a crowd.
And so when I first saw this documentary I was astounded by another
perspective of what had happened there. There's no doubt that
certainly on Spanish-language television here in the United States as
well as English language, that was a dominant image that still to this
day has come down in folklore or what Happened in that April coup. And
so I'm wondering, when you say that you think this particular film is
overly partisan for amnesty standards, if you could expound on that a
little more.
DON WRIGHT: Sure. I think I needed to clarify that the
decision to include the film and then to not include the film was very
much a local decision that we didn't feel we had the capacity to
properly put the film in context and properly examine the, and respond
to the film itself. We feel that it was an error for us to consider
that film based on the lack of information that we had about the
circumstances of the film. So that was very much a local decision by a
small group of amnesty members that are part of our planning
committee.
EVA GOLINER-MONCABA: I just wanted to comment on that
particular image that was broadcast around the world that was used in
Venezuela as the justification for the coup as well as through
international media, that the journalists from Venevision has now
admitted that the image and that it was a manipulated image, that the
voiceover does was, in fact, inaccurate, that he had no idea of who
the Chavez supporters were firing at. And that it was later shown,
through the video -- Or through the film you see that they were firing
actually at, you know, the snipers who were firing at them from down
on the street below and from up on buildings above. And I actually
brought a picture, you can't see it on the radio, but I don't know if
you could focus on this, but it shows the metropolitan police in
Caracas who were on the opposition side with latex gloves on, with
their firing guns. And they were actually down on the ground firing up
at the bridge, at the Chavez supporters. This was actually taken by a
photographer who happened to be down on the street. Luckily was in
that area and didn't get found. She was later beaten by the same
metropolitan police, but not because they found her camera, luckily.
So, these photos were released and this actually gave the government a
lot of proof on to what exactly occurred during those events around
Puente Laguna, which is the name of that bridge.
And we would just question, as the government has as well, why
would they be wearing latex gloves?
AMY GOODMAN: Hmm. Alexandra Beach?
ALEXANDRA BEACH: I don't know the answer to that. But what
we think that the person who answered why they were shooting was
actually the gentleman in the vest. When he was arrested, one of the
interesting things that we have in Venezuela is that pretty much
everything takes place on camera. Everything in Venezuela is
televised. And so when he was being arrested, they asked him why he
was shooting and he said he was shooting to defends the revolution and
to defends an ideology. And so then they said do you regret it? And he
said, well, I don't know. So, to present this as them shooting in
self-defense is really a stretch of -- Really a stretch of what was
going on. And also, you know, with the issue of the snipers, you know,
if they were standing on buildings as many people have alleged, the
buildings are on the presidential palace were being guarded by
Chavez's guards because of the severity of the situation. So, if
snipers had access to the top of these buildings, it -- You know, and,
again, I'd like the ask and I would challenge here the government to
investigate what it was. I mean, it is the government's responsibility
to investigate who the snipers were. And to this day, we don't know
who the snipers were.
AMY GOODMAN: Alexandra beach, just a question. Would you
character what Happened on April 11, April 12 as a coup?
ALEXANDRA BEACH: You know, your producer asked me that
question -- Your producer asked me that question yesterday on the
phone and I think it is an important question and I would almost have
to speak to everyone involved to say yes or no. And my visceral
reaction is that it wasn't premeditated because of the irrationality
of the events of those two days. I absolutely don't agree and I don't
know anyone that agrees with what the interim government did, reacted
to on those days. Was ate military reaction? Yes. Was it a military
reaction to a chaotic situation in which people were dropping dead on
both sides? Yes. It was a military reaction.
AMY GOODMAN: And Carmona, his role? What about that?
ALEXANDRA BEECH: Carmona, I feel sorry for him, really. The
guy is teaching a college course in Bogata, Colombia, and I don't
think he has many friends because of what he did on that day. I dont'
think I can say a lot about him. Obviously he had no political
experience business in being in that presidential palace and that just
shows that it was -- I don't know what the American express is of
[Spanish phrase] you know, people were make decisions as events
happened and most of the decisions were extremely bad ones.
JUAN GONZALES: The thing that strikes me -- Latin America
has had conflicts, has had revolutions, has had polarized societies in
many countries over the years. But the astounding to me in this
particular situation is the role of the mass media, that in essence,
clearly by the -- by that televised shot the day afterwards, that the
gustavos uneros and univision were active participants, not just in
terms of reporting the events, but they were apparently participants
and conspirators in the decision.
And that's why when you say everything was televised, everything
was televised except perhaps the most important day of the events
which was the day of the coup itself.
ALEXANDRA BEECH: I actually have a little contention with
that because one of the things that we have -- One of the phenomenon
that we have in Venezuela and you sort of have to live there to
understand why it is a phenomenon, is the government can force
privately-owned networks at any point, any time of day to air what its
content -- Whatever is airing on state television. So between April 8
and April 11, Chavez used this mechanism 31 times and then two times
on April 11, he forced networks to air his speeches.
Now, normally that mechanism is in place obviously for national
security. But Chavez uses it to talk about his daughter's turtle or to
talk about his sex life or whatever. So, on that evening, we were
watching television, those of us that weren't on the streets.
I have friends also on the street. But we were watching television.
When Chavez came on television and said everything was normal. Now
article 58 of our Constitution, which calls for [speaking in Spanish],
you know, if you want to translate that...
JUAN GONZALES: A timely and truthful Information.
ALEXANDRA BEECH: ...the networks used that to split the
screen, had Chavez talk on one sides and people dropping on the other.
Then Chavez immediately cut the signals of all the private television
networks. I think there have been sins on both sides.
AMY GOODMAN: Just speeding this up because we have one more
guest to talk about the issue of censorship and that is Steve Rendell,
going to another movie and that is the one that CBS has just pulled.
EVA GOLINER-MONCABA: Well, I think it is integral and
imperative to point out that the private media have a museum on
information and they don't ever broadcast any of the government's
achievements, anything about pro-government supporters, which is part
of the reason why the government has been forced to use their state
channel and occasionally on important -- During important events to
use national broadcasting method where they cut into private channels,
which is something that I think most countries have anyway. But Chavez
doesn't use it frivolously. That is a ridiculous allegation.
To purchase an audio or video copy of this entire program, call
1 (800) 881-2359.
