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.

 

Venezuelans reject Chavez's socialism

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV


I wouldn't say he's a dictator, and given his own coup attempt he's hardly a democrat.


Wrong, he was elected. His coup attempt failed if I'm not mistaken..


But he is an A1 Prime hypocrite. It's okay for him to stage a coup against the elected government, but when it's done against him it's an anti-democratic, Bush-backed, CIA plot?


No it's not ok to stage a coup, I'm not sure what happened to him, didn't he serve time? What would we Americans do if some one overthrew our president? Citizens would be taking up arms against the government, and we could only hope the military wouldn't go along with it...


It's fine for him to call world-leaders "fascist" and "the devil", but when others have unkind words for him they are outdated "neo-colonialists"?


Do you understand anything about colonialism? It's just like the American revolution when Americans resisted to have their own self-determined economy. Many former colonies including Venezuela have not realized what the United States was able to do...


He's allowed to continually interrupt the prime minister of Spain, but when King Juan Carlos tells him to shut up it is the monarch who is rude?


I never said anything about this. He may have been rude in this case, if not he wasn't asking anything too impertinent...


The only one trying to have it both ways is Chavez. Just like all cheap demagogues.


You're trying to paint Chavez as having it both ways, but he's not...




posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Raoul Duke
 


Yes, Il Duce, he was elcted. AFTER he staged a coup attempt.

The fact that his coup attempt failed is merely icing on the cake, as the attempt against hinm also failed. At least tehre's one country where coups are not a sign of "business as usual".


rhetorical
/ritorrik’l/

• adjective 1 relating to or concerned with rhetoric. 2 expressed in terms intended to persuade or impress. 3 (of a question) asked for effect or to make a statement rather than to obtain an answer.


www.askoxford.com...

As an Australian I understand a great deal about colonialism. Do you understand anything about international relations, or even simple manners?

Whether you spoke about it or not is nither here nor there. But as you don't know what I'm referring to...

news.bbc.co.uk...

news.bbc.co.uk...

and this one will give you the video of it all

search.bbc.co.uk...


Really, Chavez isn't trying to have it both ways?

Then what do you call it when you demand the right to talk, but demand your opponents keep quiet?

When I was a kid we called that "can dish it out, but can't take it".

Care to explain the legal reason for cancelling RCTV's broadcast licence? Those would be legal reasons which rely on proof, not innuendo.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 11:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheOracle
I am scratching my head out of confusion.
If he had won the vote, people would have cried dictatorship and vote rigging.
He has lost the vote and for the same people he is dictator anyways? I mean..hello? If he really wanted to rig the result he could have done it without a sweat.
I think no matter what happens with Chavez, people will find something to say and call him a dictator, because CNN or the bush admn. said so or maybe because he takes a stand against the current US govt.

Anyways I think he is a good man, he is doing the right thing going through a democratic way to stay in power. There is nothing wrong for a leader to stay in power if the people are behind him.
Also I am actually happy he lost the vote, it proved the world that he is a genuine and wants the approval of the Venezuelans.



[edit on 3-12-2007 by TheOracle]

Instead of scratching your head, try looking up his past history and what he is about.



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 11:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV


Yes, Il Duce, he was elcted. AFTER he staged a coup attempt.

The fact that his coup attempt failed is merely icing on the cake, as the attempt against hinm also failed. At least tehre's one country where coups are not a sign of "business as usual".


In my book if one is democratically elected his/her past indiscretions are forgiven...



As an Australian I understand a great deal about colonialism. Do you understand anything about international relations, or even simple manners?


????


Care to explain the legal reason for cancelling RCTV's broadcast licence? Those would be legal reasons which rely on proof, not innuendo.



Venezuela and the Media: Fact and Fiction
by Robert W. McChesney & Mark Weisbrot

To read and view the U.S. news media over the past week, there is an episode of grand tyranny unfolding, one repugnant to all who cherish democratic freedoms. The Venezuelan government under “strongman” Hugo Chavez refused to renew the 20-year broadcast license for RCTV, because that medium had the temerity to be critical of his regime. It is a familiar story.

And in this case it is wrong.

Regrettably, the US media coverage of Venezuela’s RCTV controversy says more about the deficiencies of our own news media that it does about Venezuela. It demonstrates again, as with the invasion of Iraq, how our news media are far too willing to carry water for Washington than to ascertain and report the truth of the matter.

Here are some of the facts and some of the context that the media have omitted or buried:

1. All nations license radio and TV stations because the airwaves can only accommodate a small number of broadcasters, far fewer than the number who would like to have the privilege to broadcast. In democratic nations the license is given for a specific term, subject to renewal. In the United States it is eight years; in Venezuela it is 20 years.

2. Venezuela is a constitutional republic. Chavez has won landslide victories that would be the envy of almost any elected leader in the world, in internationally monitored elections.

3. The vast majority of Venezuela’s media are not only in private hands, they are constitutionally protected, uncensored, and dominated by the opposition. RCTV’s owners can expand their cable and satellite programming, or take their capital and launch a print empire forthwith. Aggressive unqualified political dissent is alive and well in the Venezuelan mainstream media, in a manner few other democratic nations have ever known, including our own.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


www.commondreams.org...

[edit on 4-12-2007 by Raoul Duke]



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 11:34 PM
link   
I'm sure there are those that will say this was another stolen election



posted on Dec, 3 2007 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


im sure there will be i suppose, but im curious, in your opinion, who exactly stole the election?

chavez did lose on his reforms that were up for vote afterall...

PS 4 pages and 4 flags? cmon ya'll wheres the love?

[edit on 3-12-2007 by Damocles]



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles
reply to post by Alxandro
 


im sure there will be i suppose, but im curious, in your opinion, who exactly stole the election?

chavez did lose on his reforms that were up for vote afterall...

PS 4 pages and 4 flags? cmon ya'll wheres the love?

[edit on 3-12-2007 by Damocles]



Well duh, Sean Penn and his Socialist buddies will say Bush rigged that election as well.

51-49? Hmmm



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


The U.S. government does interfere with elections all over the world (particularly Latin America). I hadn't heard this had been done this time around in Venezuela, but I'll look for info to post here.



[edit on 4-12-2007 by Raoul Duke]



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Damocles
 

I wonder if it will soon "come to light" that the reason this stuff was voted down was due to interference from the U.S. ... I mean, then he could go ahead with his threatened oil cut to the U.S. and that would again make Iran's oil even more important. Man, I hate thinking like that lol



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by HellcatEmi
 


Although part of me would like the entertain the prospect of US interference (just because it harmonizes with my personal "pro-socialism" stance), I rather suspect that it is a fantasy.

It's just not a good time for them to make any moves. The backlash would be very harsh and they're under a lot of scrutiny.



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by BitRaiser
 


I guess I should have clarified... I don't think that the U.S. actually interfered...just speculating on the chain of events that would/could occur if that accusation was made.



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by HellcatEmi
 


I gotcha.
I was just stating my position on it.
I hope the claims don't come up.

Well, other than the fact that Western Cultural influence defiantly helped color this vote. Those voting No where helping to maintain the status quo of the "freedom" to be an ultra elite scumball at the expense of everyone else.



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Alxandro
 


Geez, doesn't anyone ever read a thread before posting anymore?

I posted this same concept on page 3 of this thread.



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 10:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raoul Duke
In my book if one is democratically elected his/her past indiscretions are forgiven...


Excellent, what a way to get the Nazis off. After all, they were democratically elected to the Reichstag.




Originally posted by HowlrunnerIVAs an Australian I understand a great deal about colonialism. Do you understand anything about international relations, or even simple manners?


????


If you don't understand the answer, don't ask the question...??...

You tried to call me on colonialism. Prior to federatin in 1901, Australia was six different colonies. We learn our history well in school. Including the dispossession of the Aborigines, the outbreaks of anti-colonial violence (Rum Rebellion, Eureka Stockade), and the restrictions on non-white immigration. You were tryng to excuse Chavez whitewashing of his refusal to accept criticism.

As for international relations, tell me, how does it enhance his nation's interests to be intentionally rude at international forums? How does that help him negotiate trade, aid etc? As for simple manners...well, if you continually interrupt another speaker, I'm forced to question your mother's parenting skills, not to mention your own manners. Chavez seems to think he has the right to be rude to others, but they must be polite to him...


Chavez’s answer to the demonstrations was to call the students “clowns” and more sinisterly to deploy soldiers using tear gas, plastic bullets and water cannon to disperse them.

This showed beyond any doubt that while Chavez is willing to use any forum that affords him free speech to denigrate anyone with whom he disagrees, he is equally ready to crush all within his own country who disagree with him.


www.bbc.co.uk...




Care to explain the legal reason for cancelling RCTV's broadcast licence? Those would be legal reasons which rely on proof, not innuendo.



Venezuela and the Media: Fact and Fiction
by Robert W. McChesney & Mark Weisbrot

To read and view the U.S. news media over the past week, there is an episode of grand tyranny unfolding, one repugnant to all who cherish democratic freedoms. The Venezuelan government under “strongman” Hugo Chavez refused to renew the 20-year broadcast license for RCTV, because that medium had the temerity to be critical of his regime. It is a familiar story.

And in this case it is wrong.

Regrettably, the US media coverage of Venezuela’s RCTV controversy says more about the deficiencies of our own news media that it does about Venezuela. It demonstrates again, as with the invasion of Iraq, how our news media are far too willing to carry water for Washington than to ascertain and report the truth of the matter.

Here are some of the facts and some of the context that the media have omitted or buried:

1. All nations license radio and TV stations because the airwaves can only accommodate a small number of broadcasters, far fewer than the number who would like to have the privilege to broadcast. In democratic nations the license is given for a specific term, subject to renewal. In the United States it is eight years; in Venezuela it is 20 years.

2. Venezuela is a constitutional republic. Chavez has won landslide victories that would be the envy of almost any elected leader in the world, in internationally monitored elections.

3. The vast majority of Venezuela’s media are not only in private hands, they are constitutionally protected, uncensored, and dominated by the opposition. RCTV’s owners can expand their cable and satellite programming, or take their capital and launch a print empire forthwith. Aggressive unqualified political dissent is alive and well in the Venezuelan mainstream media, in a manner few other democratic nations have ever known, including our own.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


www.commondreams.org...



As I said

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIVCare to explain the legal reason for cancelling RCTV's broadcast licence? Those would be legal reasons which rely on proof, not innuendo.


If you can't, just say so.


Imagine a world in which Tony Blair hosts a television programme called Hello, Prime Minister from locations around the country every Sunday on BBC One and on every BBC radio station.

Imagine this programme, in which he lambasts his political opponents and cries up the government's achievements for three or four hours at a time.

Imagine he also commandeers airtime on ITV and Channel 4 and Five at peaktime, sometimes two or three times a week.


news.bbc.co.uk...

More...


RCTV's Todos Intimos, at 9pm each night, is currently one of the top-rating telenovelas or soap operas which dominate the ratings in Venezuela - which may be why Granier so resents what he calls Chavez's frequent "confiscation" of RCTV airtime during Todos Intimos's transmissions.


None of which gives a legal reason for refusing to renew RCTV's broadcast licence. "Because I can" is not a legal reason. What had RCTV done that was in contravention of the licencing laws?

What it does do is show a pattern of undemocratic action by a leader who uses not only state but also private assets to publicise a party's agenda.

Rather similar to what Prime Minister Hun Sen and his Cambodian People's Party do here in Cambodia. Tell me, Duke Raoul, do you live in Caracas?



posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 01:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
None of which gives a legal reason for refusing to renew RCTV's broadcast licence. "Because I can" is not a legal reason. What had RCTV done that was in contravention of the licencing laws?

I wish the US Administration had the balls to yank Fox's license for spewing Pro-elite dis informational bullpucky.

Wait... Fox spews pro-administration, Pro-elite dis informational bullpucky.

Please refer to this post as a demonstration of how easy it is to tear apart these stories coming out of the ultra-elite backed, privately owned media sources:
An example of Bullpucky Revealed

I personally believe that any "news source" that wantonly lies to the people in order to intentionally obfuscate the truth should have it's license pulled.

And aside from all that, a true dictator wouldn't wait for a license to expire... they would force the source's closure through any means necessary... including the use of force.

*shrug*

At the end of the day, it's likely pointless to attempt to get people to understand how things are there. There's simply too much BS, too much bias, and too much self-satisfied Western Righteousness.



posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 01:42 AM
link   
Check this out:


FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES

Article 1: The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is irrevocably free and independent, basing its moral property and values of freedom, equality, justice and international peace on the doctrine of Simon Bolivar, the Liberator. Independence, liberty, sovereignty, immunity, territorial integrity and national self-determination are unrenounceable rights of the Nation.

Article 2: Venezuela constitutes itself as a Democratic and Social State of Law and Justice, which holds as superior values of its legal order and actions those of life, liberty, justice, equality, solidarity, democracy, social responsibility and, in general, the preeminence of human rights, ethics and political pluralism.

Article 3: The essential purposes of the State are the protection and development of the individual and respect for the dignity of the individual, the democratic exercise of the will of the people, the building of a just and peace loving society, the furtherance of the prosperity and welfare of the people and the guaranteeing of the Fulfillment of the principles, rights and duties established in this Constitution. Education and work are the fundamental processes for guaranteeing these purposes.

Article 4: The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is a decentralized Federal State on the terms set forth in this Constitution, governed by the principles of territorial integrity, cooperation, solidarity, attendance and shared responsibility.

Article 5: Sovereignty resides untransferable in the people, who exercise it directly in the manner provided for in this Constitution and in the law, and indirectly, by suffrage, through the organs exercising Public Power. The organs of the State emanate from and are subject to the sovereignty of the people.

Article 6: The government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and of the political organs comprising the same, is and shall always be democratic, participatory, elective, decentralized, alternative, responsible and pluralist, with revocable mandates.

Article 7: The Constitution is the supreme law and foundation of the legal order. All persons and organs exercising Public Power are subject to this Constitution.

Article 8: The national flag with its yellow, blue and red stripes, the National Anthem "Gloria al bravo pueblo" (Glory to the Brave People), and the coat of arms of the Republic are the symbols of the native land. Law shall regulate their characteristics, meaning and use.

Article 9: Spanish is the official language. The use of native languages also has official status for native peoples, and must be respected throughout the territory of the Republic, as constituting part of the cultural heritage of the Nation and humanity.

Venezuela's Constitution

That there is the part of Venezuela's constitution... a document made possible through the efforts of Hugo Chavez and his supporters.
Does that sound like the sort of document a Dictator makes law?



posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by BitRaiser
Check this out:


FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES
Article 6: The government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and of the political organs comprising the same, is and shall always be democratic, participatory, elective, decentralized, alternative, responsible and pluralist, with revocable mandates.

Venezuela's Constitution

That there is the part of Venezuela's constitution... a document made possible through the efforts of Hugo Chavez and his supporters.
Does that sound like the sort of document a Dictator makes law?


I never said he was a Dictator. I said he was a hypocrite and your post just proves it.

What is "decentralised" about Chavez' method of governing? What is "responsible" or "pluralist" about his methods?

The constitution of the Kingdom of Cambodia guarantees freedom of expression and assembly, yet the government uses a State of Cambodia (commie) law to prevent public protests...All the while Hun Sen tells the people how democratic he is...

Any country that relies on the politics of personality instead of the rule of law has already stepped off the path of democracy.

Chavez invoking the name of Simon Bolivar is the equivalent of Serbian demagogues invoking Josip Broz Tito. Tito was an arch-Federalist utterly opposed to Serbian primacy.

Or maybe not, depending on how much credence you put in Wiki's writings...


For this reason, and to prevent a break-up, Bolívar wanted to implement in Gran Colombia a more centralist model of government, including some or all of the elements of the Bolivian constitution he had written (which included a lifetime presidency with the ability to select a successor, though this was theoretically held in check by an intricate system of balances).

This move was considered controversial and was one of the reasons why the deliberations met with strong opposition. The convention almost ended up drafting a document which would have implemented a radically federalist form of government, which would have greatly reduced the powers of the central administration.

Unhappy with what would be the ensuing result, Bolívar's delegates left the convention. After the failure of the convention due to grave political differences, Bolívar proclaimed himself dictator on August 27, 1828 through the "Organic Decree of Dictatorship".


And this is Chavez' hero, oh well...

edit: bloody italics...

[edit on 5-12-2007 by HowlrunnerIV]



posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlueRaja
My point was that just because these guys are "elected" doesn't necessarily mean as much as the stats might show. Chavez' popularity is because he's basically bribed the lower class, and pitted them against the professional class, trying to make himself out to be the modern day Robin Hood.


And the difference between him and ALL leaders of western countries past and present is?



posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 03:12 AM
link   
reply to post by malcr
 


i havnt gotten a check from W yet...

hell they wont even give me my disability when my condition is listed AS a disabling condition...



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join