The title of a recently released CNN article is "US Report: Chavez Moving to Silence Media Critics". Of course, this is not good, but the absence of free speech is a fundamental characteristic of a dicatorship.

The second and third sentences set the tone: According to a report released by the Open Source Center, a US government department which tranlates and analyzes foreign media reports, Chavez is " moving forcefully to silence critics". This is a regular part of life for dictators. They must "force" their way on people who disagree with them.

The third sentence is "The relationship between PRIVATELY OWNED media in Venezuela and the LEFTIST Chavez has never been rosy". Again, this isn't surprising because the Venezuelan media is PRIVATELY OWNED, while Chavez works for the government or, more accurately, Chavez is the government and when one person is the government with the idea that only he is right, they have a right to suppress all opposition. With this in mind how can the relationship between the dictatorial Chavez and the dissenting media possibly be "rosy"?

According to the unclassified intelligence report allegedly released on August 3, "The media crimes bill is the most blatant example of the government's STEADY ENCROACHMENT (i.e. interference) on media freedom IN AN EFFORT TO ESTABLISH A MEDIA MONOPOLY and STIFLE FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION". Unfortunately, this is the way of life in dictatorial societies such as Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, Cuba and China.

The Venezuelan government retorted in a fact sheet statement: "As usual, much disinformation has shaped the debate surrounding these developments".

So what's causing all this back and forth? "At the same time Chavez was extoling these two measures, supporters of his government attacked the Globovision television studio, one of the few remaining stations that gives a voice to the opposition". Of course Chavez the dictator wouldn't be in favor of that.

"In the August 3 attack more than 30 members of a pro-government party THREW TEAR GAS AT THE STUDIO AND INJURD THREE PEOPLE. The leader of the attack, ARDENT Chavez supporter Lina Ron was arrested". As expected, "Chavez condemned the incident", but "last week, a group of people alleged to be among his supporters attacked a group of journalists who were passing out leaflets in the street". These journalists were only carying out their professional duties.

According to Carlos Lauria, Americas' program coordinator for the Committee to Protect Journalists, "The harassment (of journalists) IS A PERMANENT CONDITION" because in dictatorial societies, ordinary folks don't have a say in the affairs of their own country and the government is always right.

According to Robert Rivard, chairman of the Inter-American Press Association's Commitee on Freedom of the Pess and Information, " Freedom of expression IN GENERAL, FOR EVERYONE, is under attack in these countries. They all (i.e. the government officials in dictatorial societies) all have A DEEP, ABIDING DISRUST OF JOURNALISTS AND FREEDOM OF THE PRESS". These people may not have any reason to keep journalists from expressing unbiased opinions about what's going on except perhaps that 'We don't like you guys so what you have to say is basically meaningless and pointless which essentially means that you are wasting your breath'.

Finally, according to UNESCO Secretary-General Koichiro Masuura, " There can be no feedom of expression, or even democacy, in the absence of media pluralism". This is equivalent to someone saying 'I'm not going to change no mater what you say, so save your breath'. If someone says that, then there is absolutely no point in carrying on that conversation anymore.