It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The New World As Seen By Hugo Chavez

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 08:45 PM
link   
Chavez is an hypocritical ignorant moron. How much crap would come to the person who stood up in his country and said he was "the devil" ? He made a law stating that this would be a crime but it's OK to do so in another country?

It irks me that other countries burn our flags, burn replicas of our President, stomp and spit on our flag and colors because we support Israel or because we bombed a terrorist hide out and in doing so killed some non-terrorists also, etc. Yet where is that same out cry when a terrorist straps a bomb to himself and blows up people, women, children, as they shop for groceries?

How come we, Americans, didn't take to the streets and burn pictures of Osama and stomp on his pictures after 9/11? Why don't we, again Americans, march against Chavez for his ignorant ramblings about our President? There is more outrage in this country when a gay man gets denied a job for being gay or when a mother breast feeds in public than for a man calling our President Satan himself or for car bombings in Iraq that kill our soldiers.

The balance of right and wrong has surely shifted for the worse in this great land of ours.




posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by UnrealZA

He made a law stating that this would be a crime but it's OK to do so in another country?




He was in the UN, not the US. Think diplomatic immunity.






Why don't we, again Americans, march against Chavez for his ignorant ramblings about our President?




Why bother?

The USA has long history of black ops in South and Central America. I am sure the CIA has it all under control.


.

sp



[edit on 22-9-2006 by soficrow]



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
If I were offered free oil, I'd smile and take it, and call him the chump he really is as soon as his back was turned.

Who is he kidding? After all, he stole the oil from the companies he nationalized. "Robin Hood Chavez". Yeah, that's it.


Listen.. corporations own NOTHING if it is in the ground. The state owns it. We give our oil to mega corporations who sell it back to us while a few VERY FEW men at the top of the company reap the reward.

State owned oil in Venesualla however will give more wealth back to the people because no one individual owning it.

Corporations make me sick, and the article is correct Exxon would never do this, infact they led the charge to rape our pocket books for money in the name of supply n demand.

Is Chavez an enemy to our nation? OHHHH YES!! You don't even know! Vennesualla has the worlds largest army, the most high tech weaponry and the greatest war time leader Chavez, they are planning to invade the entire Gulf Coast and we are at their mercy! Not to mention in the jungles of this super powerful and wealthy nation is an ongoing nuclear program which they have already completed and are now aimed at us!!!

Give me a break, hes a guy who bashed the bloody hell out of Bush because our government is nothing but arrogant jerks who really do talk like they own the world. Apparently we Americans cant stand being talked down to!?? Makes me wonder what a few very inteligent world leaders feel like when a slacked jaw, monkey of a man with an IQ of a small rodant and the vocabulary of a 5 year old. Must make them feel all nice and warm inside.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 09:24 PM
link   

iori_komei
It's not theft, it belongs to the nation, they are allowing the corporations to use it, and if they decide they don't want to let them anymore, than the corporation has no right to say anything about it.

Tell you what. I'm going to lease you this plot of land that I own. You build some buildings on it, have utilities installed, pave 5 acres, fill them up with brand new cars, and open up your new car dealership.

We'll draw up the leases and contracts, all according to law.

Then, when you have done all the grunt work, and have started to turn a profit, I'm gonna come back and nationalize it, because I decided that I didn't want you using the land anymore. I'm taking all your cars and buildings, too. The land belongs to the people, after all, right?

That's exactly the philosopy you are espousing.

I believe in the rule of law. You believe in mob rule. That's the difference.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Listen.. corporations own NOTHING if it is in the ground. The state owns it. We give our oil to mega corporations who sell it back to us while a few VERY FEW men at the top of the company reap the reward.

Wrong. Ever hear of mineral rights? Google is your friend.


Corporations make me sick, and the article is correct Exxon would never do this, infact they led the charge to rape our pocket books for money in the name of supply n demand.

Most young people think this way until they start to draw a paycheck from a corporation.


Makes me wonder what a few very inteligent world leaders feel like when a slacked jaw, monkey of a man with an IQ of a small rodant and the vocabulary of a 5 year old. Must make them feel all nice and warm inside.

Pretty good assessment of Chavez.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Mineral rights mean nothing as Chavez rightfully proved. He took the oil and the company cant do a damn thing about it.

I work for a corporation and find it disgusting, careing about money instead of the actuall people they are supposed to care for.

Chavez is just like Bush as far as attitude, only polar opposite. Why are you so defendant on Bush.. is there something wrong with maybe seeing a little truth in another Presidents words? Do you not find it odd that not only are we making enemies all over the world but they are no longer affraid of Bush and tell him to his face he is the devil?



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Tell you what. I'm going to lease you this plot of land that I own. You build some buildings on it, have utilities installed, pave 5 acres, fill them up with brand new cars, and open up your new car dealership.

We'll draw up the leases and contracts, all according to law.

Then, when you have done all the grunt work, and have started to turn a profit, I'm gonna come back and nationalize it, because I decided that I didn't want you using the land anymore. I'm taking all your cars and buildings, too. The land belongs to the people, after all, right?

That's exactly the philosopy you are espousing.

I believe in the rule of law. You believe in mob rule. That's the difference.


There's a big difference.

In that when you the person leasing the land and all that has tens of
billions of dollars.

I don't believe in massive rights for the mob/group, I do however for
the individual.

That aside, corporations have no right to do anything, they must do
what the governments say.

And that's coming from someone who intends to head an international
corporation.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Back to Mussolini:

Communism is when the government owns the corporations; capitalism is when the corporations own the government.

Flip sides of the same coin.


True, Communism opresses the individual, and the spirit of mankind, and since everything is owned by the government, the people have no say whatsoever on what they can have, what they can eat, or what they say; while in Capitalism an individual can overcome poverty if he/she works hard, people can express their views, and follow the religion or way of life that is in their hearts, as long as it does not deny life, and liberty to another individual.


Originally posted by soficrow
I just like Chavez cuz he's a little guy with big cajones - and he's not afraid to put his own neck on the line. Unlike his counterpart in the USA.



Chavez is a blabbering idiot who changes his persona according to the people he is with, and he wouldn't go out without several of his thugs all over him.

He claims the U.S. is out to get him, while making statements to expand a "global revolution" with the purpose of creating an army to defeat the United States and other countries which are Capitalists. Several times have i posted pro-Chavez sites which have the speeches done by this madman which testifies to this being true.

You, among most if not all ATS/ATSNN members, are able to post your views because of Capitalism, you have a computer and can pretty much eat anything you want because of Capitalism.

Poverty is an unfortunate fact of life, and you will not find any economic/political system where there are no poor people.

But how convinient that some people are trying to blame Capitalism for the faults of every economic/political system...

[edit on 22-9-2006 by Muaddib]



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
Mineral rights mean nothing as Chavez rightfully proved. He took the oil and the company cant do a damn thing about it.

You are absolutely right. I should have said, mineral rights exist in a land where men are free, and choose to live by the rule of law.

Petty socialist dictators need not apply.


I work for a corporation and find it disgusting, careing about money instead of the actuall people they are supposed to care for.

News flash: Corporations exist to turn a profit, not to be your nanny. That doesn't discount or lessen the fact that many corporations are very good "neighbors" to the communities they are located in. It's out of a sense of good business, though, not altruism.


Why are you so defendant on Bush.. is there something wrong with maybe seeing a little truth in another Presidents words? Do you not find it odd that not only are we making enemies all over the world but they are no longer affraid of Bush and tell him to his face he is the devil?

Oh please! It took no courage for Chavez to trash talk Bush. Any potty-mouthed teenager can do the same. This is the USA, after all.

Real courage would mean that Chavez allows any Venezuelan to speak their mind when in Caracas. Copy our Freedom of expression. But he doesn't allow that, now does he? I wonder why not?

And that is the guy you choose to defend?



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
There's a big difference.

In that when you the person leasing the land and all that has tens of
billions of dollars.

I don't believe in massive rights for the mob/group, I do however for
the individual.

That aside, corporations have no right to do anything, they must do
what the governments say.

And that's coming from someone who intends to head an international
corporation.

iori, I hate to say this, but you are very naive. To think that people start up a business with tens of billions of dollars behind them is proof that you don't know much about business.

Does it somehow make it "right" if he nationalizes a multi-billion dollar corporation's assets? How about the mom & pop grocery store? Is that different?

And why should it matter how much money they have? Are you against the rich?

And you hope to head an international corporation. Good luck to you.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky

News flash: Corporations exist to turn a profit, not to be your nanny.





Exactly.

Which means that every time a corporation faces an 'a' or 'b' choice:

a) Do what's best for people, the environment, the planet; or

b) Forget the people, environment, and planet, and go for the bucks;

Then,

the corporation is legally required to choose 'b,' no waffling or compromise allowed.


Interesting system, dontcha think?






sp



[edit on 23-9-2006 by soficrow]



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 10:23 AM
link   
I have the schitzophrenic answer to all this.

Chavez, is a dummy, uneducated, non-diplomat moron, but he speaks the truth!!
And a commie at that!

But knows what he's talking about! Go figure!!! This may be the trend of the future.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow
Which means that every time a corporation faces an 'a' or 'b' choice:

a) Do what's best for people, the environment, the planet; or

b) Forget the people, environment, and planet, and go for the bucks;

Then,

the corporation is legally required to choose 'b,' no waffling or compromise allowed.


Interesting system, dontcha think?


Hooray for taking choice out of the matter! I mean, I don't know about you, but a company of any size should immediately be turned into a charity, shouldn't it? Because then, there would be NO major concerns to do things like drive our economy.

There are laws in place to navigate between the planet and the dollar. Change them if you have concerns about raping the planet. Don't punish the corporations which feed so many because you take issue with them. I'm sure the people who were rendered unemployed by Chavez agree with me in the respect that having a wage and an average amount of ideology beats having no wage and a ton of it.

DE


df1

posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Most of his people live below the poverty line...

Chavez wins landslide elections because more of his people live above the poverty line than before chavez. Your criticism of chavez is unfair and deceptive as most of the people in any south american country live below the poverty line by american standards.



he supports terrorism in Colombia and other places...

The colombian government is propped up with US drug war money or it would not be in power. It is nothing more than US terrorism via a puppet government. Chavez supports columbian freedom fighters and rightly so.



The figures, on Page 5 of the Institute’s...

Blah blah blah. Chavez winning elections by landslide margins demonstrates the fallacy of these statistics. The poor of his country know whether they are better off or not. Venezualan peasants are not as easy for politicians to manipulate with the media as fat & happy americans. A peasant knows whether he has more food in his belly or not.



nationalization is theft, regardless of how much lipstick you put on that pig.

It is also theft when US politicians give a competitive advantage to their corporate friends. Rather than lipstick the identity of US corporate criminals is often hidden behind the mask of national security. We should clean up the massive corporate corruption in our own country before giving advice on the issue to other countries.

Viva Chavez

[edit on 23-9-2006 by df1]



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by soficrow


Exactly.

Which means that every time a corporation faces an 'a' or 'b' choice:

a) Do what's best for people, the environment, the planet; or

b) Forget the people, environment, and planet, and go for the bucks;

Then,

the corporation is legally required to choose 'b,' no waffling or compromise allowed.


Interesting system, dontcha think?

[edit on 23-9-2006 by soficrow]


That's not really true, it might be true that some companies are doing it in countries that do not have high standards to cause the least damage to teh environment, such as Venezuela after Chavez got in office and that is a fact, but many companies have to meet certain standards to protect the environment.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
iori, I hate to say this, but you are very naive. To think that people start up a business with tens of billions of dollars behind them is proof that you don't know much about business.

Does it somehow make it "right" if he nationalizes a multi-billion dollar corporation's assets? How about the mom & pop grocery store? Is that different?

And why should it matter how much money they have? Are you against the rich?

And you hope to head an international corporation. Good luck to you.


No, of course not every company starting has that kind of money,
what I'm saying is the companies that built the places had/ve that
kind of money.

Well apart from the fact that reight and wrong are relative to the
person talking..
He has the right to nationalise the oil indsutry in his country, there's noth-
ing saying he can't in their constitution or laws.

If they did have Ma & Pa grocery stores there, I doubt he would, there's no
reason to do it.

Yes, I am against the rich because the amjority of them are rude, greedy
uptight snobs who don't deserve a dollar they have, and a good majority
of them have'nt even earned the money.



posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 02:43 PM
link   
If all presidents of this world would be 50% of Hugo Chavez this Planet would be a far Better Place to live in - too bad some of you can not see that, since you are blinded by hatred towards everything and everyone who speaks open-mindedly towards capitalism and the way world turns these days. Money and Greed rule this planet. And some of you always want to add this charming remark, that without capitalism there would be no internet and other stupid ideas like that. The evolution of mankind has always been toward destruction of his fellow man, and whatever he discovered was while searching for bigger and better means of killing his brother. It is the evolution of destruction - not the evolution of creation. And Caplitalism is a systam that is based upon two things: money and greed - and nothing else pretty much matters.


Thomas Friedman -What the World Needs Now

For globalism to work, America can’t be afraid to act like the almighty superpower that it is.…The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist—McDonald’s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the designer of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley’s technologies is called the United States Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps.

Basicly the American Empire remains Mighty beacuse of the USArmy, USNavy and USAirForce - and all those 3 branches of the Military need Wars in order to survive. In order to maintain the so-called Americn Dream, American Empire must wage wars - because only wars keep an empire strong; peace is not selling good these days, only wars create profits.

I full agree with mister Chavez - and all those who call him an Idiot, you yourselfes are Idiots, for not seeing a bigger and better picture of a world, who could have been ours, not owned by private corporations, who rule entire goverments, entire countries, entire continents, entire world of Ours.


Rise Up Against the Empire

The hegemonic pretensions of the American empire are placing at risk the very survival of the human species. We continue to warn you about this danger and we appeal to the people of the United States and the world to halt this threat, which is like a sword hanging over our heads.

American empire is doing all it can to consolidate its system of domination. And we cannot allow them to do that. We cannot allow world dictatorship to be consolidated.

The government of the United States doesn't want peace. It wants to exploit its system of exploitation, of pillage, of hegemony through war.

You want more Capitalism?

More Globalization?

Who Benefits from this?

The People of this Planet?

The Children of this Planet?

Or the Power-Hungry-Corporate-Whores (and their devil advocates)?


Poverty Facts and Stats

For economic growth and almost all of the other indicators, the last 20 years [of the current form of globalization, from 1980 - 2000] have shown a very clear decline in progress as compared with the previous two decades [1960 - 1980]. For each indicator, countries were divided into five roughly equal groups, according to what level the countries had achieved by the start of the period (1960 or 1980). Among the findings:

  • Growth: The fall in economic growth rates was most pronounced and across the board for all groups or countries.

  • Life Expectancy: Progress in life expectancy was also reduced for 4 out of the 5 groups of countries, with the exception of the highest group (life expectancy 69-76 years).

  • Infant and Child Mortality: Progress in reducing infant mortality was also considerably slower during the period of globalization (1980-1998) than over the previous two decades.

  • Education and literacy: Progress in education also slowed during the period of globalization.

  • And I think to myself...

    What a Wonderful World...



    posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 02:45 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by iori_komei
    Well apart from the fact that reight and wrong are relative to the
    person talking..
    He has the right to nationalise the oil indsutry in his country, there's noth-
    ing saying he can't in their constitution or laws.


    And there are places where rape isn't crime. Does that make it right? What about places where they quash freedom of religion/ Hey, it's not in their constitution, so it's OKAY!


    Yes, I am against the rich because the amjority of them are rude, greedy
    uptight snobs who don't deserve a dollar they have, and a good majority
    of them have'nt even earned the money.


    All those doctors and bussiness owners would probably disagree with you. doctors tend to work hard, and anyone who owns a company tends to, too. Lawyers work hard. But hey, if you want to be bitter, go for it.

    DE



    posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 02:59 PM
    link   
    OK, this is the News Network. Let's show some respect please.



    posted on Sep, 23 2006 @ 03:06 PM
    link   

    Originally posted by DeusEx
    And there are places where rape isn't crime. Does that make it right? What about places where they quash freedom of religion/ Hey, it's not in their constitution, so it's OKAY!

    No, but that is a good counterpoint.

    Corporations don't do any good for humanity, nor does rape, well unless
    every woman on the planet was refusing and the future survival of the
    species was at line, but that's getting away from the point.




    All those doctors and bussiness owners would probably disagree with you. doctors tend to work hard, and anyone who owns a company tends to, too. Lawyers work hard. But hey, if you want to be bitter, go for it.

    I don't consider doctors to be rich, just lower upper class.

    When I say rich, I think billionares, and the Paris Hilton archotype.

    And lawyers are no better, the only differenece is they earn there
    money, but th'yre still just as bad.



    new topics

    top topics



     
    1
    << 1    3  4 >>

    log in

    join