babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » Venezuelan constitutional amendment

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Venezuelan constitutional amendment
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 30 November 2007 11:26 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
In another thread, I posted one of the proposed amendments to the Venezuelan constitution. It reads as follows:

Art. 100 - Recognition of Venezuelans of African descent, as part of Venezuelan culture to protect and promote (in addition to indigenous and European culture).
Venezuela’s Constitutional Reform: An Article-by-Article Summary

Any reaction?

[ 30 November 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 30 November 2007 12:55 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes. This is a positive amendment, even though it may be mostly for show.

It is only one of 69 amendments. Many of the others are highly objectionable.

It is part of the intrinsically undemocratic nature of the Referendum that one must vote "yes" or "no" to the whole package.

It is not fair to ask a question such as "Should blacks be treated fairly and Hugo Chavez get unlimited power, yes or no".


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 30 November 2007 01:10 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Emergency powers can also be harnessed to divert national efforts to aiding large numbers of citizens suffering aftermaths of natural disasters, like hurricanes wiping out New Orleans and such.

Ending illiteracy and exclusion from participation in the economy by the majority of Venezuelans is high on the agenda. Chavez is going to create the prosperous property owning democracy which Maggie Thatcher only conned Britons into believing she would do over three terms and phony majority dictatorial power.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 30 November 2007 01:16 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What a shame the left in this country hasn't organized the poor with the same success as has been done in Venezuela. We'd have a lot more success.

Whatever the result of the vote, the battle over the amendment won't be finished on the 2nd.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 30 November 2007 01:19 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You have a great propensity Jeff toward the dramatic. And I question your claims.

In the now closed thread, you said you read the articles, but you provided no link and your numbers did not match the articles. Is that a trick?

The articles as linked by me, above and in the closed thread, state, and I repeat:

quote:
Art. 339 - The Supreme Court's approval for states of exception is no longer necessary, only the approval of the National Assembly.

Now that suggests to me that for a state of emergency, the National Assembly would have to give approval. Is that not what you read? That doesn't quite jive with "unlimited power".

How does the proposed Chavez constitution compare with our own?

quote:
Who can declare a national state of emergency?
The prime minister and the cabinet.

How long does it last?
A state of national emergency can last up to 90 days, at which point it can be extended.

What special powers does the federal government have in a national state of emergency?
The government may, at its discretion:

* regulate or prohibit travel when it is deemed necessary for health and safety reasons
* remove people and their possessions from their homes
* use or dispose of non-government property at its discretion
* authorize and pay persons to provide essential services that are deemed necessary
* ration and control essential goods, services and resources
* authorize emergency payments
* establish emergency shelters and hospitals
* assess and repair damaged infrastructure
* convict or indict those who contradict any of the above.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/stateofemergency/

Favourably, it looks like to me. Does anyone remember having an opportunity to vote on Canada's constitution as Venezuelans will soon have an opportunity to do?

I would encourage everyone to visit the link above and draw their own conclusions.

Chavez is the first non-white president of Venezuela and he is attempting to empower the poor, non-white majority. If he fails, and the US backed opposition is next successful at deposing him, Bolivia will be next.

[ 30 November 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
CMOT Dibbler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4117

posted 30 November 2007 01:31 PM      Profile for CMOT Dibbler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Why is this in the anti racism forum
From: Just outside Fernie, British Columbia | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 30 November 2007 01:41 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Read the first post. I think that is very relevant.
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 30 November 2007 01:49 PM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
Why is this in the anti racism forum

It is an attempt to move this debate into a forum where critics of the amendments won't be allowed to question them because of one article on Afro-Venezuelan rights (which, really, no one should have any objections to anyway).

It's an insult to the entire purpose of the anti-racism forum, frankly.


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 30 November 2007 01:53 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You're here. Jeff is here. So who has it stopped?

This is why it is relevant.

Chavez and Morales represent people of color in Latin America moving into positions of power in their own countries representing their own people. They scare the hell out of the power brokers.

This is about race and power.

If Chavez and Morales are deposed, the oligarchs will not hesitate for one moment to bring retribution upon the poor and indigenous peoples of Latin America as they have done so many times before.

When people point to our own governments and the power they are conferring upon themselves to declare emergencies and strip civil rights and others say it is the thin edge of the wedge, they are pooh-poohed and tut-tutted by the very same people who now point to Chavez and scream "WITCH!!!"

What does the new constitution guarantee the historically deprived indigenous and colored populations of Venezuela?

- Health Care
- Right to a free education expanded from high school to university.
- The state will promote a diversified and independent economic model, in which the interests of the community prevail over individual interests and that guarantee the social and material needs of the people. The state is no longer obliged to promote private enterprise.
- Introduces new forms of property, in addition to private property. The new forms are (1) public property, belonging to state bodies, (2) direct and indirect social property, belonging to the society in general, where indirect social property is administered by the state and direct is administered by particular communities, (3) collective property, which belongs to particular groups, (4) mixed property, which can be a combination of ownership of any of the previous five forms.
- Venezuela's foreign policy is directed towards creating a pluri-polar world, free of hegemonies of any imperialist, colonial, or neo-colonial power.
- Strengthening of the mandate to unify Latin America, so as to achieve what Simon Bolivar called, "A Nation of Republics."
- The state will promote the active participation of the people, restoring power to the population (instead of decentralizing the state).
- Municipalities are obligated to include in their activities the participation of councils of popular power.

Maybe Chavez will turn out to be what people fear. Maybe he will deliver what he has promised to the people of Venezuela.

What is certain is that if he fails, the disenfranchised poor, black, and indigenous populations of Venezuela will pay dearly and will not get another chance for many generations to come.

[ 30 November 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 30 November 2007 01:55 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh yes, the Chavez "reforms" (which you first claimed did not give him any increased power) are now to be justified by a potted comparison to Canadian law.

Really, you ought to read the Human Rights Watch Report, which explains it all quite well.

http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/11/29/venezu17447.htm

And Fidel! Fidel sinks to a new low, suggesting that emergency powers for Chavez personally are required in cases of natural disaster.

Oh right! There might be a hurricane, so the right to a fair trial has to be removed.!

So why does the "reform" say that The President may declare a state of emergency which may include:

"circumstances of a social, economic, POLITICAL, natural, or ecological nature"?

quote:
Se califican expresamente como tales las circunstancias de orden social, económico, político, natural o ecológico

Article 337


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 30 November 2007 02:05 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My last comment on this is above yours and it is my last on this topic. Feel free to continue with your hysterics.
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 30 November 2007 02:19 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
More on this:

quote:
This was also a racial strategy as La Paz and its sister city El Alto are at the heart of the country's majority Indian population that support Morales and mobilized in 2003 to topple an oligarchic president in La Paz who murdered Indian demonstrators in the streets.

In Sucre in recent months right wing militants have menaced and assaulted delegates of MAS, including Silvia Lazarte, the Assembly's indigenous women president. The Assembly has been effectively prevented from functioning since August 15.



http://www.counterpunch.org/burbach11262007.html

From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 30 November 2007 02:20 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, it is certainly hysterical to quote the actual text of the "reform".

Here's another one, from the Venezuelan government website you provided:

quote:
Art. 265 - Supreme Court judges may be removed from office by a simple majority vote of the National Assembly, instead of a two-thirds majority and an accusation by the citizen power.

In democratic countries, judges have security of tenure. That way, they can be independent of the politicians of the day. Imagine what Canada would be like if every "majority" government could remove the judges of the Supreme Court "by simply majority vote" in Parliament.

Only toadies would support this crap.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 30 November 2007 02:30 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That sounds like a position once held by Canada's current governing party which still does advocate politicizing Canada's judiciary and which still does have the right to call emergency powers not unlike the proposed Venezuelan constitution. Why are you not hysterical about that?

And again, at least Venezuelans get a vote.


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 30 November 2007 02:30 PM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:
Yes, it is certainly hysterical to quote the actual text of the "reform".

Here's another one, from the Venezuelan government website you provided:

In democratic countries, judges have security of tenure. That way, they can be independent of the politicians of the day. Imagine what Canada would be like if every "majority" government could remove the judges of the Supreme Court "by simply majority vote" in Parliament.

Only toadies would support this crap.


So Jeff tell us which government of Venezala have you supported in the last 30 years.

emergency powers for the President only,wow.

Bush Has Already Given Himself the Same Powers
So Jeff did you scream as loudly when George II granted himself the same type of powers back in March?


From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 30 November 2007 02:48 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:
In democratic countries, judges have security of tenure. That way, they can be independent of the politicians of the day. Imagine what Canada would be like if every "majority" government could remove the judges of the Supreme Court "by simply majority vote" in Parliament.

Only toadies would support this crap.


Oh sure, and supreme court judges in Texas have never been bankrolled by a corporate cabal with tacit approval of Republican Party toadies.

Jeff, no person or so-called democratic institution has ever existed independently or "at arm's length" from North American governments and the powerful corporate lobby. At least not since Brian Baloney introduced Warshington style lobbying to Ottawa.

And this is especially true of our Central Bank. They haven't been independent of the likes of former bond salesmen like Michael Wilson. Or like Oxford graduate John Crow, who the news media propagandized Canadians into believing he made no friends while attending the high falutin' university for would-be world beaters and dominators of national finance.

Chavez understands that Venezuelans don't vote for IMF heads or central bankers. And BIS bankers meet behind closed doors and vote on issues affecting global economies and without any government's elected officials present. That's not democratic. These people are connected and owe favours to that class of people who don't carry lunch pails or brown paper bags to work everyday, and especially not the unemployed whose daily lives really are affected during those closed door meetings of central bankers.

quote:
"Once a nation parts with the control of its currency and credit, it matters not who makes the nations laws. Usury, once in control,
will wreck any nation. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred
responsibility, all talk of the sovereignty of parliament and of democracy is idle and futile."
- William Lyon Mackenzie King in a speech made leading up to 1935 Canadian elections

From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 30 November 2007 02:52 PM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:

In democratic countries, judges have security of tenure. That way, they can be independent of the politicians of the day. Imagine what Canada would be like if every "majority" government could remove the judges of the Supreme Court "by simply majority vote" in Parliament.

Only toadies would support this crap.


That's because in our system, no matter which party is in power, the same people actually rule. So we can pretend that the judiciary is independent.


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 30 November 2007 04:18 PM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
Maybe Chavez will turn out to be what people fear. Maybe he will deliver what he has promised to the people of Venezuela.

What is certain is that if he fails, the disenfranchised poor, black, and indigenous populations of Venezuela will pay dearly and will not get another chance for many generations to come.



You know, if Chavez was sincerely concerned with health care, education and the recognition of African-Venezuelans he could have submitted those amendments to the Venezuelan people without these self-serving executive powers piggy-backing on top of them.

Right now it's clear that the "good parts" of this scheme are simply there to tempt voters to swallow the whole rotten mess. Chavez is holding the Venezuelan people, and their aspirations, hostage. Sure, he is willing to recognise the contribution of African-Venezuelans and guarantee access to education and health care, but only if the people give him what he wants.


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 30 November 2007 04:36 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Free_Radical:

You know, if Chavez was sincerely concerned with health care, education and the recognition of African-Venezuelans he could have submitted those amendments to the Venezuelan people without these self-serving executive powers piggy-backing on top of them.

Aha! So you're on to Chavez and his plan to do evil in the world then?

quote:
Right now it's clear that the "good parts" of this scheme are simply there to tempt voters to swallow the whole rotten mess.

So you're saying it's all too good to be true, and that Chavez and his evil-doer anti-globalizationists are plotting behind the scenes to ... do what then? Why would he challenge the empire of good and fairness in order to simply line his own pockets or perhaps carrying out a remote-controlled agenda on behalf of a global KAOS cabal of socialists? Would his challenging the empire have anything to do with their trying to bump him off in 2002?


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 30 November 2007 05:13 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 30 November 2007 05:22 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
pffff! shhh
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 30 November 2007 05:41 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Okay, Free_Radical, seriously, you're okay. So why don't we try a serious conversation?

How many modern nations do not have provisions for executive control in an emergency?

[ 30 November 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 01 December 2007 05:15 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
How many modern nations do not have provisions for executive control in an emergency?[/QB]

I would take a guess and say that every country has some provisions for invoking special powers in the face of an emergency, including Venezuela today, under the current constitution.

Chavez isn't suddenly creating emergency measures where none ever existed before, he is altering the ones he already has - making them easier to invoke, easier to extend and the office of president less accountable.

Obviously you are unwilling, or unable, to exert the intellectual effort to actually analyse what these articles entail.

Emergency powers are always dangerous territory and require a serious effort to balance expediency with respect for human rights and freedoms. The protections that are lost under the proposed emergency measures - such as the right to due process, to be presumed innocent until guilty, or to hear the charges and evidence against you - blatantly violate accepted international norms.


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 01 December 2007 06:01 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here's what American James Petras has to say about emergency powers in Venezuela:

quote:
The amendment allowing the executive to declare a state of emergency and intervene in the media in the face of violent activity to overthrow the constitution is essential for safeguarding democratic institutions. In light of several authoritarian violent attempts to seize power recently by the current opposition, the amendment allows dissent but also allows democracy to defend itself against the enemies of freedom. In the lead up to the US-backed military coup of April 11, 2002, and the petroleum lockout by its senior executives which devastated the economy (a decline of 30% of GNP in 2002/2003), if the Government had possessed and utilized emergency powers, Congress and the Judiciary, the electoral process and the living standards of the Venezuelan people would have been better protected. Most notably, the Government could have intervened against the mass media aiding and abetting the violent overthrow of the democratic process, like any other democratic government. It should be clear that the amendment allowing for 'emergency powers' has a specific context and reflects concrete experiences: the current opposition parties, business federations and church hierarchies have a violent, anti-democratic history. The destabilization campaign against the current referendum and the appeals for military intervention most prominently and explicitly stated by retired General Baduel (defended by his notorious adviser-apologist, the academic-adventurer Heinz Dietrich), are a clear indication that emergency powers are absolutely necessary to send a clear message that reactionary violence will be met by the full force of the law.

The reduction of voting age from 18 to 16 will broaden the electorate, increase the number of participants in the electoral process and give young people a greater say in national politics through institutional channels. Since many workers enter the labor market at a young age and in some cases start families earlier, this amendment allows young workers to press their specific demands on employment and contingent labor contracts.


None of our experts in constitutional democracy and "due process" dares mention the CIA-backed military coup against Chavez in 2002. Clearly that would be considered a precedent for need of emergency powers. Surely there should be some ability for the democratically-elected government of the people(landslide Chavez) to occasionally put a stop to privately owned TV and radio stations which openly encourage and foment riots in the streets and general violence, anarchy and that sort of thing. Thuggery is not democratic process. It may be a right to protest, but occasionally and invariably, something's got to be done to curtail CIA-Venezuelan elitist attempts to interfere with that country's democracy.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 01 December 2007 06:14 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Obviously you are unwilling, or unable, to exert the intellectual effort to actually analyse what these articles entail.

Emergency powers are always dangerous territory and require a serious effort to balance expediency with respect for human rights and freedoms. The protections that are lost under the proposed emergency measures - such as the right to due process, to be presumed innocent until guilty, or to hear the charges and evidence against you - blatantly violate accepted international norms.



Okay, so you don't want to have a serious conversation. Got it.

If you had any intellect upon which to make an effort, you would recognize that in all executive emergency powers is suspension of due process, the presumption of innocence, to hear the charges against you, to face your accusers,, or all international norms including Canada's own emergency measures which I am sure you protest every day.

The US has introduced sweeping measures, sans a national emergency, that has resulted in at least one American citizen being tortured to the point of madness and nary a cry from the "Venezuelan sky is falling" crowd such as yourself.

My guess is you would defend those measures as the "War on Terriers".

Venezuela, on the other hand, faces a historic existential threat that remains real. If any nation, today, in the hemisphere, requires additional powers to respond to a threat, it is Venezuela.

So making that asset-less effort, why would you argue Venezuela has less of a right to take measures to protect the state than Canada or the USA?

And, again, as you seme thick on this, the Venezuelans are actually going through a democratic process. They are debating these very same issues and they will be voting on them.

When did you vote for the emergency measures bestowed upon our government? In that case, isn't Venezuela really more of a democracy?


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 01 December 2007 07:08 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This thread is clearly a vehicle for the usual suspects to yell at each other about Venezuelan politics, not an anti-racist discussion.

So I'm moving this to the international news forum.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
peacenik2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10286

posted 01 December 2007 07:21 AM      Profile for peacenik2        Edit/Delete Post
Mark Weisbrot, an economist and co-director and co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, speaks about the Venezuelan Constitution:

http://tinyurl.com/3xeqph


From: Nova Scotia, Canada | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 01 December 2007 07:25 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
. . . all executive emergency powers is suspension of due process, the presumption of innocence, to hear the charges against you, to face your accusers, or all international norms including Canada's own emergency measures which I am sure you protest every day.

Actually, they don't. You yourself posted the details on what Canadian authorities may due during an emergency several posts back.

Nary a word about the suspension of due process or the right to a fair trial:

quote:
The government may, at its discretion:

* regulate or prohibit travel when it is deemed necessary for health and safety reasons
* remove people and their possessions from their homes
* use or dispose of non-government property at its discretion
* authorize and pay persons to provide essential services that are deemed necessary
* ration and control essential goods, services and resources
* authorize emergency payments
* establish emergency shelters and hospitals
* assess and repair damaged infrastructure
* convict or indict those who contradict any of the above.



Funny, that.

Like I said, since you are unwilling to do the work yourself, here are just a few of the established international authorities on the rights of citizens and and the legal process:

quote:
Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
Article 10

Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11

(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.


quote:
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights:
Article 4

1. In time of public emergency which threatens the life of the nation and the existence of which is officially proclaimed, the States Parties to the present Covenant may take measures derogating from their obligations under the present Covenant to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation, provided that such measures are not inconsistent with their other obligations under international law and do not involve discrimination solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin.
2. No derogation from articles 6, 7, 8 (paragraphs I and 2), 11, 15, 16 and 18 may be made under this provision.

Article 15

1. No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time when the criminal offence was committed. If, subsequent to the commission of the offence, provision is made by law for the imposition of the lighter penalty, the offender shall benefit thereby.



You will recall that the Chavez's amendment only guarantees a defence lawyer and a judge (and it says nothing about the impartiality of the judge). Nothing else.

But I'm glad to see you recognise that these measures are about as rotten as Bush's PATRIOT Act. We seem to be making some progress here.

Anyway, you really ought to read the report by Human Rights Watch that Jeff posted, they do a far more thorough and competent job analysing the amendments than I could.

[ 01 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 01 December 2007 07:37 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Nary a word about the suspension of due process or the right to a fair trial:

Talk about lazy and being unprepared to do any work. Those are from the CBC, they aren't the language of the act. I know you think of CBC as the ultimate authority, but they are not.

When the government seizes your property in a national emergency and jails you if you get in the way, what due process takes place? Are you really that naive?

And of course, being lazy I suppose, you have failed to answer my questions. Did you vote for Canada's constitution and emergency measures act?

Why are Venezuelans entitled to more democracy than Canadians?

quote:
Anyway, you really ought to read the report by Human Rights Watch that Jeff posted, they do a far more thorough and competent job analysing the amendments than I could.

No doubt. But have you read what they said about Canada's security certificates? Or are you only interested in those governments seeking to expand democracy to indigenous peoples and people of color?

[ 01 December 2007: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 01 December 2007 07:52 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
Talk about lazy and being unprepared to do any work. Those are from the CBC, they aren't the language of the act.

Says the one who didn't look it up themselves in the first place before mouthing off about it . . . but I digress.

Anyway, here you go, on a silver plater:

quote:
Emergencies Act ( 1985, c. 22 (4th Supp.) ):
AND WHEREAS the Governor in Council, in taking such special temporary measures, would be subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian Bill of Rights and must have regard to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, particularly with respect to those fundamental rights that are not to be limited or abridged even in a national emergency;

No, preambles aren't necessarily binding, but I don't feel like picking through the full text with a fine-toothed comb just to satisfy you. Either way, the preamble has been used before by the Supreme Court to interpret the law. It would be very difficult (read borderline impossible) for the Canadian government to wield the same power Chavez is looking for.

[ 01 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 01 December 2007 08:00 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
No, preambles aren't necessarily binding

quote:
It would be very difficult (read borderline impossible) for the Canadian government to wield the same power Chavez is looking for.

You really are naive.

In the US, the Patriot Act, it is said, does not apply to US citizens. Yet a US citizen was arrested, tortured, and driven mad in the process as an enemy combatant - something that isn't supposed to happen.

No "independent judge" freed the man. No international court or body took notice. Not one person in authority has been held to account.

In Canada, in the last war, persons of Japanese descent, despite our laws, despite the magna carta, were arrested, dispossessed and sent to concentration camps.

In a state of emergency, the government rules, it can suspend the constitution, and the courts can sort it all out later well after it is far too late.

Grow up and stop being a child.

And one more time, at least the Venezuelans have a vote on their constitution. They can reject it. You never had a say at all. And you think you can teach them about democracy. What a laugh.


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
ceti
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7851

posted 01 December 2007 10:03 AM      Profile for ceti     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That's the privileged oh so liberal Gringo speak where the darkies cannot be trusted to govern themselves, nor decide their own future. It's pretty disgusting to see this kind of attitude on rabble come up over and over again.
From: various musings before the revolution | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 01 December 2007 10:15 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
In Canada, in the last war, persons of Japanese descent, despite our laws, despite the magna carta, were arrested, dispossessed and sent to concentration camps.

That would have been before either the Canadian Bill of Rights (1960) or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982). Unless Mackenzie King was a time traveller (though with him, who knows), he was acting in an era when we didn't have the same protections of rights and freedoms as today.

Anyway, I've gotten about as much fun as is possible out of beating this dead horse and I'll excuse myself from the debate. Feel free to continue to indulge in the delusion that you're right. Only tomorrow will tell.

Hopefully the Venezuelan people are more informed - and more concerned - about their democracy than you are. No doubt they are. While I'm sure you must find it fun to vicariously bask in "la revolucion" from afar, I imagine it's a lot different when you actually live there.


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 01 December 2007 10:42 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Free_Radical:

I'm sure you must find it fun to vicariously bask in "la revolucion" from afar, I imagine it's a lot different when you actually live there.

Why is it that part-time amateur democrats ever take trips to Guatemala, El Salvador, Haiti or Honduras, and observe what it's really like for people living in U.S.-sponsored shitholes? They only come out of the woodwork when there's a chance for a popular leader to make real differences in the majority of people's lives.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 01 December 2007 12:48 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's worth noting that those who are opposed to the constitutional changes fail to consider that the existing constitution certainly did not protect the Venezuelan populace from state violence and oppression in the past. If a government chooses to use violence against it's population.

The present constitution has done more to protect the interests of the ruling elite than the majority of the people, this is not dissimilar from western democracies where the interests of the elite are protected through creating the appearance of justice.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 01 December 2007 01:57 PM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by N.R.KISSED:
. . . existing constitution . . . present constitution . . .

It is also worth noting that the constitution Venezuela has today was written by Chavez in 1999 (it replaced the 1961 constitution) - but I assume you didn't realise that

From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 01 December 2007 02:49 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Chavez will not be the only President of Venezuela from now until the end of time. Some day, perhaps sooner than we think, he will either die, retire, lose and election or be deposed. Once the constitution is amended to give him these vast new powers, those vast powers will then be available to every future Venezuelan president - regardless of ideology.

That means that if a rightwing pro-American becomes President of Venezuela, that person will be able to rule by decree thanks to these amendments that people seem to think only applies to Chavez.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 01 December 2007 03:11 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sarkozy could conceivably be president of France for 30 years if the people appreciated his right wingyness for as long. But we're not wetting our pants over that possibility for some reason or other. Fascists of the last century and this one have been known to take liberties with rules anyway, so what's the big deal? The "Liberal" Democrats have all the legal opportunity and popular support for impeaching Cheney and Bush for crimes ranging from lying to Congress about WMD in Iraq to causing the death of over a million and a half innocent Iraqis and American soldiers to defrauding American taxpayers of several hundred billion dollars for an immoral war on poor people. And yet they choose to kowtow to the Republican mafia's agenda in Warshington.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 01 December 2007 03:20 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
After that incomprehensible, incoherent stream of consciousness drivel - what more is there to say?
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 01 December 2007 03:27 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If the people don't want Chavez, all they have to do is not vote for him in the next election. That's very similar to what you've parroted time and again wrt phony majority dictatorships in the last three most politically conservative and most politically backward nations. Remember?
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 01 December 2007 03:28 PM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by ceti:
That's the privileged oh so liberal Gringo speak where the darkies cannot be trusted to govern themselves, nor decide their own future. It's pretty disgusting to see this kind of attitude on rabble come up over and over again.
I agree.

This kind of crap would never be tolerated in the feminism or anti-racism forums. I don't know why it is tolerated here at all.


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 01 December 2007 03:34 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

That means that if a rightwing pro-American becomes President of Venezuela, that person will be able to rule by decree thanks to these amendments that people seem to think only applies to Chavez.

That's already happened throughout Latin America during the cold war with a number of brutal U.S.-backed dictatorships. As in, "they weren't legitimate" If I had a dollar for every time I reminded you of things like this, I'd be independently wealthy by now.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 01 December 2007 03:50 PM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
This kind of crap would never be tolerated in the feminism or anti-racism forums. I don't know why it is tolerated here at all.

Are you trying to say that anyone who does not approach this subject from a pro-Chavez point of view should be banned from the discussion (or from the site altogether?) in the same manner as they would be in the feminism or anti-racism forums?

From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 01 December 2007 03:57 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
That's already happened throughout Latin America during the cold war with a number of brutal U.S.-backed dictatorships.

It was wrong then and this is wrong now. I just don't buy this argument that just because the "right" sometimes plays dirty that gives the left license to bring in undemocratic measures and build up dictatorial personality cults.

Two wrongs don't make a right.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
The Wizard of Socialism
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2912

posted 01 December 2007 03:58 PM      Profile for The Wizard of Socialism   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Like most people, when I think of the brave fight of the Venezuelans against the tyranny of the dictator chavez, I think of the parallel fight that the Rebel Alliance faced in George Lucas' "Star Wars" universe.

In 1978 CBS aired "The Star Wars Holiday Special" in which Carrie Fisher sings a song about their struggle for freedom to the Star Wars instrumental music. I've included a link to the YouTube video. To hear the song, start it at 1:41. This one's going out to all the brave Venezuelan rebels, fighting for not only their freedom, but ours as well. Happy Life Day!

This is the promise of the Tree of Life.

[ 01 December 2007: Message edited by: The Wizard of Socialism ]


From: A Proud Canadian! | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 01 December 2007 04:08 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

It was wrong then and this is wrong now. I just don't buy this argument that just because the "right" sometimes plays dirty that gives the left license to bring in undemocratic measures and build up dictatorial personality cults.

Two wrongs don't make a right.


I think you should sift through this database(and it's actually incomplete with U.S.-backed Pol Pot to OBL and company missing), and get back to us with which of those examples fits up with Chavez. See ya


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 01 December 2007 05:23 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well in my opinion, none of you, including Jeff, have made a serious claim against Chavez' dictatorial, nsuh!@, I mean democratic changes to Venezuela's constitution. Various stoogeocrats in Canada have made constitutional changes in this country over the years without raising significant protest.

However, I must say that Ottawa's attempt to give "independence" to Canada's central bank was voted down in 1982 by an all-parties finance committee. As it is with Chavez' proposal today, our own representatives in Ottawa weren't convinced that central banks should operate in a fully independent manner from democratically elected government back then either. And with several bank bailouts in Canada as well as the U.S. since 1982, it is looking more and more like a prudent decision not to enshrine bank independence in Canada's constitution.

And if we remember, Mulroney and Chretien signed us all up for FTA and NAFTA after federal elections with those two issues being major elections issues in 1988 and 1993. The majority of Canadians voted against those two controversial trade agreements according to campaign platforms of the three major parties. In spite of being a country with one of the most well educated and informed publics, Canada has been ruled by what many have described as paternalistic and somewhat dictatorial governments since at least 1984.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 01 December 2007 06:03 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is about Venezuela not Canada. I don't see any reason why Chavez needs this dictatorial "enabling act" to implement his program. It's all just about personal aggrandizement.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 01 December 2007 06:31 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
This is about Venezuela not Canada.

Central Bank "independence" It was a constitutional issue in Ottawa in 1982. And now the same issue looms large in Venezuela and being voted on tomorrow in a national referendum in that country. Pay attention.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 01 December 2007 06:35 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It is also worth noting that the constitution Venezuela has today was written by Chavez in 1999 (it replaced the 1961 constitution) - but I assume you didn't realise that

Nice petty one-upmanship and a complete deflection from the point,the constitution prior to Chavez did not prevent state violence, oppression and dictatorship. Which raises the larger point that constitutions and laws are only guidelines and rules and the only rules that Dictators utilize is the rule of force, they do not respect and law or constituiton that gets in the way of their will and desire for absolute control, they do not change rules through democratic means.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 01 December 2007 06:55 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
They neglect to mention that 167 national assembly deputies have voted on and approved the amendments laid out in writing by Venezuela's democratically elected government in the same process that was used in 1999.

I wonder why our fearless leaders in Ottawa were never as thoughtful with putting FTA and NAFTA to referendums? And why won't our stoogeocrats trust Canadian voters with a referendum on SPP, deep integration and customs union with that bankrupt national security state to the south of us?

Corporate America siphons off millions of barrels of Canadian oil and oceans of natural gas every day at firesale prices, and our colonial administrators can't afford to build a bloody hospital in AnywhereVille Canada. God help us.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 01 December 2007 07:03 PM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
UNfortunately, this constitutional reform has ten undemocratic sham clauses hidden by a figleaf of a few things that sound nice on paper.

There is no excuse for giving the President new powers that he doesn't already have to arbitrarily censor the media and declare "states of emergency" on a whim and start assaulting freedom of speech.

Pinochet tried something similar when Chile had a referendum on a new consitution in 1989 that would have given Pinochet vast new powers and made him president for life. Chileans voted NO, and hopefully Venezuelans will also vote NO.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 01 December 2007 07:17 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
Pinochet tried something similar when Chile had a referendum on a new consitution in 1989 that would have given Pinochet vast new powers and made him president for life. Chileans voted NO, and hopefully Venezuelans will also vote NO.

Pinochet was illegitimate from day one 9-11-73.
He was a U.S.-backed tin pot who is now believed to have pocketed some $27 million dollars belonging to the people of Chile. With the oversight of Milton Friedman's apprentices, Pinochet re-wrote the Chilean Constitution, and he made sure to protect his own immunity as part of the reforms while agreeing to hand over power to a civilian government in 1990.

General Pinochet also guaranteed 10 percent of the copper revenues went to the military. Revenues from copper, the hard currency that drove economic recovery post laissez failure from 1985 forward, remained in government hands, which was Allende's posthumous gift to the Chilean people.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 01 December 2007 09:43 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here's some of the outstanding positives from the proposed Constitutional Reform, to be voted on by the Venezuelan people tomorrow:

1. A new citizens' right called "the right to the city". This right shall entitle ALL of the citizens to equal access to the city's services or benefits.

Just imagine this in Canada. Developers would lose their special privileged access and City Planning might actually come to mean something other than an empty slogan. Capitalist and land developer interests in our country would react with the same murderous venom that the privileged reacted with when the workers dared to strike for simple recognition rights in 1919.

2. Renaming Caracas as the cradle of Simon Bolivar, the Liberator and Queen of the Warairarepano (an indigenous name for the mountain range surrounding Caracas).

3. Citizen rights and duties. Take a deep breath.
Such things aren't even imagined in Canada:

* Voting age lowered to 16 years,

* gender parity in candidacies,

* creation of councils of popular power,

* social security fund for self-employed,

* reduction of workweek to 36 hours,

* recognition of Venezuelans of African descent,

* free university education,

* introduction of communal and social property.

Each one of these, taken alone, would require a titanic bloody struggle in our own country, probably requiring a general strike or a protracted, decades-long battle at least. Taken as a group, making so many positive changes in one fell swoop is simply outstanding.

I love the idea of social security for the self-employed. It has been several decades now that the despicable, but highly profitable, capitalist practice of turning employees into "jobbers" and such to off load liability, pensions, and all sorts of "expenses" that interfere with unfettered profit-taking, whatever the human cost has been going on. Hear, hear.

The new forms of property are really worth delving DEEPLY into. Here is a selection:

quote:
Art. 115 - Introduces new forms of property, in addition to private property. The new forms are (1) public property, belonging to state bodies, (2) direct and indirect social property, belonging to the society in general, where indirect social property is administered by the state and direct is administered by particular communities, (3) collective property, which belongs to particular groups, (4) mixed property, which can be a combination of ownership of any of the previous five forms.

Eat your heart out, Soviet Russia. And eat your heart out, as well, all those whose fetid imagination cannot fathom anything but private capitalist property or dull, lifeless state public property that belongs to no one.

4. Prohibits foreign countries to fund political activity.

This is long overdue and good, common sense. Of course, the minions of imperialism will wail like banshees about this.

5. Creation of institutions of popular power "not born of suffrage nor any election, but out of the condition of the human groups that are organized as the base of the population. This is like a human right to participate in the affairs of state. It is far beyond making marks on pieces of paper so some asshole can violate their own promises and undertakings made during a vacuous "election" campaign. More democracy. More power to the people. Yippie kay yay.

6. Citizen assemblies with right to recall powers in regard to the executive bodies formed from their members.

7. A prohibition on privatizing the jails. Hear, hear.

8. Treating national businesses more favourably than foreign businesses.

Take your "free trade" and drop dead, Yanqui.

9. There are a number of references to democratic and anti-imperialist foreign policy and military, as well as transforming the military reserves into a militia. I believe that is a citizen army ... and that the armed forces of Venezuela shall never be at the service of a foreign power.

Choke on it, Yanqui. Choke on it and die.

And that's just the first batch of changes from Chavez and the National Assembly. There's another batch as well. Amazing.

The great Liberator (El Libertador), Simon Bolivar, hero of millions, would have been honoured to know that his name would be attached to such open partisanship for the common man and woman almost two centuries after his death.

[ 01 December 2007: Message edited by: N.Beltov ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152

posted 01 December 2007 10:11 PM      Profile for ghoris     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Those all look lovely on paper (and taken in isolation from all the truly anti-democratic things in the proposal), but the whole exercise seems to me to be a bit like waving a magic wand and thinking that - poof! - all of these things will happen.

People might vote for it, but whether it actually gets implemented is another matter. I guess if people trust that Chavez will actually obey the constitution and rule of law, then I could see why they would support this. I'm not so optimistic.


From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Boyd Reimer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14289

posted 02 December 2007 06:15 AM      Profile for Boyd Reimer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hello friends:

Today Venezualans will be asked, in a referendum, if they support amendments to their constitution:

"Land for the hungry to grow food" is a topic on many voters minds.

"One [amendment] article expedites land expropriation facilitating re-distribution to the landless and small producers. Chavez has already settled over 150,000 landless workers on 2 million acres of land." (quote from James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University, New York--See first link, below.)

With land, the poor can grow food for themselves instead of going hungry like many are presently. With land, small producers can also have power over future food sources to prevent future hunger--a fact that the wealthy inside and outside Venezuala have not focused on. Instead the wealthy are focused on keeping their power and getting Venezuala's oil.

That's probably why the media battles are taking place all around the world.

Also planned for today were real physical violent battles according to a memo from the US embassy in Venezuala to the CIA: Another coup in Venezual was planned (just like the failed one in 2002 documented in the video "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised"). Just like in 2002, today's strategy, revealed in the below memo, shows that media battles always assist physical battles.

A brief analysis of the memo is here:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/2911

---------------------------------------

For further reading:

The actual Nov 26, 2007 memo itself (in Spanish) from the US embassy in Caracas, Venezuala, to the CIA.
http://www.aporrea.org/tiburon/n105390.html (It will be available in English as soon as the translators carefully translate it.)

An English itemization of the some of the contents of the memo:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/2914

--------------------------------------

What's all the fuss about? Here is the question being asked in the referendum and key articles of the constitutional reform being voted on today:
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/2889

Response to right-wing media on the question of "Is Venezuala is still a democracy?":
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/2888 (By the way, no one thought it was cause for a violent uprising when Trudeau was an elected leader for a total of 15 years.)

As you can see, work of http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/ is again very helpful as it has been for over four years.
I would suggest bookmarking it to provide more balance in our sources. Presently our sources of information are being too heavily influenced by the wealthy around the world who want Venezuala's oil.

Also helpful is an economic analysis of Venezuala coming from Focus on the Global South here:
http://www.focusweb.org/the-economic-policy-of-the-latin-american-left-in-government.html?Itemid=94


Bye,
Boyd Reimer


From: Toronto | Registered: Jul 2007  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 06:56 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
4. Prohibits foreign countries to fund political activity.

Will that also bar Venezuela from funding political activity in other countries? Or is it only that other countries can't fund political activity in Venezuela?


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 07:09 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

Will that also bar Venezuela from funding political activity in other countries? Or is it only that other countries can't fund political activity in Venezuela?


Jeez! Political interference in dozens of countries around the world is considered illegal. The CIA are old hands at tainting democracy, election rigging, political assassinations, military coups, dirty tricks, terrorism, skull duggery, ...

quote:
"The Illegal we can do now. The unconstitutional will take a little longer." -- Henry Kissinger trying to be funny at a cocktail party

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 07:17 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
By all accounts Chavez has been funneling money to parties and candidates he favours in other Latin American countries - I'm just wondering whether that will all come to an end if this referendum passes?
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 02 December 2007 07:22 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Boyd Reimer:
The actual Nov 26, 2007 memo itself (in Spanish) from the US embassy in Caracas, Venezuala, to the CIA.
http://www.aporrea.org/tiburon/n105390.html (It will be available in English as soon as the translators carefully translate it.)


Doesn't it seem kind of funny that this memo would need to be translated into English?

Presumably, the Venezuelan officials would have intercepted an English copy of "Operation Pliers" in the first place, or do all U.S. embassies communicate with CIA headquarters solely in Spanish these days? What a farce

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 07:24 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The CIA are old hands at tainting democracy, election rigging, political assassinations, military coups, dirty tricks, terrorism, skull duggery, ...

So??? THis isn't about a referendum in the US stopping the CIA from interfering in other countries. It's about whether or not Venezuela should give massive, scary dictatorial powers to whoever is President from now until the end of time.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 07:30 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

So??? ...


I think your comments are pretty scary sometimes.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 07:34 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Free_Radical:

Doesn't it seem kind of funny that this memo would need to be translated into English?

Presumably, the Venezuelan officials would have intercepted an English copy of "Operation Pliers" in the first place, or do all U.S. embassies communicate with CIA headquarters solely in Spanish these days? What a farce

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


Ya, the CIA blew their $45 billion dollar budget for the year with Iraq/Iran and are reduced to using unilingual spooks in Caracas. Apparently their embassy spooks are wobbling for better pay by communicating in Spanish.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 02 December 2007 07:41 AM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post
Apparently, some are willing to overlook the massive damage, liberty-smashing & civilian deaths caused by US imperialism, and they end up spouting Pentagonal doctrine. Isn't this a leftwing discussion forum ?

Throughout recent history, the US has shown a pattern of having a ruthless hands-on approach WRT infiltrating and attacking foreign leftist nations and/or supporting Fascist military dictatorships.

The imperialistic US pattern usually works according to one of these different scenario-sequences.

1) The US funds and helps to implement an authoritarian military dictatorship, or murderous counter-insurgency, to counter a perceived foreign ideological 'threat'.

2) The US then views & treats the established Fascist regime as an ally, or attacks/unravels it later out of short-term convenience or because the regime gets out of control.


Study the history of Germany, Chile, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Columbia, Iraq, Pakistan and other countries for evidence.

-----------------------------------------------

1) Leftist populism implements/elects a leftist government.

2) The US initiates infiltration, sabotage, assasination plots, manipulation, coups, clandestine or explicit targetting and invasions of sovereignty, in order to thwart and destroy the leftist manifestation.

3) The established leftist government responds defensively to threat 2), usually with *some* degree of increased hardline stances / retaliatory authoritarianism.

4) The US-based Neo-Liberal/Neo-Conservative corporate mainstream media monopoly starts covering the story only from 3), without mentioning 1) & 2).

Study the history of Germany, Chile, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Columbia, Iraq, Pakistan, Venezuela, and other countries for evidence.

How does anyone on a leftwing discussion forum avoid identifying these well documented facts of reality ?

The US diverts billions in taxpayer dollars to build a massive military-industrial-prison complex, causing the highest domestic incarceration rate, the deaths of millions of civilians in hasty & unneccesary wars (Iraq, Vietnam) and secretive foreign prisons employing torture. How can any here be blind to this ?

We could fairly judge the efficacy, viability, legitamacy & morality of those leftist governments IF there was a HANDS-OFF atmosphere and approach provided by the US trillion dollar infiltration & domination machine, but since the US have consistently pursued the OTHER approach, of an aggressive HANDS-ON approach WRT foreign policy & perceived ideological threats, we really must avoid taking the mainstream corporate media view of biased omission of the facts.


From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 07:45 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
and none of that is any excuse for cheering on some military demagogue trying to create a personality cult who wants to amend his countries constitution in ways that seriously menace freedom of speech and the future of free-multiparty elections.

Chavez has enough power under the current constitution. He doesn't need this "enabling act"


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 02 December 2007 07:49 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
Ya, the CIA blew their $45 billion dollar budget for the year with Iraq/Iran and are reduced to using unilingual spooks in Caracas. Apparently their embassy spooks are wobbling for better pay by communicating in Spanish

I'm glad you find this glaring incongruity funny.

quote:
"I find the document quite suspect," said Jeremy Bigwood, an independent researcher in Washington. "There’s not an original version in English, and the timing of its release is strange."

(NY Times - In Chávez Territory, Signs of Dissent)

Who then, exactly, is this Jeremy Bigwood character, this slavish apologist for American imperialism?

Why, he is the guy who used the Freedom of Information Act to reveal U.S. funding of Venezuelan political groups in the past.

quote:
The U.S. documents, obtained through a freedom of information request filed by a researcher for the National Security Archive at George Washington University, show that $216,000 was provided from 2003 through this year to unnamed student groups at several universities for "conflict resolution," "democracy promotion" and other programs.

Jeremy Bigwood, the researcher, has obtained other documents in recent years showing U.S. aid for anti-Chavez groups. He said these documents show, at the very least, that the Bush administration wanted to "keep a finger on the pulse of the student movement."



(Washington Post - Students Become Potent Adversary To Chavez Vision)

Mr. Bigwood is clearly one of those principled investigative journalists who will not be swayed by blind adherence to some ideology.

Give it a try, sometime.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 02 December 2007 07:54 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by N.R.KISSED:
Nice petty one-upmanship and a complete deflection from the point.

No, I think it is a very important point worth making. Until now, you (and several others, no doubt) appear to have been under the illusion that Venezuela was burdened with some rotten constitution that predated the "Bolivarian Revolution". The truth is that Chavez already wrote a constitution in 1999, the constitution Venezuela has today, and now he's going back for more.

Moreover, if the "Si" side loses today, Venezuela will still have a Hugo Chavez-authored constitution.

So what's the big deal, then, if some people oppose his current "reforms"?

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 08:01 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The CIA and Bushler tried to overthrow Chavez three times already, and you're worried about one more accusation against Warshington, USSA? My god you're pathetic.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 08:03 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
...and regardless of whether Chavez's latest power grab passes or not - the US could still try to overthrow him. This changes nothing. All it does is give Chavez and any president that succeeds him in the future, more powers to arrest opponents and trample all over freedom of the press.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 02 December 2007 08:04 AM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Free_Radical:

So what's the big deal, then, if some people oppose his current "reforms"?

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


It's a referendum on whether the country should continue towards "21st century socialism". It's critical. (That's the real basis for the opposition.)


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 08:13 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It's a referendum on whether the country should continue towards "21st century socialism".

Bull shit. It's just a mad power grab by one megalomaniac. If people in Venezuela want "21st century socialism" all they have to do is keep voting for parties that have a socialist platform in elections held every four years.

I don't believe that a country's constitution should explicitly favour one political ideology over another. I'd be upset if Canada's constitution included language about Canada being a "Capitalist" country and i also object to the word socialism appearing in any country's constitution.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 02 December 2007 08:19 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
I don't believe that a country's constitution should explicitly favour one political ideology over another. I'd be upset if Canada's constitution included language about Canada being a "Capitalist" country and i also object to the word socialism appearing in any country's constitution.

Most of the articles, such as the reduced work week, pensions for the self-employed, lowering the voting age, etc. could have easily been enacted through legislation anyway. A constitutional amendment was not necessary at all.

Of course, Chavez needed something to sweeten the deal when the other articles strip away the independence of the judiciary and hand the president broad emergency powers.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 02 December 2007 08:20 AM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
and none of that is any excuse for cheering on some military demagogue trying to create a personality cult who wants to amend his countries constitution in ways that seriously menace freedom of speech and the future of free-multiparty elections.

Chavez has enough power under the current constitution. He doesn't need this "enabling act"


Why do you falsely imply that I am cheering him on ? You, OTOH, imply that the Pentagonal directives WRT leftist leaders are the way to go, because you never criticize those directives & policies, so I guess you cheer that approach on. Who initiated the polarized conflict ? Did Chavez send troops or assasination agents to the East coast of the US ?

Again, you ignore steps 1) & 2), and instead dive in with the AT&T/NBC/Fox News approach, via step 3).


What about the hands-off environment I referred to ? You see, that is really what it's all about. Does the US have the right to constantly meddle, murder & manipulate while you come in at step 3) and start bashing the Pentagon's target along with the mainstream corporate media ?

Do you want Washington to maintain it's aggressive & preemptive, paranoid, imperialistic meddling ? Then why do you not speak out against it and the disproportionately massive secrecy, power & wealth which is it's impetus ? Again, read steps 1) & 2), and study the history of Germany, Hitler, Prescott Bush, Vietnam, Chile, Pinochet, Nicaragua, Columbia, Afghanistan, the Mujahedein, Pakistan and Musharraf for some clues.

I know you want to introduce a scarecrow in order to ignore steps 1) & 2) and the reality of the Pentagon's influence in those countries and persons, but it doesn't deflect reality. You cannot escape the issue at hand, which is ultimately about the most powerful meddling force on earth in the last 80 years, and that is US foreign policy.

Again, I am not cheering on Chavez, so stop flailing away at scarecrows, and either admit & address the well documented sequence of historical reality, or you are simply choosing to be blind to it.

It's time for the US to take a non-interventionist / HANDS-OFF approach. If you disagree, then you are a right-wing authoritarian WRT foreign policy, buying into the highly omittive, corporate media bias.... on what is supposed to be a leftwing forum.

Again, what I *am* cheering on is the right of foreign countries to be free from the targetting and meddling policies of US foreign policy and the Pentagon.

Do you not support their right to be free from the largest & most powerful imperialistic meddler on earth ?


From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 08:22 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
'Operation Pincer': the CIA's role against Venezuela

Friday, November 30, 2007
By: Gloria La Riva

quote:
Only days before the vote, orchestrated attacks by opposition groups are increasing and a destabilization campaign is fully underway, directed and financed by Washington. A newly-discovered CIA communiqué calls for intensified attacks after Dec. 2.

José Aníbal Oliveros Yépez, a 19-year-old worker with Petrocasas in the city of Valencia, was murdered on Nov. 26. He was shot in the back by a group of opposition thugs responding to the CIA and Venezuelan right-wing’s call for terrorist violence to intimidate Chávez supporters. Petrocasas is a social project to build houses. Oliveros’ death has caused great consternation in the public.

This week Chávez denounced new assassination plots against him, after a red laser light was pointed at him in a public rally, indicating that a gun’s sights were possibly fixed on him. Cuban president Fidel Castro urged him to take more precautions.

These incidents are consistent with a newly-revealed CIA plot described in a U.S. embassy memorandum to CIA director Michael Hayden. Titled "Operation Pincer," dated Nov. 20, 2007 and exposed on Venezuela’s pro-revolution TV program, "La Hojilla," it details the U.S. multi-pronged campaign to discredit and disrupt the referendum.

Michael Middleton Steere, the U.S. embassy official reporting to the CIA in the memo, admits that by its own calculations a strong majority of Venezuelans, up to 57 percent, favors a "yes" referendum vote. The CIA memorandum says, "Our analyses show that this trend is irreversible in the short term, that is, in the next 15 days these percentages cannot be modified in a significant way."

The counter-revolutionary disturbances taking place, and tactics such as misleading poll results, are taken straight from the CIA planning book.


What's happened in Venezuela in the last two weeks corroborates the general outline of the leaked CIA memo. If it wasn't for the CIA's established history of dirty tricks and war on democracy in Latin America in general, then we might have some cause to question Venezuela's claim to the intercepted memo. The danger is very real with U.S. and Colombian troops amassed on Venezuela's border as we speak. The USSA, herr Bushler, and Uribe's right-wing death squad government represent a menace to democracy still.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 02 December 2007 08:25 AM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

I don't believe that a country's constitution should explicitly favour one political ideology over another. I'd be upset if Canada's constitution included language about Canada being a "Capitalist" country and i also object to the word socialism appearing in any country's constitution.

You don't mind then, as long as it's not made blatantly clear? Because we do have a capitalist constitution. There is no neutral constitution. But this is a matter of differing ideologies: You believe the state is neutral. I don't.

ETA: You can't "build socialism" just by electing a socialist party. Moving from capitalism to socialism is a matter of fundamental structural change.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: RosaL ]


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 08:29 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It's time for the US to take a non-interventionist / HANDS-OFF approach. If you disagree, then you are a right-wing authoritarian WRT foreign policy, buying into the highly omittive, corporate media bias.... on what is supposed to be a leftwing forum.

Again, what I *am* cheering on is the right of foreign countries to be free from the targetting and meddling policies of US foreign policy and the Pentagon.


I agree that the US should stop interfering in other countries. I also oppose violence against women and pedophilia.

But that is not what we are debating here. This is about whether Chavez should be granted dictatorial powers in a referendum in Venezuela today. This has nothing to do with the CIA (much as you wish it were otherwise) and everything to do with Venezuela being at risk of becoming a dictatorship.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 02 December 2007 08:30 AM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Stockholm should save his scaremongering for when Chávez comes out with a constitutional plan that would see:

1. Voters having to register before they can vote, and declare themselves to the state as a supporter of a particular party.

2. Abolition of the right to have recall referendums to throw the president out of office, and substituting instead a cumbersome legislative process of impeachment, available only for treason, bribery or other high crimes and misdemeanours.

3. Staggered elections for the National Assembly, so that too many crooks can't be voted out all at once.

4. The presidential power to veto legislation passed by the assembly.

5. Abolition of direct election of the President, using instead an electoral college composed of unelected people representing party votes in 23 states on a winner-take-all basis.

6. Making the President commander-in-chief of the army.

7. Allowing each state to set its own rules for the conduct of federal elections, including setting their own suffrage standards, method of counting votes, and the use of electronic voting machines or "chad" ballots.

8. Declaration that whatever the President does is by definition legal.

9. Giving the President the personal right to terminate and abrogate international treaties at will.

10. Giving the President the power to release or withhold funds to the executive branch, even after funds have been approved by the National Assembly.

11. Giving the President the power to rule by executive order, outside of times of national crisis.

12. Giving the President power to re-write laws passed by the National Assembly through the use of Presidential "signing statements".

13. Revoking constitutional guarantees of gender equality, and guaranteed minimum representation in legislative bodies for indigenous people.

14. Relegating the electorate to spectator status between elections, by abolishing 60,000 communal councils, organized into 10,000 communes, 3,000 cities, and 200 federal districts.

15. Making the Central Bank independent and not accountable to the elected government, but to private capital.

16. Abolition of the right to free education to the university level.

In other words, making Venezuela more like the United States of America.


From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 02 December 2007 08:31 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
What's happened in Venezuela in the last two weeks corroborates the general outline of the leaked CIA memo.

Would that be the translation, or the "original" Spanish?

Did the memo say anything about Chavez bing assassinated with a laster pointer? Or do we have to wait for the English translation?

Anyway, back to more serious matters, does anyone have any idea how things are going at the Venezuelan consulate in Toronto today (or elsewhere in Canada, for that matter)? Are voters being harassed by protesters like they were for the presidential elections last year?


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 02 December 2007 08:32 AM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post
Those who are willfully ignorant of the history of US imperialistic meddling in Central & South America, are doomed to unwittingly support it in the future.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/10/AR2006121000302.html


From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 08:36 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
Stockholm should save his scaremongering for when Chávez comes out with a constitutional plan that would see: . . .

15. Making the Central Bank independent and not accountable to the elected government, but to private capital.

16. Abolition of the right to free education to the university level.

In other words, making Venezuela more like the United States of America.


Excellent, M. Spector. And that Pilger video you posted several weeks ago entitled "The War on Democracy" was bueno, a must view. Gracias.

Viva La Revolucion!


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 08:42 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If there are some things in the "constitutional plan" that are agreeable and some things that are scary power grabs - why not have a ballot that lists all 60 amendments individually instead of having to vote for all or nothing?

I for one might happily vote YES to free post-secondary edeucation and then happily vote NO to giving the President the right to censor the media and declare states of emergency anytime he wants, extending the length of the presidential term and letting the president keep running indefinitely.

But i guess Chavez didn't do that because he was afraid that the only way to get his power grab was to sweeten the pot with some other stuff that could easily have been legislated into law on its own.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 02 December 2007 08:46 AM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:

I agree that the US should stop interfering in other countries. I also oppose violence against women and pedophilia.

But that is not what we are debating here. This is about whether Chavez should be granted dictatorial powers in a referendum in Venezuela today. This has nothing to do with the CIA (much as you wish it were otherwise) and everything to do with Venezuela being at risk of becoming a dictatorship.


Actually, if the US has targetted Chavez with it's tired & true, well documented pattern of imperialistic meddling, then it is very VERY much what we are discussing here, and you cannot whimsically dismiss that fact OR the established historical precedent & pattern.

If the US had taken a completely HANDS OFF approach WRT : 1930's Hitler, 1960's Vietnam, 1970's Chile, 1980's Afghanistan, 1980's Nicaragua, 1990's Iraq, 2000's Columbia and 2000's Venezuela, then it would be a completely different evaluational environment, now wouldn't it ? But instead, we have an established precedent, spanning 80 years, of well-documented US meddling, which simply cannot arbitrarily be dismissed.

Again, you overlook steps 1) & 2) in the well-documented historical sequence, and the distinct probability that it has happened yet again WRT Venezuela.

But rational folks who are politically left of center, don't find that probability surprising, nor are they willing to casually disregard the big picture and historical context in favor of cheering on the imperialistic US foreign policy and Pentagonal directive.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Peppered Pothead ]


From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 09:09 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You can't use American foreign policy as an excuse for establishing a dictatorial personality cult in Venezuela.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 09:16 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
If there are some things in the "constitutional plan" that are agreeable and some things that are scary power grabs - why not have a ballot that lists all 60 amendments individually instead of having to vote for all or nothing?

I thought the same thing after reading about Mulroney sliding a bill through parliament on the quiet and in the absence of political debate in 1991 which radically changed the way money is created in this country, and we've had huge problems funding basic infrastructure and social programs ever since.

I thought the same thing when phony majority governments signed us all up for FTA and NAFTA, that there should have been more Canadian voter input through something like a national referendum. But there were none. The doctor was quoted as saying to the madman and CIA that Chileans can't be trusted with democracy.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 02 December 2007 09:32 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yesterday's "Si" rally of 500,000 dwarfed the much smaller opposition rally the day before of 200,000. I wonder if the "objective" CBC or any private Canadian network will actually cover this more massive rally the way they covered the much smaller opposition manifestation? I expect the Canadian networks to find some way to trivialize the bigger event.


Prepare for a thumping Yanqui and may your minions wail like banshees.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 09:37 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The results will speak for themselves. Of course the moment the price of oil drops, Venezuela will go bankrupt and whoever is in power will quickly be burned in effigy. Apparently there are already massive food shortages in Caracas and people can't get the most basic staples. Imagine how much worse it will be once the "petro dollars" start to run out.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 09:39 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The CIA memo says to expect blood in the streets if the Yes side wins. The CBC and CNN should be all over that one.
From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 02 December 2007 09:45 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
Apparently there are already massive food shortages in Caracas and people can't get the most basic staples. Imagine how much worse it will be once the "petro dollars" start to run out.

CBC - Turnout strong for referendum to give Chavez more power
quote:
. . .

In the capital Caracas, CBC journalist Connie Watson talked to one shopper at a high-end supermarket who said she was finally able to buy milk after going without for two months.

"There's no toilet paper, no cooking oil, sugar — and beef and chicken are hard to find, too," said Rosario Ruiz, who spent more than an hour waiting to be served.

To combat double-digit inflation, the government controls the prices of many of the most basic items, and producers are taking a loss to supply the public with food.

Grocer Alberto Cabral said it's also difficult to get soap, detergent, tomato sauce and mayonnaise. The situation has been critical for six months, he said.

"Before, the people were happy," Cabral said. "They had a lot of money. They ate well — but in these last few months, life is getting pretty difficult."

Cabral said his family market has been in business for 50 years and has never lived through so many shortages at once.

After queuing up for food, Ruiz put her ration of one litre of liquid milk and one can of powdered milk in her car, a vehicle that only costs about one dollar to fill up with gas.

"We have oil, but we don't have food," she said. "And you can't eat oil."

. . .



From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 09:46 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
Imagine how much worse it will be once the "petro dollars" start to run out.

Imagine the Yanquis disappointment if Venezuela and Iran and possibly Russia and other oil exporting countries go off the petro dollar and create their own oil bourse trading in anything but U.S. dollars.

"Make the economy scream" -- the madman to the CIA on Allende's Chile


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 09:46 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Who cares what a CIA memo says? If there is "blood in the streets" it will be news. If there isn't - it won't be news.

Violence is likeliest if the results are very, very close and there start being accusations and counter-accusations of fraud.


From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 02 December 2007 09:56 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I see that the link from Free_Radical confirms my suspicions of the CBC coverage of the much bigger "Si" rally. The basic fact, which cannot be denied, is smothered in a blanket of trivializations and negativity. Well, it's to be expected.

It's very encouraging, however, this prospect of thwarting the Sauron-like intentions of the U.S. and its minions towards Venezuela. It will be even more encouraging if changes in Venezuela spark further changes in other Latin American countries and the trickle becomes a flood.

Of course, it's to be expected that the grunting of the orcs of imperialism will get louder. I expect babble to get visited by more of them as well as the usual assortment of troll-like web creatures. Snort! Grunt! Wail away! Show your hatred of anything that smells of socialism!


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 10:00 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
Who cares what a CIA memo says? If there is "blood in the streets" it will be news. If there isn't - it won't be news.

Violence is likeliest if the results are very, very close and there start being accusations and counter-accusations of fraud.


Which is exactly what the CIA has planned: not recognizing the results of a yes vote followed by terrorist attacks and blood in the streets.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 02 December 2007 10:02 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I see the "Rebels are we! Born to be free! Just like the fish in the sea!" crowd is out in full force.
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 02 December 2007 10:07 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by N.Beltov:
Sauron-like intentions of the U.S. and its minions towards Venezuela.

Wow.

This is hyperbole beyond Godwin and into some strange, weird realm. You can be certain that people are going to take anything you have to say seriously after that post

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 10:11 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Free_Radical:

Wow.

This is hyperbole beyond Godwin and into some strange, weird realm. You can be certain that people are going to take anything you have to say after that post

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


I think he was trying to insult you, N Beltov. And I wouldn't stand for it when he does.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
contrarianna
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13058

posted 02 December 2007 10:14 AM      Profile for contrarianna     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
[QB]Who cares what a CIA memo says? If there is "blood in the streets" it will be news. If there isn't - it won't be news.
/QB]

Yeah, who cares? Why mention a US plan of operations for a coup in a sovereign nation?
Is this memo "not news" because (this particular coup attempt) hasn't happened yet--or because exposing it highlights the US practice of destroying sovereign foreign governments, including democracies, whenever they want?

From: here to inanity | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 02 December 2007 10:15 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
On the contrary. Tolkienesque metaphors are perfect for describing the unrelenting murderous and hateful intentions and actions of Uncle Sam towards Venezuela and anything really progressive in Latin America. Since the time of Monroe, U.S. authorities have looked upon this entire hemisphere as their own property. Their backyard. The evidence is lengthy and overwhelming.

It is entirely appropriate that alternatives to U.S. dominance of the hemisphere make use of the image of that great Liberator who warned, two centuries ago, about the likely evil intentions and harm that that the Yanqui empire could and would do to Latin America.

And it's entirely appropriate that I make use of a fictional Sauron to remind people of the unrelenting venon and the lidless eye of imperialism. It is a perfect metaphor.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 02 December 2007 10:17 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by N.Beltov:
And it's entirely appropriate that I make use of a fictional Sauron . . .

To paint opponents of Chavez's "reforms" as sub-humans? Real nice.

Completely out to lunch, this one.


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
ceti
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7851

posted 02 December 2007 10:21 AM      Profile for ceti     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm getting pretty sick of this bullshit being repeated here ad nauseam on rabble, a supposedly progressive board where all sorts of fascist, racist, anti-human, anti-democratic views are being peddled in the name of righteousness that pretends to be oh so social democratic, but which masks a much starker visage of pure arrogance and contempt for humanity.

It's not just an issue over whether one is pro or anti-Chavez, but a much bigger issue that will prove decisive in the years to come.

Those who sneer at the Bolivarian process are like the Pharisees and Sadducees of old. Just check out Gregory Wilpert's article:

quote:
The second area that the constitutional reform deepens is social and political inclusion by giving all citizens the right to equal access to city resources ("right to the city," art. 18),[5] prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation and health condition (art. 21), including young people in the political process by lowering the voting age from 18 to 16 years (art. 64), requiring gender parity in candidacies for elected office (art. 64), protecting people from having their primary home expropriated due to bankruptcy (art. 82), introducing a social security fund for self- and informally employed Venezuelans (art. 87), guaranteeing free university education (art. 103),[6] recognizing and promoting the culture Venezuelans of African descent (art. 100), and giving university students parity in the election of university authorities (art. 109). These are all forms of social and political inclusion that, if realized, would place Venezuela at the forefront in the world in this regard.

or Robin Hahnel's article at MRZINE.

But sadly it seems all this will be lost on those who have contempt for those they feel are inferior to themselves just by dint of purity, ideological or otherwise.


From: various musings before the revolution | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 02 December 2007 10:26 AM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by ceti:
I'm getting pretty sick of this bullshit being repeated here ad nauseam on rabble, a supposedly progressive board where all sorts of fascist, racist, anti-human, anti-democratic views are being peddled in the name of righteousness that pretends to be oh so social democratic, but which masks a much starker visage of pure arrogance and contempt for humanity.

Then I will put to you the same question I asked M.Spector - should anyone who does not approach this subject from a pro-Chavez point of view be banned from the discussion (or from the site altogether?) in the same manner as they would be in the feminism or anti-racism forums?

Honest question. Of course, it is up to the moderators to decide, but a policy I will abide by if enacted.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Free_Radical ]


From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 02 December 2007 10:27 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Latin America has been awash in blood thanks to the U.S.A. Eduardo Galeano, in his outstanding book Open Veins of Latin America, deliberately uses a metaphor of blood-letting to describe the history of the continent. Mind you, Galeano's history probably goes back before the Yanqui empire came along. But it's just more of the same.

If anything, I'm using metaphorical and gentler language to describe the horrors of football stadiums filled with torture victims, as in Chile in 1973, or Embassies incinerated with peaceful protestors and staffers still inside, as in Guatemala, or Archbishops murdered while saying Mass, as in El Salvador, or international crimes like bombing ports in Nicaragua, in defiance of the whole world, or invading tiny Grenada because Uncle Sam wanted to lash out after several hundred marines in Lebanon got blown to bits, or ....

No, my language is modest by comparison.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 10:31 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
While the imperial Republic attempted a resource grab in Iraq, the CIA and Pentagon berserkers were caught with their pants down in "the backyard."

Venezuela's elitists have only the Yanqui vanguard to blame for leaving them hung out to dry as an outbreak of democracy took place in their own backyard.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 02 December 2007 10:40 AM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It is a standard ploy of the dishonest to create stupid rumours of a coup in order to stampede the population into accepting dictatorship.

It was done in the US around 9-11, but decent people objected, and detest the Administation that manipulated the people by screaming "The Terrorists are coming".

Now, in Venezuela, the supporters of Chavez, including the Communist Party of every country which has one, join in the hue and cry.

"The CIA is making a coup! Vote for The Leader! Vote for EMERGENCY POWERS!"

Obviously, the CIA isn't making a coup, there is nothing hear besides a world-wide screaming campaign.

Those who participate are either knowingly lying to us, or terminally gullible morons.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 02 December 2007 10:42 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

ˇAhora Sí!


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 02 December 2007 10:51 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
CIA Documents Show Bush Knew of 2002 Coup in Venezuela
From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 02 December 2007 11:13 AM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
No, I think it is a very important point worth making. Until now, you (and several others, no doubt) appear to have been under the illusion that Venezuela was burdened with some rotten constitution that predated the "Bolivarian Revolution". The truth is that Chavez already wrote a constitution in 1999, the constitution Venezuela has today, and now he's going back for more.

That has nothing to do with the point I was making which was that no constitution is a guarantee against dictatorship or state oppression. Dictatorship has no regard for constitutions and state oppression still occurs under the best of constitutions.


quote:
So what's the big deal, then, if some people oppose his current "reforms"?

There is nothing wrong with opposing the reforms, using dubious logic, hyperbole and hysteria to support this opposition is problematic and that is precisely what you and others are doing.

There might be parts of the reforms that are worth further scrutiny but your claims that this is a massive shift to dictatorial control are unfounded. The changes that have been mentioned are fairly standard in almost any democracy. All democracies have state of emergency clauses all democracies have state appointed officials, to claim these changes as undemocratic are therefore unfounded.

If this is dictatorship than clearly you have no understanding of what dictatorship is, if you actually looked at statements made by the leaders of the 2002 coup it might help. These people (the same ones that you now present as paragons of democratic virtue) seized power through military means and immediately seized government supported media and closed them down, they suspended parliament, declared the constitution null and void, banned the right to protest all in the name of democracy.

That is how dictatorships work they seize power through force and they maintain it through force. Parliaments are closed, opposition parties banned and ALL opposition media is closed down, members of the opposition are tortured and disappeared.

Despite 9 years of crying Dictatorial Wolf none of this is happen, nor is it likely to all of a sudden. On the contrary Chavez continues to win democratic support of the majority of the population for some reason this is disconcerting to you. Even if Chavez loses this referendum he will still be popular with the majority of the populace.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: N.R.KISSED ]


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 02 December 2007 11:17 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's interesting that the US media is claiming (in headlines no less) that the referendum is to make Chavez "president for life" when, in fact, there is only a proposal to end term limits so that a President could be elected for more than two terms.
From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 02 December 2007 11:19 AM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Naomi Klein recently wrote about the steps required to create a fascist dictatorship:

quote:
1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy
.........


Creating a terrifying threat - hydra-like, secretive, evil - is an old trick. It can, like Hitler's invocation of a communist threat to the nation's security, be based on actual events (one Wisconsin academic has faced calls for his dismissal because he noted, among other things, that the alleged communist arson, the Reichstag fire of February 1933, was swiftly followed in Nazi Germany by passage of the Enabling Act, which replaced constitutional law with an open-ended state of emergency).


Chavez is no fascist, but the reason the Communists on babble get all indignant about those who oppose his ideas is this: they are not democrats themselves, they will ALWAYS support a dictatorship which opposes the US.

That's why they are not worth arguing with. They still have Stalin in their souls, and they really do like the old fella.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 11:20 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:
It is a standard ploy of the dishonest to create stupid rumours of a coup in order to stampede the population into accepting dictatorship.

It was done in the US around 9-11, but decent people objected, and detest the Administation that manipulated the people by screaming "The Terrorists are coming"


How ingenious. You claim that socialists in Venezuela must necessarily be compared in the same light as that nation which has demonstrated itself to be the world's foremost source of terror and export of torture.

I think you're trying to suggest that the victims of U.S. imperialism have no other recourse but to become monstrous abusers of basic human rights when everything points to the contrary.

You're trying to tell us that Chavez must bide his time while in power like the very weak Bachelet surrounded by Pinochet's fascists in parliament. That's not democracy, Jeff. That's kowtowing to US imperialism and their colonial administrator-bureaucrats embedded in government in those countries. Bullshit on you.


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 02 December 2007 11:36 AM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The results will speak for themselves. Of course the moment the price of oil drops, Venezuela will go bankrupt and whoever is in power will quickly be burned in effigy. Apparently there are already massive food shortages in Caracas and people can't get the most basic staples. Imagine how much worse it will be once the "petro dollars" start to run out.

They were out of cheese doodles at the corner store i guess I should contact the C.I.A. and organize a coup?

Oh no what will happen when the oil sands runs out!! Panic Panic

You latch onto any hyperbole you can and excagerate it there no evidence to support your claims that there are "massive" food shortages or people were unable to get most basic staples. Reports were there were some shortages in eggs and dairy,of course if it is in the high end supermarkets than this is a matter of grave concern.

OF course the fact that the impoverished of Venezuela has access to affordable and nutritous food as never before is irrelevant to you, because you have no interest in impoverished people.

The fact that the wealthy food producers are controlling supplies as a means of political manipulation and a desire to destabalize social and economic reforms that threaten their interests.

Why you think the population of Venezuela is incapable of making up their own minds in another matter.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: N.R.KISSED ]


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 02 December 2007 11:37 AM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:
the Communists on babble

Make it stop.


From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Stargazer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6061

posted 02 December 2007 11:37 AM      Profile for Stargazer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm not a Communist, nor am I an idiot. Unlike you Jeff, I think that Venezuela is under attack by the CIA and I am not naive enough to think they won't target Chavez, as they have in the past. The US interest is to ensure Chavez is smeared and preferably out of power. What is naive is assuming- no believing, that there is NO plot to take out Chavez.
From: Inside every cynical person, there is a disappointed idealist. | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 02 December 2007 11:39 AM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:
Chavez is no fascist, but the reason the Communists on babble get all indignant about those who oppose his ideas is this: they are not democrats themselves, they will ALWAYS support a dictatorship which opposes the US.

That's simply not true. We socialists never supported Pol Pot or Khmer Rouge, the most blood-thirsty mass murderer since Adolf Hitler. John Kerry said the Khmer Rouge opened fire on him and Green Berets as Uncle Sam tried to deliver weapons to them. So there's one of several instances where socialists didn't support a not-so U.S.-friendly despot being supported in secret by the CIA, Dick, Henry, Maggie, Ronnie and key United Nations allies in power at the time.

quote:
That's why they are not worth arguing with. They still have Stalin in their souls, and they really do like the old fella.

Stalin was a ruthless bastard. And I would prefer that ruthless bastard over Wall Street's and European industrialists' black horse of the same era, Adolf Hitler. I think closet fascists everywhere have a soft spot for the old mass murderer for his corporate-sponsored war of annihilation on Soviet communism. In their tiny minds, 53M to 83M dead and missing at the end of WWII were not nearly enough. In their infinitessimally small minds, MacArthur was a sane person who wanted to save the capitalist world by nuking hundreds of millions of human beings and murdering an idea in the cradle.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 02 December 2007 12:03 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Chavez is no fascist, but the reason the Communists on babble get all indignant about those who oppose his ideas is this: they are not democrats themselves, they will ALWAYS support a dictatorship which opposes the US.

That's why they are not worth arguing with. They still have Stalin in their souls, and they really do like the old fella.


I am not a communist either nor do i have a problem with people opposition to Chavez, but the best opposition you can muster is clumsy red baiting and unverifiable claims of dictatorship.

Chaves has not banned opposition, he has not banned the right to assembly he has not banned the corporate press, he has not imprisoned or disappeared any opposition,he must be a pretty crap dictator. The fact that for the past 9 years there have been claims that these actions were just around the corner might give someone more reflexive pause for thought.


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 02 December 2007 12:04 PM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:

Chavez is no fascist, but the reason the Communists on babble get all indignant about those who oppose his ideas is this: they are not democrats themselves, they will ALWAYS support a dictatorship which opposes the US.

There aren't nearly enough Communists on babble

The polls have closed in Venezuela. Now we wait.


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 02 December 2007 12:05 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ha ha! You "socialists" never supported Pol Pot, etc because you supported SOVIET Communism, and not CHINESE Communism!

And you still have Stalin in your HEARTS, even though the Official Line of the CP since 1956 has been to disavow Stalin. So you disavow him; big surprise. The point is, the rot went a lot deeper than just Mr. Stalin; and it still does.

People with that track record simply apply the word "democratic" to any dictator the Party supports. That is why, "Fidel", you aren't worth arguing with. You are an apologist for dictatorship, so you have no problem with Chavez's "reforms".


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 02 December 2007 12:09 PM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:
you still have Stalin in your HEARTS

It's like arguing with a Freudian.


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 02 December 2007 12:11 PM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:
Ha ha! You "socialists" never supported Pol Pot

Sure enough. The thread is now about your contention that babble is in danger of being taken over by a secret cabal of Stalinists. As if the rest of us are incapable of examining people's arguments critically and need you to protect us by bullying those damn Commies into silence. Thanks for nothing.


From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 02 December 2007 12:15 PM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The problem is that the US does have a history of overthrowing governments it does not like in Latin America and there is some evidence that they were at least aware of the 2002 coup before it happened (I believe there's also some evidence that some of the coup leaders had met with the US Ambassador previous to the event).

Of course, it's also true that governments like to emphasize "enemies" in order to bolster their support. This isn't just the case with dictatorships though - democratic governments have done it too as we see with the response to 9/11 and Al-Qaeda - witness for example the Greek conservative government's recent attempt to blame that countries fires on terrorism in order to deflect their poor response or the previous Spanish government's attempt to blame the 2004 Madrid train bombings on ETA.

Personally, I don't think CNN is trying to murder Chavez but I wouldn't be surprised if the CIA is or if the US has a plan to try to exploit the referendum campaign as a precursor for another coup attempt. It's certainly not an unreasonable theory based on past events.

I don't think you have to be a Stalinist or even a Communist to think that there may be plans for another coup against Chavez. Nor do you have to be a Stalinist or Communist to think that, on balance, the current government in Venezuela has done more to help the poor than its predecessors or even to see it as a democratic government.

Certainly, Jeff, I hope you can take a look at some of the hysterical things said in even the mainstream US media about Chavez and agree that it is inaccurate and little more than propaganda. Listening to the US media you'd think Chavez is a brutal dictator overseeing a police state with a network of gulags, not that he's been elected and re-elected to office and that Venezuela is a fairly lively democracy.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 02 December 2007 12:26 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here's another segment of Naomi Wolf's analysis of how the US is taking a route toward fascism:

quote:
9. Dissent equals treason

Cast dissent as "treason" and criticism as "espionage'. Every closing society does this, just as it elaborates laws that increasingly criminalise certain kinds of speech and expand the definition of "spy" and "traitor".


Now here's the Great Leader, Chavez:

quote:
CARACAS, Venezuela -- President Hugo Chavez warned his supporters that anyone voting against his proposed constitutional changes would be a "traitor," rallying his political base before a referendum that would let him seek re-election in 2012 and beyond.
Brandishing a little red book that lists his desired 69 revisions to Venezuela's charter, Chavez exhorted his backers Friday to redouble their efforts for a victorious "yes" vote in the Dec. 2 ballot.

"He who says he supports Chavez but votes 'no' is a traitor, a true traitor," the president told an arena packed with supporters.


Well, what if someone were a socialist, but didn't think Chavez should have enhanced powers? Chavez can't distinguish between himself and socialism. He's single-handedly destroying his own popularity by overreaching like this.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 02 December 2007 12:34 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Certainly, Jeff, I hope you can take a look at some of the hysterical things said in even the mainstream US media about Chavez and agree that it is inaccurate and little more than propaganda.

Of course, so what? Does that justify creating the basis for a dictatorship in Venezuela?

And yes, so far Chavez has had popular support, and mine too, though I have always seen in him a potential Peron or Perez Jimenez caudillo lying in wait.

But the time to object to a dictatorship is when it is proposed, not after its workings are obvious.

As Naomi Wolf put it in her warning about the Bush drive towards a quasi-fascist state:

quote:
It is a mistake to think that early in a fascist shift you see the profile of barbed wire against the sky. In the early days, things look normal on the surface; peasants were celebrating harvest festivals in Calabria in 1922; people were shopping and going to the movies in Berlin in 1931.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,2064157,00.html


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.R.KISSED
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1258

posted 02 December 2007 12:37 PM      Profile for N.R.KISSED     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And yes, so far Chavez has had popular support, and mine too, though I have always seen in him a potential Peron or Perez Jimenez caudillo lying in wait.

Interesting logic "I've always thought it so it must be true"


From: Republic of Parkdale | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 02 December 2007 12:39 PM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:
Well, what if someone were a socialist, but didn't think Chavez should have enhanced powers? Chavez can't distinguish between himself and socialism. He's single-handedly destroying his own popularity by overreaching like this.

If socialists in Venezuela were saying this, I'd take them very seriously. But the overwhelming majority of socialists in Venezuela support Chavez.


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
Free_Radical
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12633

posted 02 December 2007 12:43 PM      Profile for Free_Radical     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by RosaL:
But the overwhelming majority of socialists in Venezuela support Chavez.

Except PODEMOS ("For Social Democracy"). They've seen through his "reforms" and have broken ranks over the referendum. Others have as well.

From: In between . . . | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 02 December 2007 12:46 PM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Free_Radical:

Except PODEMOS ("For Social Democracy"). They've seen through his "reforms" and have broken ranks over the referendum. Others have as well.

They oppose it because it goes too far for them - beyond social democracy to socialism.


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 02 December 2007 12:47 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If socialists in Venezuela were saying this, I'd take them very seriously. But the overwhelming majority of socialists in Venezuela support Chavez.

I am not so sure of that. Reports so far show that many of the poorest areas are not coming out to vote for the referendum.

I also posted, on Friday, commentary from ex-guerillas and members of the Communist Party saying that the referendum goes too far towards personal dictatorship.

I have no doubts that lots of people will "support Chavez", trusting that he won't misuse the vast power which the Referendum may give him. But trusting the leader is a well-established road to dictatorship; we here at babble can surely think without checking with Venezuelan "socialists" to see if our analysis is right.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
ghoris
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4152

posted 02 December 2007 12:56 PM      Profile for ghoris     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
jeff and Stockholm, you're wasting your breath. Ideology trumps democracy around here. If rabble had existed twenty years ago we would have been hearing how wonderful the Soviet Union and its leaders were.

[ 02 December 2007: Message edited by: ghoris ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
RosaL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13921

posted 02 December 2007 12:58 PM      Profile for RosaL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by jeff house:

I have no doubts that lots of people will "support Chavez", trusting that he won't misuse the vast power which the Referendum may give him. But trusting the leader is a well-established road to dictatorship; we here at babble can surely think without checking with Venezuelan "socialists" to see if our analysis is right.

I'm not sure why you are putting quotation marks around "socialists".

All I'm saying is that they are there and their views are probably better informed than any of ours. I'm not saying we have to agree with them, just that what they have to say should be taken seriously.


From: the underclass | Registered: Mar 2007  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 02 December 2007 12:58 PM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by ghoris:
jeff and Stockholm, you're wasting your breath. Ideology trumps democracy around here. If rabble had existed twenty years ago we would have been hearing how wonderful the Soviet Union and its leaders were.

I actually doubt that.


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 02 December 2007 01:02 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I put quotations around "socialists" because it is used by people who are Communists as well as by non-Communist socialists.

Since the Communists generally support dictatorship, their support for Chavez does not aid me in deciding whether he is liable to accrue dictatorial power to himself.

The idea that someone else knows better is always a cop out. Did you feel the same way about the American Presidency when George Bush was using 9-11 to undermine basic rights?


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
bigcitygal
Volunteer Moderator
Babbler # 8938

posted 02 December 2007 01:05 PM      Profile for bigcitygal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Closing for length.
From: It's difficult to work in a group when you're omnipotent - Q | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca