Chavez Until 2031 ?

Dirk Gently

U.S. imposes sanctions on Venezuela for, wait for it....... "lack of help in the war against terror" :rolleyes:

What about the U.S. refusing to extradite terrorists wanted by Venezuela for bombings? It seems certain terrorists are exempt from the U.S. war on terror. What exactly has Venezuela done to warrant sanctions? Is calling for dialogue being unhelpful in the march to war against so called terror? What about the school of Americas where the U.S. military trains Latin American military officers in terrorist tactics such as torture and murder gangs. Obviously this is acceptable behavior to the U.S. but having diplomatic relations with countries the U.S. wishes to attack amounts to "a lack of help" in the war on terror.
No doubt Sand will be along in a while to explain it all to us.

BBC

MSN

VENEZUELA REACTION

RTE

mr_angry

Yup. Apparently "not being all that helpful" is a valid reason for sanctions these days. Regardless of people's opinions of Chavez, left-wing government, or the re-distribution of wealth, the US is making itself look utterly retarded with this one.

Hogmeister B

mr_angry wrote:

Yup. Apparently "not being all that helpful" is a valid reason for sanctions these days. Regardless of people's opinions of Chavez, left-wing government, or the re-distribution of wealth, the US is making itself look utterly retarded with this one.

Unbelievable isn't it?! Although Venezuela are should count emselves lucky- when Afghanistan failed to assist the US' little adventure they bombed it to rubble and starved the population. Failing to assist in that instance meant refusing to extradite 'terrorists' unless the Americans produced some evidence against them.

Dirk Gently

How can the U.S. accuse Venezuela of being unhelpful when they release terrorists wanted by Venezuela in their custody?

U.S. hypocrisy <--- an example of the U.S. being “unhelpful” in the war on terror.

This has to be one of the most blatant and transparent acts of aggression by the U.S. towards Venezuela, even by their shaky standards. Declaring them a country of “concern”, one step down from the axis of evil in an attempt to declare Venezuela a terrorist state.

It will be interesting to see the international reaction to this, if any at all.
Will their be condemnation of the U.S. attempt to demonise Venezuela or will countries just sit back and accept it, maybe joining in with sanctions of their own?

Parsley

[QUOTE=clown bag

It will be interesting to see the international reaction to this, if any at all.
Will their be condemnation of the U.S. attempt to demonise Venezuela or will countries just sit back and accept it, maybe joining in with sanctions of their own?[/QUOTE]

Condemn the US. Ha ha, good one. Pretty much no developed world govt has said anything to support Chavez or Morales; the ones who have made any comment at all followed the American line- ie, disgraced themselves by making unfounded and hypocritical allegations.

For instance Tony Blair said Chavez should 'abide by international standards of democracy'. Yes, that is the same Tony Blair who has power with 19% of the registered vote, who lied to his country to justify an invasion and having said after Live8 that Ethiopia's debt was forgiven forced, along with other western leaders, the Ethiopians to pay $10 billion dollars first (in a famine year).

Parsley

clown bag wrote:

It will be interesting to see the international reaction to this, if any at all.
Will their be condemnation of the U.S. attempt to demonise Venezuela or will countries just sit back and accept it, maybe joining in with sanctions of their own?

Condemn the US. Ha ha, good one. Pretty much no developed world govt has said anything to support Chavez or Morales; the ones who have made any comment at all followed the American line- ie, disgraced themselves by making unfounded and hypocritical allegations.

For instance Tony Blair said Chavez should 'abide by international standards of democracy'. Yes, that is the same Tony Blair who has power with 19% of the registered vote, who lied to his country to justify an invasion and having said after Live8 that Ethiopia's debt was forgiven forced, along with other western leaders, the Ethiopians to pay $10 billion dollars first (in a famine year).

Incidentally, the largest party grouping in the EU parliament boycotted Morales' speech there yesterday, which is a disgrace. They attempted to pass a motion accusing him of 'violating human rights' (ie of corporations) by nationalising gas. Apparently it's not a violation of human rights to leave a country's people starving and in poverty while you make lavish fortunes out of their natural gas (which, incidentally, you illegally acquired).

johnthesavage

Anyone watching Sky News yesterday evening? James Rubin (former assistant US secretary of state, now tv presenter) attacked Chavez in the most laughable way. In his "analysis" of the "threat" posed by Chavez he used language and techniques befitting the lowest of tabloid journalism.
He pointed out that Chavez had got himself elected just like Hitler. He said Chavez was much admired by misguided liberals and lefties like George Galloway - cue infamous clip of Galloway praising Saddam Hussein. I can't remember too much of the rest but it was pretty dismal stuff about how the liberal/left always support evil dictators in the beginning and are incapable of learning from history, more clips of Chavez meeting Castro etc. Somehow I expected just a little more subtlety in their propaganda.

edit: Rubin also said that supporters of Chavez were quick to point out his improvements in social spending, when the "reality" was that he was squandering vast sums on typical dictator-like projects born out of his own vanity.

Diaspora

All leaders go stale Chavez in 2031 sounds like a recipe for disaster

Boston

You all seemed to be ignoring the post on the first pages which claimed he's not looking for a 25 year term, but for the oppertunity to be re elected over and over again up to 25 more years in office.

You all just devided into pro and anti chavez camps, and none have answer the question, is the guy actually looking for a 25 year term, or is that the spin that being put on it.

Dirk Gently

johnthesavage wrote:

Anyone watching Sky News yesterday evening? James Rubin (former assistant US secretary of state, now tv presenter) attacked Chavez in the most laughable way. In his "analysis" of the "threat" posed by Chavez he used language and techniques befitting the lowest of tabloid journalism.
He pointed out that Chavez had got himself elected just like Hitler. He said Chavez was much admired by misguided liberals and lefties like George Galloway - cue infamous clip of Galloway praising Saddam Hussein. I can't remember too much of the rest but it was pretty dismal stuff about how the liberal/left always support evil dictators in the beginning and are incapable of learning from history, more clips of Chavez meeting Castro etc. Somehow I expected just a little more subtlety in their propaganda.

edit: Rubin also said that supporters of Chavez were quick to point out his improvements in social spending, when the "reality" was that he was squandering vast sums on typical dictator-like projects born out of his own vanity.

Yeah seen that disgraceful bit of misinformation the other night. When asked was Chavez a tin pot Dictator the reply was, no he has money so hes not a tin pot dictator. In other words he's not a tin pot dictator hes a rich dictator. No attempts made to challenge or justify the comment. Also "he was elected just like Hitler" which is true of everyone who was ever elected to any position anywhere ever but implies that Chavez is a fascist dictator. again this went unchallenged.

Does anyone else think it’s very dangerous to have a former assistant US secretary of state host a show on prime time T.V. on the main news channel, especially when U.S. foreign policy and Hugo Chavez are the topics of discussion? As proven in this programme it was totally biased and un factual. Anyone watching that programme who hasn't being following the Venezuela situation would have being left with the impression that Chavez is a dictator and the U.S. is concerned about the plight of the poor in Venezuela.

Also "Chavez for life" was mentioned a few times, again implying that he does not intend to contest elections in future and that he has installed himself for life. No attempt was made to represent the facts.

For want of a better word this show was full of "lies" and suggestive journalism. I wonder just how "former" James Rubin regards his position in the U.S. government. It seems he is just continuing the same work practices and job description in the guise of a Journalist. i.e. lying and making unfounded suggestive comments.

Right, back to the champions league Final for me after my little half time rant. C’mon Barca!

Dirk Gently

LiouVille wrote:

You all seemed to be ignoring the post on the first pages which claimed he's not looking for a 25 year term, but for the oppertunity to be re elected over and over again up to 25 more years in office.

You all just devided into pro and anti chavez camps, and none have answer the question, is the guy actually looking for a 25 year term, or is that the spin that being put on it.

To answer your question, he is not looking for a 25 year term. If the opposition refuse to contest the elections which they are threatening to do, Chavez wants to ask the people if he can be allowed to run for election in future. He oly wants the ability to contest elections, its up to the people to vote him in every time he runs. Under current Venezeulan law he must step down after two terms like in america, but he wants to run in further elections like in england where there is no limits, like Tony Blair- elected for 3 terms.

see this piece for how some parts of the press mis-represented what he said and what he actually said.
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1723

Heres an artical today from the same website looking at the role of the media in reporting on chavez and how suggestive comments influence peoples perception of him and Venezuela http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1731

Boston

So this thread has been aload of hype over nothing.

Dirk Gently

LiouVille wrote:

So this thread has been aload of hype over nothing.

Yes, but every accusation against Chavez is a load of hype over nothing.
Welcome to propaganda warfare.

Every now and again a lie is spun and given media representation, people denounce Chavez for a while until it becomes clear that what has been said is untrue. Then the cycle begins again with a new accusation which is disproved, then another , then another........

The evil quasi dictator strongman militant ruthless undemocratic overlord of Venezuela is coming to get you. Make sure you look under your bed at night before you go to sleep.
10 landslide election victories in 8 years hes an evil dictator I tell you. Sure Hitler was elected, don’t you see the connection, blah blah blah. :rolleyes:

Dirk Gently

Looks like Hugo is thinking about trading oil in Euros instead of Dollars.

Should be interesting to see the U.S. response to that. Iraq and Iran spring to mind. If Iran isn’t blown to **** before they get their Euro exchange up and running and if Chavez follows suit I wonder how disastrous it would be to the value of the Dollar. I reckon if Chavez is serious about a change over to petro Euros it would speed up U.S. efforts to remove him from power. Interesting times ahead.

ISAW

LiouVille wrote:

You all seemed to be ignoring the post on the first pages which claimed he's not looking for a 25 year term, but for the oppertunity to be re elected over and over again up to 25 more years in office.

You all just devided into pro and anti chavez camps, and none have answer the question, is the guy actually looking for a 25 year term, or is that the spin that being put on it.

THat question has been answered. It is SPIN! He is looking to be re elected for as many times as the people will elect him. The constitution allows the people to call for a recall election and various other means of counteracting dictatorships. The US neocons put a spin on it when they supported dictators elsewhere.

Hogmeister B

ISAW wrote:

THat question has been answered. It is SPIN!

Lies and propaganda are the words i'd use!

Boston

ISAW wrote:

THat question has been answered. It is SPIN! He is looking to be re elected for as many times as the people will elect him. The constitution allows the people to call for a recall election and various other means of counteracting dictatorships. The US neocons put a spin on it when they supported dictators elsewhere.

It hadn't been answered before I asked it. But had been before your replied.

meepins

clown bag wrote:

Looks like Hugo is thinking about trading oil in Euros instead of Dollars.

Should be interesting to see the U.S. response to that. Iraq and Iran spring to mind. If Iran isn’t blown to **** before they get their Euro exchange up and running and if Chavez follows suit I wonder how disastrous it would be to the value of the Dollar. I reckon if Chavez is serious about a change over to petro Euros it would speed up U.S. efforts to remove him from power. Interesting times ahead.

Well the U.S already sent one of their battle cruisers down there on 'training missions'.Nothing would suprise me.

ISAW

LiouVille wrote:

It hadn't been answered before I asked it.

what do you think this is "The Two Ronnies mastermind" forum?
B: In the semi finals you chose "Answering the last question" ?
c: correct
B : Any you chosen specialised subject this time is "Answering the next question before it is asked"?
C: Frankly I dont give a damn
B: Your twominutes start now. What were the final lines of Rhett Butler in "gone with the wind"

But had been before your replied.

Oh dear you just blew my causality shift theory out the window.

Dirk Gently

quit bitching bitches. :mad:

Either start talking Chavez and leave your own personalities out of it or go to after hours and engage in a petty bitch fest there.

Boston

ISAW wrote:

what do you think this is "The Two Ronnies mastermind" forum?
B: In the semi finals you chose "Answering the last question" ?
c: correct
B : Any you chosen specialised subject this time is "Answering the next question before it is asked"?
C: Frankly I dont give a damn
B: Your twominutes start now. What were the final lines of Rhett Butler in "gone with the wind"

In your reply, you indicated that the question had been answered before I asked it. It hadn't. You where being snotty, just like you're being now.

Clown bag, your not a mod.

Dirk Gently

LiouVille wrote:

Clown bag, your not a mod.

yeah but petty personality clashes hurt my eyes, unless its funny, which in this case it wasn't.

Boston

clown bag wrote:

yeah but petty personality clashes hurt my eyes, unless its funny, which in this case it wasn't.

How on earth is it a personality clash, on second thoughts I don't care. This thread was pointless to begin with, now thats it's been shown to be BS the OP has failed to reply.

Dirk Gently

LiouVille wrote:

How on earth is it a personality clash, on second thoughts I don't care. This thread was pointless to begin with, now thats it's been shown to be BS the OP has failed to reply.

meh, I don't much care either at this point to be honest. The thread was a non-event but it still won’t stop some people claiming as fact that he is a dictator for life. Just the way it is.

I look at this thread as a talking shop for all things Venezuela and Chavez rather than the original title of Chavez until 2031 which was disproved early on. Any further points about Chavez I will post here so as not to have loads of different threads open discussing his latest alleged evil actions.

Hogmeister B

clown bag wrote:

meh, I don't much care either at this point to be honest. The thread was a non-event but it still won’t stop some people claiming as fact that he is a dictator for life. Just the way it is.

I look at this thread as a talking shop for all things Venezuela and Chavez rather than the original title of Chavez until 2031 which was disproved early on. Any further points about Chavez I will post here so as not to have loads of different threads open discussing his latest alleged evil actions.

Indeed.

ISAW

LiouVille wrote:

In your reply, you indicated that the question had been answered before I asked it. It hadn't. You where being snotty, just like you're being now.

Clown bag, your not a mod.

I pointed out that of course it hadent been answered before you asked it. They wouod defy causality! However it HAD been answered several pages ago and I only re iterated that it HAD been answered.

I was using an example from humour to show how it is not logically possible to answer you before you ask. However since very early in the discussion the question of the US putting spin on something had been answered.

Would you like examples?

Actually I suggest i am correct so maybe I should support my own position:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51331662&postcount=1
Original poster suggests

He just seems to be getting more totalitarian and authoritarian by the day !! I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but it dosen't look good !

SAnd in post 3 added to the spin

Sorry, is this supposed to be shocking? Its been blatantly obvious for a long time that hes been preparing the ground for this. Why do you think he has invested so much time and energy in gutting the institutions of state and building a party militia?

in post 8 he is compared to Mugabe
In post 9 we get pure spin:

from what I gather, he's seeking in indefinite re-election,

A series of spun claims followed. in post 16 Hobbes pointed to economic and social indicators which showed them up as spin.

My first post is in post 18 where I suggested

Where is there any evidence to back up the suggestion that chaves has an army of thugs which are wiping out the population?

I also asked for evidence he was trying to wipe out the middle class.
Viscosity added to the spin and suggested the Human development index was a waste of a reference and then referred to an anti chaves site which ALSO referenced to the HDI.

I believe I have clearly supplied evidence of spin at this point. as Hobbes stated in post 27:

There is already a huge 10 page thread on Chavez in this forum that goes into more detail with sources, links etc. You can go on and on but all your doing is spouting air without sources to back it up.

After more counter evidence Clown Bag in post 35 clearly stated "He is not installing himself for life"
and supplied a reference. Clearly showing the original tolitarian and authoritarian claim was spin!

It goes on in that vein with unsupported claim and supported counter evidence (i.e. clearly showing the claims are SPIN.

Then in post 70 YOU arrive and ask if he is looking for a 25 year term or is it just spin and claim that nobody has addressed it.

Louisville wrote:

and none have answer the question, is the guy actually looking for a 25 year term, or is that the spin that being put on it.

It was answered!
Clown Bag answered it in post 35. In addition loads of other evidence was supplied since then.

Now either you accept that or you dont. Do you accept that clown Bag stated that Chaves is not installing himself for life in post 35?

If you don't then i am sorry but you have a problem with both causality AND logic.

Boston

ISAW wrote:

Now either you accept that or you dont. Do you accept that clown Bag stated that Chaves is not installing himself for life in post 35?

If you don't then i am sorry but you have a problem with both causality AND logic.

i accept that he pointed it out. It's why I asked the question. Since it seemed surprising that he had been completely ignored by all parties, or at least seemingly so. Even in my post, I acknowledge that its been pointed out. So no, my question had not been answered before it was asked, you merely miss understood my point.

ISAW

LiouVille wrote:

i accept that he pointed it out. It's why I asked the question. Since it seemed surprising that he had been completely ignored by all parties, or at least seemingly so. Even in my post, I acknowledge that its been pointed out. So no, my question had not been answered before it was asked, you merely miss understood my point.

You have no questions marks in your original post
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51390959&postcount=70
Now you asked is he looking for a 25 year term or is it just spin.
I answered that it is just spin and 35 messages before you claimed it hadnt been answered Clown bag answered it.

What is the point which I misunderstood? Please care to tell us?
What is the question you asked that had not been answered? Please care to inform us all?

Akrasia

Just to add in, On the first page, post 20, I made this point

plus, it is unclear whether he means it's a 25 year term per election, or if he just wants to remove the limit on how many terms an individual president can hold.

But even if it was a 25 year term, there are constitutional methods by which recall elections can be held, and chavez has already demonstrated that he is willing to submit himself to as many votes as are necessary in order to maintain confidence in his leadership.

Boston

ISAW wrote:

You have no questions marks in your original post
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=51390959&postcount=70
Now you asked is he looking for a 25 year term or is it just spin.
I answered that it is just spin and 35 messages before you claimed it hadnt been answered Clown bag answered it.

What is the point which I misunderstood? Please care to tell us?
What is the question you asked that had not been answered? Please care to inform us all?

Well this claim was made without being backed up. Nobody bar Clown-bag seemed to pay attention, even you ignored it so I asked if it was true, and it was pretty obviously a question even with out the "?". In my mind, the claim was made, yet you guys where still going on about a 25 year term, so there was still confusion over what the actual story was. Whats the big difficulty you're having with me?