Venezuela and Chavez

bobbaggio

I don't know if this should be here, but I searched boards for a suitable place to put this.

So, My venezuelan friends are all going over to London to Vote against Chavez and speak of how horrible he is, and are looking forward to his reign of terror coming to an end. I can't believe news reports that I have googled. And if he is that bad, how did he stay in power for so long?

Just wondering what people's thoughts are on this? I would like to be able to add my two cents when my friends discuss it...

weisses

Have you read this ??

http://www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/reports/venezuela0712webwcover.pdf

bobbaggio

Wow, I've read the first 10 pages, very interesting....

Thanks for the reply! I appreciate it....

asherbassad

bobbaggio wrote: »

Wow, I've read the first 10 pages, very interesting....

Thanks for the reply! I appreciate it....

That report is an utter sham. It's essentially a rehash of the farcical 2008 report that has been completely debunked by over 100 experts on Latin America, from HArvard, Johns Hopkins and many other notable institutes.

HRW is notoriously biased against Chavez and this report masquerading as "analysis" doesn't even meet the most rudimentary standards of integrity. It's a laughable rag at best.

You might want to read this about the report:

http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/7149

Jonny7

asherbassad wrote: »

That report is an utter sham. It's essentially a rehash of the farcical 2008 report that has been completely debunked by over 100 experts on Latin America, from HArvard, Johns Hopkins and many other notable institutes.

HRW is notoriously biased against Chavez and this report masquerading as "analysis" doesn't even meet the most rudimentary standards of integrity. It's a laughable rag at best.

You might want to read this about the report:

http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/7149

Isn't that site pro-Chavez?

asherbassad

Jonny7 wrote: »

Isn't that site pro-Chavez?

Is that the best you can do?

Read the the debunking of the report, check the list of signatories.
HRW never responded after it's report was exposed as a complete farce.

It doesn't matter if the site is pro-chavez, anti-chavez or neutral if what it says turns out to be true. All you need to do is check the facts. You don't seem willing to do that however. When facts are presented and they expose the falsehood of your preconceived notions you simply go silent or at best throw out the "tin-foil" comment or winky emoticon.

That kind of response is as weak an lacking in merit as HRW's shabby attempt at responding to the debunking and then their ultimate silence when they were found out.

You might garner a bit of respect if you could once admit that you were wrong. I won't hold my breath though.

Jonny7

asherbassad wrote: »

It doesn't matter if the site is pro-chavez, anti-chavez or neutral

HRW is notoriously biased against Chavez

I am just pointing out this contradiction. Not really into either report.

asherbassad

Jonny7 wrote: »

I am just pointing out this contradiction. Not really into either report.

There's the truth and then there's falsehoods, propaganda and misrepresentations.

A site could be anti-Chavez and print lies about him.
A site could be pro-Chavez and print lies about him. In this case the debunking of the report is bona fide and the HRW report is a pack of lies.

This leads us to conclude that we must take all demonising of Chavez by western governments and watchdogs with a pinch of salt.

When a newspaper prints something that later turns out to be false, they usually issue a statement which could be an admission of erroneous reporting or a retraction. Human Rights Watch has done no such thing in the light of the 2008 report nor of the 2012 report.

Therefore, EVERYTHING they report must be at least questioned and re-examined. If they can print such lies about Chavez and Venezuela in general they can certainly do it about Assad, Gadaffi, Ahmedinejad.


But back to the point, I'm trying to show the OP that the report he was given was utter crap. He sounds like he would have read it and come to the conclusion that Venezuela under Chavez is this rigid, oppressive totalitarian dictatorship which is simply not true.

He would then have been behind US military intervention to topple Chavez and install a puppet government to "liberate the Venezuelan people".
Sound familiar?

I'm merely preventing him from being fooled into believing falsehoods and propaganda.

bobbaggio

Right, well automatically....I don't want to subscribe to assherbassad's view

Worztron

bobbaggio wrote: »

I don't know if this should be here, but I searched boards for a suitable place to put this.

So, My venezuelan friends are all going over to London to Vote against Chavez and speak of how horrible he is, and are looking forward to his reign of terror coming to an end. I can't believe news reports that I have googled. And if he is that bad, how did he stay in power for so long?

Just wondering what people's thoughts are on this? I would like to be able to add my two cents when my friends discuss it...

Watch the excellent documentary The War on Democracy (2007). Hugo Chavez has done a lot of good in Venezuela - free education + free health care.

shedweller

That human rights watch site smacks of something Strategic Communications Laboratory would come up with. Www.scl.cc
Steer most people in a given direction and thats most of the work done. Internet forums are no exception, hence the vehement debunking on subjects like this.

asherbassad

bobbaggio wrote: »

Right, well automatically....I don't want to subscribe to assherbassad's view

It's not my "view". The report is a sham. If you want to believe a pack of demonstrably false claims then that's up to you. Go ahead.

If you are interested in the truth, however, then that's a different story.

Incidentally what's the reason you have for not wanting to "subscribe" to my view?

bobbaggio

Just the way you came in here and attacked anyone that said anything. I will agree, I don't know anything about this and you obviously have a vested interest in this and are passionate about it, but nobody really said anything horribly wrong, there was a link posted, I said it was interesting and someone mentioned that as biased and wrong as the first link was, the second one might be just the same. As both are trying to convince us of something. And both have opinions. That's all, no need for the hostility....

asherbassad

bobbaggio wrote: »

Just the way you came in here and attacked anyone that said anything. I will agree, I don't know anything about this and you obviously have a vested interest in this and are passionate about it, but nobody really said anything horribly wrong, there was a link posted, I said it was interesting and someone mentioned that as biased and wrong as the first link was, the second one might be just the same. As both are trying to convince us of something. And both have opinions. That's all, no need for the hostility....

Bobbaggio, the two most democratic states on the planet are Iceland and Venezuela Why? They are the only 2 states that can have a sitting leader recalled at ANY time during his or her tenure. The US, UK, France, Canada, Spain, Australia, anywhere doesn't have that within an elected framework. The elections in Venezeula this week were deemed the most flawless (quote ex President Jimmy Carter) of any nation in the Western Hemisphere.
By comparison, the Vienna Commission, sanctioned to oversee the 2004 US Presidential Election, packed up and left before the polls had closed called the whole thing an insult.
So you tell me ... who's a democracy and who's a complete bribe-ocracy?

Monty Burnz

asherbassad wrote: »

Bobbaggio, the two most democratic states on the planet are Iceland and Venezuela Why? They are the only 2 states that can have a sitting leader recalled at ANY time during his or her tenure. The US, UK, France, Canada, Spain, Australia, anywhere doesn't have that within an elected framework. The elections in Venezeula this week were deemed the most flawless (quote ex President Jimmy Carter) of any nation in the Western Hemisphere.
By comparison, the Vienna Commission, sanctioned to oversee the 2004 US Presidential Election, packed up and left before the polls had closed called the whole thing an insult.
So you tell me ... who's a democracy and who's a complete bribe-ocracy?

Indeed, Venezuela is a true workers' paradise. *cough*

asherbassad

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Indeed, Venezuela is a true workers' paradise. *cough*

Care to elaborate on that, Monty?
I may have missed your point.