Venezuelan Coup and the US involvement

cheyisrameyah

Rising Star
Platinum Member
I appreciate the knowledge that Que, Ew and Mak have dropped. I have been reading alot this summer about the US policy of interventionism. I feel that the wealth from oil should be used to help uplift the people of Venezula. I applaud Chavez for working to nationalize the oil sector becuase it probably would only benefit the few that are in control of the industry. Personally, I think he is damn lucky that we are involved in that quagmire in the Mid-East. That being said, I strongly believe in the ideals of the Constitution and that foreign govts should have the right to select their own method and leaders of govt without intervention from any US govt agency or dept. From my reading, I have ascertained that the US has had its foot on the neck of Central America, South America and certain islands of the Caribbean since the late 1800's if not earlier (economically speaking). That has to end, the citizens of these countries are victims of corporatacy, greed and racism just like the US is but to a much greater extent. Once again, thank you for dropping the knowledge brothers, this thread helped to inspire my summer reading list. Keep up the good work.
 

nyyyyce

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Is there really someone questioning our involvment?


:smh:


[FLASH]http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/O2Uqx_mkhPs[/FLASH]
 

nyyyyce

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
LISTEN and learn folks...

[FLASH]http://youtube.com/watch/v/9MPaa3BQldM[/FLASH]



[FLASH]http://youtube.com/watch/v/moCogXpbe6I[/FLASH]


YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST: If Chavez bails out Iran and their oil problem S*** is going to escalate REAL QUICK!


[FLASH]http://youtube.com/watchvv/w-aGdxXtTXk[/FLASH]
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Gunmen fire on Venezuela protest​

Gunmen have opened fire on students returning from a protest
in Caracas against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's planned reforms


_44225477_gunman_ap203b.jpg



BBC News
Thursday, 8 November 2007


Several people have been reported injured during the clashes, including at least two by gunfire.

The students were protesting against plans to remove presidential term limits, the subject of a referendum.

Thousands had marched peacefully to the Supreme Court and filed a demand for the vote to be suspended.

Unidentified gunmen opened fire on the students as they returned from the march, prompting scenes of chaos as students fled.

One witness told the Reuters news agency that after the initial violence supporters of Mr Chavez drove through the area on motorbikes and shooting into the air.

National Guardsmen had been posted along the march route to stop clashes between protesters and Chavez supporters.

Troops also surrounded the Central University of Venezuela, a centre of opposition to Mr Chavez's government.

'Power grab'

The amendments up for approval in a December referendum include giving the president control over the central back and the creation of new provinces governed by centrally appointed officials.

President Chavez is also proposing to bypass legal controls on the executive during a state of emergency, bring in a maximum six-hour working day, and cut the voting age from 18 to 16.

Supporters say the changes will deepen Venezuela's democracy but critics accuse Mr Chavez of a power grab.

Last week troops used tear gas and water cannon to disperse thousands of students protesting in Caracas against the proposed amendments.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7084262.stm
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Venezuela Students Shot After Anti-Chavez Protest​

By Matthew Walter and Steven Bodzin

Nov. 7 (Bloomberg) -- Venezuelan student protesters were fired on, resulting in two gun-shot injuries, when they returned to campus today from a march opposing President Hugo Chavez's plan to rewrite the nation's constitution.

Seven more victims suffered other injuries, according to university official. Local television station Globovision broadcast images of protesters running for cover during the incident on the campus of the Universidad Central de Venezuela. One image showed a man in a black leather jacket firing a pistol twice. Interior Minister Pedro Carreno said at 7:10 p.m. New York time that the situation was under control.

Tens of thousands of students marched across downtown Caracas to the Supreme Court building today to petition for a delay to a planned referendum Dec. 2 on Chavez's proposal to modify the constitution. The changes would include eliminating presidential term limits, easing the seizure private property and reducing the powers of state governments.

``I'd like to make a call for reflection,'' Carreno said in a national address. ``We are making a call to the owners of the mass media, to the students, to the leaders of the opposition political parties -- enough already.''

Injuries

Dr. Rodolfo Tapa, dean of the university's medical school, said in an interview with Globovision that two of the victims suffered gun-shot wounds. Others suffered respiration problems caused by tear-gas bombs, among other injuries, Dr. Fernando Alvarado, assistant director of the university's hospital, said on state television.

Students, business groups, the Catholic Church and some of Chavez's former allies have come out against the constitutional plan during the past two weeks.

Protests at the Universidad de Lara, in Lara state, on Nov. 2 turned violent, resulting in two deaths by gunshot.

Carreno said television reports broadcasting images from the crime scene were irresponsible, and are a clear attempt to foment opposition to the government.

``It's inconceivable that in this transcendental moment for the political life of the country, that they would want to harden mass opinion against the reform.''

To contact the reporter on this story: Matthew Walter in Caracas at mwalter4@bloomberg.net ; Steven Bodzin in Caracas at sbodzin@bloomberg.net .

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aQ983Gmv50Gs&refer=latin_america
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
`

In pictures: Venezuela clashes:


_44226082_pistolap416.jpg

Unknown gunmen have opened fire on students protesters in
the Venezuelan capital, Caracas.


_44226084_gun2afp416.jpg

The men, mostly wearing masks, confronted students after a
peaceful demonstration against planned constitutional changes
proposed by President Hugo Chavez.


_44226086_benchafp416.jpg

The two groups clashed, leaving at least eight people injured,
one of them from gunfire.


_44226087_motoafp416.jpg

It is not clear how the violence first erupted, but a number of
gunmen entered the campus of the Central University of Venezuela
on motorbikes.


_44226089_slingshotafp416.jpg

Angry students threw rocks at a building where the gunmen
were hiding.


_44226091_firebombap416.jpg

They also set fire to benches and threw firebombs.


_44226093_demoap416b.jpg

The students were protesting constitutional reforms being put
to a referendum next month.


_44226097_injuredap416.jpg

Among the changes are amendments to abolish presidential
term limits, and to give the president control over the Central Bank.

`
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
^^^

Damn..dude had a slingshot in pic

Makk..I told you a long time ago dude was going to suspend term limits. He wants to be a dictator for life... He is idol and mentor is CASTRO.
 

Makkonnen

The Quizatz Haderach
BGOL Investor
^^^

Damn..dude had a slingshot in pic

Makk..I told you a long time ago dude was going to suspend term limits. He wants to be a dictator for life... He is idol and mentor is CASTRO.
oh yeah all dictators get democratically elected and seek memorandums to justify their democratic dictatorship. :hmm: I don't remember Castro keeping power that way. Maybe I need a refresher in Cuban History.


That anti-Chavez shooting bullshit happened before the coup too. It was all a setup by anti-chavez people last time. Wouldnt be surprised if it was the same bullshit all over again. Last time the neutral media showed pics of proChavez people shooting and said they were attacking people and it turned out they were shooting back at antichavez snipers.
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
^^^

Makk,

You seem to be walking around the point. Most dictators are voted in by their countries (castro, hitler, lenin, stalin, etc) before they systematically depower the system from removing them from office. Dude is systematically ratifying the constitution and policies of his country to not only remain in power indefinitely... but also to have authorative-absolute powers.
 

Makkonnen

The Quizatz Haderach
BGOL Investor
^^^

Makk,

You seem to be walking around the point. Most dictators are voted in by their countries (castro, hitler, lenin, stalin, etc) before they systematically depower the system from removing them from office. Dude is systematically ratifying the constitution and policies of his country to not only remain in power indefinitely... but also to have authorative-absolute powers.
How am I walking around the point? Term limits? We've talked about that shit for a long time. Hell every politician who thinks he can swing it talks term limits - even Bush.

If you think Im avoiding the point maybe you could be more straight forward with who he is mimicking - is it Castro or Hitler or Stalin or Lenin? Lenin and Stalin were voted in but not by the russian people - I dont consider the Congress of Soviets electing them the same as a popular general election. I thought it was just Castro you said he was idolizing and following in the footsteps of. He clearly has the military and political power do throw out the constitution and impose his will on his nation if he wanted but he doesnt have to- you know why? The majority of the people in his country LIKE HIM AND WHAT HE DOES. That's just the truth.

If he was Castro Jr. he would have killed and imprisoned all the coup leaders and opposition groups long ago.



You're saying the same stuff you always say. But somehow its another year later and it still hasn't become what you say it will.
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
Makk,

It's not like you to avoid facts. Why are you so in denial about this dude? Look at what he is doing systematically. I'm not going to take the time to make long posts in this thread anymore.. as you keeping it up with current events... dude has legislation that may pass next month to suspend term limits.....

There is a big different between "talking limits" and taking the steps to suspend your country's constitution so that you can remain in office indefinitely...come on Makk..be serious man... you act like this dude is your wife man... you see no wrong in any of his actions...

Castro, Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, etc... all make the same point..you seem to think just because he was initially voted in by his people that he has no bounds on what he can do to retain his power indefinitely...
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
MAKK...

I dont even want to argue this shit with you... but it is clear as day what dude is trying to do in terms of aggregating absolute power into his own hands.... but anyways...back to regurlarly scheduled programming...
 

Makkonnen

The Quizatz Haderach
BGOL Investor
:lol: wow - wife? :smh:

you just brought up Hitler, Stalin, Lenin and Castro erroneously for the most part and are beating a dead horse with the term limits shit,resort to name calling with the wife remark and tell me its not like me to avoid facts?

Seriously bruh analyze yourself on that last point. Did he make a power grab militarily to be president for life even though he could easily? No.
Your casting of him as the murderous dictator as of right now is bullshit. Time will tell if he goes ballistic and turns into a Stalin type character. If anything a better leader to compare him to is Khaddafi - he actually shares a whole lot of similarities with him.

You act like he's gonna have you writing the people's software in a hot minute :lol:
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
How was it erroneous? You said he was "democratically elected"? The others on the list were elected by their people as well..nothing erroneous about the comparison at all. The point you made about him initially being elected is a moot point.

The point is about this thirst for absolute power and reshaping his country's laws in order to accomplish that goal. In that capacity, he is equal to everyone on that list in his aspirations.

I'm not beating a dead horse. I don't even discuss the shit anymore. However, it doesn't even take very little intelligence to see the trend in his decision-making...i told you a long time ago what he was going to do...and every few months someone posts an article that is right along with what I said... nationalizing resources, suspending the constitution, killing term limits..... etc. He is taking a chop one leg off at a time approach to complete control over the country in all aspects

And the comment about "you act like dude is your wife" was not calling you a name in that sense...my bad if it came out wrong... it was meant to be illustrate how you always come to dude's rescue....you always have an excuse for everything with this dude as if he can do no wrong....
 
Last edited:

kimchifunk

Potential Star
Registered
How was it erroneous? You said he was "democratically elected"? The others on the list were elected by their people as well..nothing erroneous about the comparison at all. The point you made about him initially being elected is a moot point.

The point is about this thirst for absolute power and reshaping his country's laws in order to accomplish that goal. In that capacity, he is equal to everyone on that list in his aspirations.

I'm not beating a dead horse. I don't even discuss the shit anymore. However, it doesn't even take very little intelligence to see the trend in his decision-making...i told you a long time ago what he was going to do...and every few months someone posts an article that is right along with what I said... nationalizing resources, suspending the constitution, killing term limits..... etc. He is taking a chop one leg off at a time approach to complete control over the country in all aspects

And the comment about "you act like dude is your wife" was not calling you a name in that sense...my bad if it came out wrong... it was meant to be illustrate how you always come to dude's rescue....you always have an excuse for everything with this dude as if he can do no wrong....

because chavez was democratically elected and he didn't need a contrived catastrophe like 9-11 or the reichstag fire to consolidate power. other than castro, none of those other leaders had cia attempts to destablize their country and overthrow them. that's basically what solidified chavez's grip on power. people should worry more about musharraf and stop bitching about chavez.
 
Last edited:

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Hey 16 post mofo kimshifunk; can you please write in complete sentences!?!?

QueEx
 

kimchifunk

Potential Star
Registered
Hey 16 post mofo kimshifunk; can you please write in complete sentences!?!?

QueEx

hey moderator mofo, every sentence had a subject, verb, and predicate, but i corrected the spelling and specified the pronouns to aid in clarity.
 

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Whatever. This: "because chavez was democratically elected and he didn't need a contrived catastrophe like 9-11 or the reichstag fire to consolidate power" is not a sentence, nevertheless, I think I understand what you're saying: Chavez was democratically elected, therefore, he did not need a contrived catastrophe like 9-11 or the reichstang fire as a means to consolidate power.?.?.?

QueEx
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
because chavez was democratically elected and he didn't need a contrived catastrophe like 9-11 or the reichstag fire to consolidate power. other than castro, none of those other leaders had cia attempts to destablize their country and overthrow them. that's basically what solidified chavez's grip on power. people should worry more about musharraf and stop bitching about chavez.

Know your history man. So was Hitler.... they were all ELECTED....then consolidated power through other means AFTER they got elected by the people...they didn't come into power after a COUP. When don't need to talk about "false flag" etc. It is irrelevant. We are discussing this particular leader and how he is attempting to become an "absolute leader". I've already thoroughly discussed the neo-conservative power grabs in the U.S. in other threads... but none of that shit takes anything away from what Chavez is attempting to pull in Venezuela
 

kimchifunk

Potential Star
Registered
Know your history man. So was Hitler.... they were all ELECTED....then consolidated power through other means AFTER they got elected by the people...

as far as them being elected, i acknowledged as much and addressed the rest here:
he didn't need a contrived catastrophe like 9-11 or the reichstag fire to consolidate power


When don't need to talk about "false flag" etc. It is irrelevant. We are discussing this particular leader and how he is attempting to become an "absolute leader".

if that was true, then you could have cut the comparisons to hitler now couldn't you? the fear factor is precisely how he got the peoples' consent. that makes it far from irrelevant.

I've already thoroughly discussed the neo-conservative power grabs in the U.S. in other threads... but none of that shit takes anything away from what Chavez is attempting to pull in Venezuela

chavez's body count isn't anywhere close to stalin, lenin, or hitler. it was a bad and premature comparison. period. if chavez wanted to murder the opposition, he could have been done that after the first coup attempt and what or who could have stopped him? there is dissent in venezuela and opposition media exists there.
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
as far as them being elected, i acknowledged as much and addressed the rest here:
he didn't need a contrived catastrophe like 9-11 or the reichstag fire to consolidate power

He doesn't even need to do that. He just ratifies the constitution WITHOUT the "false flag". See how easy that was:cool:

It doesn't matter what is contrived in order to secure absolute power..whether it's done through false flags or claiming to be a deity like in ancient times. The FACTS of the matter is that Chavez is consistently pushing policy so that he can rule indefinitely with absolute power.


if that was true, then you could have cut the comparisons to hitler now couldn't you? the fear factor is precisely how he got the peoples' consent. that makes it far from irrelevant.

Maybe you are having a problem of disassociation. The issue is that ..just like Hitler, Stalin, Lenin...etc... he is making a very calculated run on absolute power. A majority of dictators BEGIN as elected leaders and slowly eliminate policies that could even remotely eradicate their power. In that sense, Chavez is in the same league with the road he is taking.




chavez's body count isn't anywhere close to stalin, lenin, or hitler. it was a bad and premature comparison. period. if chavez wanted to murder the opposition, he could have been done that after the first coup attempt and what or who could have stopped him? there is dissent in venezuela and opposition media exists there.

Again..you are clearly struggling with reading comprehension and this response is a misdirection at best. Who in this thread mentioned anything about "body count". The debate was on ONE point: being "elected". As if being elected means that a leader can absolve a system of checks and balances for his own gain. I am talking about the thirst of absolute power and eradicated the constitution and any policies that allow for checks and balances so that you can be a dictator indefinitely. Whether you kill 1 person or 1 million people to do it in irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that Chavez, and his latest "no term limit" policy, is doing anything within his power so ensure that he can rule Venezuela indefinitely...even if he has to bypass the constitution to do so.
 

kimchifunk

Potential Star
Registered
He doesn't even need to do that. He just ratifies the constitution WITHOUT the "false flag". See how easy that was:cool:

wrong. the people vote on it.


It doesn't matter what is contrived in order to secure absolute power..whether it's done through false flags or claiming to be a deity like in ancient times. The FACTS of the matter is that Chavez is consistently pushing policy so that he can rule indefinitely with absolute power.

there are checks and balances there. he is proposing changes to the constitution that have to be approved. so unless you can prove that he is holding a gun to the heads of the other elected representatives, it is a moot point.


Maybe you are having a problem of disassociation. The issue is that ..just like Hitler, Stalin, Lenin...etc... he is making a very calculated run on absolute power. A majority of dictators BEGIN as elected leaders and slowly eliminate policies that could even remotely eradicate their power. In that sense, Chavez is in the same league with the road he is taking.

no, my problem is the errant association of chavez with said leaders and, also, your contention that MOST dictators begin as elected leaders is also flawed. some does not equal most.

from wikipedia:
Modern dictators have usually come to power in times of emergency. Frequently they have seized power by coup d'état, but some, most notably Benito Mussolini in Italy and Adolf Hitler in Germany achieved office as head of government by legal means (election or appointment), and once in office gained additional extraordinary powers. Mainly Latin American, Asian and African nations, especially developing nations, have known many dictatorships, usually by military leaders at the head of a junta, either claiming to constitute a revolution or to reestablish order and stability.



Again..you are clearly struggling with reading comprehension and this response is a misdirection at best. Who in this thread mentioned anything about "body count". The debate was on ONE point: being "elected". As if being elected means that a leader can absolve a system of checks and balances for his own gain.

that is a bad assumption. it is up to the people of venezuela to judge his intent and then decide to agree or disagree to the proposed changes. if the venezuelan people believe that dissolving "checks and balances," as you put it, would help expedite positive reforms within their own country, so be it.

I am talking about the thirst of absolute power and eradicated the constitution and any policies that allow for checks and balances so that you can be a dictator indefinitely. Whether you kill 1 person or 1 million people to do it in irrelevant.

wrong. it matters to the people of venezuela who vote on it. they are more concerned with whether or not chavez is a tyrant.

The fact of the matter is that Chavez, and his latest "no term limit" policy, is doing anything within his power so ensure that he can rule Venezuela indefinitely...even if he has to bypass the constitution to do so.

you just said "within his power" and it is "within his power" to propose and have the people of that country define the extent of that power. if the constitution is changed by the power of the people to allow him to rule indefinitely then who are you, especially a non-resident of venezuela, to say he by-passed the constitution? are we to say the constitution was by-passed to allow women and blacks the right to vote? no. it has been changed 27 times by the will and for the benefit of the people.
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
wrong. the people vote on it.

Exactly. Are you getting the point.... the Germans voted for all those ratifications that Hitler made until they unknowingly surrendered their country over to a dictator.



there are checks and balances there. he is proposing changes to the constitution that have to be approved. so unless you can prove that he is holding a gun to the heads of the other electe representatives, it is a moot point. .

This is the sentiment of an "apologist".. did Hitler hold a gun to the head of the germans...the guns didn't come out until after they surrendered their power.

There are checks and balances there NOW...however, if his legislations continues to pass...the checks and balances will not continue to exist...he is now pushing beyond nationalization of industry and now looking to directly control the central banks...and now he is attempting to eliminate term limits so that he can rule indefinitely. The painting is on the wall whether you admit to it being there or not.

Do you understand what makes a point "moot"? There is a logical framework used to justify the use of that term. Your reply didn't comply.


no, my problem is the errant association of chavez with said leaders and, also, your contention that MOST dictators begin as elected leaders is also flawed. some does not equal most.

The associate is not fallacious. Chavez, as well as the others I mentioned, were all elected heads of states..who then later went on to claim absolute power.

Chavez is also an elected head of state...who is showing through his legislation that he wants indefinite and absolute power over his country. The means used are irrelevant. The end-game is the same...absolutism.

Most dictators in modern times come to power as elected officials....even more so now during the last several decades.







that is a bad assumption. it is up to the people of venezuela to judge his intent and then decide to agree or disagree to the proposed changes. if the venezuelan people believe that dissolving "checks and balances," as you put it, would help expedite positive reforms within their own country, so be it.

The elimination of checks and balances is not something in the real of "relativism". If you have even a rudimentary understanding of philosophy, I don't need to explain that. That is judged by the policy. The policy he is promoting speaks for itself. It doesn't matter if one person or 1 billion people think it qualifies as so. There is no relativism or dependency of "large numbers" that has any effect on the fact of whether a policy eliminates checks and balances. If a policy is proposed that in effect thwarts a system that previously relied on several layers of recourse to determine what is lawful or not, it is working against checks and balances...


wrong. it matters to the people of venezuela who vote on it. they are more concerned with whether or not chavez is a tyrant.

You can't be that dense..you can't be. We are taking about semantics...The semantics of absolute power...why do you keep running to relativistic theory to support your argument when we are speaking on objective reality. What someone does with that power is another argument all together.

Whether you kill people or not does not determine whether or not you are a dictator. It may be a quality of "some dictators", but by definition, you do not need to be a "killer" to qualify. Do you understand what a dictator is by definition? Then tell whether the murder count matters?:smh::smh:

you just said "within his power" and it is "within his power" to propose and have the people of that country define the extent of that power. if the constitution is changed by the power of the people to allow him to rule indefinitely then who are you, especially a non-resident of venezuela, to say he by-passed the constitution? are we to say the constitution was by-passed to allow women and blacks the right to vote? no. it has been changed 27 times by the will and for the benefit of the people.

He is attempting to eradicate checks and balances within the system for his own political gain. Is the constitution being modified to "help the people"? A damn 2 year old knows the only reason this is being proposed for modification is to further Chavez' power play in Venezuela..otherwise..what is the point of it?

The modification is not the problem... the reason for the modification is the problem and the result of the modification is an even further problem...
 
Last edited:

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
but anyway brah... I'm on vacation... I'm done with this thread for a while..I've already chopped it up enough in here..

be easy...will catch the next events/updates in this thread ..peace..

I'm going to ask you one question though...that will put you in a bit of a conundrum as you can't have your cake and eat it too... that relativistic talks leaves you with a contradiction.

What would you do or what would be your opinion if Bush was attempting to push through legislation that eliminated term-limits so that he could attempt to rule indefinitely?
 
Last edited:

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Being on vacation is not an acceptable excuse for ending a good discussion! lol
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
Being on vacation is not an acceptable excuse for ending a good discussion! lol

lol.. Man.. I'm in Istanbul...the only reason I'm online is because it's kind of cold tonight here...

I need to check back in on the politics board more often..I've probably missed all types of gems dropped in here...been traveling the last month through Africa, Europe, and the Middle East so haven't been online as much..


I will probably double-post a thread in the main board and in here about Africa soon through...with pics..and some interesting thoughts about the whole China-Africa thing.....

The recent barrage of investments by China in Africa was a BIG topic while I was there.... some Africans even went as far as saying that Africans only "respond to the whip and are lazy".... meaning that Africans always need a "master" and China is going to be the new one... those were not my words... those were the words of a South African when I was in Kruger Park..
 

Makkonnen

The Quizatz Haderach
BGOL Investor
How was it erroneous? You said he was "democratically elected"? The others on the list were elected by their people as well..nothing erroneous about the comparison at all.


When was Castro elected? Like I said bruh - ERRONEOUS
http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/1/newsid_2479000/2479867.stm

Castro didn't come to power via any election. He came to power via armed struggle and stayed there. He said he'd have elections at first but always pushed it back. Clearly Chavez has not duplicated any of the actions of the persons you posted and that list is pretty incindiary considering some of those guys killed millions of people.




The point you made about him initially being elected is a moot point.

Initially? The only reason he is in power is because of his being democratically elected in fair elections right? How can you claim he is a dictator/war criminal to be if he isn't doing anything undemocratic? Hardly a moot point since elections aren't abolished, he hasn't blown up parliament or had a kristallnacht or setup a congress of soviets.


The point is about this thirst for absolute power and reshaping his country's laws in order to accomplish that goal. In that capacity, he is equal to everyone on that list in his aspirations.

wtf? Terrible leap. What nations do not reshape their laws to suit themselves? I'm not familiar with such static systems. What evidence do you have to backup your claims about his Hitleresque thirst for power? Youre wylin out. Break it down if you have proof otherwise how can anyone take shit like that seriously? :lol: You sure you arent talking about Pol Pot instead of Hugo Chavez?


I'm not beating a dead horse. I don't even discuss the shit anymore.
You are beating a dead horse imo because you are still discussing it and you aren't the first person to forward this argument about a power grab. Your friend(sarcasm) GW and his folks often say the same shit about him.

However, it doesn't even take very little intelligence to see the trend in his decision-making...i told you a long time ago what he was going to do...and every few months someone posts an article that is right along with what I said... nationalizing resources, suspending the constitution, killing term limits..... etc. He is taking a chop one leg off at a time approach to complete control over the country in all aspects


When did Chavez suspend the constitution???????????? That's a newsflash I surely missed.
You have some links for that? Google draws a blank. How did he slip that one by?

Hold up. If he suspended the constitution why would he pursue changing laws democratically? Doesn't make sense. In his buckwild thirst for power wouldnt he just do what he wants since his Hitler like dictator mentality would pretty much control him right?

:lol:

Like I said Khaddaffi. He's not the first indigenous leader to nationalize resources after the removal of colonial rulers or their descendants.


And the comment about "you act like dude is your wife" was not calling you a name in that sense...my bad if it came out wrong... it was meant to be illustrate how you always come to dude's rescue....you always have an excuse for everything with this dude as if he can do no wrong....

Im not saying he can do no wrong. I dont like Khadaffi and he literally is the South American Khadaffi down the line except he didnt come to power in a coup because he failed in that attempt.
Im sure he does plenty of shit I couldnt stomach morally. It goes with the job. He's attempting to rebuild his nation after centuries of colonial oppression- thats a dirty fucked up job. He's a better leader than anyone I see in office in my country so maybe thats why my standards are lower ;)

He may be all the things you say, but you merely saying it is so does not make it so. I could easily see him grabbing all power if he was confronted militarily by the US or faced with some other great threat so I dont think youre nuts in your analysis. I just dont see the majority of his nation worse off under his bullshit oppression(if it manifests itself) than I do under the old style.
 

Makkonnen

The Quizatz Haderach
BGOL Investor
but anyway brah... I'm on vacation... I'm done with this thread for a while..I've already chopped it up enough in here..

be easy...will catch the next events/updates in this thread ..peace..

I'm going to ask you one question though...that will put you in a bit of a conundrum as you can't have your cake and eat it too... that relativistic talks leaves you with a contradiction.

What would you do or what would be your opinion if Bush was attempting to push through legislation that eliminated term-limits so that he could attempt to rule indefinitely?
id do what im already planning on doing regardless of what bush does. why does he need to be in power? only two families have led this nation* since 1988. Im already doing what I'd be doing if Bush changed term limits because shit is already that bad here.

these dudes are publicly saying its cool to torture people. If that aint the wrong writing on the wall I dont know what is.

Have a good safe trip. Be on point shit gets blown up a few times a year round there.
 

Makkonnen

The Quizatz Haderach
BGOL Investor
lol.. Man.. I'm in Istanbul...the only reason I'm online is because it's kind of cold tonight here...

I need to check back in on the politics board more often..I've probably missed all types of gems dropped in here...been traveling the last month through Africa, Europe, and the Middle East so haven't been online as much..


I will probably double-post a thread in the main board and in here about Africa soon through...with pics..and some interesting thoughts about the whole China-Africa thing.....

The recent barrage of investments by China in Africa was a BIG topic while I was there.... some Africans even went as far as saying that Africans only "respond to the whip and are lazy".... meaning that Africans always need a "master" and China is going to be the new one... those were not my words... those were the words of a South African when I was in Kruger Park..
an afrikaaner's words? or a black man's?

china is getting over in africa with their bootleg IMF strategy
its too bad the leadership is so fucked up and goes for that bs
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
id do what im already planning on doing regardless of what bush does. why does he need to be in power? only two families have led this nation* since 1988. Im already doing what I'd be doing if Bush changed term limits because shit is already that bad here.

these dudes are publicly saying its cool to torture people. If that aint the wrong writing on the wall I dont know what is.

Have a good safe trip. Be on point shit gets blown up a few times a year round there.

That question wasn't for you... it was for the other dude because of something he wrote in another person
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
an afrikaaner's words? or a black man's?

china is getting over in africa with their bootleg IMF strategy
its too bad the leadership is so fucked up and goes for that bs

It was a black man's word.. ... but as with anything...the word of one person does not represent the sentiment of all black South African's and even he said his friends think he is too harsh... but he gave some interesting perspectives.....we kicked it hard over some brews..he was dropping science about the Europeans taking over the South and West... the... Arabs taking over the north...etc.....he had some interesting perspectives... I'm going to make that post though and elaborate on his sentiments and the sentiments of other Africans as well...
 
Last edited:
Top