Can Chavez get any more mental?

[Coito ergo sum]

haha, your seriously asking me to cite a source when you link to Vcrisis?

Yes, of course.

You made a general accusation that the American media just can't be trusted.

You are, I presume, aware of the trustworthy media? If so, please, by all means, help a brutha out and share your enlightened knowledge. Throw a cite or two out. I'll even search for the Venezuela articles myself. All, I need are the sources. You are so sure of yourself, and so sure I'm stating false facts - surely, providing me with the correct information, which must come from somewhere besides your own head, is better than keeping it to yourself?

I'd love to read what you've read about Venezuela, and to know what wonderful source material you have access to that I just can't find, because I live in the oppressive United States which controls everything I read and listen to.....

Or, should we just assume this is your political bias coming into play, and you really don't have another source. You just root for the socialist, and assume anything bad claimed about them is a lie. Is that right?

EDIT 2: I do find it curious that you claimed the US media can't be trusted, and you went on to cite a US website, Youtube, and it's a recording of the American National Press Club. So much for the biased Americans, right?

EDIT - your source is Oliver frickin' Stone? You are kidding right?

I'm listening - where is the material that shows he did not do the things I noted above? Anywhere on the hour long video in particular?

[Robert_S]

I think the BBC might possibly have some bias around South America.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8584199.stm

That particular translation has overtones of tea party.

By all means, provide the good sources then.

Educate me.

I'm citing the BBC and my flatmate.

Bolivia's army has begun using the revolutionary motto "Fatherland or death, we shall overcome!", angering some conservative former generals.

President Evo Morales introduced the slogan, which was popularised by Fidel Castro and Che Guevara - the leaders of the Cuban communist revolution.

Patria = fatherland? That's the same patria that's the root word of patriotism. Calling it "fatherland" instead of "nation" doesn't conflate a pro-indigenous socialist Bolivarian Bolivian president honering the memory of Che Guevara with fucking Nazis? Surely a responsible news organisation would either choose a different translation or make some reference to the fact that in Spanish it doesn't have the same connotations that it does in English?

[Coito ergo sum]

I think the BBC might possibly have some bias around South America.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8584199.stm

That particular translation has overtones of tea party.

By all means, provide the good sources then.

Educate me.

I'm citing the BBC and my flatmate.

Bolivia's army has begun using the revolutionary motto "Fatherland or death, we shall overcome!", angering some conservative former generals.

President Evo Morales introduced the slogan, which was popularised by Fidel Castro and Che Guevara - the leaders of the Cuban communist revolution.

Patria = fatherland? That's the same patria that's the root word of patriotism. Calling it "fatherland" instead of "nation" doesn't conflate a pro-indigenous socialist Bolivarian Bolivian president honering the memory of Che Guevara with fucking Nazis? Surely a responsible news organisation would either choose a different translation or make some reference to the fact that in Spanish it doesn't have the same connotations that it does in English?

Not sure what any of that has to do with the accuracy of Chavez having people arrested for having the nerve to say that Venezuela lacks freedom of speech....etc.

[Robert_S]

I think the BBC might possibly have some bias around South America.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8584199.stm

That particular translation has overtones of tea party.

By all means, provide the good sources then.

Educate me.

I'm citing the BBC and my flatmate.

Bolivia's army has begun using the revolutionary motto "Fatherland or death, we shall overcome!", angering some conservative former generals.

President Evo Morales introduced the slogan, which was popularised by Fidel Castro and Che Guevara - the leaders of the Cuban communist revolution.

Patria = fatherland? That's the same patria that's the root word of patriotism. Calling it "fatherland" instead of "nation" doesn't conflate a pro-indigenous socialist Bolivarian Bolivian president honering the memory of Che Guevara with fucking Nazis? Surely a responsible news organisation would either choose a different translation or make some reference to the fact that in Spanish it doesn't have the same connotations that it does in English?

Not sure what any of that has to do with the accuracy of Chavez having people arrested for having the nerve to say that Venezuela lacks freedom of speech....etc.

I was disputing the BBC as an unbiased source on matters in South America. That article diminished my opinion of the BBC quite a bit.

As for human rights and freedom of the press, he's not perfect, but neither was Abe Lincoln. Need he fear a US backed coup? Well, there was a 9/11 in another country in South America that gives a hint.

[Coito ergo sum]

I was disputing the BBC as an unbiased source on matters in South America. That article diminished my opinion of the BBC quite a bit.

As for human rights and freedom of the press, he's not perfect, but neither was Abe Lincoln. Need he fear a US backed coup? Well, there was a 9/11 in another country in South America that gives a hint.

No source is unbiased, and nobody is perfect. But, Chavez arrests people for claiming that Venezuela lacks freedom of speech, and he intimidates media outlets so they print and publish the right material. He seizes private property. He aligns himself with Ahmadinejad, and makes public anti-semitic statements expressing support for terrorist groups like Hamas.

He's a real peach.

[sandinista]

@Coito ergo sum, it's not just Stone in the video. You want to learn something about Latin America, you say you are willing, well..give it a watch, it's quite good. Answers pretty much the same questions you are posing here.

add on: I would also ask, you make all these spurious claims about Chavez, I would be curious to learn which world leaders you do think are "peaches". All of the accusations you make of Chavez still pale in comparison to what the leaders of your country have actually done. Saying that, you may very well have the same hatred for US presidents who have a far worse record on human rights. Just curious.

[Coito ergo sum]

@Coito ergo sum, it's not just Stone in the video. You want to learn something about Latin America, you say you are willing, well..give it a watch, it's quite good. Answers pretty much the same questions you are posing here.

I am, dude. It's an hour long. And, so far I have heard it all before.

Do not assume that people who don't share your view haven't heard what you've heard. You implied that the "US media" is so untrustworthy, yet your source was the US National Press Corp, and an American filmmaker, published on an American internet website called youtube. Also present is Tariq Ali, who I am quite familiar with.

I've listened to about 1/2 of it so far, and NOTHING DISPUTES ANYTHING I ASSERTED ABOUT CHAVEZ. I can see you offering it as support for the overall merits of Chavez, but you logically have to do so by ignoring the events I noted. Mr. Stone didn't address them specifically, and so far the bit I've heard of Ali hasn't addressed them either, yet.

[sandinista]

I meant the US mainstream media. Not every filmmaker and internet site. Just to be clear. I also am a big fan of Democracy Now, which is american. However, it does not represent the US mainstream media.

Yah, keep watching, again, it answers quite concisely the very accusations you were making. If you choose to believe the corporate mainstream press, go for it.

[Coito ergo sum]

“It’s true that many of Chávez’s fiercest critics in Washington have turned a blind eye to Colombia’s appalling human rights record,” said José Miguel Vivanco, director of the group’s Americas division. “But that’s no reason to ignore the serious damage that Chávez has done to human rights and the rule of law in Venezuela,” which includes summarily expelling Mr. Vivanco and an associate, in violation of Venezuelan law, after Human Rights Watch issued a critical report in 2008.

Mr. [Tariq] Ali replied that “we can talk about all this endlessly,” but “the aim of our film is very clear and basic.” In “South of the Border,” he added: “We were not writing a book, or having an academic debate. It was to have a sympathetic view of these governments.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/movie ... ted=2&_r=1

[Coito ergo sum]

I meant the US mainstream media. Not every filmmaker and internet site. Just to be clear. I also am a big fan of Democracy Now, which is american. However, it does not represent the US mainstream media.

Yah, keep watching, again, it answers quite concisely the very accusations you were making. If you choose to believe the corporate mainstream press, go for it.

I will believe whoever best backs up their claim. I know Oliver Stone's history, and he doesn't care much for accuracy, but rather overall theme. And, Tariq Ali's quote above illustrates quite clearly what they were doing in making their movie.

[Coito ergo sum]

[sandinista]

“It’s true that many of Chávez’s fiercest critics in Washington have turned a blind eye to Colombia’s appalling human rights record,” said José Miguel Vivanco, director of the group’s Americas division. “But that’s no reason to ignore the serious damage that Chávez has done to human rights and the rule of law in Venezuela,” which includes summarily expelling Mr. Vivanco and an associate, in violation of Venezuelan law, after Human Rights Watch issued a critical report in 2008.

Mr. [Tariq] Ali replied that “we can talk about all this endlessly,” but “the aim of our film is very clear and basic.” In “South of the Border,” he added: “We were not writing a book, or having an academic debate. It was to have a sympathetic view of these governments.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/movie ... ted=2&_r=1

It is truly amazing how a long-time Latin America correspondent who accuses Oliver Stone’s recently released documentary “South of the Border” of “mistakes, misstatements and missing details,” manages to get practically every single statement of his own wrong, misstated, or lacking in detail. This is all the more amazing, considering that the filmmakers and I spoke to Rohter at length last week and provided him with the plenty of information to back up the film’s points, which he chose to ignore.

The bottom line is, even though Rohter brings up three arguments to cast doubt on the Stone documentary’s version of the coup (failure to mention the hard-line opposition account, my potential bias as a witness, and government control over a building from which people were shot), he is unable to raise a single point in the Stone documentary’s coup discussion that is misstated or false.

http://www.zcommunications.org/new-york ... ry-wilpert

Filmmakers Respond to Attack from the New York Times' Larry Rohter

http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/5457

[sandinista]

haha, yah that Hard Talk show was hilarious. The interviewer got dismantled. The best he could come up with was; he found one poor woman who's sons couldn't find work and gave that as an example of Chavez's failed policies. Fucking ridiculous.

[Coito ergo sum]

haha, yah that Hard Talk show was hilarious. The interviewer got dismantled. The best he could come up with was; he found one poor woman who's sons couldn't find work and gave that as an example of Chavez's failed policies. Fucking ridiculous.

Well, and Chavez throwing opponents in jail on trumped up "corruption" charges, among other things.

[Coito ergo sum]

“It’s true that many of Chávez’s fiercest critics in Washington have turned a blind eye to Colombia’s appalling human rights record,” said José Miguel Vivanco, director of the group’s Americas division. “But that’s no reason to ignore the serious damage that Chávez has done to human rights and the rule of law in Venezuela,” which includes summarily expelling Mr. Vivanco and an associate, in violation of Venezuelan law, after Human Rights Watch issued a critical report in 2008.

Mr. [Tariq] Ali replied that “we can talk about all this endlessly,” but “the aim of our film is very clear and basic.” In “South of the Border,” he added: “We were not writing a book, or having an academic debate. It was to have a sympathetic view of these governments.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/movie ... ted=2&_r=1

It is truly amazing how a long-time Latin America correspondent who accuses Oliver Stone’s recently released documentary “South of the Border” of “mistakes, misstatements and missing details,” manages to get practically every single statement of his own wrong, misstated, or lacking in detail. This is all the more amazing, considering that the filmmakers and I spoke to Rohter at length last week and provided him with the plenty of information to back up the film’s points, which he chose to ignore.

The bottom line is, even though Rohter brings up three arguments to cast doubt on the Stone documentary’s version of the coup (failure to mention the hard-line opposition account, my potential bias as a witness, and government control over a building from which people were shot), he is unable to raise a single point in the Stone documentary’s coup discussion that is misstated or false.

http://www.zcommunications.org/new-york ... ry-wilpert

Filmmakers Respond to Attack from the New York Times' Larry Rohter

http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/5457

Did Tariq Ali say he was misquoted?