Author
|
Topic: Venezuela and Iran
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594
|
posted 23 August 2006 01:57 PM
quote: Originally posted by Martha (but not Stewart): Did Chavez stand by Iran in their treatment of Kazemi? Does Chavez stand by Iran in their treatment of Jahanbegloo? "Any situation" means any situation, not just most situations: so I guess the answer to my questions is, sadly, yes.
Martha, Ottawa stood by a shadow government in Washington as the CIA toppled democratically-elected socialist leaders and aided in the murder of thousands of key socialists in Iran and Iraq over the course of the last 50 years. Fundamentalists promising social democracy to the people and then reverting to suppression and militant rule is a tried and true formula since at least the Nazis time in the sun. Washington and shadow government have engineered the spread of militant Islam as a method for suppressing whole nations of people and abating the advancement of secular socialism in those countries. It's all just a game to them and costing the American and British taxpayers billions of dollars and social democracy at home in the west.
And our Liberal and Conservative leaders in Canada have arraigned and signed trade deals with U.S.-backed puppets in Latin American countries where "diplomacy" is front and centre with kick-back, graft, corruption and gross human rights violations. Paul Martin and company were accomplices to the CIA's overthrow of a democratically-elected leader in Haiti recently. Our support was quiet but pro-active with a loan of Canadian police officers and military personel. [ 23 August 2006: Message edited by: Fidel ]
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Steppenwolf Allende
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13076
|
posted 24 August 2006 09:02 PM
quote: The NYT is neither left nor right. It is pro-imperial and Amero-supremecist. It will support whatever editorial position filters through its wealthy elite worldview. Just peek at their disgusting pro-Israel coverage of the assault on Lebanon.
Skookums! As former subscriber to the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, when I lived in the US for four years back in the 1980s, I when I remember those publications, the term "left of center" doesn't even exist, let alone come to mind. It's true they are generally more "liberal" in the US sense of the term on social issues, which is why the religious right hates them. But "left?!" Not in this universe. The qualities both those publications have, or at least had when I was reading them regularly, is that they are, despite their servile pro-corporate capitalist dogma, far more accurate than the Global Canwest garbage papers we have to put up with here in Canada (like the Nazi Post or, in BC, the Sun and Province or Times Colonialist).
From: goes far, flies near, to the stars away from here | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steppenwolf Allende
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13076
|
posted 24 August 2006 09:03 PM
As far as Chavez moves around Iran, I think it’s a real blunder, in the sense that he’s overdoing it. I’m a strong supporter of the Bolivarian coalition government in Venezuela and its economic and political democratization agenda. But on this one, Chavez blew it and comes off even looking like a clown.It’s one thing for him to come out denouncing even the hint of a US military invasion of Iran. It’s quite another to let himself stand shoulder to shoulder with a totalitarian extreme-right-wing regime that happily butchers people whose views and values are even remotely similar to Chavez’ (and according to Amnesty International, that’s a lot of people). That regime has an admitted open hate-on for any serious degree of democracy and stands against just about everything the Venezuelan government stands for. Right now, that regime is opposed to the Bush Administration. But I was recently told by an Iranian human rights activist exiled in Canada that there are some quiet moves on the part of the Iranian government to butter up to the Bush regime and perhaps cut some deals—like maybe going back to doing some of the US government/Corporate America’s dirty work in return for staying in power and continuing to do what it does now. If they succeed we’ll see yet another miraculous reversal in the corporate media and the US government. Suddenly Iran will somehow see the error of its ways and become the good guy—just like in the 1980s, when Saddam Hussein, despite gassing the Kurdish populations and jailing labour and human rights activists by the thousands, was the great moderate hero in the war against Iran. And sadly, lots of folks will buy it, just like they always do.
From: goes far, flies near, to the stars away from here | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ghlobe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12731
|
posted 24 August 2006 09:25 PM
quote: Originally posted by Steppenwolf Allende:
Right now, that regime is opposed to the Bush Administration. But I was recently told by an Iranian human rights activist exiled in Canada that there are some quiet moves on the part of the Iranian government to butter up to the Bush regime and perhaps cut some deals—like maybe going back to doing some of the US government/Corporate America’s dirty work in return for staying in power and continuing to do what it does now.If they succeed we’ll see yet another miraculous reversal in the corporate media and the US government. Suddenly Iran will somehow see the error of its ways and become the good guy—just like in the 1980s, when Saddam Hussein, despite gassing the Kurdish populations and jailing labour and human rights activists by the thousands, was the great moderate hero in the war against Iran.
It is certainly possible, but I doubt the Iranian government could do that. It is very different from Saddam of 80s. Iraq under Saddam was a one-man show, so it was always easy for Saddam to switch sides. Iran has never been a one-man show even during Khomeini. This is a revolutionary government formed heavily on the basis of opposition to Imperialism, chants of death to America and annhilation of Israel, and keeps repeating such rhetoric to its mass everyday. Changing this foundation may bring down their whole system.[ 24 August 2006: Message edited by: ghlobe ]
From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
blake 3:17
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10360
|
posted 25 August 2006 03:28 PM
Chávez says China deal 'great wall' against US · Venezuela to supply a million barrels of oil a day · Beijing scrambling to feed energy-hungry economy Jonathan Watts in Beijing Friday August 25, 2006 The Guardian The Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, at a press conference in Beijing. Photograph: Frederic J Brown/AFP/Getty Images
China and Venezuela, two of the biggest nations on Washington's worry list, drew closer together today with the signing of trade agreements that the Venezuelan president called a "Great Wall" against American hegemonism. A million-barrel a day oil deal and a promise by China to back Venezuela's bid to join the United Nations security council were the main fruits of a week of meetings in Beijing, ending with talks between Hugo Chávez and the Chinese prime minister, Wen Jiabao, today.
The warming of relations reflects a shift in global diplomacy as China seeks energy resources to fuel its economy and Mr Chávez attempts to build alliances with nations threatened by US power, including Iran, Syria and North Korea. China agreed to increase its imports of Venezuelan oil, refined fuels and a hydrocarbon called Orimulsion from the current 160,000 barrels a day to 500,000 by 2009 and a million by 2016. This is crucial for China, which is the world's second largest oil user after the US. From being a net exporter of oil little more than a decade ago, the world's most populous and fastest growing economy is increasingly dependent on overseas supplies. It uses about 7.4m barrels a day, up half a million from last year. Full story.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|