It's always absurd when someone who lives on the other side of the planet, is telling someone from the country/culture in question; how things "really " are in that country/culture.
I'm sure Byrnzie believes everything he says. But it is rather foolish for him to assume people with hands-on experience....people from that country/culture; don't know what they are talking about.
But hey, Byrnzie will always have his wonderfully entertaining links.
It's always absurd when someone who lives on the other side of the planet, is telling someone from the country/culture in question; how things "really " are in that country/culture.
I'm sure Byrnzie believes everything he says. But it is rather foolish for him to assume people with hands-on experience....people from that country/culture; don't know what they are talking about.
But hey, Byrnzie will always have his wonderfully entertaining links.
Nice of you to join the discussion with your personal attack on me. Or is it that you think making personal attacks on people in the 3rd person is excusable?
Feel free to contribute something to the thread topic instead of just focusing on my character.
The possibility of asking for a revocatory referendum was stated in the Constitution, nothing illegal. Not a second coup attempt, Chavez's Constitution (the Bolivarian Constitution that he, himself, wrote) contemplated the possibility of a referendum, by collecting over a million signatures, and presenting them to the CNE (National Electoral Council). So, the opposition gathered the signatures, which were verified by the CNE, and the Referendum took place.
And what were the results? You say that a million signatures were collected. I've read that for the mandate to pass they must obtain more than 3,757,773 million votes, as Chavez won with this number in the election.
The possibility of asking for a revocatory referendum...Not a second coup attempt
Seems that some people see it differently:
http://www.focal.ca/pdf/focalpoint_august03.pdf
'...opposition organizations continue to focus on ousting the President, albeit via different means than before. Characterized by internal divisions, the opposition continue to try, (though not always successfully), to present a coherent, unified discourse on the need to organize a revocatory referendum as soon as possible...'
Venezuela's Commander-in-Chief of the Army, General Garcia Carneiro:
"...this is simply an opposition media campaign which has used the August 19 half-way point in President Chavez Frias' presidency to promote a second or third attempted coup against the legitimate government of this country and to claim that the government will not allow a referendum to take place ... this is not so!"
So, again I ask you, if only rich Venezuelans disagree with Chavez, how come Carlos Ocáriz was elected major of Petare, which is the largest poor neighborhood of Caracas?
You did not give me your opinion about Chavez's invitation to Al-Bashir, nothing major, just a little genocide in Darfur, you know...
I don't see what this has to do with the discussion at hand. Maybe as far as Chavez is concerned it just boils down to Freedom of Speech. He allows 24 hour mainstream News channels in Venezuela to compare him to Hitler and to spend all day criticizing him, so maybe he also believes that Al-Bashira also has a right to speak?
What do you think about every U.S leader since 1948 inviting the Israeli leadership to Washington? Is that acceptable? Or is it just some leaders responsible for war crimes should be excluded from State invitations, whilst others accused of war crimes should be welcomed with open arms?
At the very least it seems that Chavez was trying to make a point about the ICC applying double-standards:
http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/africa/a ... %20warrant
'...Speaking at the opening ceremony of the summit, Al-Bashir, according to Reuters, urged Arab leaders meeting in Doha to reject the indictment and accused Israel of backing rebels in Darfur.
"We appreciate your support and hope it will lead to strong and clear resolutions .... that reject this resolution and call for its cancellation," he said.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad called on the summit to express unequivocal support for Bashir.
"We are called upon today to reject the warrant categorically and to express absolute support for Sudan at this stage," he said. "What is happening to Sudan now is another chapter in the effort to weaken the Arabs ... and another stage in the effort to break up Sudan."
Arab states were quick to rally around Al-Bashir last month. Some cited the absence of international measures against Israel over its three-week war on Gaza that killed 1,300 Palestinians. Arabs generally see a double-standard applied...
Qatar, which hosts a key U.S. military base, said last week it had faced unspecified pressure not to receive Al-Bashir but its prime minister flew to Khartoum to repeat the invitation.
Officials in Doha said Saudi Arabia had pressed the summit of 22 Arab League nations to offer strong support for Sudan.'
So, again I ask you, if only rich Venezuelans disagree with Chavez, how come Carlos Ocáriz was elected major of Petare, which is the largest poor neighborhood of Caracas?
How come Chavez has won all three elections since 1998?
'..Chávez and his allies have effectively neutralized the judiciary. While some newspapers and broadcasters are still independent and some are outspoken in their opposition to Chávez, the President and his legislative supporters have strengthened the state's capacity to limit free speech and created powerful incentives for self-censorship. They have, for example, expanded laws making "contempt" for government officials a criminal offense, increased prison sentences for criminal defamation, and abused the state's control of broadcasting frequencies to intimidate and discriminate against stations with overtly critical programming.
Seems that there's another side to every story:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez According to Greg Grandin, professor of Latin American history at New York University, "[The Venezuelan] media is chronically obsessed with Chávez, and critical in a way that would be completely alien for most US observers." After the media-backed 2002 coup attempt, Venezuela passed 'social responsibility' legislation regulating the media but has largely declined to enforce it..
Throughout his presidency, Chávez has hosted the live talk show known as Aló Presidente ("Hello, President!").[48] The show broadcasts in varying formats on state owned Venezolana de Televisión (VTV—Venezuelan State Television) each Sunday at 11:00 AM. The show features Chávez addressing topics of the day, taking phone calls and live questions from both the studio and broadcast audience, and touring locations where government social welfare programs are active. Additionally, on July 25, 2005, Chávez inaugurated TeleSUR, a proposed Pan-American homologue of Al Jazeera that seeks to challenge the present domination of Latin American television news by Univision and the United States-based CNN en Español. Chávez's media policies have contributed to elevated tensions between the United States and Venezuela.[49]
In 2006, President Chávez announced that the terrestrial broadcast license for RCTV—Venezuela's second largest TV channel—would not be renewed.[50] The channel's terrestrial broadcasts ended on May 28, 2007 and were replaced with a state network.[51] RCTV is accused of supporting the coup against Chávez in April 2002, and the oil strike in 2002-2003. Also, it has been accused by the government of violating the Law on the Social Responsibility of Radio and Television.[52] The director of the station, Marcel Granier, denies taking part in the coup.[53] According to journalist Eva Golinger, "In the days before the April 11, 2000 coup, Venevisión, RCTV, Globovisión and Televen replaced regular programming with anti-Chávez speeches and propaganda calling for viewers to take to the streets."[54] One of the main justifications for the coup was news footage aired by the private stations on April 11 showing Chávez supporters on the Puente Llaguno bridge shooting at an unseen target earlier that day, with a voiceover saying that they were shooting at a peaceful opposition march. It was later proved that the Chávez supporters on the bridge had not been shooting at a march, they were exchanging fire with Metropolitan Police positioned behind cars and buildings; the opposition march had not passed near the bridge and was not fired at from it. The airing of this report was followed, later on the 11th, by an interview with a group of dissident generals who said that because of the deaths caused by the government, they would no longer recognise Chávez as president. CNN news correspondent Otto Neustadl said that he was told on the 10th, before the events took place, that "tomorrow, on the 11th there will be a video of Chávez, there will be deaths and then 20 military officials of high rank will appear and pronounce themselves against the government of Chávez and will request his resignation." Eva Golinger concludes from this and other evidence that "The media involvement in the coup had clearly been premeditated."[55]
RCTV is still broadcasting via cable and satellite and is widely viewable in Venezuela.[56] The revocation of its license has been condemned by a multitude of international organizations.[53][57][58][59] However, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) questioned whether, in the event a television station openly supported and collaborated with coup leaders, the station in question would not be subject to even more serious consequences in the United States or any other Western nation.[60] In a poll conducted by Datanalisis, almost 70 percent of Venezuelans polled opposed the shut-down, but most cited the loss of their favorite soap operas rather than concerns about limits on freedom of expression.'
So, again I ask you, if only rich Venezuelans disagree with Chavez, how come Carlos Ocáriz was elected major of Petare, which is the largest poor neighborhood of Caracas?
How come Chavez has won all three elections since 1998?
Because he's still popular... you think I don't acknowledge that? That does mean I have to agree with him. My point is that Chavez supporters and/or detractors are not as monolithic as you want to paint them.
The possibility of asking for a revocatory referendum...Not a second coup attempt
Seems that some people see it differently:
http://www.focal.ca/pdf/focalpoint_august03.pdf
'...opposition organizations continue to focus on ousting the President, albeit via different means than before. Characterized by internal divisions, the opposition continue to try, (though not always successfully), to present a coherent, unified discourse on the need to organize a revocatory referendum as soon as possible...'
Venezuela's Commander-in-Chief of the Army, General Garcia Carneiro:
"...this is simply an opposition media campaign which has used the August 19 half-way point in President Chavez Frias' presidency to promote a second or third attempted coup against the legitimate government of this country and to claim that the government will not allow a referendum to take place ... this is not so!"
OK, so you're telling me that I don't know how to read in Spanish (my native tongue) the Constitution? This is almost insulting. The 2004 Referendum was 100% legal and permitted by the law ...The possibility for a revocatory referendum is clearly stated in Arts. 72 and 233 of the Bolivarian Constitution of 1999. In 2003/2004 more than 3,6 million signatures were collected and the referendum took place. Chavez won the 2004 referendum. And that's fine. What bothers me is that people who signed that petition have been blacklisted, again Lista Tascón and Lista Maisanta.
I'd love to give you links in English, but I don't think the Constution has been translated yet. If you understand Spanish here's a wikipedia link (since you consider it a valid source) http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refer%C3%A ... uela,_2004
'..Chávez and his allies have effectively neutralized the judiciary. While some newspapers and broadcasters are still independent and some are outspoken in their opposition to Chávez, the President and his legislative supporters have strengthened the state's capacity to limit free speech and created powerful incentives for self-censorship. They have, for example, expanded laws making "contempt" for government officials a criminal offense, increased prison sentences for criminal defamation, and abused the state's control of broadcasting frequencies to intimidate and discriminate against stations with overtly critical programming.
Seems that there's another side to every story:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez According to Greg Grandin, professor of Latin American history at New York University, "[The Venezuelan] media is chronically obsessed with Chávez, and critical in a way that would be completely alien for most US observers." After the media-backed 2002 coup attempt, Venezuela passed 'social responsibility' legislation regulating the media but has largely declined to enforce it..
Throughout his presidency, Chávez has hosted the live talk show known as Aló Presidente ("Hello, President!").[48] The show broadcasts in varying formats on state owned Venezolana de Televisión (VTV—Venezuelan State Television) each Sunday at 11:00 AM. The show features Chávez addressing topics of the day, taking phone calls and live questions from both the studio and broadcast audience, and touring locations where government social welfare programs are active. Additionally, on July 25, 2005, Chávez inaugurated TeleSUR, a proposed Pan-American homologue of Al Jazeera that seeks to challenge the present domination of Latin American television news by Univision and the United States-based CNN en Español. Chávez's media policies have contributed to elevated tensions between the United States and Venezuela.[49]
In 2006, President Chávez announced that the terrestrial broadcast license for RCTV—Venezuela's second largest TV channel—would not be renewed.[50] The channel's terrestrial broadcasts ended on May 28, 2007 and were replaced with a state network.[51] RCTV is accused of supporting the coup against Chávez in April 2002, and the oil strike in 2002-2003. Also, it has been accused by the government of violating the Law on the Social Responsibility of Radio and Television.[52] The director of the station, Marcel Granier, denies taking part in the coup.[53] According to journalist Eva Golinger, "In the days before the April 11, 2000 coup, Venevisión, RCTV, Globovisión and Televen replaced regular programming with anti-Chávez speeches and propaganda calling for viewers to take to the streets."[54] One of the main justifications for the coup was news footage aired by the private stations on April 11 showing Chávez supporters on the Puente Llaguno bridge shooting at an unseen target earlier that day, with a voiceover saying that they were shooting at a peaceful opposition march. It was later proved that the Chávez supporters on the bridge had not been shooting at a march, they were exchanging fire with Metropolitan Police positioned behind cars and buildings; the opposition march had not passed near the bridge and was not fired at from it. The airing of this report was followed, later on the 11th, by an interview with a group of dissident generals who said that because of the deaths caused by the government, they would no longer recognise Chávez as president. CNN news correspondent Otto Neustadl said that he was told on the 10th, before the events took place, that "tomorrow, on the 11th there will be a video of Chávez, there will be deaths and then 20 military officials of high rank will appear and pronounce themselves against the government of Chávez and will request his resignation." Eva Golinger concludes from this and other evidence that "The media involvement in the coup had clearly been premeditated."[55]
RCTV is still broadcasting via cable and satellite and is widely viewable in Venezuela.[56] The revocation of its license has been condemned by a multitude of international organizations.[53][57][58][59] However, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) questioned whether, in the event a television station openly supported and collaborated with coup leaders, the station in question would not be subject to even more serious consequences in the United States or any other Western nation.[60] In a poll conducted by Datanalisis, almost 70 percent of Venezuelans polled opposed the shut-down, but most cited the loss of their favorite soap operas rather than concerns about limits on freedom of expression.'
You know what? You're right and I'm wrong. Chavez is the best thing that has ever happened to Venezuela. I bow to your wisdom and I thank you for enlightening me. After all the information you've provided me I can see that I've been mistaken for almost 12 years. This has been an entertaining experience, but I really need to do my job
So, again I ask you, if only rich Venezuelans disagree with Chavez, how come Carlos Ocáriz was elected major of Petare, which is the largest poor neighborhood of Caracas?
You did not give me your opinion about Chavez's invitation to Al-Bashir, nothing major, just a little genocide in Darfur, you know...
I don't see what this has to do with the discussion at hand. Maybe as far as Chavez is concerned it just boils down to Freedom of Speech. He allows 24 hour mainstream News channels in Venezuela to compare him to Hitler and to spend all day criticizing him, so maybe he also believes that Al-Bashira also has a right to speak?
What do you think about every U.S leader since 1948 inviting the Israeli leadership to Washington? Is that acceptable? Or is it just some leaders responsible for war crimes should be excluded from State invitations, whilst others accused of war crimes should be welcomed with open arms?
At the very least it seems that Chavez was trying to make a point about the ICC applying double-standards:
http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/africa/a ... %20warrant
'...Speaking at the opening ceremony of the summit, Al-Bashir, according to Reuters, urged Arab leaders meeting in Doha to reject the indictment and accused Israel of backing rebels in Darfur.
"We appreciate your support and hope it will lead to strong and clear resolutions .... that reject this resolution and call for its cancellation," he said.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad called on the summit to express unequivocal support for Bashir.
"We are called upon today to reject the warrant categorically and to express absolute support for Sudan at this stage," he said. "What is happening to Sudan now is another chapter in the effort to weaken the Arabs ... and another stage in the effort to break up Sudan."
Arab states were quick to rally around Al-Bashir last month. Some cited the absence of international measures against Israel over its three-week war on Gaza that killed 1,300 Palestinians. Arabs generally see a double-standard applied...
Qatar, which hosts a key U.S. military base, said last week it had faced unspecified pressure not to receive Al-Bashir but its prime minister flew to Khartoum to repeat the invitation.
Officials in Doha said Saudi Arabia had pressed the summit of 22 Arab League nations to offer strong support for Sudan.'
What has the US has to do with anything? There are other countries and presidents in this world. So, since the ICC has not prosecuted Dubya or Simon Peres it cannot prosecute Al-Bashir? The UN has already ruled that what happened in Darfur is indeed genocide.
So now the ICC was incorrect in prosecuting, and condemning, Al-Bashir? I know Judge Moreno Ocampo. He was part of the Court that prosecuted the military junta here in Argentina. My point, regarding Chavez is this: Al-Bashir has an international order of arrest and Venezuela has agreed with the ICC. So, is Chavez inviting Al-Bashir to Venezuela to arrest him, or he signs treaties and then not comply with them?
Nevermind, as I said in my previous reply I'm greatful to you for enlightening me. Have a great weekend!!!!
The UN has already ruled that what happened in Darfur is indeed genocide.
The U.N has also ruled that Israel has committed war crimes but that doesn't stop every Israeli President being welcomed at the White house with open arms.
What has America got to do with it? America has got everything to do with having bled Venezuela for decades and for regarding Latin America as it's backyard. But then I suppose the privileged few in that part of the world never had a problem with it.
Al-Bashir has an international order of arrest and Venezuela has agreed with the ICC. So, is Chavez inviting Al-Bashir to Venezuela to arrest him, or he signs treaties and then not comply with them?
You say that Venezuela has agreed with the ICC? Isn't Chavez the leader of Venezuela? So how could Venezuela agree with the ICC without his approval?
Anyway, this certainly does sound like the crime of the century. A head of state inviting another head of state who has been accused of war crimes to his country. I've never before heard of such a thing. Sure sounds like Chavez should be 'ousted' from office.
Chavez won the 2004 referendum. And that's fine. What bothers me is that people who signed that petition have been blacklisted, again Lista Tascón and Lista Maisanta.
If people really have been blacklisted then I admit that sucks. Do you have any more details on these blacklistings e.t.c? What problems have people encountered exactly? And were any of these people involved in the 2002 coup attempt?
Byrnzie, why keep arguing at this point with people. Anything and everything someone counters with posts or facts or details, you either downplay or deny. You might as well just reply - I'm right, you're wrong.
CONservative governMENt
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
Chavez won the 2004 referendum. And that's fine. What bothers me is that people who signed that petition have been blacklisted, again Lista Tascón and Lista Maisanta.
If people really have been blacklisted then I admit that sucks. Do you have any more details on these blacklistings e.t.c? What problems have people encountered exactly? And were any of these people involved in the 2002 coup attempt?
This is my last reply about this issue. Clearly you've not read my previous replies. I said I personally know people that have lost their jobs, have being denied their retirement pensions, have been unable to find a new job, and even some have had to leave the country. I won't give you the names of my/my parents friends or friends of friends, etc. These are your average folks, some were working in government offices, other in the private sector and, poor Gumersinda she's been a nanny her whole life, all she did was sign the petition and the next thing you know she couldn't renew her identity card or collect her retirement pension. Of course, if you were working in a goverment agency/office whatever and you had signed the petition you were fired. Since when do you have to agree with the goverment to work as a clerk in a public agency? The State and the government are 2 different things.
This is a website that's gathering all those that have had problems because of being included in the Tascón List: http://www.firmantes.com/index.php People tell how they've been agravated, there's also actual evidence of such list (legal paperwork)
There's legal evidence in several sites. If you Google Tascon List -or Lista Tascón in Spanish- you'll find out it's not some secret plot we, the evil people that oppose Chavez, are making up
It's always absurd when someone who lives on the other side of the planet, is telling someone from the country/culture in question; how things "really " are in that country/culture.
I'm sure Byrnzie believes everything he says. But it is rather foolish for him to assume people with hands-on experience....people from that country/culture; don't know what they are talking about.
But hey, Byrnzie will always have his wonderfully entertaining links.
Nice of you to join the discussion with your personal attack on me. Or is it that you think making personal attacks on people in the 3rd person is excusable?
Feel free to contribute something to the thread topic instead of just focusing on my character.
I'd say he did. It wasn't a personal attack on your character. It was a legitimate point about your lack of credibility when speaking as an "expert" as compared to people that actually live and deal with the issues in question.
It's always absurd when someone who lives on the other side of the planet, is telling someone from the country/culture in question; how things "really " are in that country/culture.
I'm sure Byrnzie believes everything he says. But it is rather foolish for him to assume people with hands-on experience....people from that country/culture; don't know what they are talking about.
But hey, Byrnzie will always have his wonderfully entertaining links.
Nice of you to join the discussion with your personal attack on me. Or is it that you think making personal attacks on people in the 3rd person is excusable?
Feel free to contribute something to the thread topic instead of just focusing on my character.
I'd say he did. It wasn't a personal attack on your character. It was a legitimate point about your lack of credibility when speaking as an "expert" as compared to people that actually live and deal with the issues in question.
I didn't say I was an expert. And the fact that I don't live in Venezuela is irrelevant. I suppose I have no right to voice an opinion on the U.S too, right?
Sorry, but that argument is old, and baseless.
And she doesn't live in Venezuela anymore, she lives in Argentina.
and poor Gumersinda she's been a nanny her whole life, all she did was sign the petition and the next thing you know she couldn't renew her identity card or collect her retirement pension.
Gumersinda? Is that a Venezuelan name? Sounds like an Indian name to me.
This is a website that's gathering all those that have had problems because of being included in the Tascón List: http://www.firmantes.com/index.php People tell how they've been agravated, there's also actual evidence of such li\There's legal evidence in several sites. If you Google Tascon List -or Lista Tascón in Spanish- you'll find out it's not some secret plot we, the evil people that oppose Chavez, are making up
Gumersinda? Is that a Venezuelan name? Sounds like an Indian name to me.
Well, Venezuelans have the most peculiar names. Some common female names are: Mayerling, Tibisay, Yuraida, Zuraima. And in Venezuela it's nor rare, at all, for parents to create names say with the first part of the father's name and the first half of the mom's name. I had a neighbor called Algiuli (she was a girl, her father's name was Alberto (hence the Al part) and her mom was called Giuliana, hence the giuli). When I was a teenager I used to take part in literacy campaigns and I one of the girls was named Jackeline Kennedy Onassis (that was her name) and her last name was González. Actually, I agree with a decree that Chavez issued -or tried to- to restrict these kind of bizarre names. There was this clerk at one of my parents' closets friends office that was called Superman (for real!!!). Everytime there's an election the poor guy becomes famous.
Gumersinda is actually more common in Colombia. Anyways she babysat me and my sister for more than 10 years, and I still keep in touch with her...
This is a website that's gathering all those that have had problems because of being included in the Tascón List: http://www.firmantes.com/index.php People tell how they've been agravated, there's also actual evidence of such li\There's legal evidence in several sites. If you Google Tascon List -or Lista Tascón in Spanish- you'll find out it's not some secret plot we, the evil people that oppose Chavez, are making up
Is there anything available in English?[/quote]
The firmantes website is only available in Spanish, sorry. Most of the real in-depth coverage of Chavez/Venezuela is only available in Spanish. Spaniard, Argentine, Uruguayan and Chilean newspapers unfortunately are not available in English and they tend to be good sources. Although there's the occasional good report on the NYT or on The Guardian. And there's a blog http://www.caracaschronicles.com that's excellent. Both guys are critical of both Chavez and some segments of the oppostion. It is a very well written blog by two extremely clever guys from Venezuela and it's in English. Franciso Toro is a political scientist and Juan Cristóbal is an economist.
Yes, Byrnzie, you're correct, I don't live in Vzla. anymore, but I still go on vacations to visit friends and I keep in touch on a daily basis with most of my friends and acquaintances. I also read everyday newspapers/blogs/magazines/international organizations briefings about Venezuela. I am Venezuelan at heart, I was born in Chile, but I also have to because it's part of my job.
PS: as usual, apologies if I fail to make myself 100% clear, but English is not my native language.
The firmantes website is only available in Spanish, sorry. Most of the real in-depth coverage of Chavez/Venezuela is only available in Spanish. Spaniard, Argentine, Uruguayan and Chilean newspapers unfortunately are not available in English and they tend to be good sources. Although there's the occasional good report on the NYT or on The Guardian. And there's a blog http://www.caracaschronicles.com that's excellent. Both guys are critical of both Chavez and some segments of the oppostion. It is a very well written blog by two extremely clever guys from Venezuela and it's in English. Franciso Toro is a political scientist and Juan Cristóbal is an economist.
Yes, Byrnzie, you're correct, I don't live in Vzla. anymore, but I still go on vacations to visit friends and I keep in touch on a daily basis with most of my friends and acquaintances. I also read everyday newspapers/blogs/magazines/international organizations briefings about Venezuela. I am Venezuelan at heart, I was born in Chile, but I also have to because it's part of my job.
PS: as usual, apologies if I fail to make myself 100% clear, but English is not my native language.
O.k, thanks.
I was just trying to dig a little deeper I suppose. I don't like to take things at face value. I know there's a lot of conflicting opinions on Chavez's Venezuela. I'm not the type of person to simply agree with someone just because they happen to live in the country in question.
Anyway, thanks for the info.
Some people on this board stick their tails in the air when I ask questions or post links which challenge certain conventional wisdoms. But, hey, fuck 'em. That's just the way I roll.
I was just trying to dig a little deeper I suppose. I don't like to take things at face value. I know there's a lot of conflicting opinions on Chavez's Venezuela. I'm not the type of person to simply agree with someone just because they happen to live in the country in question.
Anyway, thanks for the info.
Some people on this board stick their tails in the air when I ask questions or post links which challenge certain conventional wisdoms. But, hey, fuck 'em. That's just the way I roll.
You're welcome. It's fine if you want to "challenge conventional wisdoms" and all. But, it wouldn't kill you to be a little more receptive to other people's opinions or trying not to stereotype people. You instantly casted me as a "rich americanized Venezuela", which invalidated everything I had to say (I'm not any of those, btw). What's the point in arguing with someone whose opinions bear no meaning whatsoever? Just a small observation
Have a great week!
You instantly casted me as a "rich americanized Venezuela", which invalidated everything I had to say (I'm not any of those, btw)
My mistake for presuming that people who hire maids and nannies, can speak a number of different languages, and have lived in various parts of the world, are wealthy. An easy mistake to make. I'll try not to jump to conclusions next time.
Edit: Just because someone happens to live in the country being discussed doesn't mean they have the final word on it.
You're welcome. It's fine if you want to "challenge conventional wisdoms" and all. But, it wouldn't kill you to be a little more receptive to other people's opinions or trying not to stereotype people.
You hit the nail on the head there, but it's a futile effort on your part. That's just his MO.
My mistake for presuming that people who hire maids and nannies, can speak a number of different languages, and have lived in various parts of the world, are wealthy. An easy mistake to make. I'll try not to jump to conclusions next time.
Thanks for proving the point. You're a piece of work my man.
You're welcome. It's fine if you want to "challenge conventional wisdoms" and all. But, it wouldn't kill you to be a little more receptive to other people's opinions or trying not to stereotype people.
You hit the nail on the head there, but it's a futile effort on your part. That's just his MO.
My mistake for presuming that people who hire maids and nannies, can speak a number of different languages, and have lived in various parts of the world, are wealthy. An easy mistake to make. I'll try not to jump to conclusions next time.
Thanks for proving the point. You're a piece of work my man.
You couldn't resist adding your two cents worth could you.
Edit: Just because someone happens to live in the country being discussed doesn't mean they have the final word on it.
No. But it does mean you might want to give their views some weight and merit. More so than some dude that lives in China and whose only knowledge of Venequela comes from news he has to steal around Chinese web censors.
You couldn't resist adding your two cents worth could you.
No more than you could. Want to lecture me on the US constitution again? That went real well for you last time. Then you can get back to telling Venezuelan citizens that they don't know shit about their country's politics.
Edit: Just because someone happens to live in the country being discussed doesn't mean they have the final word on it.
No. But it does mean you might want to give their views some weight and merit. More so than some dude that lives in China and whose only knowledge of Venequela comes from news he has to steal around Chinese web censors.
I did give her 'views' [vague allegations] some weight. I gave them so much weight that I went to the trouble to research them to see if there was any supporting evidence for them. I didn't come up with much. But I took her word for it that there's documentary evidence available on the internet in Spanish.
You couldn't resist adding your two cents worth could you.
No more than you could. Want to lecture me on the US constitution again? That went real well for you last time. Then you can get back to telling Venezuelan citizens that they don't know shit about their country's politics.
You're still stroking your ego over the fact that I was wrong about American law as it pertains to racial hatred on the internet? Wow, that one really must have a long shelf-life for you.
And at what point did I tell her that 'she doesn't know shit about their country's politics'?
You're not putting words in my mouth again are you?
You couldn't resist adding your two cents worth could you.
No more than you could. Want to lecture me on the US constitution again? That went real well for you last time. Then you can get back to telling Venezuelan citizens that they don't know shit about their country's politics.
You're still stroking your ego over the fact that I was wrong about American law as it pertains to racial hatred on the internet? Wow, that one really must have a long shelf-life for you.
Nah, just one of the few times anyone's been able to back you into a corner and get you to admit to being less than perfect. It was nice to see and I'd love for other people to do it more often because it's badly needed. But while we're talking about stroking egos, why don't you bump that post you made that pasted a bunch of quotes from people on other forums telling you you're a genius and a wonderful debater?
It was nice to see and I'd love for other people to do it more often because it's badly needed. But while we're talking about stroking egos, why don't you bump that post you made that pasted a bunch of quotes from people on other forums telling you you're a genius and a wonderful debater?
And I posted those quotes on a thread which asked what good people could do politically/socially. I just used those quotes as an example that even a fuck-wit like me can [appear to] make a difference.
Anyway, thanks for taking such a personal interest in everything I say and do. I'm not sure whether to be flattered or worried.
Comments
I'm sure Byrnzie believes everything he says. But it is rather foolish for him to assume people with hands-on experience....people from that country/culture; don't know what they are talking about.
But hey, Byrnzie will always have his wonderfully entertaining links.
Nice of you to join the discussion with your personal attack on me. Or is it that you think making personal attacks on people in the 3rd person is excusable?
Feel free to contribute something to the thread topic instead of just focusing on my character.
And what were the results? You say that a million signatures were collected. I've read that for the mandate to pass they must obtain more than 3,757,773 million votes, as Chavez won with this number in the election.
Seems that some people see it differently:
http://www.focal.ca/pdf/focalpoint_august03.pdf
'...opposition organizations continue to focus on ousting the President, albeit via different means than before. Characterized by internal divisions, the opposition continue to try, (though not always successfully), to present a coherent, unified discourse on the need to organize a revocatory referendum as soon as possible...'
Venezuela's Commander-in-Chief of the Army, General Garcia Carneiro:
"...this is simply an opposition media campaign which has used the August 19 half-way point in President Chavez Frias' presidency to promote a second or third attempted coup against the legitimate government of this country and to claim that the government will not allow a referendum to take place ... this is not so!"
I don't see what this has to do with the discussion at hand. Maybe as far as Chavez is concerned it just boils down to Freedom of Speech. He allows 24 hour mainstream News channels in Venezuela to compare him to Hitler and to spend all day criticizing him, so maybe he also believes that Al-Bashira also has a right to speak?
What do you think about every U.S leader since 1948 inviting the Israeli leadership to Washington? Is that acceptable? Or is it just some leaders responsible for war crimes should be excluded from State invitations, whilst others accused of war crimes should be welcomed with open arms?
At the very least it seems that Chavez was trying to make a point about the ICC applying double-standards:
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/69675 ... t-icc.html
Hugo Chavez:
"Why would the ICC not order (former US president George W) Bush's arrest or the arrest of the president of Israel (Shimon Peres)?" Chavez asked.
http://www.ngrguardiannews.com/africa/a ... %20warrant
'...Speaking at the opening ceremony of the summit, Al-Bashir, according to Reuters, urged Arab leaders meeting in Doha to reject the indictment and accused Israel of backing rebels in Darfur.
"We appreciate your support and hope it will lead to strong and clear resolutions .... that reject this resolution and call for its cancellation," he said.
Syrian President Bashar al-Assad called on the summit to express unequivocal support for Bashir.
"We are called upon today to reject the warrant categorically and to express absolute support for Sudan at this stage," he said. "What is happening to Sudan now is another chapter in the effort to weaken the Arabs ... and another stage in the effort to break up Sudan."
Arab states were quick to rally around Al-Bashir last month. Some cited the absence of international measures against Israel over its three-week war on Gaza that killed 1,300 Palestinians. Arabs generally see a double-standard applied...
Qatar, which hosts a key U.S. military base, said last week it had faced unspecified pressure not to receive Al-Bashir but its prime minister flew to Khartoum to repeat the invitation.
Officials in Doha said Saudi Arabia had pressed the summit of 22 Arab League nations to offer strong support for Sudan.'
How come Chavez has won all three elections since 1998?
Seems that there's another side to every story:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Ch%C3%A1vez
According to Greg Grandin, professor of Latin American history at New York University, "[The Venezuelan] media is chronically obsessed with Chávez, and critical in a way that would be completely alien for most US observers." After the media-backed 2002 coup attempt, Venezuela passed 'social responsibility' legislation regulating the media but has largely declined to enforce it..
Throughout his presidency, Chávez has hosted the live talk show known as Aló Presidente ("Hello, President!").[48] The show broadcasts in varying formats on state owned Venezolana de Televisión (VTV—Venezuelan State Television) each Sunday at 11:00 AM. The show features Chávez addressing topics of the day, taking phone calls and live questions from both the studio and broadcast audience, and touring locations where government social welfare programs are active. Additionally, on July 25, 2005, Chávez inaugurated TeleSUR, a proposed Pan-American homologue of Al Jazeera that seeks to challenge the present domination of Latin American television news by Univision and the United States-based CNN en Español. Chávez's media policies have contributed to elevated tensions between the United States and Venezuela.[49]
In 2006, President Chávez announced that the terrestrial broadcast license for RCTV—Venezuela's second largest TV channel—would not be renewed.[50] The channel's terrestrial broadcasts ended on May 28, 2007 and were replaced with a state network.[51] RCTV is accused of supporting the coup against Chávez in April 2002, and the oil strike in 2002-2003. Also, it has been accused by the government of violating the Law on the Social Responsibility of Radio and Television.[52] The director of the station, Marcel Granier, denies taking part in the coup.[53] According to journalist Eva Golinger, "In the days before the April 11, 2000 coup, Venevisión, RCTV, Globovisión and Televen replaced regular programming with anti-Chávez speeches and propaganda calling for viewers to take to the streets."[54] One of the main justifications for the coup was news footage aired by the private stations on April 11 showing Chávez supporters on the Puente Llaguno bridge shooting at an unseen target earlier that day, with a voiceover saying that they were shooting at a peaceful opposition march. It was later proved that the Chávez supporters on the bridge had not been shooting at a march, they were exchanging fire with Metropolitan Police positioned behind cars and buildings; the opposition march had not passed near the bridge and was not fired at from it. The airing of this report was followed, later on the 11th, by an interview with a group of dissident generals who said that because of the deaths caused by the government, they would no longer recognise Chávez as president. CNN news correspondent Otto Neustadl said that he was told on the 10th, before the events took place, that "tomorrow, on the 11th there will be a video of Chávez, there will be deaths and then 20 military officials of high rank will appear and pronounce themselves against the government of Chávez and will request his resignation." Eva Golinger concludes from this and other evidence that "The media involvement in the coup had clearly been premeditated."[55]
RCTV is still broadcasting via cable and satellite and is widely viewable in Venezuela.[56] The revocation of its license has been condemned by a multitude of international organizations.[53][57][58][59] However, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) questioned whether, in the event a television station openly supported and collaborated with coup leaders, the station in question would not be subject to even more serious consequences in the United States or any other Western nation.[60] In a poll conducted by Datanalisis, almost 70 percent of Venezuelans polled opposed the shut-down, but most cited the loss of their favorite soap operas rather than concerns about limits on freedom of expression.'
Because he's still popular... you think I don't acknowledge that? That does mean I have to agree with him. My point is that Chavez supporters and/or detractors are not as monolithic as you want to paint them.
OK, so you're telling me that I don't know how to read in Spanish (my native tongue) the Constitution? This is almost insulting. The 2004 Referendum was 100% legal and permitted by the law ...The possibility for a revocatory referendum is clearly stated in Arts. 72 and 233 of the Bolivarian Constitution of 1999. In 2003/2004 more than 3,6 million signatures were collected and the referendum took place. Chavez won the 2004 referendum. And that's fine. What bothers me is that people who signed that petition have been blacklisted, again Lista Tascón and Lista Maisanta.
I'd love to give you links in English, but I don't think the Constution has been translated yet. If you understand Spanish here's a wikipedia link (since you consider it a valid source)
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Refer%C3%A ... uela,_2004
You know what? You're right and I'm wrong. Chavez is the best thing that has ever happened to Venezuela. I bow to your wisdom and I thank you for enlightening me. After all the information you've provided me I can see that I've been mistaken for almost 12 years. This has been an entertaining experience, but I really need to do my job
What has the US has to do with anything? There are other countries and presidents in this world. So, since the ICC has not prosecuted Dubya or Simon Peres it cannot prosecute Al-Bashir? The UN has already ruled that what happened in Darfur is indeed genocide.
So now the ICC was incorrect in prosecuting, and condemning, Al-Bashir? I know Judge Moreno Ocampo. He was part of the Court that prosecuted the military junta here in Argentina. My point, regarding Chavez is this: Al-Bashir has an international order of arrest and Venezuela has agreed with the ICC. So, is Chavez inviting Al-Bashir to Venezuela to arrest him, or he signs treaties and then not comply with them?
Nevermind, as I said in my previous reply I'm greatful to you for enlightening me. Have a great weekend!!!!
Is that what I said?
The U.N has also ruled that Israel has committed war crimes but that doesn't stop every Israeli President being welcomed at the White house with open arms.
What has America got to do with it? America has got everything to do with having bled Venezuela for decades and for regarding Latin America as it's backyard. But then I suppose the privileged few in that part of the world never had a problem with it.
Is that what I said? I merely drew attention to the double standards at play in the world - something which Chavez also seemed to be doing.
You say that Venezuela has agreed with the ICC? Isn't Chavez the leader of Venezuela? So how could Venezuela agree with the ICC without his approval?
Anyway, this certainly does sound like the crime of the century. A head of state inviting another head of state who has been accused of war crimes to his country. I've never before heard of such a thing. Sure sounds like Chavez should be 'ousted' from office.
My pleasure.
I didn't deny that.
If people really have been blacklisted then I admit that sucks. Do you have any more details on these blacklistings e.t.c? What problems have people encountered exactly? And were any of these people involved in the 2002 coup attempt?
Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
This is my last reply about this issue. Clearly you've not read my previous replies. I said I personally know people that have lost their jobs, have being denied their retirement pensions, have been unable to find a new job, and even some have had to leave the country. I won't give you the names of my/my parents friends or friends of friends, etc. These are your average folks, some were working in government offices, other in the private sector and, poor Gumersinda she's been a nanny her whole life, all she did was sign the petition and the next thing you know she couldn't renew her identity card or collect her retirement pension. Of course, if you were working in a goverment agency/office whatever and you had signed the petition you were fired. Since when do you have to agree with the goverment to work as a clerk in a public agency? The State and the government are 2 different things.
This is a website that's gathering all those that have had problems because of being included in the Tascón List: http://www.firmantes.com/index.php People tell how they've been agravated, there's also actual evidence of such list (legal paperwork)
There's legal evidence in several sites. If you Google Tascon List -or Lista Tascón in Spanish- you'll find out it's not some secret plot we, the evil people that oppose Chavez, are making up
I'd say he did. It wasn't a personal attack on your character. It was a legitimate point about your lack of credibility when speaking as an "expert" as compared to people that actually live and deal with the issues in question.
I didn't say I was an expert. And the fact that I don't live in Venezuela is irrelevant. I suppose I have no right to voice an opinion on the U.S too, right?
Sorry, but that argument is old, and baseless.
And she doesn't live in Venezuela anymore, she lives in Argentina.
Gumersinda? Is that a Venezuelan name? Sounds like an Indian name to me.
Is there anything available in English?
Well, Venezuelans have the most peculiar names. Some common female names are: Mayerling, Tibisay, Yuraida, Zuraima. And in Venezuela it's nor rare, at all, for parents to create names say with the first part of the father's name and the first half of the mom's name. I had a neighbor called Algiuli (she was a girl, her father's name was Alberto (hence the Al part) and her mom was called Giuliana, hence the giuli). When I was a teenager I used to take part in literacy campaigns and I one of the girls was named Jackeline Kennedy Onassis (that was her name) and her last name was González. Actually, I agree with a decree that Chavez issued -or tried to- to restrict these kind of bizarre names. There was this clerk at one of my parents' closets friends office that was called Superman (for real!!!). Everytime there's an election the poor guy becomes famous.
Gumersinda is actually more common in Colombia. Anyways she babysat me and my sister for more than 10 years, and I still keep in touch with her...
Is there anything available in English?[/quote]
The firmantes website is only available in Spanish, sorry. Most of the real in-depth coverage of Chavez/Venezuela is only available in Spanish. Spaniard, Argentine, Uruguayan and Chilean newspapers unfortunately are not available in English and they tend to be good sources. Although there's the occasional good report on the NYT or on The Guardian. And there's a blog http://www.caracaschronicles.com that's excellent. Both guys are critical of both Chavez and some segments of the oppostion. It is a very well written blog by two extremely clever guys from Venezuela and it's in English. Franciso Toro is a political scientist and Juan Cristóbal is an economist.
Yes, Byrnzie, you're correct, I don't live in Vzla. anymore, but I still go on vacations to visit friends and I keep in touch on a daily basis with most of my friends and acquaintances. I also read everyday newspapers/blogs/magazines/international organizations briefings about Venezuela. I am Venezuelan at heart, I was born in Chile, but I also have to because it's part of my job.
PS: as usual, apologies if I fail to make myself 100% clear, but English is not my native language.
O.k, thanks.
I was just trying to dig a little deeper I suppose. I don't like to take things at face value. I know there's a lot of conflicting opinions on Chavez's Venezuela. I'm not the type of person to simply agree with someone just because they happen to live in the country in question.
Anyway, thanks for the info.
Some people on this board stick their tails in the air when I ask questions or post links which challenge certain conventional wisdoms. But, hey, fuck 'em. That's just the way I roll.
You're welcome. It's fine if you want to "challenge conventional wisdoms" and all. But, it wouldn't kill you to be a little more receptive to other people's opinions
Have a great week!
My mistake for presuming that people who hire maids and nannies, can speak a number of different languages, and have lived in various parts of the world, are wealthy. An easy mistake to make. I'll try not to jump to conclusions next time.
Edit: Just because someone happens to live in the country being discussed doesn't mean they have the final word on it.
You hit the nail on the head there, but it's a futile effort on your part. That's just his MO.
Thanks for proving the point. You're a piece of work my man.
You couldn't resist adding your two cents worth could you.
No. But it does mean you might want to give their views some weight and merit. More so than some dude that lives in China and whose only knowledge of Venequela comes from news he has to steal around Chinese web censors.
No more than you could. Want to lecture me on the US constitution again? That went real well for you last time. Then you can get back to telling Venezuelan citizens that they don't know shit about their country's politics.
I did give her 'views' [vague allegations] some weight. I gave them so much weight that I went to the trouble to research them to see if there was any supporting evidence for them. I didn't come up with much. But I took her word for it that there's documentary evidence available on the internet in Spanish.
You're still stroking your ego over the fact that I was wrong about American law as it pertains to racial hatred on the internet? Wow, that one really must have a long shelf-life for you.
And at what point did I tell her that 'she doesn't know shit about their country's politics'?
You're not putting words in my mouth again are you?
Nah, just one of the few times anyone's been able to back you into a corner and get you to admit to being less than perfect. It was nice to see and I'd love for other people to do it more often because it's badly needed. But while we're talking about stroking egos, why don't you bump that post you made that pasted a bunch of quotes from people on other forums telling you you're a genius and a wonderful debater?
I never said I was perfect. Obstinate maybe, but not perfect.
Having the courage of one's convictions isn't the same as arrogance.
And I posted those quotes on a thread which asked what good people could do politically/socially. I just used those quotes as an example that even a fuck-wit like me can [appear to] make a difference.
Anyway, thanks for taking such a personal interest in everything I say and do. I'm not sure whether to be flattered or worried.