Chavez Takes a Stand

[Toro]

Re: RE: Chavez Takes a Stand

There is nothing uncontroversial about Venezuela or its oil production at this point, Toro. I have many clues about who hires private spooks and why. I also know that George Friedman has links to PNAC and considered the illegal invasion of Iraq a good thing because, "The conquest of Iraq will not be a minor event in history: it will represent the introduction of a new imperial power to the Middle East. The United States will move from being an outside power influencing events through coalitions to a regional power that is able to operate effectively on its own. Most significant, countries like Saudi Arabia and Syria will be living in a new and quite unpleasant world."

For those of you wondering who the hell George Friedman is and why I suddenly introduced his name, he's the founder and CEO of Stratfor.

He doesn't just accept American imperialism, he cheers it on and uses his position to promote it. I didn't know the original article was from his company, but I've seen enough like that I recognised the genre.

Wrong. Since you're imposing your own ideological judgement, lets see what else he says;

(I) intend to be cold and clinical. Nothing has become cheaper than passionate discourse. (I) deliberately treat Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden as what they are, skilled and dedicated men with a clear vision of how they want to look at the world. (I)treat George W. Bush the same way. I understand that both views will be vigorously attacked by those who would wish to make each other into monsters or idiots. They are neither. They are leaders, playing chess with the lives others and the fate of the world. Fools and psychotics do not accumulate and hold such power.

This does not mean that I am indifferent to the outcome of the war. I am an American, and my fate is intimately bound to that of my country. Apart from that, I regard the moral principles of my republic superior to those of other regimes. I understand that Osama bin Laden believes the same of his dream of Caliphate. That makes us enemies. Nevertheles, walking around in fog of rage will not me or anyone else more effective. Passion has been praised too much. It leads to loud noises and incoherence.

I highlighted what you posted to point out that what he says is something called analysis. But only someone from the far, far Left with a hatred of America would say it is cheerleading.

There's nothing uncontroversial about Venezuela's oil production yet you jump all over me for being a Bush stooley? Re-read the quote I posted about Friedman. Several times.

 

[jimmoyer]

Derry, your fundamental flaw, is not having skepticism accross the board.

You're right to be skeptical of bungling American policy in Venezuela.

You're also wrong to applaud Chavez without more severe caveats.

If you were not just a citizen but rather a leader of a country you would not have the luxury to have skepticism in only one category.

It would behoove your responsibility to have just as great a skepticism for other countries.

Sometimes the weaker ones contain as great an evil as the strong.

To ignore this is just to persue your own luxury as a citizen with no responsibilities.

If you're wrong about this guy, what favors are you doing for the world?

Even the weaker ones not only must but often prefer to play power politics and manipulation.

 

[Derry McKinney]

No what he says his cheerleading disguised as analysis, Toro. He's a PNACer, a true believer in neo-conservatism. He didn't just drink the Kool-Aid, he delights in dispensing it to others.

Remaining cold and dispassionate when people are losing their lives is one of the signs of a psychopath, by the way. Friedman brags about it.

 

[Derry McKinney]

Derry, your fundamental flaw, is not having skepticism accross the board.

I thought it was wearing my hat at the table.

You're also wrong to applaud Chavez without more severe caveats.

How severe do you want them to be? The Venezuelan people are demonstrably better off under him, human rights abuses are down (although improvement is still needed), he is democratically elected, his ideas are spreading outside of Venezuela and having a positive effect for the people in those countries.

I'm supposed to worry that he may or may not, depending on who you ask, be mismanaging the oil industry? I'm supposed to worry that he's (GASP!) a socialist?

He's not perfect and he will undoubtedly make some mistakes, likely some very bad ones. His people are doing far better under him than they have under the previous mistake-makers though.

If you were not just a citizen but rather a leader of a country you would not have the luxury to have skepticism in only one category.

I raise goats for a living, Jim. When I see somebody who is willing to help goat farmers in places where nobody helped the goat farmers before, I cheer him on.

It would behoove your responsibility to have just as great a skepticism for other countries.

I skepticism for a great many countries. Most of the world's billions agree with my skepticism of the Great Satan to our south though.

If you're wrong about this guy, what favors are you doing for the world?

If I'm wrong about this guy, he's still better than the alternatives being offered up. I'll tell you what...you get some better alternatives down there and I'll consider them. Going back to the way it was before is not a positive development though.

 

[Derry McKinney]

Chavez Leads the Way

 

[Jo Canadian]

Chavez Leads the Way

I think this pretty much says it all: ...The Chávez government, for its part, has forged ahead with various spectacular social projects, assisted by the huge jump in oil prices, from $10 to $50 a barrel over the past six years. Instead of gushing into the coffers of the already wealthy, the oil pipelines have been picked up and directed into the shanty towns, funding health, education and cheap food. Foreign leaders from Spain and Brazil, Chile and Cuba, have come on pilgrimage to Caracas to establish links with the man now perceived as the leader of new emerging forces in Latin America, with popularity ratings to match. This extensive external support has stymied the plans of the US government to rally the countries of Latin America against Venezuela. They are not listening, and Washington is left without a policy....

 

[Derry McKinney]

That's the real deal. He's also ensured that Venezuela gets to keep that money instead of giving it to Exxon. That makes Georgie and his pals mad.

 

[Toro]

Chavez Leads the Way

Biased source! Wah! Wah!












Waits for the inevitable "loser" or "Bush supporter" slag.

 

[Jo Canadian]

Chavez Leads the Way

Biased source! Wah! Wah!

Waits for the inevitable "loser" or "Bush supporter" slag.

When is any source not Biased? That cop-out is no better than saying, "your lying and I'm right...Wah! Wah!"

But seriously, if changes are being made that are more positive, why should writing about it be a bad thing? It's been pointed out already that Chavez has had made some mistakes, but overall is doing better than his predecessors.

Biased link

another biased link

oh, look another

Good lord, there's no end to it

There'za ton of Biasness in these links. Quick bury your head in the sand and it'll go away

 

[Toro]

When is any source not Biased? That cop-out is no better than saying, "your lying and I'm right...Wah! Wah!"

:wink:







Scroll up.

 

[Jo Canadian]

When is any source not Biased? That cop-out is no better than saying, "your lying and I'm right...Wah! Wah!"

:wink:
Scroll up.

Soooooo, does that mean you're saying it as a cop-out? Or are you're saying you're right? I'm willing to go with the former.

 

[Toro]

When is any source not Biased? That cop-out is no better than saying, "your lying and I'm right...Wah! Wah!"

:wink:
Scroll up.

Soooooo, does that mean you're saying it as a cop-out? Or are you're saying you're right? I'm willing to go with the former.

No. I was accused of posting a biased source by the individual who posted the bias source I was pointing out. That's all.

 

[Reverend Blair]

He's saying that my friend, a simple goat farmer from Saskatchewan, nailed him for spinning and he doesn't like it.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Your source wasn't journalistic, Toro. It was from a vested interest with connections to PNAC. Worse than that, you tried to hide who your source was.

 

[Derry McKinney]

ooops...he skipped that part. ;-)

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: Chavez Takes a Stand

Your source wasn't journalistic, Toro. It was from a vested interest with connections to PNAC. Worse than that, you tried to hide who your source was.

I wasn't trying to hide it to be mysterious. Like I said earlier, I don't like posting paid-for, copyright material. But this seemed like a Left-wing w***fest so I thought I'd throw something contradictory into the mix. You can believe whatever nonsense you want, but that's why I did it.

Sorry, simply because someone has sources within an organization you don't like doesn't mean the information I buy from the service is biased. Where do you think people get their primary information, scanning the Internet or buying the newspaper? Simply because someone is a journalist with a big British newspaper doesn't mean he's not biased. Or do you agree with everything Mark Steyn writes? (http://www.steynonline.com/)

If you genuinely believe that someone in my line of work would buy something that I thought was being spun for political effect, you either are so ideological that you filter only what you want to believe or you truly do not understand why such a service exists. Friedman was ex-CIA. If someone with intelligence skills can offer something to filter through the political BS and tell me what's happening on the ground, that's valuable to me. If there was a good service by an ex-KGB agent, I'd look at that too. I don't care as long as the information is good. But that doesn't mean he's always going to be correct, and I understand that.

And, again, what was the information that got you guys all so bent out of shape? That Venezuela was fudging its oil output. Big news, eh? That caused the Far Left here to go crazy, and speaks more to your mindset than mine. "Spreading information so that shareholders won't invest" is about as politically biased as it gets.

 

[Reverend Blair]

Gee...seems like somebody is a little defensive. What's the matter, did Chavez buy AK-47s instead of M-16s? Tough titty.

You showed up and tried to play spy games. Don't give me that copyright crap either...if you were concerned you know damned well that naming the source is better protection than claiming secret status, at least if you know that if you are who you say you are. You got nailed for being a spinner. Tough luck. It's what happens when you spin.

Speaking of who you are...I notice you're from S'toon, or there abouts. Might I know you?

 

[Toro]

Re: RE: Chavez Takes a Stand

Gee...seems like somebody is a little defensive. What's the matter, did Chavez buy AK-47s instead of M-16s? Tough titty.

You showed up and tried to play spy games. Don't give me that copyright crap either...if you were concerned you know damned well that naming the source is better protection than claiming secret status, at least if you know that if you are who you say you are. You got nailed for being a spinner. Tough luck. It's what happens when you spin.

Whatever. :roll:

 

[Reverend Blair]

Good Answer!

 

[Toro]

Editorial in Tuesday's Wall Street Journal.

Boy, after the vehement attacks suggesting that oil production was, gasp, down, I can't wait to see the response on this one.

Bush Doctrine, Latin-Style
June 7, 2005; Page A14

A U.S. President has many demands on his time. So when George W. Bush put Venezuelan democracy advocate Maria Corina Machado on his schedule last Wednesday, he was sending an important signal of American support.

Ms. Machado is a leader of Súmate, Venezuela's most important non-government electoral watchdog. Súmate has been monitoring the slow destruction of Venezuela's democratic institutions under President Hugo Chávez. And doing it so well that Mr. Chávez wants to put Súmate's leadership, including Ms. Machado, in jail on trumped-up conspiracy charges.

Mr. Chávez is a living reminder of the old Latin saw, "one man, one vote, once." He has packed the Supreme Court, illegally stacked the supposedly independent electoral council in his favor, and diminished the rights of the opposition in the National Assembly.

Súmate has been the one Venezuelan institution willing and able to monitor this anti-democratic behavior and bring it to the attention of the world. It was the organized voice of dissent during last summer's stolen recall referendum, when the European Union refused to act as an observer because of the lack of transparency in the voting process. The secrecy of the vote is among Súmate's biggest current worries. Mr. Chávez's electoral council has announced its intention to use electronic ballot books to monitor polling stations in August's municipal elections, and few Venezuelans think such technology is benign.

This week Súmate leaders, including Ms. Machado, are attending a meeting of the Organization of American States in Fort Lauderdale. Ms. Machado says she hopes the OAS will take up Secretary General José Miguel Insulza's proposal to ensure that nongovernmental voices be heard so that, as she puts it, "the state of democracy can be objectively and independently measured" in Venezuela.