CARACAS, Venezuela — President Hugo Chavez said Sunday that foreigners who publicly criticize him or his government while visiting Venezuela will be expelled from the country.

Chavez ordered officials to closely monitor statements made by international figures during their visits to Venezuela — and deport any outspoken critics.

"How long are we going to allow a person — from any country in the world — to come to our own house to say there's a dictatorship here, that the president is a tyrant, and nobody does anything about it?" Chavez asked during his weekly television and radio program.

The Venezuelan leader's statements came after Manuel Espino, the president of Mexico's conservative ruling party, criticized Chavez during a recent pro-democracy forum in Caracas.

Government opponents argue Chavez — a close ally of Cuban leader Fidel Castro — is becoming increasingly authoritarian and cracking down on dissent as he steers oil-rich Venezuela toward what he calls "21st-century socialism."

Chavez rejects such allegations, countering that democratic freedoms have been extended since he was first elected in 1998. The former paratroop commander says his government has empowered the poor by giving them increased decision-making authority in politics.

During Sunday's six-hour program, Chavez assured private property owners their rights will be guaranteed under a pending constitutional reform.

"Private property will respected," he said.

Many wealthy Venezuelans fear second homes, yachts or other assets could be seized as Chavez advances his Bolivarian Revolution, a movement named after South American independence hero Simon Bolivar. Chavez denies any such plans.

Chavez is expected to present his reform proposal to the National Assembly, which is completely controlled by his allies, in the coming weeks. Few details have emerged from a special executive committee that he appointed to draft a proposal for overhauling the country's charter.

Also Sunday, Chavez announced an initiative to slash the salaries of Venezuela's top public servants. He said no public servant should make more than $7,000 a month. Most Venezuelans make minimum wage — roughly $250 a month.

Reducing the pay of top officials has become a popular move in Latin America. The presidents Nicaragua, Bolivia, Peru and Costa Rica recently cut salaries, including their own, in response to widespread criticism.

In his typically wide-ranging television program, Chavez also said Castro recently warned him to take precautions against possible U.S.-backed assassination attempts.

He said Cuba's 80-year-old "Maximum Leader" gave him a copy of former CIA Director George Tenet's recently published memoir and told him: "'Read it, Chavez, because that is the most perfect killing machine ever invented and I'm a survivor ... I survived more than 600 (assassination) attempts.'"

"The CIA is everywhere," said Chavez, who has repeatedly warned that U.S. President George W. Bush could order him killed.

U.S. law has forbidden assassination attempts since the 1970s, and Washington denies the U.S. government has attempted to kill Castro since then.



.... But it's OK for him to come to the U.S. and criticize our government.

Watch and see another "socialist" country become a dictatorship.

venevuela has the right to self determination. what they don't have the right to is murder of the population. and if the people of the country are not stupid they will get rid of him when they want him gone WITHOUT inerference of any other country. and if it is done, it will be because of the oil, not for the notion of "freedom".

just like the american people are responsible for bush and company being in power. no matter who voted for him and his, or not.

CARACAS, Venezuela — President Hugo Chavez said Sunday that foreigners who publicly criticize him or his government while visiting Venezuela will be expelled from the country.
Does this really come as a surprise to anyone?
He said Cuba's 80-year-old "Maximum Leader" gave him a copy of former CIA Director George Tenet's recently published memoir and told him: "'Read it, Chavez, because that is the most perfect killing machine ever invented...."
Damn skippy.
"The CIA is everywhere," said Chavez, who has repeatedly warned that U.S. President George W. Bush could order him killed.
Despite it being illegal, God willing...
.... But it's OK for him to come to the U.S. and criticize our government.
Amazing, isn't it?
Watch and see another "socialist" country become a dictatorship.
Bingo.

Sources? :rolleyes:

So what if he does?
Nothing wrong with a little socialism.

socialism will and can work as long as you don't get into a pissing contest with your "enemies".

the biggest mistake russia did was waste so much fucking money on the military machine. imagine all the resources, time, and money being focused on health care, food, housing, and education instead.

Sources? :rolleyes:

Sources for what? The AP story I posted?

Sources for what? The AP story I posted?

OldPhart, there is this nifty "feature" of the internet that allows you to "link" from the text of what you copied and pasted to the source of where you copied and pasted it from. They are called "hyper-links" and they can be used to prove that you didn't just make that whole "article" up.

You should try them sometime.

:thumbs:

Here is a link to the AP story.

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/venezuelas-chavez-says-foreigners/n20070722203009990002

And BTW - I have never "made up" a story I have posted here, and for you to think I may have, just shows confused you really are. I'm don't do that kind of crap (yes Dhrama, I actually have integrity).

And as far as your condescending tone regarding my computer and posting "skills"... just because I don't include juvenile pictures and inflammitory comments in my posts, doesn't mean I cant... just that I have the inclination to do so.

Bravo, OP.

So what if he does?
Nothing wrong with a little socialism.
And you insist you're not a hack.....pfft. :rolleyes:

Chavez moving toward "socialism"...

I doubt that he will impliment a true socialist system, but I certainly hope that he does.

It would give me a slight bit of hope for the betterment of the lives of the common people. There, and everywhere else that democratic socialism is practiced.

Bravo, Chavez.

http://www.spmichigan.org/e107_files/images/New-SPUSA-Logo.gif

I don't have a problem with Chavez implementing socialism in his country. I do, however, have a problem with his curbing the basic human right of free speech. Such a move is indefensible.

And BTW - I have never "made up" a story I have posted here

No offense, but you can say that until you are blue in the face but it doesn't prove anything. The link is proof and it adds context by showing where the story is coming from.

I don't think that requesting a source is too much to ask.

.

I don't have a problem with Chavez implementing socialism in his country. I do, however, have a problem with his curbing the basic human right of free speech. Such a move is indefensible.

I agree with you.
Well said.

Chavez expelling anyone who bad-mouths him is almost textbook fascism...

Bu..bu..bu..but he's a "socialist", Decka. A real man for the people. :rolleyes:

Chavez expelling anyone who bad-mouths him is almost textbook fascism...


Well, it could be (probably will be soon) worse. At present he is only expelling them. If history is an indicator, firing squads won't be far behind.

I agree with you.
Well said.

how do you know they want free speech? we have been told we cant force the Iraqis to live free, for all we know the venezuelans want to live in a dictatorship

Actually Fascism is the merger of corporate and government power. expelling anyone who bad-mouths him would actually be an example of totalitarianism.

Actually Fascism is the merger of corporate and government power. expelling anyone who bad-mouths him would actually be an example of totalitarianism.

Sources for this "definition"?

http://www.webster.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=fascism

Main Entry: fas·cism
Pronunciation: 'fa-"shi-z&m also 'fa-"si-
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian fascismo, from fascio bundle, fasces, group, from Latin fascis bundle & fasces fasces
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control <early instances of army fascism and brutality -- J. W. Aldridge>
- fas·cist /-shist also -sist/ noun or adjective, often capitalized
- fas·cis·tic /fa-'shis-tik also -'sis-/ adjective, often capitalized
- fas·cis·ti·cal·ly /-ti-k(&-)lE/ adverb, often capitalized


I put the link to the definition in there, so you wouldn't think I "made it up". You have to hover over it with your mouse and click the left mouse button to activate it.

Sources for this "definition"?

The person who founded the Fascist movement - Mussolini.

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

Word History: It is fitting that the name of an authoritarian political movement like Fascism, founded in 1919 by Benito Mussolini, should come from the name of a symbol of authority. The Italian name of the movement, fascismo, is derived from fascio, "bundle, (political) group," but also refers to the movement's emblem, the fasces, a bundle of rods bound around a projecting axe-head that was carried before an ancient Roman magistrate by an attendant as a symbol of authority and power. The name of Mussolini's group of revolutionaries was soon used for similar nationalistic movements in other countries that sought to gain power through violence and ruthlessness, such as National Socialism.

http://budz.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/fascism_not_us.jpg

Actually Mussolini started out as a socialist.

http://www.thecorner.org/hist/total/f-italy.htm

I prefer to acknowledge Webster's definition other some random quote from the oft verbally "windy" and "sail headed" Mussolini (he was a played to whatever audience that gave him more power)

Actually Mussolini started out as a socialist.

No argument there, but the fact remains he started the Fascist movement so he would be the most qualified to define it.

:thumbs:

And therein lies the difference between us.

I believe that one's actions define them, where you believe their words do.

And therein lies the difference between us.

I believe that one's actions define them, where you believe their words do.



No, I just believe that one defines a political concepts such as "fascism" with words.
And that the person who created said concept is best qualified to define it.

What a radical notion...

Mussolini also stated that Italy was an aircraft carrier ??!??!?

and Hitler said....

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator - by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

We agree to disagree on this one... no one will paint a true picture from the inside looking out.

Mussolini also stated that Italy was an aircraft carrier ??!??!?

???



and Hitler said....

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator - by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

This has nothing to do with him creating a political ideology.

If he was to call that stance "Hitlerism" would you accept his definition for that ideology or would you insist that it really means flower arrangement because you like that definition better?


We agree to disagree on this one...

Agreed.

I like an unbiased definition, Not a quote from an megalomaniac totalitarian dictator describing what his "political system" is.

Musolini founded the Fascist movement.

That makes him most qualified to define his own movement, no matter how much you personally dislike him.

ya, and Saddam got 99% of the vote too :rolleyes:

ya, and Saddam got 99% of the vote too

Ya, and Bush legitimately won in florida and ohio. :rolleyes:

I read an article that said Chavez is deporting anyone who criticizes his government, yet the freethinkers among us still hold the guy up as a hero

I read an article that said ...

Don't believe everything you read kiddo... :thumbs:

uh, so you are denying that?

No, Trav, I do not deny that you are an idiot.

There is no denying that.

:thumbs:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070723/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_chavez

First Trav says:

Chavez is deporting anyone who criticizes his government

And posts an article that says:

CARACAS, Venezuela - President Hugo Chavez said Sunday that foreigners who publicly criticize him or his government while visiting Venezuela will be expelled from the country.

Nice reading comprehension skills there Trav... :rolleyes:

LOL, your hypocrisy is sickening

your hypocrisy is sickening

It pales in comparison to your ignorance, hatefulness and hypocrisy Trav. :rolleyes:

and your predictability is annoying

and your predictability is annoying

If I was so predictable, you wouldn't keep saying such stupid things. :thumbs:

I can't help it if everything you do not understand is "stupid"

Musolini founded the Fascist movement.

That makes him most qualified to define his own movement, no matter how much you personally dislike him.


I did not know Mussolini (since he died well before I was born), therefore I couldn't say if I would have liked him or not (although I doubt I would based on his actions).

I'm sure that Jim Jones and David Koresh would have described their "movements" much more aptly than.... ummm.... say... a historian? That's why I put in the Hitler quote (but that seemed to fly over you). When a person that starts a "movement" or "ideal" defines it, it does NOT give them any authority over describing the truth of the situation. It may be their deluded thought process or a statement to justify their actions (to themselves or others - who knows).

Just because Hitler said he was doing "the Lord's work" doesn't mean it was anymore true than if I begin calling myself "the King of Siam"..... wait, if I said it.... it must be true!!!!

All hail the King!

:lolhit:

I did not know Mussolini, therefore I couldn't say if I would have liked him or not

Well, I based that upon you calling someone you didn't know a

..megalomaniac totalitarian dictator...




I'm sure that Jim Jones and David Koresh would have described their "movements"

Did they coin any terms to describe their movements? Were their movements political ideologies?

Apples and Oranges.

Apparently that important difference is still going straight over your head.

I think OldPhart's point is that the founder of an ideology or movement will inevitably put a spin on it. We therefore cannot take the founder's definition as objective.

I think OldPhart's point is that the founder of an ideology or movement will inevitably put a spin on it. We therefore cannot take the founder's definition as objective.

I know what his point was. He was trying to attack me for using that quote of Mussolini's because he didn't like that definition (even though it is the correct one)

Then why take Jefferson or Madison's word on the Consitiutional Democracy they were trying to create?

After all, they were just putting a "spin" on it...

Then why take Jefferson or Madison's word on the Consitiutional Democracy they were trying to create?
Personally, I don't. I prefer to judge the definition, merits, and flaws of Constitutional Democracy for myself.

Personally, I don't. I prefer to judge the definition, merits, and flaws of Constitutional Democracy for myself.

Which is precisely how we ended up in this situation where people are interpreting the Consititution in ways the framers never intended.

like how they saw abortion written into somehow?

Dharma, your strawman has died, ceased to exist, is extinct, is pushing up daisies, is no more, ceases to be, etc...........

Dharma, your strawman has died, ceased to exist, is extinct, is pushing up daisies, is no more, ceases to be, etc...........

Way to rip off Monty Python. How original.

There was never a "strawman".

You are just being needlessly argumentitive about a definition you don't agree with but cannot disprove.

Can I just ask you, dharma, on where you stand?

Do you back Hugo Chavez in his actions here or not?

A yes or no answer will suffice.

You are just being needlessly argumentitive about a definition you don't agree with but cannot disprove.

Look in the mirror there bubba.

You are still arguing that a single quotation from a politician trumps a studied definition from Webster's dictionary.

Which is precisely how we ended up in this situation where people are interpreting the Consititution in ways the framers never intended.

The framers never intended black people to have the right to vote. Does that mean they shouldn't? The framers never said that our phone calls shouldn't be monitored by the government, but the courts have interpreted the Fourth Amendment to include those communications as being covered by its mantle of protection. Do you disagree with this?

does anyone have a link to what the original constitution said before it got chopped up? yes, jefferson disliked what the constitutional congress did to his original version he used to show both versions to people and asked them which they liked best.

the basis of "democracy" in america is rich white slave owning land owning men dictated what was and who could vote. did you know indenture servitude (white slavery) was legal until 1826?

Which is precisely how we ended up in this situation where people are interpreting the Consititution in ways the framers never intended.
Considering that I can vote even though I'm not white, I am quite thankful for that.

My main point is that people should judge things for themselves rather than blindly accept someone else's view, regardless of how prominent that person may be.

The framers never intended black people to have the right to vote.

There is plenty of evidence that some of the framers did, in fact, ultimately want liberty for ALL men, including Blacks. Jefferson tried unsuccessfully to free blacks in Virginia and was punished by the conservatives for it. Washington tried to free his slaves but was betrayed by Martha who refused to honor that request.


The framers never said that our phone calls shouldn't be monitored by the government,

The framers never knew what a telephone was.

I was actually referring to the Supreme Court Clerk who used the 14th Amendment to justify Corporate Person-hood.

Do you agree that the Framers intended corporations to be given Constitutional rights of individual citizens?

.

My main point is that people should judge things for themselves rather than blindly accept someone else's view, regardless of how prominent that person may be.

I understand the point you are trying to make.

My response to you is that a wise man does not discount the advice of experienced men just because their opinions are politically distasteful.

.

You are still arguing that a single quotation from a politician trumps a studied definition from Webster's dictionary.

You are quite incorrect.

I am arguing that the person who founds a political ideology is better qualified to define their own ideology than is some editor at Websters.

:thumbs:

You are quite incorrect.

I am arguing that the person who founds a political ideology is better qualified to define their own ideology than is some editor at Websters.

:thumbs:

To you I am incorrect. To myself I am quite correct.

Like I said earlier in this discussion.... we agree to disagree. Unless you have some emotional issue that will not let you concede anything... even the aforementioned statement that we agree to disagree.

:thumbs: back at 'cha

To you I am incorrect. To myself I am quite correct.

I am sorry but you are quite wrong again.

You are trying to tell me what I was saying and I corrected you.

That isn't something that is open to interpretation. I told you what my point was. You don't tell me what my point was unless you are looking for clarification.

I hope you are clear on this now.

:thumbs:

I am sorry but you are quite wrong again.

You are trying to tell me what I was saying and I corrected you.

That isn't something that is open to interpretation. I told you what my point was. You don't tell me what my point was unless you are looking for clarification.

I hope you are clear on this now.

:thumbs:

I was trying to tell you what you were saying was incorrect. I tend to forget that some people cannot stand to be corrected.

Oh and I'm clear all right... you are an insufferable ass that cannot stand to concede ANYTHING and must have the last word in ALL issues.

This has gone to the 2nd grade "my dad can beat up your dad" type of argument. Sure, it's fun for a while, but it gets old when you realize the person you are arguing with don't even know who his dad is.

and BTW I'll tell you anything I damn well please. Just because you don't have a proverbial "leg to stand on" with your "But he said it! It must be the truth!" stupidity. The definition I gave you is a fact, it's up you to compare it to the rantings of a long dead dictator... I can't do your thinking for you.

:thumbs:

and BTW I'll tell you anything I damn well please.

Yes, and again, when you try to tell me what my point was and misrepresent what I said, you only make yourself look like an arrogant, dishonest ass.

I will call you out on it every time.

If that makes me "insufferable" in your book then I am fine with that.

:thumbs:

Let's see....

I cut and pasted a AP story about Chavez and his next move toward a totalitarian regime.

You... questioned the source (and my integrity as a long time poster here... that I might "make up a story" to post?)

You... at the same time questioned my knowledge about using these forums, assuming that I was too dense to know how to use a hyper-link.

You... then made a statement relating to the definition of Fascism, which is NOT the actual definition. And I called you on it.

It has since been a pissing match with you, while you try to disprove a definition from the dictionary ( I know.... you are much more intelligent than the scholars at Webster's.... LOL)

....and I'm an ass? Maybe so, but you brought it on yourself with your condescending attitude and righteous indignation of me (and many others here). I'm just calling you on it.

Why don't you learn to debate w/o starting with a personal attack. Look to Vile, Sedan, Brooks, and a host of others here on how to debate and discuss issues in a civil manner.

Dharma thinks that whenever he says "it makes you look like a," he's not actually calling you names, so it's okay. In fact, you're the hypocrite!

Dharma thinks that whenever he says "it makes you look like a," he's not actually calling you names, so it's okay. In fact, you're the hypocrite!

Try reading the entire series of posts before commenting please.

Dharma wasn't being both condescending and questioning my integrity?

And I may be hypocritical here... I'm just doing the same things Dharma does.

Let's see....

I cut and pasted a AP story about Chavez and his next move toward a totalitarian regime.

You... questioned the source

*gasp!* (the horror!)

You... at the same time questioned my knowledge about using these forums, assuming that I was too dense to know how to use a hyper-link.

When you act stupid, I have no choice but to assume you are stupid.


You... then made a statement relating to the definition of Fascism, which is NOT the actual definition.

Incorrect. I informed you of the real definition by the man who invented the ideology.

I already said long ago that we will agree to disagree on that.


It has since been a pissing match with you,

Because you insist on making it one because you keep misrepresenting what I said.


....and I'm an ass?

Clearly.



Why don't you learn to debate w/o starting with a personal attack.

Take your own advice.

I asked you politely for a source and you were the one who decided to act like an asshole first.

.

OldPhart, there is this nifty "feature" of the internet that allows you to "link" from the text of what you copied and pasted to the source of where you copied and pasted it from. They are called "hyper-links" and they can be used to prove that you didn't just make that whole "article" up.

You should try them sometime.

This is your "polite" response to me? Questioning my integrity and forum posting knowledge?

And just where did you assume I was stupid based on my posts?

OldPhart,

Why are you so determined to continue a pointless pissing contest?

:rolleyes:

You are quite incorrect.

I am arguing that the person who founds a political ideology is better qualified to define their own ideology than is some editor at Websters.

:thumbs:

What someone thinks their ideology is and what it really is, or what it becomes, are different things.

I am sure if you read the ideology of David Koresh you probably would not agree with it, but, since you seem unable to understand this you will be forever forced to accept at face value whatever some nut says was his motivation or ideology.

Try reading the entire series of posts before commenting please.

Dharma wasn't being both condescending and questioning my integrity?

And I may be hypocritical here... I'm just doing the same things Dharma does.
That little bit of snideness was aimed at dharma, not you. Sorry if you didn't catch it.

That little bit of snideness was aimed at dharma, not you. Sorry if you didn't catch it.
When I glanced over it, I didn't either. I did find it somewhat surprising, you defending Dharma and all - I mean this entire "debate" (amongst many others) has been a complete bust for him. Embarrassingly so, IMHO.

I don't look at dharma threads as "debates." Just as, "embarrassments to AllForums."

Oh, I agree - that's why I put the word debate in quotes.

I don't look at dharma threads as "debates." Just as, "embarrassments to AllForums."

While we don't agree all the time Nappy, I couldn't agree more there. And I'm sure many others agree too.. hopefully dharma actually absorbs some criticism and quits blaming everyone else.

That little bit of snideness was aimed at dharma, not you. Sorry if you didn't catch it.

My apologies Nap.

I think I was in defensive mode at the time.

After reading through it again, I see your point.

Again, sorry.