View Full Version : Hugo Chavez, dead at 58
Coverage here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-21679053).
It's Org policy not to speak ill of the dead until they are buried, so I'm going to try to think of something nice to say about the man.
Um.
He won at least one election fairly?
-edit-
Oh, and Aló Presidente (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al%C3%B3_Presidente) was hilarious. So there's that.
HoreTore
03-05-2013, 23:45
He did win one election fair and square.
That means he fairly won one election more than the "pro-democratic and freedomloving" opposition of Venezuela ever did. Chavez was far from perfect, but at least he was better than the fascists.
HopAlongBunny
03-05-2013, 23:50
Viva la revolucion redux?
So, in truth, he actually was El Presidente For Life. ~D
I was actually surprised at this. RIP.
Kralizec
03-06-2013, 00:05
Hugo Chavez was the living proof that even a democraticly elected government can be despotic.
He certainly had cojones and his antics were sometimes funny, if you were not actually subject to his rule.
I suppose his views and attitude were understandable given Latin America's general history. It's possible, plausible even that he meant well. Beyond that, I can't think of anything positive to say about him.
Strike For The South
03-06-2013, 00:12
CIA
With Polonium
In the lavarotory
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-06-2013, 00:26
He was a product of his situation, he was not an evil man, I would say he tried to do the right thing. Rather like Lenin.
Still, we shall have to see what his death brings for Latin America at large, as well as his own country.
I do wonder though, if he has really only just died.
Rhyfelwyr
03-06-2013, 00:33
He was the least disastrous of the 3rd world left-wing demagogues. To be fair, he didn't do too badly at all.
ICantSpellDawg
03-06-2013, 02:11
Good. LIP Venezuela
Nobody should die at that age, rest in peace mr Chavez
Papewaio
03-06-2013, 05:58
58 is pretty young. Cancer is one of our true enemies, not political affiliations.
True enemy
With cancer
In political affiliations
InsaneApache
03-06-2013, 12:23
GUARDIAN readers were today in mourning for a man who would have banned the Guardian if it was in Venezuela.
The people’s champion was very fond of being agreed with
The death of President Hugo Chavez has robbed Britain’s left wing of an heroic figure whose bravely authoritarian regime stood up to America and journalism.
Julian Cook, from Finsbury Park, said: “He was sort of democratically elected and in many ways Venezuela was kind of almost a free country. I’ll miss him so much.”
Emma Bradford, a level six Guardian reader from Stevenage, added: “He introduced free healthcare and free education and if you have those two things then why on earth would you need a free press?
“Yes, we have those things in Britain and we have a free press, but – for our sins – we are much more complex than the noble Latin American peasants.”
She added: “I only use Venezuelan petrol in my Saab because it has been properly taxed.”
Tom Booker, from Hackney, added: “Journalists would have had a much easier time in Venezuela if they had just agreed with President Chavez. If you read his autobiography you’d realise that he was actually very nice.
“The oil tax paid for precious, beautiful things like schools, hospitals, secret police and the wildly popular TV show Stop What You Are Doing and Listen to the President.”
Meanwhile, tributes were also paid to Chavez by the usual arseholes.
Ken Livingstone, George Galloway and Gerry Adams all said he was a great man, which is pretty much all you need to know about Hugo Chavez.
something nice to say....something nice.....uhhhhmmm....
He wasn´t a dictator like some have accused him of.
he was just a wannabe.
For all his faults, he prevented Venezuela from doing what almost all other oil rich nations have done: bending over and letting multinational oil companies come in, paying off the political elite and taking the bulk of the profits, leaving behind another paradoxical material rich, dirt poor country.
The question is whether Venezuela in 5 years time will have sold off the reserves to the oil multinationals and be accepting imf loans in exchange for cutting the standard of living for ordinary Venezuelans.
Seamus Fermanagh
03-06-2013, 14:30
Man, movement....legend?
While no fan of his government's leftist policies myself (thought I freely acknowledge some of the obvious short term benefits dfespite seeing too much potential for long term harm), any political observer who does not acknowledge his consumate skill with most of the Venezuelan people and his sweeping impact on Venezuela (and throughout Latin America) is missing the boat.
Those ex-pats celebrating his death are dealing with this the wrong way.
FWIW, Frontline did an hourlong episode about Chavez and Aló Presidente.
Full episode viewable here (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/hugochavez/view/).
Crazed Rabbit
03-06-2013, 16:01
For all his faults, he prevented Venezuela from doing what almost all other oil rich nations have done: bending over and letting multinational oil companies come in, paying off the political elite and taking the bulk of the profits, leaving behind another paradoxical material rich, dirt poor country.
The question is whether Venezuela in 5 years time will have sold off the reserves to the oil multinationals and be accepting imf loans in exchange for cutting the standard of living for ordinary Venezuelans.
Instead he got rid of many qualified engineers in those refineries and cut maintenance spending which led to more accidents and deaths. By seizing refineries he's made all sorts of companies hesitant to invest in Venezuela.
And isn't the poverty level remain the same or increase?
It will be interesting to see if Venezuela gets a real democracy or if his successor tries to consolidate power.
CR
Sarmatian
03-06-2013, 16:15
He made a stop to foreign interest groups getting rich exploiting the wealth of Venezuela, and for that he has my respect, even though his system wasn't much of a democracy.
Instead he got rid of many qualified engineers in those refineries and cut maintenance spending which led to more accidents and deaths. By seizing refineries he's made all sorts of companies hesitant to invest in Venezuela.
And isn't the poverty level remain the same or increase?
It will be interesting to see if Venezuela gets a real democracy or if his successor tries to consolidate power.
CR
That sounds like it was lifted from the CIA fact book*
Let me guess what the "democratic" candidate will look like:
- Rich
- Talks about improving living standards by increasing foreign investment
- Lived in the US
- Massive advertising budget
*Sponsored by Texaco.
Oh and would you believe it. Today's Financial Times opinion piece is all about how Venezula must let the oil giants in, in order to stabilise the country's economy.
The vultures are circling.
Ja'chyra
03-06-2013, 17:59
To be honest he didn't seem much worse then our politicians, lets see how they compare:
He won at least one election fairly? - If you mean more people voted for them than didn't, afraid not
He introduced free healthcare and free education and if you have those two things then why on earth would you need a free press? - Whereas ours are trying to charge for our free healthcare, do charge for our free education and bend over and take it from the press, when they aren't trying to manipulate/bargain with them to spin their own agenda
“The oil tax paid for precious, beautiful things like schools, hospitals, secret police and the wildly popular TV show Stop What You Are Doing and Listen to the President.” - Instead of being like our taxes that are used to pay for spin doctors, bankers bonuses, politicians pensions and duck houses?????
Ken Livingstone, George Galloway and Gerry Adams all said he was a great man, which is pretty much all you need to know about Hugo Chavez. - I agree, with these, erm, people as supporters you don't stand much of a chance even if you are a saint.
For all his faults, he prevented Venezuela from doing what almost all other oil rich nations have done: bending over and letting multinational oil companies come in, paying off the political elite and taking the bulk of the profits, leaving behind another paradoxical material rich, dirt poor country. - Ours fail at this
To be honest finding out if he was a good guy or not sounds like more effort then I'm willing to put in but neither will I condemn him as the devil when, compared to our politicians, I can't see he was that bad. So in that context good things about him were:
Never invaded another country for oil on the pretext of WMDs
Didn't let big corporation write the laws (BSkyB amongst others)
Didn't prop up a failing corrupt industry with tax money (Bankers)
Didn't kow tow to the US (Pick a Prime Minister)
Didn't sell of national assets them prop them up with tax money (Railways, utilities, soon to be health, defence, prisons etc etc)
GUARDIAN readers were today in mourning for a man who would have banned the Guardian if it was in Venezuela.
The people’s champion was very fond of being agreed with
The death of President Hugo Chavez has robbed Britain’s left wing of an heroic figure whose bravely authoritarian regime stood up to America and journalism.
Julian Cook, from Finsbury Park, said: “He was sort of democratically elected and in many ways Venezuela was kind of almost a free country. I’ll miss him so much.”
Emma Bradford, a level six Guardian reader from Stevenage, added: “He introduced free healthcare and free education and if you have those two things then why on earth would you need a free press?
“Yes, we have those things in Britain and we have a free press, but – for our sins – we are much more complex than the noble Latin American peasants.”
She added: “I only use Venezuelan petrol in my Saab because it has been properly taxed.”
Tom Booker, from Hackney, added: “Journalists would have had a much easier time in Venezuela if they had just agreed with President Chavez. If you read his autobiography you’d realise that he was actually very nice.
“The oil tax paid for precious, beautiful things like schools, hospitals, secret police and the wildly popular TV show Stop What You Are Doing and Listen to the President.”
Meanwhile, tributes were also paid to Chavez by the usual arseholes.
Ken Livingstone, George Galloway and Gerry Adams all said he was a great man, which is pretty much all you need to know about Hugo Chavez.
You need to pay respect to the Mash by crediting them :-)
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/
InsaneApache
03-06-2013, 18:26
You need to pay respect to the Mash by crediting them :-)
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/
Indeed it was remiss of me. :clown:
What monster was Chavez: Depriving big Oil Companies of the profit they would have made on their under paid workers’ sweat. All these shares holders not been able to buy a new boat… Not like in the UK where the Energy Companies pocket billion but still increase the prices, where the most vulnerable have to choose between heating and eating, where pensioners are left to die because financial profits are the priority, where bankers who are responsible for one of the biggest crisis in History are still pocketing millions.
Chavez use oil money to help the poor: how indecent of him.
Chavez just decreased drastically illiteracy (from around 65000 teachers to 350000), created hospital and health centres in the barrios, and enforced a land reform for the poor. Infant mortality decreased, and unemployment as well.
He decriminalised abortion,
That will not stop Rightist and Conservatives Newspapers to pretend ““a country in far worse condition than it was when he became president, its future clouded by rivals for succession in a constitutional crisis of his Bolivarian party’s making and an economy in chaos” (Miami Herald).
Elected twice (and not because his brother decided he was), escaping (just) a Military Coup, he frightened the freedom of media, but with a bizarre twist, the dictator allowed 90 % of the media to be in owned by opponents who openly appeal to kill him.
“His presidential election victories — in 1998, 2000 and 2006, as well as his victory over an attempt to recall him in a 2004 referendum — were all recognized by credible international observers” (Time World).
He initiate a democratic reform seeing that a Representative can be impeached if a sufficient number of citizens petition for it (elections have to be organised). When he was defeated for a referendum (51% to 49%), he accepted the vote by the majority.
Chavez was not perfect, and due to the past story of Latin America with the USA, his tendency to find all opponents to this power acceptable was one of the black spots. However, in my knowledge, he never armed dictators, or trained their police.
Is it a bit of a lol storm for these US critics to have a pop at Chavez when you look at the looooong list of n'ar do wells and outright crooks the US not only created through their School of the Americas, but supported in their personal fiefdom of central and south america.
their personal fiefdom of central and south america.
Personal favorite: William Walker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Walker_(filibuster)), American mercenary and short person (5'2"). Conquered Nicaragua in 1857, re-instituted slavery, and declared himself Presidente for life. That's style, that is.
Crazed Rabbit
03-07-2013, 03:09
That sounds like it was lifted from the CIA fact book*
...
*Sponsored by Texaco.
Or, you know, talking to a Venezuelan chemical engineer and reading safety analysis of a deadly explosion at a Venezuelan refinery.
Oh and would you believe it. Today's Financial Times opinion piece is all about how Venezula must let the oil giants in, in order to stabilise the country's economy.
And who's fault is it that Venezuela's economy is crap?
Is it a bit of a lol storm for these US critics to have a pop at Chavez when you look at the looooong list of n'ar do wells and outright crooks the US not only created through their School of the Americas, but supported in their personal fiefdom of central and south america.
That doesn't make Chavez any better. The best you can argue is that he was, in part, a reaction to what the USA did.
What monster was Chavez: Depriving big Oil Companies of the profit they would have made on their under paid workers’ sweat. All these shares holders not been able to buy a new boat… Not like in the UK where the Energy Companies pocket billion but still increase the prices, where the most vulnerable have to choose between heating and eating, where pensioners are left to die because financial profits are the priority, where bankers who are responsible for one of the biggest crisis in History are still pocketing millions.
Chavez use oil money to help the poor: how indecent of him.
He helped himself plenty - Chavez's family wealth is estimated to be around $2 billion USD. I wonder how many poor he could have helped with $1 billion USD. And guess what - not all people who own stocks are filthy rich yacht owners!
CR
HopAlongBunny
03-07-2013, 03:52
I guess it depends on how you "frame" his picture.
Dedicated nationalist who prevented the "sucking dry" of Venezuela's bounty; champion of the poor who built and ran schools, hospitals and services for the poor; benefactor who internalized the wealth created to such an extent that his pockets turned to gold
or
Communist; prevented the enrichment of foreign nationals; corrupt swine who cast pennies to the poor while living in opulence (they should be so lucky to get cake); a radical who impoverished the nation by attempting to "lift all boats".
Sarmatian
03-07-2013, 09:02
Or, you know, talking to a Venezuelan chemical engineer and reading safety analysis of a deadly explosion at a Venezuelan refinery.
Like those backward, third-world dictatorship, UK and USA which had much more devastating oil-related disasters.
And who's fault is it that Venezuela's economy is crap?
Complicated issue, but not solely Venezuela's fault.
That doesn't make Chavez any better. The best you can argue is that he was, in part, a reaction to what the USA did.
Indeed he was. If US wasn't trying to run SA as its personal fiefdom, there would have probably been no Chavez.
He helped himself plenty - Chavez's family wealth is estimated to be around $2 billion USD. I wonder how many poor he could have helped with $1 billion USD. And guess what - not all people who own stocks are filthy rich yacht owners!
CR
Quite possible.
Its true. No true communist revolutionary would have been comfortable sitting on such wealth. No popular leader of any kind, really. That's not to say that he was a bad guy, or that he didn't make a powerful impact on Latin America, but he was just as greedy as anyone else with power in the end.
I don't think he was a bad guy either, I think that he believed in what he did. Bit of a clown, but not a bad guy
a completely inoffensive name
03-07-2013, 09:25
Chavez was a corrupt failure of a dictator whose origin was a product of the US foreign policy he made a career out of lambasting. He left Venezuela in terrible shape for the future and his lauded ability to stave off the multinational oil corporate "vultures" is not so much a positive for Chavez but a negative for left leaning Westerners who feel that any bastard that sticks the middle finger at the US/UK government must not be such a bad guy after all.
Chavez was like most leaders, a borderline personality. But yes, he stopped Venezuela from becoming Nigeria, which is what the corporations and their political representatives would like.
There is much praise of Chavez by Arabs and Iranians on Facebook. People would do well to remember that Chavez supported both the baathist scum of Syria and Iraq and Imadinnerjacket in Tehran.
Chavez was a corrupt failure of a dictator whose origin was a product of the US foreign policy he made a career out of lambasting. He left Venezuela in terrible shape for the future and his lauded ability to stave off the multinational oil corporate "vultures" is not so much a positive for Chavez but a negative for left leaning Westerners who feel that any bastard that sticks the middle finger at the US/UK government must not be such a bad guy after all.
He wasn't that far off, the Dutch (read as Royal Shell) have been looking for an excuse for war for quite a while, annexation of these pesky islands that for some reason still belong to us would have been a very good one.
Or, you know, talking to a Venezuelan chemical engineer and reading safety analysis of a deadly explosion at a Venezuelan refinery.
Which country was that again that had an offshore platform explosion and poisoned half the Mexican Gulf with oil in the process?
Weren't safety standards ignored in the process?
http://www.nola.com/news/gulf-oil-spill/index.ssf/2013/02/witness_in_gulf_oil_spill_tria.html
Ah yes, inviting those guys over would surely help with safety standards profits.
Safety concerns in the Venezuelan oil industry are well founded. Characterising Chavez as a dictator is also not without substance. Saying that the Venezuelan economy has problems is true.
These truths are being used as a stalking horse for those whose interests are nothing to do with safety, Venezuelan democracy or the living standards of Venezuelans, and everything to do with corporate profits.
Sarmatian
03-07-2013, 12:13
left leaning Westerners who feel that any bastard that sticks the middle finger at the US/UK government must not be such a bad guy after all.
It's the other way around. Anyone who sticks the middle finger at US/UK must be a bad guy. That's how it's been for a very long time.
The truth is that prior to Chavez, 90% or close to it, of oil revenues went to US. Now the revenues remain in Venezuela for the most part. The first part is the primary reason he didn't like the US, the second part is primary reason the US didn't like him. Everything else, including democracy, or lack of it, press rights, minority right etc etc... is just plain bollox.
Rhyfelwyr
03-07-2013, 14:56
There is much praise of Chavez by Arabs and Iranians on Facebook. People would do well to remember that Chavez supported both the baathist scum of Syria and Iraq and Imadinnerjacket in Tehran.
Yeah, his choice of internation allies was, like Brenus said, a black spot on his leadership. In that sense, he kind of lumped himself in with the 'bad guys'.
But he should be judged mainly on his domestic policies, I think he got caught up in his support of dodgy foreign movements/regimes before they turned particularly nasty. In much the same way the US armed the Afghan Muhijadeen.
Riedquat
03-07-2013, 17:03
Chavez was like most leaders, a borderline personality. But yes, he stopped Venezuela from becoming Nigeria, which is what the corporations and their political representatives would like.
And that is the most central aspect why his people loved him. Nobody in Venezuela history gave a damn about its people ever. People who like to tag him as a dictator should know the people of Venezuela never have had more liberties than these past years.
Can people saying that Chavez (or family) got millions provide the sources of their information? Just for me to know where to look, except rightist newspapers claiming things without any evidence… Thanks
Kralizec
03-07-2013, 22:42
Safety concerns in the Venezuelan oil industry are well founded. Characterising Chavez as a dictator is also not without substance. Saying that the Venezuelan economy has problems is true.
These truths are being used as a stalking horse for those whose interests are nothing to do with safety, Venezuelan democracy or the living standards of Venezuelans, and everything to do with corporate profits.
That's a rather cheap shot. You're implying that everyone who raises these issues about Chavez' policies is some sort of corporate stooge.
Even though the erosion of freedom of the press, the rule of law and whatnot in Venezuela since Chavez took power are undisputable facts - nobody really cares about those things anyway, so anybody who holds it against him must have an agenda or something. Right?
Here's a dash of irony for you: Chavez, that champion of the working class, robbed the employees of nationalized oil companies of their independent labour unions. When the employees went on strike, he had many of them fired and deliberately saw to it that they'd have a hard time finding new employment - going as far as forcing the oil companies which were still in private hands not to hire them.
Personal favorite: William Walker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Walker_(filibuster)), American mercenary and short person (5'2"). Conquered Nicaragua in 1857, re-instituted slavery, and declared himself Presidente for life. That's style, that is.
That's awesome!
Except that he was a midget.
And I suppose it was sort of immoral.
Greyblades
03-07-2013, 23:46
Even though the erosion of freedom of the press, the rule of law and whatnot in Venezuela since Chavez took power are undisputable facts - nobody really cares about those things anyway, so anybody who holds it against him must have an agenda or something. Right?
Here's a dash of irony for you: Chavez, that champion of the working class, robbed the employees of nationalized oil companies of their independent labour unions. When the employees went on strike, he had many of them fired and deliberately saw to it that they'd have a hard time finding new employment - going as far as forcing the oil companies which were still in private hands not to hire them.Needs citation.
Kralizec
03-07-2013, 23:57
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2008/09/18/decade-under-ch-vez
This is one source I remember reading years ago; I think I raised it in a backroom thread once. Some quotes:
When Chávez first assumed the presidency, there was broad public support for his
calls to clean up a judiciary that was dysfunctional and profoundly discredited. The
1999 Constitution created a new Supreme Court and sought to guarantee its integrity
and independence. But in 2004 Chávez signed legislation that made it possible for
his supporters in the National Assembly to both pack and purge the Supreme Court.
The governing coalition implemented this court-packing legislation by filling the 12 new
seats (in what had been a 20-member court) with political allies. This packed
Supreme Court subsequently fired hundreds of lower court judges and appointed
hundreds more.
Since this takeover occurred, the court’s response to government measures that
threaten fundamental rights has typically been one of passivity and acquiescence. It
has failed, in particular, to counter assaults on the separation of powers, such as the
2004 court-packing law and, more recently, a 2007 constitutional reform package. It
has also failed to safeguard fundamental rights in prominent cases involving the
media and organized labor.
The Supreme Court similarly failed to uphold the freedom of association of
Venezuelan workers when it dismissed a petition to clarify the proper role of the
state in union leadership elections. As we document in chapter 5, state interference
in union elections, in direct violation of international standards on labor law practice,
has been a widespread problem in Venezuela throughout Chávez’s presidency.
Political discrimination has been openly endorsed and practiced in the oil industry,
which is one of the country’s largest sources of employment and the backbone of the
national economy. After a two-month-long strike in December 2002, the government
fired close to half of the workforce from the state oil company, Petróleos de
Venezuela, S.A. (PDVSA), and blacklisted them from future employment in the oil
sector. A month before the 2006 presidential election, the energy minister (who also
serves as PDVSA president) boasted that the company had “removed 19,500
enemies of the country from the [oil] business” and would continue to do so, telling
PDVSA employees that anyone who disagreed with the government “should give up
their post to a Bolivarian.” Although the minister issued a memo almost a year later
proscribing political discrimination, there is credible evidence that the
discriminatory mindset reflected in his initial remarks was also embodied in actual
employment policies in some departments of PDVSA.
HopAlongBunny
03-08-2013, 00:05
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2008/09/18/decade-under-ch-vez
This is one source I remember reading years ago; I think I raised it in a backroom thread once. Some quotes:
And the evidence of corruption...?
Riedquat
03-08-2013, 01:37
Since this takeover occurred, the court’s response to government measures that
threaten fundamental rights has typically been one of passivity and acquiescence. It
has failed, in particular, to counter assaults on the separation of powers, such as the
2004 court-packing law and, more recently, a 2007 constitutional reform package. It
has also failed to safeguard fundamental rights in prominent cases involving the
media and organized labor.
Ohh.. the oxymoron! Fundamental rights involved media in a country where the normal joe die from starvation while the media is playing big bother tv show... Please realize all latin america isn't a normal country as you know them. Here things play different in every aspect of life, every democratic government I remember we have had has reformed the supreme court or the internal laws just to get a majority of their own entourage there and avoid legal opposition in other aspects. These are not the solemn democracies you know, these are just corrupt bureaucracies where every government in charge try to accommodate the best they can just to achieve their own goals, from time to time surges one president where part of those goals are for the best of his people, Kirchner here and Chavez in Venezuela. I never liked them but some things must be told!
Riedquat
03-08-2013, 01:40
And the evidence of corruption...?
Come and live here 10 months, then you will realize you don't need evidence of some normal facts... ours must be a parallel reality...
Philippus Flavius Homovallumus
03-08-2013, 02:16
Yeah, his choice of internation allies was, like Brenus said, a black spot on his leadership. In that sense, he kind of lumped himself in with the 'bad guys'.
But he should be judged mainly on his domestic policies, I think he got caught up in his support of dodgy foreign movements/regimes before they turned particularly nasty. In much the same way the US armed the Afghan Muhijadeen.
I happen to disagree, Chavez supported men like Castro etc. because he preferred Comunists and Socialists who oppressed their people to Capitalists who didn't pay for healthcare for the poor.
Neither position is very laudable but the Capitalists aren't rounding people up and having them shot.
This is about what Chavez saw as important, clearly he was more interested in someone's economic policy than their social one - or he believed the ends justified the means.
Ohh.. the oxymoron! Fundamental rights involved media in a country where the normal joe die from starvation while the media is playing big bother tv show... Please realize all latin america isn't a normal country as you know them. Here things play different in every aspect of life, every democratic government I remember we have had has reformed the supreme court or the internal laws just to get a majority of their own entourage there and avoid legal opposition in other aspects. These are not the solemn democracies you know, these are just corrupt bureaucracies where every government in charge try to accommodate the best they can just to achieve their own goals, from time to time surges one president where part of those goals are for the best of his people, Kirchner here and Chavez in Venezuela. I never liked them but some things must be told!
It's not an oxymoron - freedom of the press is a fundamental right, it's the right to criticise your leaders in print that is so essential to a functional democracy.
Anyway, you missed the point, the argument being played out here is about how the West saw Chavez - all you're doing is reinforcing the Western Right by saying he's just like every other dictator in that part of the world.
HopAlongBunny
03-08-2013, 02:26
Sorry but I was just trying to follow-up on Brenus's comment.
Most of that document sounds like a regular transition of power; kick out the old appointees-make your own. I don't doubt corruption was present, I just want to see facts from independent sources and it would help if the "facts" were verified by being traceable to actual (preferably) gov't documents.
LittleGrizzly
03-08-2013, 03:00
Isn't Chavez choice of allies exactly the same as the UK and the USA's choice of allies, its important to remember than Venezula don't have the same diplomatic luxuries as the likes of the UK and the USA. Particularly the USA is the most (at worst 2nd) powerful nation on Earth. Yet she has still throughout her history found the need to ally herself with some of the worst regimes in human history... particularly if we go back to the cold war.
In a way it could be argued that Venezuelan's have much more to fear for their safety than American's back in the cold war so surely if you can justify, partially justify or understand America's foreign policy during the cold war you can more than understand Chavez's selection of allies?
I happen to disagree, Chavez supported men like Castro etc. because he preferred Comunists and Socialists who oppressed their people to Capitalists who didn't pay for healthcare for the poor.
Neither position is very laudable but the Capitalists aren't rounding people up and having them shot.
This is about what Chavez saw as important, clearly he was more interested in someone's economic policy than their social one - or he believed the ends justified the means.
It's not an oxymoron - freedom of the press is a fundamental right, it's the right to criticise your leaders in print that is so essential to a functional democracy.
Anyway, you missed the point, the argument being played out here is about how the West saw Chavez - all you're doing is reinforcing the Western Right by saying he's just like every other dictator in that part of the world.
Who is rounding up and shooting people? I know that the CIA installed Pinochet did. Anyone else?
Who is rounding up and shooting people? I know that the CIA installed Pinochet did. Anyone else?
Chances are you have a T-shirt with him on it ;)
Edit, gawd help me I'll help you out
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091230060828AACW1gh
4.000 , that are a lot. Including whole families including children, naturally because of the family thingie, viva la revolution
Riedquat
03-08-2013, 14:24
It's not an oxymoron - freedom of the press is a fundamental right, it's the right to criticise your leaders in print that is so essential to a functional democracy.
Anyway, you missed the point, the argument being played out here is about how the West saw Chavez - all you're doing is reinforcing the Western Right by saying he's just like every other dictator in that part of the world.
Freedom of press do not exist when the press is part of a big corporation following its own agenda, and none of his goals are in the best interest of the country. Freedom of press in a developed country with a firm democratic conciousness cultivated within years of stable governments obviously is a fundamental right, in our nations while is an undeniable important right, it is not fundamental, there are countless more fundamental things to care of first and removing the antagonism of the media sounds very tempting to any political side.
And of course I will keep missing the point as I can't see it from the west, just from inside the south. :shrug:
Chances are you have a T-shirt with him on it ;)
Edit, gawd help me I'll help you out
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091230060828AACW1gh
4.000 , that are a lot. Including whole families including children, naturally because of the family thingie, viva la revolution
Eh? You cite a Yahoo answer which says Che Guevara killed 10 people during a civil war as proof that Chavez marched 4,000 families off to be executed?
OMG :laugh4: You were quoting stats from this site:
http://www.therealcuba.com/
As hilarious and entertaining as that site is, I'm not sure how significant it is to this discussion.
Eh? You cite a Yahoo answer which says Che Guevara killed 10 people during a civil war as proof that Chavez marched 4,000 families off to be executed?
Oh ffs Idaho it isn't exactly a secret that he even personally executed children
These 4000 as well, many more probably, he was the executionar after all. 40.000 but even maybe 100.000 perhaps. Good company you are in
Oh for crying out loud, if this is true, then the "say nice things" time is over. Everybody knows you never go full Lenin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin's_Mausoleum).
Chavez's Body To Be Permanently Displayed, Venezuela's Vice President Says (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/07/chavez-body-displayed_n_2831789.html)
Venezuela's acting president says Hugo Chavez's embalmed body will be permanently displayed in a glass casket so that "his people will always have him."
Vice President Nicolas Maduro says the remains will be put on permanent display at the Museum of the Revolution, close to the presidential palace where Chavez ruled for 14 years. Maduro says the president will lie in state first for at least another seven days.
A state funeral for Chavez attended by some 33 heads of government is scheduled to begin Friday morning. Tens of thousands have already filed past his glass-topped casket at a military academy following a seven-hour procession on Tuesday which took his body from the hospital where he died.
Greyblades
03-08-2013, 16:08
...dude if it's the vice president's decision to do that I dont really see how that supports the chaves corruption theory. I don't think Lenin specifically ordered his internment himself, and if he did that doesn' prove anything beyond an ego.
InsaneApache
03-08-2013, 16:53
In honour of the passing of Hugo Chavez, I have had his initials inscribed onto my bathroom taps.
Oh ffs Idaho it isn't exactly a secret that he even personally executed children
These 4000 as well, many more probably, he was the executionar after all. 40.000 but even maybe 100.000 perhaps. Good company you are in
From your own link:
So the answer is probably close to 10 personally during war time (not including battles which would probably be another 10-20 in an array of battles). As for those killed on his orders - after the Cuban revolution between 55 (Anderson) and several hundred (other biographers) War Criminals were executed at La Cabana in cases where Che had the final say on whether to pardon them.
As for whether the death penalty was justified, remember that 20,000 Cubans had been killed with many more tortured during the former U.S.-backed Batista dictatorship, and Che was in charge of exacting "revolutionary justice" for the victorious side in a revolution.
Sounds about as criminal as the prosecutors at Nuremberg going by that snippet.
Oh for crying out loud, if this is true, then the "say nice things" time is over. Everybody knows you never go full Lenin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin's_Mausoleum).
Chavez's Body To Be Permanently Displayed, Venezuela's Vice President Says (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/07/chavez-body-displayed_n_2831789.html)
Venezuela's acting president says Hugo Chavez's embalmed body will be permanently displayed in a glass casket so that "his people will always have him."
Vice President Nicolas Maduro says the remains will be put on permanent display at the Museum of the Revolution, close to the presidential palace where Chavez ruled for 14 years. Maduro says the president will lie in state first for at least another seven days.
A state funeral for Chavez attended by some 33 heads of government is scheduled to begin Friday morning. Tens of thousands have already filed past his glass-topped casket at a military academy following a seven-hour procession on Tuesday which took his body from the hospital where he died.
a few strings, stick a speaker up his ass and he can still give his weekly tv speeches.
From your own link:
Sounds about as criminal as the prosecutors at Nuremberg going by that snippet.
I'll just leave that for somebody else to answer
Tellos Athenaios
03-08-2013, 17:54
In honour of the passing of Hugo Chavez, I have had his initials inscribed onto my bathroom taps.
What are the other two taps in HRCF?
Oh ffs Idaho it isn't exactly a secret that he even personally executed children
These 4000 as well, many more probably, he was the executionar after all. 40.000 but even maybe 100.000 perhaps. Good company you are in
So I am in league with Hugo Chavez, and we marched 100,000 people to their deaths. It's getting late, you better start knitting lunch.
a completely inoffensive name
03-08-2013, 20:45
I wish more politicians went full Lenin. When you read about a man who held such power over others and made so many impacts on a country or even the world and then you gaze upon his dead body, it brings about a freeing experience. Although we might not have been born in the same position in life, we all certainly end up in the same place.
HoreTore
03-08-2013, 20:57
lol, yahoo answers used as a source...
As for Lenin's mummification, that was indeed Bogdanov's doing, quite a while after his death.
Ja'chyra
03-08-2013, 21:26
In honour of the passing of Hugo Chavez, I have had his initials inscribed onto my bathroom taps.
Sig'd
Rhyfelwyr
03-08-2013, 23:56
Oh for crying out loud, if this is true, then the "say nice things" time is over. Everybody knows you never go full Lenin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lenin's_Mausoleum).
Chavez's Body To Be Permanently Displayed, Venezuela's Vice President Says (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/07/chavez-body-displayed_n_2831789.html)
And yet compare how different the scenes were when their mourners visited them (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/08/venezuela-tears-christ-like-chavez).
So I am in league with Hugo Chavez, and we marched 100,000 people to their deaths. It's getting late, you better start knitting lunch.
It are very broad estimates, but fact is that Che Guavera was in command of the firing squads that killed thousands, including women and children. A lot of them personally.
Hero of the left, just another mass murderer
Greyblades
03-09-2013, 09:35
It are very broad estimates, but fact is that Che Guavera was in command of the firing squads that killed thousands, including women and children. A lot of them personally.
Prove it, or is this like the rest of your "Facts" and baseless diatribe?
It isn't that hard to find ffs I thought this was common knowledge. Google will do fine
Not really sure what Che Guevara has to do with anything. Either way I would hold any "evidence" from the US émigré cuban population at arm's length.
Well he has to do with killing thousands of people including women and children, he was a sadistic :daisy:. Of course that's of topic he didn't kill Chavez cancer did.
About Che's crimes: At the same historical Period, the 60's, San Juan Massacre (Bolivia), just as example.
This kind of policy was deployed in Asia (from Philippines to Iran, and Arabia), Africa, South America and will bloomed in Vietnam, where even today, nobody dares to tell how many Vietnamese were killed by US bombers over raids on Hanoi, Haiphong and others major cities. I can as well speak of South Africa, the then Rhodesia, or the nowadays forgotten Biafra.
The victims from Condor Operation, being threw from helicopters in the sea, or “vanished” in the thin air, added to too many repressions all around the world, in the name of anti-communism, coups and political opponents, intellectuals and unionist assassinations have led to the actual only left available political opposition: Religion.
When asking for better conditions and better salary was treated as to be a Communist Danger (and by the way, to be Communist was not illegal, so I was told few years ago, in USA) and was resolved by force and killing, this policy paved the way for more dangerous enemies.
About Che's crimes: At the same historical Period, the 60's, San Juan Massacre (Bolivia), just as example.
This kind of policy was deployed in Asia (from Philippines to Iran, and Arabia), Africa, South America and will bloomed in Vietnam, where even today, nobody dares to tell how many Vietnamese were killed by US bombers over raids on Hanoi, Haiphong and others major cities. I can as well speak of South Africa, the then Rhodesia, or the nowadays forgotten Biafra.
The victims from Condor Operation, being threw from helicopters in the sea, or “vanished” in the thin air, added to too many repressions all around the world, in the name of anti-communism, coups and political opponents, intellectuals and unionist assassinations have led to the actual only left available political opposition: Religion.
When asking for better conditions and better salary was treated as to be a Communist Danger (and by the way, to be Communist was not illegal, so I was told few years ago, in USA) and was resolved by force and killing, this policy paved the way for more dangerous enemies.
Are there any lefties proudly wearing a shirt of those who commited these crimes without knowing what scumbags who did these things really were? Che Guavara doesn't deserve to be idealised he was a coldblooded killer. If he wasn't such a charismatic and handsome guy he wouldn't be on any shirts and people would know him for what he did
I'll just leave that for somebody else to answer
like this?
lol, yahoo answers used as a source...
Quite frankly I don't know much about Che Guevara, other than his picture.
You provide a source and then I quote a part that does not support your position and you imply it's too stupid for you to bother answering.
Now I'm still as dumb as I was before, you're not very helpful Frags.
I could read up on him on Wikipedia or buy a biography or ten but I'll leave that to others (I can't read).
It just is too stupid to bother answering deal with it. You can find everything yourself if you are interested, this is the backroom not the monestary
"Are there any lefties proudly wearing a shirt of those who commited these crimes without knowing what scumbags who did these things really were?" You mean like the Righties when referring to Reagan?
"Are there any lefties proudly wearing a shirt of those who commited these crimes without knowing what scumbags who did these things really were?" You mean like the Righties when referring to Reagan?
With shirts? Reagan is no posterboy, Che Guavara is. The prick is an icon for the revolutionary left. If Che Guavara wearing lefties would see someone wear a Reagan shirt he would get beaten up pretty badly by the way, tough crowd. The hardleft knows exactly what he did and agree, and the rest just can't know what he did because nobody ever told them. Big difference. I don't remember Reagan personally killing women and children and leading a deathsquad either like Che Guavara did
Big misconception that the revolutionaries where lower class workers. They were all upper-class, was a coup d'état
Greyblades
03-09-2013, 13:40
It isn't that hard to find ffs I thought this was common knowledge. Google will do fine
If its not hard to find, find it allready.
For honosty's sake I come from a wealthy family, so I won't pretend to be anything but priviliged
@GC
Edit ffs Greyblades just type 'Che Guavara death squads' in google
Greyblades
03-09-2013, 13:46
Frags its on the head of the accuser to provide the evidence, stop being the lazy conspiracy theorist for once and provide evidence.
Fair enough! Nothing wrong with that either, don't get me wrong--that would be missing my point.
Imagine your life as it is now (or, roughly, as I assume it is now): Decent family, you know the money in the bank is safe (for the most part), everything about your living situation is carefully controlled by systems that you trust whether it be paying your rent, or getting electricity to your dwelling. Someone of roughly your same social station living in third world circumstances would find his lot in life complicated by wealth, not made easier. If the government is weak, he might have to actually defend his land from roving gangs of whatever (revolutionaries, puppet democracy police states, cartels, whatever). If the government is strong, they might demand political conformity in a way that would be completely alien to you (and me as well). Regardless of this person's personal wealth, nothing about their life is secure. Make sense?
Not the undercurrent I have a problem with but how things are dealt with, and it was basicly a massacre. Why someone would make an icon out of someone who did such horrible things is beyond my understanding. Why he is still an icon for the left puzzles me even more
Why would someone make an icon out of someone like Reagan? You already know the answer to this question! All political extremism is born of percieved injustice. Populist sentiment (from the left or the right) needs icons, and those icons tend to transcend the truth of the people they once were. One learns a lot more by studying the lives of these people than by studying their political views.
But Reagan isn't really an icon like Che Guavara is, there is a difference there. Why would you make a symbol of him, who does that really, not anyone I know who idealism him in the same way Che Guavara is. Is there allready a film in the making of Reagan? (Slap me if there is) He is regarded as a solid republican not as a revolutionary.
Edit ffs Greyblades just type 'Che Guavara death squads' in google
Just did, this came up:
http://kasamaproject.org/history/1730-62understanding-che-guevara-42-years-after-his-murder
Che was executed in cold blood 42 years ago by a U.S. lead death squad that captured him in Bolivia. Then, as now, he had emerged as a prominent symbol of self-sacrifice, armed struggle, internationalism and uncompromising opposition to U.S. domination. His death stands as a glaring example of the role the U.S. and its agents play in the brutal repression of humanity's highest aspirations. The torturers of the CIA were not invented on 9/11 -- but have a very long and bloody history.
Che is a highly romantic martyr of the people's cause. But he was also a revolutionary leader and thinker in a particular complex time; he was associated closely with a specific series of approaches and strategies.
Apparently his relation to death squads was that he was murdered by one.
Greyblades
03-09-2013, 14:26
Add one to the "frags pulling stuff out of thin air and being called out" tally.
Conradus
03-09-2013, 14:37
Kasama is first of all a communist project.
'Nuff said?
You can find enough links that proclaim Che to be a saint as well as a devil. The truth obviously rests in the middle. By browsing 5 min you can find reports of him signing 400 executions, letting a lot of his officers be executed etc. And of course the opposite.
Add one to the "frags pulling stuff out of thin air and being called out" tally.
lol, he was also executed by a fire squad yes, anything else
Ironside
03-09-2013, 16:09
But Reagan isn't really an icon like Che Guavara is, there is a difference there. Why would you make a symbol of him, who does that really, not anyone I know who idealism him in the same way Che Guavara is. Is there allready a film in the making of Reagan? (Slap me if there is) He is regarded as a solid republican not as a revolutionary.
That's because there's no iconic picture of Reagan. ~D
Really, icons are often very loosly connected to the historical reality. Pictures in particular.
HoreTore
03-09-2013, 16:18
Reagan is idealized in the US. As his primary concern was american interests, that's hardly surprising.
Che, on the other hand, was an international revolutionary, so he's fair game for anyone. His struggle was international, not national.
Edit: I used to have a Che poster on my wall, but it had to make way for a huge CNT/FAI recruitment poster a few years ago...
That's because there's no iconic picture of Reagan.
ORLY?
https://i.imgur.com/lXwZ47S.jpg?1
Conradus
03-09-2013, 18:16
That picture is actually awesome.
HoreTore
03-09-2013, 18:39
Awesome!
Where can I buy it??
Greyblades
03-09-2013, 19:51
lol, he was also executed by a fire squad yes, anything else
Yup, the sources you keep citing still havent materialised, the one that was found put doubt on your point's credibility, you still havent backed any of your tangental points with anything beyond "take my word for it" and you still havent so much as referenced your original point; the one about Hugo Chaves.
I dont think I have ever encountered such dedicated evasiveness before.
HopAlongBunny
03-09-2013, 20:19
It is fitting that the death of Hugo Chavez has spurred a debate about iconography and reality.
The symbols created around an individual far outlive the persons actual impact/importance and the associated symbols influence discussion, essentially forever.
HoreTore
03-09-2013, 20:54
Yup, the sources you keep citing still havent materialised, the one that was found put doubt on your point's credibility, you still havent backed any of your tangental points with anything beyond "take my word for it" and you still havent so much as referenced your original point; the one about Hugo Chaves.
I dont think I have ever encountered such dedicated evasiveness before.
A "Che the Butcher"-image would serve Frag's ideology extremely well. Unfortunatly for him, it's not very accurate.
4000, eh? His force in Africa numbered 100-ish, and his force in Bolivia numbered 50-ish. In neither country did he capture much ground, so it's unlikely he killed anyone except combat casaulties. Of course Kabila butchered people in the Congom but then again Che's frustrations with Kabila was the reason he left Africa anyway.
So, we're back at Cuba. Did he shoot people? Yup. Unlike regular political and military leaders, Che was an infantry grunt. Even though he was second in command, he led his men like a Lieutenant would, as a member of a squad. Like his men, he killed the enemy. Did he execute prisoners of war? Again, yup. He did. The cuban revolution executed some people. Since Che's place was on the frontlines, he took his turn in that regard as well. Want sources for that? Read his memoirs.
Does that make him a butcher? No, and I can sum up why in two words: Santa Clara. Only two people of the nearly 3000 prisoners after the city fell was executed, the two commanding officers. Noone else. Plenty of others had a bucket of blood on their hands. Batistas policy was to have the army execute any rebel, suspected rebel and people who helped the rebels(which is why the US stopped their aid). No searches or interrogations to find people with blood on their hands took place. For a revolution, that is certainly remarkable.
The iconic Che is the story of the doctor who travelled through poverty and was appalled by the injustice he saw. He was compelled to actively overthrow the tyrants and was instrumental in his first revolution. Instead of feeling content at what he accomplished, he travelled the world to fight in the front line of revolution, fukly expecting to die.
That's why people wear t-shirts with his face on it. That, plus the cool picture, of course.
What a dictatorship:
Never in the Latin America’s History had someone won 15 times on 16 elections. He almost won with between 10 t0 20 % ahead, in democratic processes and elections recognised clean by all major International Bodies, including the Organisation of American States (Washington), South American Nations Union and the EU (master in democracy).
In December 2005, UNESCO recognised Venezuela victory against illiteracy: 1.5 million Venezuelans learned to read and write (starting date: 1998, Mission Robinson).
From 1998 to 2011, the number of children in school went from 6 to 13 million, and nowadays, the rate of children in primary school is 93.2%
For college: 53.6 % in 2000, 73.3% in 2011.
Universities: 895,000 in 2000, 2,300,000 in 2011
Health:
Between 2005 and 2012, 7,873 Health Centres built. Free Health Care for all Citizens.
Number of Doctors in 1999: 20 for 100,000
Number of doctors in 2010: 80 for 100,000
Children Death Rate:
1999: 19.1 for 1000.
2011: 10 for 1000
Life expectance:
1999: 72.2
2011: 74.3
Poverty Rate :
1999: 42.8%
2011: 26.5%
Extreme Poverty: 16.6% to 7%.
From the United Nation Programme for Development (UNDP) in 2000, Venezuela was ranked 83rd, in 2011, 73rd.
The GINI coefficient went from 0.46 in 1999 to 0.39 in 2011.Still from UN sources (PNUD) Venezuela is the Country in the Region with the less inequality.
Sanitation:
Rate of Children suffering from malnutrition decreased of 40 % from 1999.
In 1999, 82 % of the population had access to drinkable water. 95 % today.
1999 : 387,000 people had pensions for 2,100,000 today
700,000 houses built.
1 million ha of land given back to the native population. 3 million ha redistributed to the poorest farmers.
I could carry on, but it is late.
Anyway, all figures about Food, Agriculture can be found in the UN statistic (UNWFP and others).
Well, when we compare with all nice democracies like Greece, Spain, Portugal, France, UK and others…
ORLY?
[picture]
:laugh4: How American, with an RPG-7 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPG-7) on his back! :laugh4:
Not sure what gun that is, but at least it doesn't look like it comes from a communist country. ~;)
Where can I buy it??
I will have a poster of this.
Various sizes of prints available here (http://www.etsy.com/listing/103439690/ronald-reagan-riding-a-velociraptor-hq).
You are welcome, enjoy your FREEDOM.
-edit-
Lots more presidential paintings are here (http://www.etsy.com/shop/sharpwriter?ref=seller_info). I particularly like Thomas Jefferson battling silverbacks while holding up the Declaration of Independence.
https://i.imgur.com/8OVBeAw.jpg?1
Are there any lefties proudly wearing a shirt of those who commited these crimes without knowing what scumbags who did these things really were? Che Guavara doesn't deserve to be idealised he was a coldblooded killer. If he wasn't such a charismatic and handsome guy he wouldn't be on any shirts and people would know him for what he did
Instead they gave Kissenger a peace prize, and Rumsfeld a handsome retirement when both should be living out their days in prison.
Yup, the sources you keep citing still havent materialised, the one that was found put doubt on your point's credibility, you still havent backed any of your tangental points with anything beyond "take my word for it" and you still havent so much as referenced your original point; the one about Hugo Chaves.
I dont think I have ever encountered such dedicated evasiveness before.
You haven't looked very well then
These are just the documented ones
http://cubaarchive.org/home/images/stories/truth%20and%20memory/victims_of_che_guevara_in_cuba_9.30.2009.pdf
I never had an original point about Chavez by the way, topic just wandered of, tends to happen. In my post about Chavez I said I didn't think he was a bad person.
If you have a pet I can't stress enough how sorry I am for it being your's
Ironside
03-10-2013, 10:41
ORLY?
https://i.imgur.com/lXwZ47S.jpg?1
I stand corrected. :hail:
Outside being awesome, it also proves Reagan to be an antediluvian, guiding the US throughout the ages.
The Lurker Below
03-10-2013, 17:16
That's because there's no iconic picture of Reagan. ~D
Really, icons are often very loosly connected to the historical reality. Pictures in particular.
It's just not in the American personality to create iconic figures with their heroes images on them. Instead we name trillion dollar weapon systems after them.
8737
Greyblades
03-10-2013, 18:02
You haven't looked very well then And again, that is your responsibility as accusor, not ours.
These are just the documented ones
http://cubaarchive.org/home/images/stories/truth%20and%20memory/victims_of_che_guevara_in_cuba_9.30.2009.pdf And it took you several days of pestering for you to produce, still points for actually finding something.
I never had an original point about Chavez by the way, topic just wandered of, tends to happen. In my post about Chavez I said I didn't think he was a bad person.
I concede the point that you had nothing more to say.
I must say despite your characteristic dancing around several confrontations to produce evidence you have actually produced something of value and unequivocally debuinked part of one of my statements. Good lord, is the obtuse fragony finally showing signs of improving at last?
If you have a pet I can't stress enough how sorry I am for it being your's
...Nope! An unbased, unprovoked, personal attack implying sadistic animal cruelty, back to form he goes.
A simple google would have done fine
And admit it was a funny insult
Greyblades
03-10-2013, 18:37
Eh, 2/10. -2 penalty due to no indication of joking.
Frags, every debate student is taught that it is thier responsibility to back up thier own arguments, the opposition isnt going to do something to benefit thier opponent if they can help it, especially when they are already convinced of thier position.
But I was right wasn't I. Why do you doubt me so much.
That opinion makes you look fat by the way, don't mind me saying it
HoreTore
03-10-2013, 20:09
But I was right wasn't I. Why do you doubt me so much.
That opinion makes you look fat by the way, don't mind me saying it
You were completely right in proving that a soldier has killed people in a war.
Bravo - nobody would've seen that happening. What's next, the sky being blue?
when it comes to Che Guevara tshirts I must admit I like this one
http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/rect-checap-pd.jpg
Greyblades
03-10-2013, 20:22
But I was right wasn't I. Why do you doubt me so much.
Because backing up your acertations is generally expected in this forum. You have a history of starting threads ranting about topics without giving any links or even an indication what you are talking about, have a track record of regularly being proven wrong and you kinda come off as a conspiracy theorist, especially about the EU.
I've come to expect afew things in the backroom and your constant refusal to source makes me think your pulling your facts out of thin air.
Kralizec
03-10-2013, 20:39
when it comes to Che Guevara tshirts I must admit I like this one
[snip]
I've always wondered if there's a t-shirt with this one:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/attachment.php?attachmentid=8739&d=1362944379
8739
HoreTore
03-10-2013, 20:47
To be fair to frags, the question of Che's life vs. Che's image isn't something you can "source" with an internet linky and be done with it. Che is a controversial figure, and google isn't known for being very factual when it comes to controversial figures/topics. The internet is, in general, chock full of half-truths, misunderstandings and outright lies on any controversial topic. Separating that from actual truths requires knowledge gained on other platforms.
Sorry to say it, but "go read a book". Or give the name of an author or two, anyone with knowledge of the subject being discussed should be able to discern whether it's nonsense or not based on that.
At the end of the day, Che killed people, both combatants and non-combatants. Was he particularly awful? Nah, he didn't kill more people than other people in similar positions has done. Figures going up to the thousands are obviously nonsensical and says more about those quoting such figures than of Che.
To be fair to frags, the question of Che's life vs. Che's image isn't something you can "source" with an internet linky and be done with it. Che is a controversial figure, and google isn't known for being very factual when it comes to controversial figures/topics. The internet is, in general, chock full of half-truths, misunderstandings and outright lies on any controversial topic. Separating that from actual truths requires knowledge gained on other platforms.
Come on, he told us to google it, so I did and the first few links were from therealcuba.com and slate.com, which, I assume, are both anti-che. So I saw the commie-looking link that was a bit further down and posted that of course because I knew Frags wanted us to look at the other two sites, which are just as biased but in his favourite direction. I thought it was funny, apologies if I was wrong. :sweatdrop: :cry:
I'll retreat to my North Korea thread. :creep:
HoreTore
03-10-2013, 21:50
Come on, he told us to google it, so I did and the first few links were from therealcuba.com and slate.com, which, I assume, are both anti-che. So I saw the commie-looking link that was a bit further down and posted that of course because I knew Frags wanted us to look at the other two sites, which are just as biased but in his favourite direction. I thought it was funny, apologies if I was wrong. :sweatdrop: :cry:
I'll retreat to my North Korea thread. :creep:
I've been fair to Frags, so I'll be fair to you to, Husar:
I actually haven't read much of this thread. I just saw a link from yahoo answers and frags claiming Che was a dirtbag, and naturally I had to butt in...
Edit: and of course, I didn't google anything myself.
I only google porn. Anything else is a waste of my time.
Because backing up your acertations is generally expected in this forum. You have a history of starting threads ranting about topics without giving any links or even an indication what you are talking about, have a track record of regularly being proven wrong and you kinda come off as a conspiracy theorist, especially about the EU.
I've come to expect afew things in the backroom and your constant refusal to source makes me think your pulling your facts out of thin air.
Not my fault I can't link to 'quality media' but blogs only, so no link
Chavez fortune estimated at around 2 billion US. (http://newsfromvenezuela.tumblr.com/post/867542155/analyst-estimates-chavezs-family-fortune-at-around-2)
that's is enough for a LOT of dollar fans.
Greyblades
03-12-2013, 15:30
The link at the top of the tumblr post just gives me a 404, the URL looks like it would be legit but I cant get anything out of it. It could be fake but I dont think a fake would put that much effort into it and neglect a source.
Oh hey look, fragony has a tumblr account:
dontcloudme reblogged this from newsfromvenezuela and added:
The redistribution of wealth by leftists.
Why do you have to be like that, all I ever did was mocking your very existance
Seamus Fermanagh
03-12-2013, 17:51
...I only google porn. Anything else is a waste of my time.
Given the current makeup of the internet, any porno-relevant term googled would generate a bajillion hits. Doesn't seem like a good use of google to me.
HoreTore
03-12-2013, 18:00
Miami-based activist groups are always a great source for unbiased and fair information on Cuba and Venezuela.....
Kinda like how North Korean state media is a great source of information on the US.
Seamus Fermanagh
03-12-2013, 18:19
Miami-based activist groups are always a great source for unbiased and fair information on Cuba and Venezuela.....
Kinda like how North Korean state media is a great source of information on the US.
And as Iraqi expats were such useful sources of information regarding WMD's in Saddam's Iraq.
Strike For The South
03-13-2013, 18:36
Time to send in Chiquita
The bananas must flow
Seamus Fermanagh
03-14-2013, 03:42
Time to send in Chiquita
The bananas must flow
...Ahhh for the glory days of Smedley Butler and the United Fruit Marine Corps! That's Bully by jingo!
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.