Chavez Hits Home

[skunk]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4695482.stm
Chavez rejects 'attack' by Blair

The Venezuelan President, Hugo Chavez, has accused the UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair, of opening up a European flank in attacks on Venezuela.
He was responding to comments by Mr Blair, urging Venezuela to abide by the rules of the international community.

Mr Chavez said Mr Blair had flouted those very rules by invading Iraq.

He called Mr Blair "a pawn of imperialism, trying now to attack us from Europe", and "the main ally of Hitler" - a reference to George W Bush.

The Venezuelan president has long railed against the US president, and accuses the US of planning to invade his country.

On Sunday he said his country needed a million armed men and women prepared to defend it.

Alliance with Cuba

Relations between Venezuela and the US worsened last week when both countries expelled one another's diplomats, after Venezuela accused the US embassy in Caracas of spying.

After US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld recently compared the Venezuelan president with Adolf Hitler, Mr Chavez responded: "The imperialist, genocidal, fascist attitude of the US president has no limits. I think Hitler would be like a suckling baby next to George W Bush."


On Wednesday in the House of Commons, Mr Blair was asked by Colin Burgon, an MP from his Labour party, whether Britain should follow "a really right-wing US republican agenda" in relation to Venezuela.

"It is rather important that the government of Venezuela realise that if they want to be respected members of the international community they should abide by the rules of the international community," Mr Blair replied.

"I also have to say with the greatest respect to the president of Venezuela that when he forms an alliance with Cuba I would prefer to see Cuba a proper functioning democracy."

Mr Chavez, a close ally of Cuba's Fidel Castro, retorted: "You, Mr Blair, do not have the morality to call on anyone to respect the rules of the international community.

"You are precisely the one who has flouted international law the most... siding with Mr Danger [George Bush] to trample the people in Iraq."Great stuff! Tell it like it is, Hugo!

[tristan]

All of the countries who participated in Iraq have lost some of their moral authority. However, that doesn't mean that anything that any leader of any of those countries says is instantly wrong. Each statement has to be judged on its own merits.

I don't buy Chavez's multi-polar act for a minute - he's a demagogue who just wants to manufacture enemies and then rally his people against them to increase his own popular support while he runs the country into the ground. And yes, I know that my president is doing the exact same thing.

[skunk]

All of the countries who participated in Iraq have lost some of their moral authority. However, that doesn't mean that anything that any leader of any of those countries says is instantly wrong. Each statement has to be judged on its own merits.And Blair's statements show the true extent of his cynicism and dishonesty. How dare he lecture anyone on being "part of the international community" while cozying up to GWPretzel?

I don't buy Chavez's multi-polar act for a minute - he's a demagogue who just wants to manufacture enemies and then rally his people against them to increase his own popular support while he runs the country into the ground.He doesn't have to manufacture enemies. Have you forgotten the attempted coup d'etat? Have you forgotten Allende? The danger is real, clear and present.

[tristan]

And Blair's statements show the true extent of his cynicism and dishonesty. Hoe dare he lecture anyone on being "part of the international community" while cozying up to GWPretzel?

You can't evaluate the truth of a statement based upon the spearker's background. If Michael Jackson says "don't molest kids", is he wrong?


He doesn't have to manufacture enemies. Have you forgotten the attempted coup d'etat? Have you forgotten Allende? The danger is real, clear and present.
Yes, I have forgotten Allende, and so has everyone else. The US hasn't given a damn about Central and South America since the USSR collapsed. That's actually one of my chief criticisms about US foreign policy, that we're not out there in Latin America trying to help them develop. It's our own backyard, and we treat them like they don't matter. When your neighbors live in poverty for decades, eventually you have to shoulder some of the blame.

[skunk]

You can't evaluate the truth of a statement based upon the speaker's background.Of course you can.

Yes, I have forgotten Allende, and so has everyone else. The US hasn't given a damn about Central and South America since the USSR collapsed. That's actually one of my chief criticisms about US foreign policy, that we're not out there in Latin America trying to help them develop. It's our own backyard, and we treat them like they don't matter. When your neighbors live in poverty for decades, eventually you have to shoulder some of the blame.And not without reason. If you were treating them like they didn't matter, your government wouldn't be trying to overthrow theirs.

[mactastic]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4695482.stm
[/indent]Great stuff! Tell it like it is, Hugo!
Why you unpatriotic son of a.... oh wait, you're a Brit. Do they even HAVE patriotism way over there?
:p

I'm guessing Limbaugh / Coulter / Savage et al. are positively drooling at this 'friend of the American left's' statement.

[Thanatoast]

It's too bad we can't get anyone sane to stand up to Bush/Blair.

If Blair goes along with whatever Bush wants in the interests of keeping the peace, isn't that appeasement?

[eva01]

God i love listening to Chavez.

[solvs]

All of the countries who participated in Iraq have lost some of their moral authority. However, that doesn't mean that anything that any leader of any of those countries says is instantly wrong. Each statement has to be judged on its own merits.
What about when it's about the same type of thing? It kinda hypocritical for Blair to worry so much about the splinter in Chavez's eye when he has a log in his own. Not saying I like Chavez, have heard good and bad things, but apply that same statement to him. Just because he may have done (or is doing) some bad things, does that mean he can't criticize Blair and Bush? He doesn't speak for me any more than Michael Moore does, but he certainly has a point with this. Blair has no right to say what he said about Chavez when he is guilty of the same. Well, worse actually.