Can Chavez get any more mental?

[sandinista]

Not to be a fucking dick or anything, but I am guessing you've never been to Latin America. Have you read much about the history of Latin America? Trust me (or don't), the social movement, including Chavez, in Latin America is a breath of fresh air from the last few decades of death squads, puppet leaders, torture, civil war, coups and assassinations. All supported by the US btw.

[Coito ergo sum]

Not to be a fucking dick or anything, but I am guessing you've never been to Latin America.

Does Brazil count? You?

Have you read much about the history of Latin America?

Quite a bit.

Trust me (or don't), the social movement, including Chavez, in Latin America is a breath of fresh air from the last few decades of death squads, puppet leaders, torture, civil war, coups and assassinations. All supported by the US btw.

Different issue. None of that is a point in favor of Chavez. The same could have been said for Stalin. At least he wasn't 300 years of Czars from Ivan the Terrible on, right?

[sandinista]

Not to be a fucking dick or anything, but I am guessing you've never been to Latin America.

Does Brazil count? You?

Have you read much about the history of Latin America?

Quite a bit.

Trust me (or don't), the social movement, including Chavez, in Latin America is a breath of fresh air from the last few decades of death squads, puppet leaders, torture, civil war, coups and assassinations. All supported by the US btw.

Different issue. None of that is a point in favor of Chavez. The same could have been said for Stalin. At least he wasn't 300 years of Czars from Ivan the Terrible on, right?

Does Brazil count? Why wouldn't it? Yes, I have traveled throughout Latin America, Mexico, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Chile. Not a different issue at all btw.

ps. How was Brazil, I would love to go there at some point as well. a political alley with Venezuela btw.

[Coito ergo sum]

\
Does Brazil count? Why wouldn't it? Yes, I have traveled throughout Latin America, Mexico, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Chile. Not a different issue at all btw.

It is a different issue.

Now, if you're saying that yes, Chavez is locking people up who oppose him on trumped up charges, squashing freedom of speech, and otherwise being a total tool-bag, BUT he's not as bad as what came before. Then we can do a comparison check, and discuss that point.

But, you're not. You're arguing that he's not actually doing the shitty things that he is, in fact, doing, and that he's actually a benevolent statesman doing only what is best for the people.

[sandinista]

"squashing freedom of speech" fuckin hell man, like I said, believe what you want to believe. You are full of shit though.

[Pensioner]

Not to be a fucking dick or anything, but I am guessing you've never been to Latin America. Have you read much about the history of Latin America? Trust me (or don't), the social movement, including Chavez, in Latin America is a breath of fresh air from the last few decades of death squads, puppet leaders, torture, civil war, coups and assassinations. All supported by the US btw.

Thanks for the video and btw I agree with your comments on this topic.

[sandinista]

you welcome.

[Trolldor]

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.

The US is hardly democratic. They're all partisan hacks.

[sandinista]

guess I should have wrapped quotes around "Democracy Now"...its a web news program. Of course the US is not democratic.

[Coito ergo sum]

"squashing freedom of speech" fuckin hell man, like I said, believe what you want to believe. You are full of shit though.

Beginning this month [March, 2005] journalists or other independent activists accused by the government of the sort of offenses alleged by Izarra [e.g. defaming Venezuela, Chavez] can be jailed without due process and sentenced to up to 30 years.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/ar ... Mar27.html

So, yes, that's called "squashing freedom of speech."

You can feel free to ignore it, if you like, but you're just ignoring the truth that doesn't support your political agenda.

a new media content law, adopted by the Chavez-controlled legislature last December [2004], that subjects broadcast media to heavy fines or the loss of their licenses for disseminating information deemed "contrary to national security." Its impact was soon felt: Two of the most prominent anti-government journalists lost their jobs as anchors on morning television shows, and Venezuelans quickly noticed the appearance of self-censorship among those who remained.

a new penal code [March, 2005] that criminalizes virtually any expression to which the government objects -- not only in public but also in private.

Shall I quote the law?

Start with Article 147: "Anyone who offends with his words or in writing or in any other way disrespects the President of the Republic or whomever is fulfilling his duties will be punished with prison of 6 to 30 months if the offense is serious and half of that if it is light." That sanction, the code implies, applies to those who "disrespect" the president or his functionaries in private; "the term will be increased by a third if the offense is made publicly."

There's more: Article 444 says that comments that "expose another person to contempt or public hatred" can bring a prison sentence of one to three years; Article 297a says that someone who "causes public panic or anxiety" with inaccurate reports can receive five years. Prosecutors are authorized to track down allegedly criminal inaccuracies not only in newspapers and electronic media, but also in e-mail and telephone communications.

Venezuelans or foreigners living in the country can be punished with a 10- to 15-year sentence for receiving foreign support that "can prejudice the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela . . . or destabilize the social order," whatever that means.

[Coito ergo sum]

guess I should have wrapped quotes around "Democracy Now"...its a web news program. Of course the US is not democratic.

There are no "pure" democracies on the planet, in the sense of everything being subject to popular vote.

However, the US is a democracy by the modern definition of that term: "government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system."

The US is as much a democracy as Canada or any western parliamentary system.

Often, the US is termed a "constitutionally limited representative republic."

We elect officials by popular vote to make decisions and laws. The government is "constitutionally limited" in the sense that the representatives' power is limited by the constitution, such that individual rights are protected against majority rule.

[sandinista]

canaduh's not a democracy either, its a fucking sham.

[Coito ergo sum]

canaduh's not a democracy either, its a fucking sham.

Which country is a democracy? Venezuela?

[sandinista]

Don't know...haven't lived in too many countries.

Buying the Press
Documents reveal multimillion-dollar funding to journalists and media in Venezuela
http://www.zcommunications.org/buying-t ... -gollinger

[Robert_S]

The US is a democracy to the extent that people give a shit and a thought or two. We (in the US) are not brainwashed. Most of us just don't care to think much or put in much effort. We're too easily distracted by Lindsey Lohan or whatever celebrity twatery will be happening next week.