quote:

---

Monterrey, Mexico - He slammed one of President George W. Bush's closest aides as "illiterate" and blasted Washington's latest free-trade proposals as a "road to hell."

He dismissed the summit of 34 heads of state that he was attending as a "waste of time" - even though he exceeded his own time limit when it was his turn to speak.

Perhaps intentionally, Venezuela's leftist president, Hugo Chávez, emerged as the bête noire of the two-day Special Summit of the Americas here.

---

[ 19 January 2004: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Hugo isn't a very nice man you know... I would feel much more comfortable if he were a Democrat.

---

Huh?

Doesn't he still posses majority support amongst much of Venezuela's least favoured? Therefore only if the middle class is in favour, someone is a 'democrat'?

[ 19 January 2004: Message edited by: HalfAnHourLater ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by HalfAnHourLater:

Huh?

Doesn't he still posses majority support amongst much of Venezuela's least favoured? Therefore only if the middle class is in favour, someone is a 'democrat'?

[ 19 January 2004: Message edited by: HalfAnHourLater ]

---

Nelson Mandela, Abraham Lincoln, Mikhail Gorbachev, George Washington, John Brown, the veterans of the Spanish Civil War, Patrice Lumumba, Cinque, Spartacus, and anyone who fought in any revolutionary war ever.

- Chavez is most certainly not a dictator. He was replaced by a dictator for about a day and the popular outcry got him back into office. Democratically elected eaders throughout Latin America (and the world) denounced his opponents for carrying out a repulsive coup. To my knowledge he's done nothing that anyone could seriously call "horrific" - though his opponents often do. Things may come to a head in Venezuela, however, and the people that I've met from Venezuela, who feel that they control their destiny for possibly the first time because of the doors that Chavez and others have helped unlock, may choose to do some "horrific" things rather then return to a status quo that they considered hopeless, empty and often filled with horror and violence of its own kind. I imagine I'd end up supporting them.

- Gorbachev was General Secretary of the CPSU during the occupation of Afghanistan until 1989, and the repression in Central Asia in 1989 and 90.

Dictator, my ass.

PS. I grant that Chavez has his faults. He's clearly a man who likes to be the center of attention, loves to grab the stage for himself at times, and is given to bombastic over-the-top rhetoric at times.

But for all that, the man is clearly a committed populist who knows that opening doors for poorer Venezuelans is the way to broadening the access to opportunity that would otherwise be denied to many.

[ 19 January 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]

quote:

---

During a rambling news conference Tuesday night, Chavez said he felt the same way about Bush as he did when he shook Bush's hand at an international gathering three years ago and told him, "I want to be your friend."...

Elaborating on his comments last week that Condoleeza Rice was "a true illiterate" for failing to understand his contributions to democracy, he said he wanted to send her a gift-wrapped copy of a literacy manual that Cuba uses. "It works in just seven weeks," he deadpanned...

Chávez exceeded his three-minute speaking time by several minutes Monday as he blasted Bush's proposed hemispheric Free Trade Area of the Americas as "infernal machinery" that would widen the gap between rich and poor.

"How many minutes do I have? ... Just one?" he asked disconsolately at one point before charging on.

---

quote:

---

- Chavez is most certainly not a dictator. He was replaced by a dictator for about a day and the popular outcry got him back into office. Democratically elected eaders throughout Latin America (and the world) denounced his opponents for carrying out a repulsive coup. To my knowledge he's done nothing that anyone could seriously call "horrific" - though his opponents often do. Things may come to a head in Venezuela, however, and the people that I've met from Venezuela, who feel that they control their destiny for possibly the first time because of the doors that Chavez and others have helped unlock, may choose to do some "horrific" things rather then return to a status quo that they considered hopeless, empty and often filled with horror and violence of its own kind. I imagine I'd end up supporting them.

---

Sorry, my mistake. I thought he took over the country like Castro did. It just shows how unbelievably arrogant I am of the whole situation. When is the next election?

quote:

---

Gorbachev was General Secretary of the CPSU during the occupation of Afghanistan until 1989, and the repression in Central Asia in 1989 and 90.

---

Shit! Yet another idol with feet made out of gray malleable material.

quote:

---

Some days. Why? Are you red-baiting?

---

quote:

---

I grant that Chavez has his faults. He's clearly a man who likes to be the center of attention, loves to grab the stage for himself at times, and is given to bombastic over-the-top rhetoric at times.

---

Nobody's perfect. I can think of a few Canadian politicians who have those problems...
all right, if Chavez was elected in free and democratic elections and if he endorses Socialist policies I will support him. Even if he were to strip naked and dance the Bolero at news conferences. He is willing to fight Bush and he deserves my respect.

[ 20 January 2004: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
Sorry, my mistake. I thought he took over the country like Castro did. It just shows how unbelievably arrogant I am of the whole situation.

---

I'm going to just let this stand as a monument to the basic requirement of checking one's facts before shooting one's mouth off, and as a reminder to myself to do the same.

quote:

---

When is the next election?

---

quote:

---

Sorry, my mistake. I thought he took over the country like Castro did. It just shows how unbelievably arrogant I am of the whole situation.

---

You mean, ignorant, not arrogant.

Believe me, ignorance is a small fault by
Babble standards.

In contrast, if you were arrogant (any trolls come to mind), you would:

1. Refuse to concede you made a factual inaccuracy. And instead find something wrong, hypocritical or anti-Semitic in the posts/ideology of the person who pointed out your factual inaccuracy.

and/or

2. Repeat said factual inaccuracy over and over, because a lie repeated several times becomes truer.

and/or

3. Question your challenger's manhood, and then never post again on said thread.

and/or

4. Whine about how dogmatic and unrepresentative people on Babble are of the general population. And imply that that makes Babblers statements
wrong-by-lack-of-association.

and/or

5. Pretend that your position has not been effectively rebutted, and covertly attempt to
shift the theme of debate on the thread, as if nothing which challenged your position occurred at all.

and/or

6. Say, "Yeah, you think you may be right, but by the standards of free Dominion, my posiiton is
moderate". Implying that if you are less conservative than Free Dominion, therefore you must be more correct than Babble.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gaia_Child:

Ummm, any others I missed?

---

Say that the NDP should change it's name and merge with the CAP, 'cause Heller is GOD - regardless of the topic.

-or-

Whine that the NDP isn't joining with the CAP, cause the NDP is not homophobic.

quote:

---

Mon February 9, 2004 05:38 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States on Monday denied Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's charge that Washington was funding opposition groups seeking a recall referendum to vote him out of office.

Chavez said on Sunday he would present documents showing millions of dollars were being channeled to the opposition through institutions created by the United States, renewing accusations of U.S. involvement in efforts to oust him.

"I'm happy to refute them (the charges). They're false," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher told reporters. "I think there's been some harping on this in Venezuela ... but what we're doing is we're supporting democracy, as we do many, many places around the hemisphere and around the world."

Chavez, a populist first elected in 1998, is facing an opposition campaign to secure a recall vote against his presidency in the South American nation, which is a major oil supplier to the United States.

He identified one of the recipients of U.S. funding as Sumate, a private Venezuelan group that helped organize a nationwide pro-referendum signature petition by the opposition late last year.

Chavez said Sumate received $60,000 from the United States.

---

[ 12 February 2004: Message edited by: Holy Holy Holy ]

The "American Center for International Labor Solidarity" which works closely with the reactionary unions in Venezuela recieved $116,001

The "Center for International Private Enterprise" (self-explanatory) recieved over 200 grand in funding for their endeavors.

The "Instituto de Prensa y Sociedad (Press and Society Institute)" recieved $25,000 to co-organize a forum, with its Venezuela-based affiliate, for media owners (and their employees) on "freedom of expression".

And the "International Republican Institute" (the face of the Republican party abroad recieved $299,999 (of American tax dollars!)to train new and existing political parties (somehow I doubt the local Communists were one).

quote:

---

"I'm happy to refute them (the charges). They're false," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher told reporters. "I think there's been some harping on this in Venezuela ... but what we're doing is we're supporting democracy, as we do many, many places around the hemisphere and around the world."

---

Momento de la Gente (The People’s Moment)
$64,000
To work with the National Assembly to provide policy input on key pieces of legislation pertinent to civil liberties. Momento will also work with and help organize local elected officials to improve their ability to oversee public budgets and advocate for decentralization.

"Advocate for decentralization" is usually a code for throwing responsibilities onto inadequately-funded local authorities and with no national standards to guide them. Much like what Stephen Harper wants to to do Canada, and what Paul Martin has been doing in practice.

Hmm. This one also sets off my BS detectors most strongly:

International Republican Institute
$299,999
To train national and local branches of existing and newly created political parties in Venezuela, both on a one-to-one basis and through group sessions. Training topics include party structure, management, and organization; internal and external party communications; effective constituent relations; membership and volunteer recruitment; candidate/leadership development; and coalition building.

Gee, "newly created political parties"? "Coalition building"? I wonder what that might be useful for.

(Edit to add

I will only cause thread drift for a minor moment:

quote:

---

Afghanistan: Approximately $625 million was appropriated between 1980-84, "including about $40 million reprogrammed from the Pentagon budget and as much as $250 million in fiscal year 1985 alone." Afghanistan has be come one of the most expensive covert actions in American history. This money was used in continuing military aid to the rebel forces of Zia Khan Nassery, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, Sayed Ahmed Gailani and to conservative mullahs "to harass Soviet occupation forces and challenge the legitimacy of the government of Babrak Karmal." The Afghanistan rebels also received monies from the National Endowment for Democracy. This included one grant of $180,000 ostensibly for their school system; but in the extreme chaos of the war area, there can be no satisfactory way of determining what the ultimate disposition of the money was; this can only be viewed as part of the Reagan administration's campaign to overthrow the government supported by the Soviet Union. (This is ironic in light of the deep loathing Americans feel for the government of Iran, for if the Afghan rebels take power they will undoubtedly create a similar fundamentalist Islamic state.)

---

How prophetic (the website seems to reproduce material that was printed in the early 1990s or late 1980s). Back to our normal thread.

[ 12 February 2004: Message edited by: DrConway ]

quote:

---

The "American Center for International Labor Solidarity" which works closely with the reactionary unions in Venezuela recieved $116,001

---

Wouldn't these people be supporting Hugo? Their title would suggest that they would be in favor of unions and decent working conditions. Is the name inaccurate?

[ 12 February 2004: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

Some suggested reading on trade union history in Latin America.

[ 12 February 2004: Message edited by: Holy Holy Holy ]

The real question is why do some trade union leaders risk their lives, their livelihoods, and everything else just for social change? What payment do THEY get?

[ 12 February 2004: Message edited by: Holy Holy Holy ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Holy Holy Holy:
Same thing turncoats get here. A seat at the table, the spoils of victory, the joy of co-optation.

The real question is why do some trade union leaders risk their lives, their livelihoods, and everything else just for social change? What payment do THEY get?

[ 12 February 2004: Message edited by: Holy Holy Holy ]

---