Hugo Chavez - Man of the People and Jew Hating Master of the Funk

Bashes Jews yet loves Jesus. Gosh, you just can't keep a good dictator down...

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satelli...cle%2FShowFull

Quote:

---

A Jewish rights organization accused Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez of making anti-Semitic comments during a Christmas Eve speech.

The Los Angeles, California-based Simon Wiesenthal Center demanded an apology from Chavez in a statement issued Wednesday, saying such remarks have long been used to persecute Jews.

"Some minorities, descendants of the same ones who crucified Christ ... took all the world's wealth for themselves," Chavez said in the Dec. 24 speech.

"In your words, the two central arguments of anti-Semitism emerge ... the accusation that Jews killed Jesus (and) associating them with wealth," the Center said in a letter sent to Chavez. "Our center strongly condemns your anti-Semitic declarations."

Chavez did not did not mention the Jewish people explicitly in the speech, which was broadcast on national television. A spokeswoman for the president's office said it had no immediate response to the complaint.

During the speech, Chavez also praised Jesus Christ as a revolutionary hero, saying he was the world's first true socialist.

The letter was signed by Shimon Samuels, the Center's international relations director, and Sergio Widder, a Latin American representative based in Argentina.

They said the Center would urge the governments of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay to "freeze the process" of incorporating Venezuela into the Mercosur trade bloc unless Chavez makes a public apology.

Widder said Thursday that the group had yet to receive a response. He said even if Chavez had not intended to refer to Jews, the possibility for that interpretation was cause for concern.

"The words of a head of state should be cautious," Widder said.

The Jewish rights organization has expressed concerns about other comments by Chavez in the past. Chavez, a fiery speaker who says he is leading Venezuela toward socialism, has said he wants to have good relations will all religious groups.

Venezuela's president is known for speaking candidly. On one occasion he used an epithet in referring to US President George W. Bush, and he once suggested US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was illiterate, offering to send her materials to learn how to read and write.

Chavez's barbs are usually aimed at opposition leaders or US officials, but he has also criticized Latin American leaders such as Mexican President Vicente Fox and former Ecuadorean President Lucio Gutierrez.

---

Might not be liking Jews, but he isnt a Dictator.

A dictator?! He is more legitimate than Bush and his govt - you lost any credibility with your post there.

He's definately not a dictator...

Quote:

---

"In your words, the [ ] central arguments of anti-Semitism emerge ... the accusation that Jews killed Jesus

---

I'm not being funny or anti semitic here, but, IIRC correctly surely the bible claims the jews DID kill Jesus? Doesn't Pilate wash his hands and hand Jesus over to the jewish authorities?

Not that I think that has any relevance to how anyone should think of jewish people today.

Benevolent despot maybe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

Benevolent despot maybe?

---

No, elected by the people. Not that hard to understand, sit back and think for a while.

This is hysterical...

The theme and content of my post deals exclusively with the subject of racism via Chavez's anti-semitic remarks and yet my inclusion of a single word, 'dictator', sends two of the Org's most notorious lefties into a tangential tizzy.

Please deal with the main issue at hand. Some time ago I caught flak by lumping Chavez into the infamous dictator club which includes Hall of Famers like Hitler and Stalin and yet here we have Hugo clearly following in their footsteps by taking a 'blame the Jews' page from their respective playbooks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by englishassassin

I'm not being funny or anti semitic here, but, IIRC correctly surely the bible claims the jews DID kill Jesus? Doesn't Pilate wash his hands and hand Jesus over to the jewish authorities?

---

Well technically they did, at least as far as Jesus' condemnation is concerned. But they condemned him under the jurisdiction of Roman law which granted them the right to pass judgment. It's the tone and timing of Chavez's speech (given on Christmas Eve and during Channukah) that makes the reference particularly alarming. The part about Jews "taking all the world's wealth for themselves" is the one that worries me the most. However, I'm thankful that Chavez is a man of the people, elected leader and global sponsor of democracy because if he were an actual 'dictator' I might be inclined to think he was laying the political groundwork for illegal seizure of private property via 'redistribution of wealth' style legislation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jag

A dictator?! He is more legitimate than Bush and his govt - you lost any credibility with your post there.

---

You've been one of Chavez's most ardent supporters here in the Org and now that your golden boy let a few of his true colors come shining through this is your your best response to my post? I'll gladly change the word 'dictator' to 'president' in my original post if you'll simply deal with the issue at hand.

I'm particularly disappointed that nobody has disputed my claim that Chavez happens to be a Master of the Funk. Are there are no George Clinton fans here in the Org?

Ummm, you live in New York, you know very well who has a big part of the wealth. :wink:
I think Mister Chavez was complimenting the Jews on being so wealthy. Why would calling someone rich be an insult is beyond me. :confused:
And yes the Jews did kill Jesus. Jesus Christ!

"Some minorities, descendants of the same ones who crucified Christ ... took all the world's wealth for themselves," Chavez said in the Dec. 24 speech.


Doesn't sound complimentary to me.

The bit about taking all the worlds wealth does seem pretty dodgy fair enough.

Quote:

---

I'm particularly disappointed that nobody has disputed my claim that Chavez happens to be a Master of the Funk. Are there are no George Clinton fans here in the Org?

---

That picture didn't make him look as if he shakes his booty on a regular basis, and he is clearly neither getting up, or down on it, so I'd have to say I'm pretty doubtful about that claim.

So because Chavez was elected without the support of the rich and steps on them when ever he gets the chance. Steals back sorry redistriputes the countrys oil wealth to the help the poorest. Runs the country like an army regiment. Talks smack about the US. Is a hardcore socialist. And wears the presidents badges of office like bling. Hates on the Jews a little. He must be a dictator. :idea2: Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. :laugh4:

Sorry I'd support Hugo Chavez over George W. "Dick Chaney's puppet" Bush 10 times out of 10.

Quote:

---

"Some minorities, descendants of the same ones who crucified Christ ... took all the world's wealth for themselves," Chavez said in the Dec. 24 speech.

---

Romans?

Quote:

---

He is more legitimate than Bush and his govt

---

And you just slipped into negative territory credibility wise.

He may have been elected freely enough, but his actions after that are those of someone striving to become a dictator. Even the recall election was full of irregularities and restrictions on voting monitering organizations.

Tell me, JAG, why would he change the constitution to give himself greater power if he wasn't trying to become a dictator?
Why would he outlaw free speech and political dissent?
Why would he pack the supreme court to ensure they never disagreed with him?
Why would he pass laws enabling him to shut down any newspaper or news station that he didn't like?

http://www.vcrisis.com/index.php?con...s/200505070444
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=18041

These are the actions of a dicator, to be sure. So why do you insist on saying he isn't a growing tyrant? Why would anyone who truly respected the democratic progress and abided by its rules do any one of the above things?

Or are you just going to ignore this all, because you can't argue against it?

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Tell me, JAG, why would he change the constitution to give himself greater power if he wasn't trying to become a dictator?
Why would he outlaw free speech and political dissent?
Why would he pack the supreme court to ensure they never disagreed with him?
Why would he pass laws enabling him to shut down any newspaper or news station that he didn't like?

---

you know I read those lines and I´m not 100% sure which of the 2 you are talking about :juggle2:

Interesting how socialists believe that there is a fixed amount of wealth in the universe. If you're talking gold deposits than sure, but we deal with cash money (and sometimes just numbers i.e. direct deposit). People don't get rich by stuffing money in their mattress (hoarding). If the Jews took all the worlds wealth then why do I have any money in my pocket at all?

because you're a Jew?

:wall:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronin

you know I read those lines and I´m not 100% sure which of the 2 you are talking about :juggle2:

---

Cute line.

Have to agree, for the most part, with our org's self-named insane rodent.

Chavez was elected in open and relatively corruption free elections.

Chavez used a demagogic approach (external enemies + have-not v have populism + economic hand-outs) to secure power. This is not new, and dates back AT LEAST to the brothers Grachi if not long before. Of itself, it is not necessarily despotic -- though it often trends that way. Any shots against the Jews are simply classic examples of the "external" enemies approach -- blame any observable problems on the "external" force. Attacking the "Christ-killers" has been a distraction ploy in Western politics since the middle ages.

Chavez has moved to enhance presidential power and to create a framework through which he can't (in practical terms) be removed from power -- though no law states directly that he is a ruler for life.

Chavez' opposition, by boycotting the election in protest of Chavez' domination of the election commission, effectively handed the legislature over to Chavez supporters in its entirety. By opting out of the political process, they run the risk of allowing:

The legislature to vote itself out of existence Reichstag-style.

Chavez to re-structure things so that political dissent isn't legal on any level.

Themselves to have to foment revolution to enact change.

All-in-all, I think Chavez HAS wandered over the line from demagogic populist to Dictator. But he didn't do it alone and a majority of Venezualans appear to be happy with him in charge.

Remember kids: if you hate Jews and run a socialist state that flirts with fascism, you're not only not bad, but a great guy, to boot!

:no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Have to agree, for the most part, with our org's self-named insane rodent.

---

WHAT?!?!? I'm an insane rodent? Actually, rabbits are of the family leporidae, along with hares, and of the order lagomorpha. So I'll thank you not to call me a rodent. ~;)

Crazed Rabbit

PS Oh, and crazed could mean other things besides insane, such as mad, full of rage, etc. ~D

Just political grandstanding. Yes, Hitler and Stalin did it, too, but if I may, for a moment, point out THE DISTINCT LACK OF JEWS IN SOUTH AMERICA. So we are all still safe from the mighty Venezuala military machine, fellow orgies, no need to invade him yet. Him and the president of Mexico need to get together and have a black/jew fry and sell it on cable it would be a big hit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Robert Dump

Just political grandstanding. Yes, Hitler and Stalin did it, too, but if I may, for a moment, point out THE DISTINCT LACK OF JEWS IN SOUTH AMERICA. So we are all still safe from the mighty Venezuala military machine, fellow orgies, no need to invade him yet.

---

Well, there are about half a million living in South America. :book:

Good old exercises in futility, from one side that won't admit that the other side's point has any merit at all and conjures up all sorts of bullshit to decry it, to the other side that won't admit that the first side's point has any merit at all and conjures up more of the same.

Though honestly, speaking completely objectively, I can't see how a world leader speaking in a degrading, racist fashion about a certain group is anything but bad. You can admit that, and still think the guy is a decent leader overall.

Nope. Chavez is our Socialist Messiah. Just Ask JAG!(TM)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good

Nope. Chavez is our Socialist Messiah. Just Ask JAG!(TM)

---

That is so lame I almost can't take it the way it was intended. :inquisitive:

As I see no question here I'll answer to the whole article:

Quote:

---

The Los Angeles, California-based Simon Wiesenthal Center demanded an apology from Chavez in a statement issued Wednesday, saying such remarks have long been used to persecute Jews.

---

So what's the problem. Now jews cannot receive either critics or bigotary comments? Of course it was a president...but why the hell the letter comes from California? There are some jews in Venezuela, if they're worried they'll act themselves. Again I'm not with Mr. President, but jews are lately offended by anything even if it's true.

Quote:

---

"Some minorities, descendants of the same ones who crucified Christ ... took all the world's wealth for themselves," Chavez said in the Dec. 24 speech.

---

The first part is well known to be truth, if Jesus ever existed. As for the second part (wich is a part of a larger statement as I can see) well it appears to resembles somebody else's opinions of the jews, but it can be truth as well. Notice that presidents usually speak with rethoric, lie and are demogogic almost by nature, so my advice will be not take any words of any president seriously, just their actions.

Quote:

---

"In your words, the two central arguments of anti-Semitism emerge ... the accusation that Jews killed Jesus (and) associating them with wealth," the Center said in a letter sent to Chavez. "Our center strongly condemns your anti-Semitic declarations."

---

It appears that the jewish leaders are always there to codemn. Even if Chavez didn't said it was them, and the accusations are true, and the second is not particulary wrong at all, but it seems that aimed at a "minority?" the words hurt more.

Quote:

---

During the speech, Chavez also praised Jesus Christ as a revolutionary hero, saying he was the world's first true socialist.

---

He's not the first.

Quote:

---

They said the Center would urge the governments of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay to "freeze the process" of incorporating Venezuela into the Mercosur trade bloc unless Chavez makes a public apology.

---

LOL- It appears that in Latin America everyone has the power to do anything. This señor is just words, he surely manages great part of the wealth, as the jewish community usually does actually, but he has no power to do such thing.

Quote:

---

Widder said Thursday that the group had yet to receive a response. He said even if Chavez had not intended to refer to Jews, the possibility for that interpretation was cause for concern.

---

Why is it cause of concern, did Chavez take any action against jews?

Quote:

---

Venezuela's president is known for speaking candidly. On one occasion he used an epithet in referring to US President George W. Bush, and he once suggested US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was illiterate, offering to send her materials to learn how to read and write.

---

If I'm not mistaken, Castro, or more specifically, Cuba was menaced by Rice not so long ago, with an invasion, wich is much more an issue than Chavez comments, wich are out of place but nothing more. Rice also menaced with killing Castro if I'm not mistaken.

Did any of you know that the idea that the Jews killed Jesus was not widely accepted or even officially introduced until Constantine introduced it during his reign?

So no, I wouldn't really call it "common knowledge" or "history."

Soulforge, as for what you have said about "the Jews being offended by anything," you have reduced yourself to making categorical comments about the Jewish people.

Well, let's do one about your people-- " 'the Argentines' admit dangerous, murderous, evil war criminals, a'la Eichmann, to their country.. oh, and they were rooting for the nazis for much of world war II and indeed giving them covert or overt assistance at period throughout. Not just the government-- all of them, down to the last child."

Now, do you think that's in any way viable or accurate?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nerouin

Did any of you know that the idea that the Jews killed Jesus was not widely accepted or even officially introduced until Constantine introduced it during his reign?

---

No I didn't knew, but between one myth is hard to discover some truth, so let's talk about faith.

Quote:

---

So no, I wouldn't really call it "common knowledge" or "history."

---

I didn't call it common knowledge though certainly it's, and I never called it history either.

Quote:

---

Soulforge, as for what you have said about "the Jews being offended by anything," you have reduced yourself to making categorical comments about the Jewish people.

---

Sorry you're right I meant "some" jewsm, specially the leaders.

Quote:

---

Well, let's do one about your people-- " 'the Argentines' admit dangerous, murderous, evil war criminals, a'la Eichmann, to their country.. oh, and they were rooting for the nazis for much of world war II and indeed giving them covert or overt assistance at period throughout. Not just the government-- all of them, down to the last child."

---

Not offended at all actually it's pretty hilarious just for the inaccuracy of it. Eichmann was argentinian? Well that's news to me, however the analogy is pretty wrong my friend. Yes we did provided assistance to the nazis, as other countries did, however we did not entered other people's dominion and stealed their habitants. Oh but wait it has nothing to do right? You did said it was innacurate on purpose, but you're fast in pointing other people's mistake and responding in accordance making exactly the same mistake. But guess what I still defend Eichmann, not because I like the nazis or Eichmann particularily, but because he came here and was accepted and tolerated, and he deserved a fair trial as any other person. But wait that doesn't matter either...

Hey guess what the point is still there: that Jesus was encomended to the punishment of crucifixion by the jewish authorities (and that the jews today are actually the descendants of the ancient) is common knowledge, and I had not heard any categorical refutation of such an statement, but please try. And that saying that they've all the wealth in the world, is out of place, as I've admitted (all the speech is out of place actually), but tell me objectivelly what's wrong with being rich, and please do tell me when Chavez expresselly says jews.

Didn't know about the Constatine link...that chap had a lot of influence on the Church for a guy who wasn't our Holy Father.

"I wanted to be King and Pope, but I can't because I'm a..."
(Forget the show that was from:laugh4: )


Seriously though, the creed (Nicene) I say on Sundays asserts that he was:

"crucified under Pontius Pilate, suffered, died and was buried."

Though the gospels clearly assert that the movers and shakers among the Sanhedrin sought his death for blasphemy, they lacked the power at that point in history. Pilate "washing his hands" of the matter was simply fig-leafing the willingness to let Christ be killed. Moreover, the gospels go on to suggest that it was Pilate's soldiers who did the job.

So we have Constantine to thank for the old tradition of anti-semitism, hmmm.



Chavez: Latin-american socialist reformer/hero, blustering dictator, or dead lettuc picker union boss -- you decide.

is this still about chavez?