Chavez....Mugabe is a "freedom fighter"

[windansea]

Chavez hails visiting Mugabe



Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez receives his Zimbabwean counterpart Robert Mugabe at the presidential palace in Caracas.
(Egilda Gomez, Miraflores Press, AP)

Caracas, Venezuela - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez praised Zimbabwe's embattled President Robert Mugabe as a "freedom fighter," bestowing the visiting African leader with a replica of South American independence hero Simon Bolivar's sword.

"I give you a replica of liberator Simon Bolivar's sword," Chavez said Thursday after the two leaders signed an energy co-operation agreement.

"For you, who like Bolivar, took up arms to liberate your people. For you, who like Bolivar, are and will always be a true freedom fighter," Chavez said. "He continues, alongside his people, to confront the pretensions of new imperialists."

Mugabe, who was in Venezuela for the February 27-28 summit of the G-15 group of developing nations, grinned as he unsheathed the sword and swung it about. Mugabe came to power in 1980 after a seven-year bush war for black rule forced a peace conference and British-supervised elections in Zimbabwe, then known as Rhodesia.

http://www.news24.com/News24/Africa/Zimbabwe/0,,2-11-259_1490385,00.ht ...

[KissMyAsscroft]

1. Well, there goes any respect I had for Chavez...

nt

[Mairead]

39. Why? Would you prefer Zimbabwe had stayed Rhodesia?

Yes, Mugabe is scum. But at least he's home-grown scum. That might not be worth much (and isn't) but it's worth something.

[WoodrowFan]

43. so's Bush

Bush is homegrown. Thugs and dictators don't get points for being homegrown. Are you saying there are no native-born leaders in Zimbabwae that are not would-be dictators??

[Rockholm]

51. Home Grown Scrum Is The Worst!

Say what you will about Rhodesia/Zimbabwe, but the country was not in near anarchy when there was colonial rule. Colonial rule did need to end. That being said, there was a right way and a wrong way to embrace, accept, and prosper under change. Sadly, Zimbabwe has not met any potential. The racist regime of Mugabe not only takes away and destroys the white farms, but puts hundreds of thousands of black farm workers out of work. I once read that a majority of these folks being given farms have no idea how to farm. It is a horrible situation that is only getting worse.

[9215]

72. Back it up with sources. Are the people worse

of than they were before? That is the million dollar question. "You once read" doesn't cut it.

[Rockholm]

79. Here is a link.....

http://www.justiceforagriculture.com/landblunder.shtml

[Mairead]

87. Did you actually LOOK at that site??

A little poem from that site:

BELOVED FARMERS.......A TRIBUTE

Beloved farmers of Zimbabwe
We will always honour you
Though they seek to crucify you
Your courage keeps on shining through.

You built homes and schools and clinics,
Created jobs for all the Hands;
From virgin bush and rough beginnings
You've developed rich and verdant lands.

Courageous farmers of Zimbabwe
They say you stole their land away:
Instead you used those raw ingredients
To bake a cake from unused clay.

Of those ingredients there are a-plentry
For all to make their special cake;
But they aren't prepared themselves to bake it:
It's yours, complete, they wish to take.

Beloved farmers of Zimbabwe
Who will feed the masses now?
Now They beat and persecute you...
Who will safely guide the plough?

Who'll protect the trees and wildlife
From the cruel and callous hand?
Who will plant and feed and nurture
The farms of this most glorious Land?

Who'll employ those many workers
Who're now filled with such deep despair?
Who'll patch them, feed them, pay them all
If you are gone, no longer there?

Beloved farmers of Zimbabwe
Take heart, and keep your heads held high;
No man can steal your honour from you...
That special spark will never die!

(edit) Oh, and I thought the 'unused clay' part was particularly good. A real echo of 'a land without people for a people without a land'. Nothing self-serving there at all, nope, move along.

[WillyBrandt]

2. Two sorry thugs

Bush's dislike of Chavez doesn't give him any worth. He's a lowlife.

Mugabe--he destroyed a nation and its future.

[Leilani]

18. Mugabe started off good

& now his country is a disaster.

So much for Chavez's opinion of people!

[Aidoneus]

20. Not exactly

He was the same person, just the pro-business/pro-West ruler. Now that he's not, and doing something that's actually quite decent (along with some other things), a dossier is suddenly discovered on him and repeated endlessly. That's how this game works, and it's silly that so many take it at face value.

[Mairead]

40. Your dislike of Chavez doesn't make him lowlife.

Quite the opposite, really.

[bemildred]

3. Your link is broke. nt

[lostnfound]

36. broken link, broken record..what's the difference? nt

[AP]

4. Neoliberals vs anti-neoliberals. Which side are you on?

[windansea]

93. interesting info here

The usual understanding of anarchism as a left wing ideology does not take into account the neo-liberal "anarchism" championed by the likes of Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and America's Libertarian Party, which couples law of the jungle right-wing economics with liberal positions on most social issues. Often their libertarian impulses stop short of opposition to strong law and order positions, and are more economic in substance (ie no taxes) so they are not as extremely libertarian as they are extremely right wing. On the other hand, the classical libertarian collectivism of anarcho-syndicalism ( libertarian socialism) belongs in the bottom left hand corner.

In our home page we demolished the myth that authoritarianism is necessarily "right wing", with the examples of Robert Mugabe, Pol Pot and Stalin. Similarly Hitler, on an economic scale, was not an extreme right-winger. His economic policies were broadly Keynesian, and to the left of some of today's Labour parties. If you could get Hitler and Stalin to sit down together and avoid economics, the two diehard authoritarians would find plenty of common ground.

A Word about Neo-cons and Neo-libs
U.S.neo-conservatives, with their commitment to high military spending and the global assertion of national values, tend to be more authoritarian than hard right. By contrast, neo-liberals, opposed to such moral leadership and, more especially, the ensuing demands on the tax payer, belong to a further right but less authoritarian region. Paradoxically, the "free market", in neo-con parlance, also allows for the large-scale subsidy of the military-industrial complex, a considerable degree of corporate welfare, and protectionism when deemed in the national interest. These are viewed by neo-libs as impediments to the unfettered market forces that they champion.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

119. Dude, you're breaking up - I'm through wasting my time!

Jeez your posts suck!

AP - you hearing this crap?

[AP]

125. I stopped reading at the chart.

I don't need a chart like that to tell me about politics.

[ugarte]

5. The enemy of my enemy is my friend

Both these guys need all the 'friends' they can get.

[AP]

6. Domination of the north

From the article:

"Earlier, Mugabe thanked his "brother President Chavez" for inviting him to Venezuela and stressed the importance of poor countries co-operating to build "integrated, strong" economies "able to resist the dominance of the North"."

[windansea]

7. brother Chavez....

another "freedom fighter" for the people!!!

[AP]

8. We’re making the world safe for capitalism

Here we are, seeking out the reds
Trying to keep the communists in order
Just remember when you’re sleeping in your beds
They’re only two days drive from the texas border

How can a country large as ours
Be scared of such a threat
Well if they won’t work for us
They’re against us you can bet
They may be sovereign countries
But you folks at home forget
That they all want what we’ve got
But they don’t know it yet

We’re making the world safe for capitalism

Here we come with our candy and our guns
And our corporate muscle marches in behind us
For freedom’s just another world for nothing left to sell
And if you want narcotics we can get you those as well

We help the multi-nationals
When they cry out protect us
The locals scream and shout a bit
But we don’t let that affect us
We’re here to lend a helping hand
In case they don’t elect us
How dare they buy our products
Yet still they don’t respect us

We’re making the world safe for capitalism

If you thought the army
Was here protecting people like yourself
I’ve some news for you
We’re here to defend wealth
Away with nuns and bishops
The good lord will help those that help themselves
I’ve some news for you
We’re here to defend wealth

We’re making the world safe for capitalism

[WillyBrandt]

9. How to Kill a Country

By Samantha Powers, who wrote "A Problem From Hell: America in the Age of Genocide"

About Mugabe. Our evils do not absolve the evils of others, even those we term rivals or enemies.

http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/news/opeds/2003/power_kill_country_am_1203.htm

[AP]

11. We don't care about what the media doesn't look at.

And the media has not looked honestly at the issue of land reform.

I'm waiting for some honest reporters to talk about what this is really about.

I'm also waiting for analysis of Venezuela, Haiti and Zimbabwe by the press to be framed within the paradigm of neoliberalism vs anti-neoliberalism. When they finally do that, Americans will be informed about the real issues at stake.

[WillyBrandt]

14. What nonsense!

Mugabe claims it's about land reform, but that's a pretext believed by only the most gullible foreigners. It's simply a matter of appropriating farms and giving it to the Mugabe goons. His side amasses more power, the great majority get nothing, food production plummets, and the opposition is attacked (often physically) by the Zanu thugs.

Calling this heroism, or a movement for justice is simply to bury your head in words and ignore the earthly misery and crookedness of what is happening.

Bah. Framing this as some challenge to neoliberalism--Mugabe is a dictator and thug who ruined a country with great potential. There are many times to bash the views of, say, The Economist, but this is not one of them. Mugabe is a crooked old brutal dictator who fucked his country up.

(Chavez is a more complicated case, I'll grant you that. But Mugabe is no good at all.)

[AP]

15. And I think THAT'S nonsense.

It is about land reform. It's about money, and that's where the money was for the west, and nobody cared about Mugabe until he threatened western profits, and I don't know where you're getting your information about thihs, because the truth is not coming from the media.

[WillyBrandt]

16. Land Reform is just a false pretext

Noble words are being used by an ignoble man, and Zimbabweans are dying and suffering for nothing

[AP]

17. They're not words. They finally held everyone to the Lancaster agreement

and Zimbabweans were dying and suffering because of the institutional poverty caused by the theft of land and the concentration of ownership in the hands of corporations which used it to grow tobacco for Europe, the profits of which went into Swiss bank accounts.

Now, after the inevitable displacement during transition, they will be much better off then they ever would have been, thanks to land reform.

Don't you see that the only reason the west hates Mugabe is because land reform will work?

This, to me, is political economics 101, and I find it stunning that so many people don't get it.

It's too obvious.

[Leilani]

19. That's silly

The people were not starving until Mugabe appropiated the land & gave it to his supporters.

They used to EXPORT food; now they are starving.

[Aidoneus]

21. They used to export tobacco to Europe

at big profits for European businesses. Now they're growing maize and other food crops that stay in Zimbabwe.

Whatever happened to the 12mil that were supposed to have died by last spring? (or was that the year before that?)

[dpibel]

23. Does the word "drought" ring any bells?

They haven't been getting much rain for a few years in that whole area of Africa. You wanna blame Mugabe for food shortages in Zambia and Namibia?

Something like 30,000 people have been given parcels of land. That Mugabe guy's got a lot of close personal friends.

[Aussie_Hillbilly]

22. Sadly

you are right, Willy. He was a freedom fighter once, but now he is just another tyrant. Refusing NGOs permission to distribute food aid in areas that vote Movement for Democratic Change... And stealing it for his supporters. After that, I don't see how anyone in the Left can support him.

http://malawihere.com/viewnews.asp?id=258&recnum=1770&catid=

He is an enemy of neoliberalism, but so are Bin Laden and Kim Jong-il.

[AP]

74. OBL is not an enemy of neoliberalism. He's the same side of the oligopoly

coin. He's just like Bush -- a couple of super rich guys fighting for imense power for their clans. He's is definitely fighting to spread wealth down and out. He's fighting to concentrate it in a different set of very powerful hands.

[lostnfound]

86. was that a typo, AP?

Did you mean "He's definitely NOT fighting to spread wealth down and out." ?

[AP]

107. OBL is fighting to concentrate wealth at the top, just like Bush.

His top is a different top than Bush's, but it's the other side of the same coin of fascism that Bush is rolling over his knuckles, and tossing in the air.

Notice the neighborhoods that were victims of the Spaning bombing. Working class neighborhoods.

(in other words, yes, that was a typo)

[cprise]

124. Many on the Left are suspending judgement

...in the absense of information.

Don't you think that just MAYBE there is a sharp demographic divide between his supporters and the opposition?

Or put another way, why should a Democratic president take tax money from Republicans and give all the welfare aid to Democrats. Never mind that Democrats tended to be much poorer than Republicans... it's blatant discrimination right???

[Mairead]

41. The people seem to think so.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

44. Kick!!! n/t

[rpannier]

10. Disappointed

I've always held a certain admiration for Chavez. He stood up to the United States and the elites in Venezuela. Mugabe on the otherhand, is a psychotic, who has brutalized his nation and any opposition to his incompetant rule. It disappoints me to hear Chavez call Mugabe a "Freedom Fighter." Unless, he is using the Ronald Reagan dictionary definition of freedom fighter.

[AP]

12. Jeezus. If you've been paying attention to what I've been saying about

neoliberalism and neocolonialism, you would have seen this one coming.

If you're for it, you're going to be on the other side of the line that Aristide, Mugabe and Chavez are on.

And this is the defining issue of our time.

I just have to say that if you're surprised by this, you haven't been paying attention to anything that has been going on in VZ, Haiti, Zimbabwe, and by extenstion, Nepal, Argentina, the Phillipines, and in every other former colony and third world country Wall St has been trying to rip off for the past 30 or so years.

[ShaneGR]

29. Jesus AP, so now you're for Mugabe???

The same guy who sets up camps to train youths how to torture politcal opponents? A leader who has limited the free press? Seized land from rightful property owners?

You can keep that neoliberalism.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

32. Do you have first-hand information on this subject, or are you just...

...getting your info from the mainstream press?

[ShaneGR]

71. Here

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/03/22/1047749994019.html

Zimbabwe's Movement for Democratic Change yesterday vowed to escalate mass action to force President Robert Mugabe's government to reform or leave office as new and horrifying details of young girls being held in "rape camps" emerged.

A two-day national strike late last week was the biggest protest for more than two years against Mr Mugabe's 23-year rule, closing factories, shops, banks and other businesses in protest at alleged human rights abuses and the economic decline.

As the strike ended, reports emerged of rape being used as a political weapon by the youth militia and other groups allied to the country's ruling party, said human rights workers and church groups.

Investigations reveal allegations of politically motivated rape against opposition supporters.

According to victims' testimony, Mr Mugabe's militia are also forcing young women to be their concubines.

Zimbabwe's human rights forum reports seven cases of politically motivated rape last year, as well as 58 murders and 1061 cases of torture. But the reported rapes, verified by medical examinations and interviews, are just the tip of the iceberg, human rights workers say.

"There is a serious problem of political rape in Zimbabwe," said Tony Reeler, human rights defender for the Institute for Democratic Alternatives for Southern Africa. "The documented cases are low, but there is considerable stigma and fear about reporting rape. From enormous anecdotal evidence we know the number is much higher.

"The victims are mostly young females, relatively uneducated, poor, rural, the most vulnerable members of society. Many urgently require antiretrovirals for HIV infection."

The trauma of rape is evident in the dull gaze of Sithulisiwe, 21. For eight months she was held captive at a "youth camp" for Mr Mugabe's ruling Zanu-PF party, where, she says, she was repeatedly gang raped and tortured. She said she was abducted in December 2001 and marched to a camp in a Bulawayo suburb.

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/02/19/france.mugabe /


Zimbabwe's torture training camps

President Robert Mugabe's government has set up secret camps across the country in which thousands of youths are taught how to torture and kill, the BBC has learned.

The Zimbabwean government says the camps are job training centres, but those who have escaped say they are part of a brutal plan to keep Mugabe in power.

<snip>

In accounts gathered by BBC Panorama from dozens of youths, it appears that for many of them the training in the camps begins with rape.

Debbie said she was raped three times on the first night, but claimed that the abuse didn't stop then.

<snip>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/3493958.stm

----

Out of Africa

<snip>

In a keynote address that opened an international book fair, President Mugabe justified his government’s decision to exclude a gay rights group from the fair, saying, “If we accept homosexuality as a right, as is being argued by the association of sodomists and sexual perverts, what moral fiber shall our society ever have to deny organized drug addicts, or even those given to bestiality, the rights they might claim and allege they possess under the rubrics of ‘individual freedom’ and ‘human rights’?”

<snip>

In Washington, D.C., U.S. representatives Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) organized 70 other members of Congress to sign a letter of protest to President Mugabe. “We are distressed to read of your attack on people who are gay and lesbian,” the letter began. A State Department official said on August 7 that there was a “possibility” that the Clinton administration would contact the Zimbabwean government over the issue.

<snip>

The party line against homosexuality in Zimbabwe is that being gay is “un-African” and a white contamination of black society. But GALZ members argue that in many cases black Zimbabweans face greater cultural and economic hurdles to coming out than do whites—which creates a perception that being gay is a white thing. While the membership of GALZ originally was mostly white, in a country where whites account for only about 11% of the population, today about half of the group’s 220 members are black.

<snip>

http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/801/801_mugabe_689.asp

-----

Zimbabwe’s Fred Phelps

Robert Mugabe has a new problem. Well-known for his crusade against legal rights for gay men and lesbians in his country, the president of Zimbabwe is now taking on Tony Blair, saying the British prime minister has turned Great Britain into a “United gay Kingdom.”

At a November meeting of commonwealth leaders in South Africa, Mugabe flew into a rage. He accused Blair of organizing the October 30 London protest in which gay activists attempted a citizen’s arrest of Mugabe as he was leaving his hotel. Blair has “three homosexuals in his cabinet,” Mugabe said, fuming. “People who are homosexuals are queer because they think differently.”

<snip>

http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/801/801_mugabe.asp

-------

Former Zimbabwe leader denied hero's burial

Zimbabwe's government has refused a hero's burial to the country's first black president, Canaan Sodindo Banana, citing his conviction for homosexual offenses, officials said Tuesday. President Robert Mugabe's elite policymaking body, the 30-member politburo, decided Monday that Banana would not receive a state funeral at Hero's Acre cemetery outside the capital, Harare. The politburo "could not accord Banana hero status as a matter of principle," spokesman Nathan Shamuyarira told state radio. Banana set a "bad example to youth" with his 1998 conviction for homosexual offenses against junior statehouse staff, Shamuyarira said.

<snip>

http://www.advocate.com/new_news.asp?id=10523&sd=11/19/03

[JohnLocke]

97. Nice comeback.

:eyes:

[WoodrowFan]

35. it ain't neoliberalism

it's old fashioned far-leftism, any abuse by the non-American left gets an automatic pass.

[AP]

75. This isn't a left-right battle. It's neoliberalism vs antineoliberalism.

It's a question of whether the wealth and assets of a nation flow to the west or circulate within a country to build up wealth in the country.

You can never even get to the question fo whether you can have a liberal democracy UNTIL you have some power in the middle class.

Don't people see this is the political issue of this century. In the US we're LOSING the middle class. All our power and wealth is shifting to the top. In VZ and Haiti and Zimbabwe, they're just trying to create one by flowing wealth and power down to the people, through better wages for work (Haiti), education and local government, financed by oil money (VZ), and land ownership by more people in an agrarian society (Zimbabwe).

You can NEVER get to the question of liberalism until you do these things.

And were going to learn that, in America, without these things, it won't matter if we have two parties, because we're not going to have enough power to tell our government not to act like fascists.

[rinsd]

89. Agree

"it's old fashioned far-leftism, any abuse by the non-American left gets an automatic pass."

Yup...I don't think Chavez is as bad as Mugabe. Mugabe is doing what dictators have done since the end of WWII cast yourself in either a friend of the US(ie capitalist or anti-communist) or give the people a pittance while taking away their actual rights. Sad, I saw here once some saying healthcare was more important than free speech while arguing with someone about Cuba.

Chavez is what he is, a politician in a contentious country trying to hold onto his power through democratic means. I don't agree with him but hey it's not my country.

[Mairead]

62. "rightful property owners"?

You mean the White Europeans whose incomer ancestors stole the land and gave themselves title to it? That kind of 'rightful'?

[ShaneGR]

70. So should EVERY american give up his land to the Indians?

Seizing peoples land makes about zero sense.

[AP]

76. Sgr, psst, it wasn't seized. The farm owners agreed 20 years ago they'd

give it back -- the Lancaster Agreement. These were the last 500 farms (corporate farmers, controlling something like 28% of the land in Zimbabwe, which exploited cheap labor to grow tobacco, which the sold in Europe, which was also where their bank accounts were) and they thought someone would start a coup, or the CIA would finance an election win for the MDC before they'd be held to their word.

You really need to not let emotion and the media guide your feelings about this issue.

It's probably time for you to do a little research, and, by research, I don't mean whatch Indianna Jones. I mean, you need to figure out the truth of what's going on in the world, and what neoliberalism is all about.

[muriel_volestrangler]

78. Why do you think the Lancaster House Agreement says that?

It does not. It said there couldn't be any seizure of land in the first 10 years; after that, the constitution was changed to allow compulsory purchase of under-utilised land, or oversized farms (but with fair compensation). It wasn't until Mugabe's government passed laws in 2000 (after the population rejected having them written into the constitution) saying land could be taken without compensation that the complaints started. The laws said that Britain had to pay the compensation instead; unsurprisingly Britain said it wasn't up to Mugabe to spend British money.

[AP]

83. It's the framework within which farmers agreed they

didn't have good chain in title. It gave them breathing room, and they knew that the breathing room would end.

It says no seizure in first ten years? So they didn't agree there'd never be seizures?

If YOU, muriel, bought a house getting title from the person who stole it with violence, and you had to give it back to the person who had title before that, do you think you should be able to sue the government or sue the person who stole it?

[muriel_volestrangler]

85. Show me where they agreed they didn't have a good claim

The seizures after the 10 years had to be compensated by the Zimbabwean government - it was in the constitution.
I don't expect property in various ex-colonial countries to be seized without compensation (or Britain, for that matter, when the land was seized by kings and barons); that goes for Zimbabwe, South Africa, Canada or the USA.

If Mugabe had been giving the land to common Zimbabwean farmers, instead of his supporters, then Britain would have been willing to negotiate a new agreement where they did help with the compensation.

However, I'm glad to see you say you're not for Mugabe.

[AP]

108. When they got to keep the farms another ten years that WAS compensation.

Do you know how much money they made off those farms and from the labor that was so cheap because the act of stealing land creates an impoverished underclass?

They go their compensation. And that was the point of that agreement. It was satisfied in spirit, and evicition after 20 years of making so much money unfairly was probably better treatment than they would have gotten in any American or British court if this were a personal dispute based on similar facts.

Britain's problem, as I understand it, wasn't that they didn't want to compensate the farmers because of who was getting the land. IIRC, it was because the farmers were being overly demanding. Perhaps you could fill in the details with a cite.

[muriel_volestrangler]

112. Cite for the British objections

Blair: It is a decision for him as to whether he wants Zimbabwe to leave the Commonwealth, but what is important for the Commonwealth is to say to Mr. Mugabe, that his behavior in Zimbabwe is totally unacceptable, that until he complies with democracy, human rights, proper governance, Zimbabwe should remain suspended from the Commonwealth. And that land reform in Zimbabwe, everyone accepts that that should happen. Britain has set aside money to help it happen, but it should happen through the United Nations program, not in a way that ends up abusing the rule of law and putting money in the pockets of Mugabe's henchmen.

http://www.britainusa.com/sections/articles_show.asp?SarticleType=1&Article_ID=4523&i=113

[AP]

114. I'm not sure if that answers the question.

And you didn't answer my question. Do you think they should get 20 years of easy profits and then also get compensated even more?

Talk about having your cake and eating it too.

[muriel_volestrangler]

116. It seems to answer it perfectly to me

perhaps you could expand on your problems with it.

As far as the compensation question goes - no, I wouldn't agree that 20 years ownership is necessarily just compensation. The profits aren't necessarily easy - if they were, the takeover by the new black farmers would have been more productive.

[AP]

122. Firstly, Stiglitz's most recent research on the economics of information

would suggest that you can't neccessarily trust the governments explanation for why they do things, I'm not sure if this statement explains why the British wouldn't pay the farmers.

The profits WERE easy. That's why they fought so hard not to give back the land. They sold high profit margin products on the European market for prices that had incredibly law costs of production (cheap land and cheap labor).

Comparing productivity of corporate farmers and subsistence farmers is comparing apples and oranges. However, are you aware that subsistence maize farming is the most productive type of farming in terms of energy input and mass output? It may not be productive in terms of making money (because you're not selling the product to western markets for a huge markup), but it's productive in terms of what you produce (and in terms of making a real difference in people's lives).

So, inevitabley, the new owners will be more productive than the corporate owners. Will that change your minds.

And back to what I was saying before: NO WESTERN COURT WOULD EVER let these farmers have 10-20 years of hostile possession AND compensate them for the value of the land. In fact, most courts would not only return the land, but also compel a payment for all or part of the rental value, and/or the actual profits from use of the land.

These corporate farmers were lucky to get the free ride that they got, and if you pushed them to tell the truth, they, and their accountants and their lawyers and their business managers would probably all admit that, not only did they calculate into their profit projections and business plans the likelihood of compelled transfer, but that they all made a lot of money well they had the land.

It amazes me that people want to romanticize what these sophistacted, lawyered-up, well-capitalized business have experienced. Those images of the poor victims of reverse discrimination are just lies that were invented in the board rooms of expensive PR firms and planted in pro-neoliberal western media, and repeated mindlessly on internet discussion boards. It's all so far from the truth.

[cprise]

126. Hard work is no excuse

As for experience, did the outgoing farmers train the new ones?

[Mairead]

77. The "Indians" certainly might think so.

And, hadn't our European ancestors done such a thorough job of genocide, they might be able to enforce it, too. It's only luck for the Europeans that the American aboriginal population preferred to die rather than be enslaved.

Why don't you spend some time thinking about justice instead of playing for points?

[noiretextatique]

80. YES, that's EXACTLY what they mean

otherwise, americans whites might have to give up property too, as you see per the post below. my family never did get those forty acres and a mule...

[ButterflyBlood]

110. So you trust Mugabe is doing this fairly

and not going after whites who obtained land legitimately?

sorry, but I don't put much faith in a guy who sets up camps to rape teenage girls as part of "training" to do things correctly.

[AP]

123. Huh? I don't even undrestand the question. What do these training camps

have to do with land reform.

If you have a problem with the process by which the land was transferred, make it.

Your argument is like saying, I don't trust FDR's WPA because of the Japanese internment camps.

You thought the WPA was a good thing, right?

[AP]

73. It amazes me how little people know about what goes on abroad.

I'm not for Mugabe, but I'm for land reform in a big way.

The archives are full of explanations of why this is all about land reform, and what's a stake for the west, and why it's going to work, and why that's a threat to American corporations.

Are you familiar with neoliberalism, sgr2?

[bemildred]

13. Throw this in the mix.

All phasers on stun, Scotty.

I am enormously impressed by Chavez, his integrity and his belief in his people

I absolutely agree with Ali Durmus. I have been following the progress of Hugo Chavez and the people of Venezuela more or less from
Mr. Chavez' election as President. I am enormously impressed by Chavez, his integrity and his belief in, and reliance on, his own people.

Of the many struggles for freedom for, and dignity of, the oppressed peoples all around the world, Hugo Chavez has been ... and thanks to
his people ... continues to be a great example for people all around the world.

Chavez, like Fidel Castro, Robert Mugabe and a handful of others -- let's not forget Kemal Ataturk -- has fought imperialism for the exclusive benefit of
the people who populate this globe.

Of course the rich will complain and conspire to subvert -- they have everything to lose! -- but why should we worry about them? Like my
own white compadres in South Africa all they have to do is realize they have to accept the dignity and value inherent in all of us. And if
they refuse, they will pay the price of humiliation and defeat.

Vheadline (Horribly biased pro-Chavez News site)

[arcos]

24. I'm very disappointed too...

I've never liked Chávez much, but lately I've been warming up to him thanks to some fellow DUers... but this is a MAJOR disappointment. Mugabe is an ass!

[Demnocrat]

25. Chavez is a good man. The dissenters need to shut up and bow down!!!!

:mad: :mad: :mad:

[leftistagitator]

30. So, calling posters communists for supporting Chavez, eh?

I bet you last a long time...

[notbush]

26. Mugabe & Chavez are both

thugs that no US politician in his or her right mind supports.
I wish the coup , of what ever it was, a few months ago had ridded us of him.
Two thugs that won't go away quietly into the night.....

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

34. Wrong

you support the Oligarchy.

[WoodrowFan]

37. see EVERYTHING in B&W?

can't someone object to oppression by the right AND by the left???

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

42. No I don't and yes they can

But I have my opinion on Chavez.
I know nothing about Mugabe, however.

That's all.

[WoodrowFan]

48. no kidding. (NT)

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

53. what are you getting at?

I wonder

[kodi]

27. mugabe is a gangster

plain and simple.

he stole the first election from joshua nkomo and never looked back.

twist his behavior as some sort of mutant liberation theology all you want, but it is him and his buddies who are lining their pockets while the devil takes the hindquarters of the poor.

mugabe has threatened and tortured his adversaries, given his supporters control of private industries, and shut down any opposition press. this is not the behavior of a role model for sub-saharan africa.

if these sorts of things were done by a right wing oligarch in central america, he would be criticized in the leftist press as a monster. but since he spouts off about land redistributon and attacks the west, he's some sort of hero.

what is it about some people who are willing to ignore this sort of stuff from alleged revolutionaries?

is it denial or just blind ideology getting in the way of reality?

[hellhathnofury]

117. I couldn't agree more.

Well said.

:)

[windansea]

121. "just blind ideology getting in the way of reality"

bingo

[punpirate]

28. I am greatly confused about this....

Chavez has largely championed the poor of Venezuela, and therefore, they represent his base. Much of what Chavez has done is good for the poor, and not very good for the wealthy of his country, hence, the attempts to oust him, with help from the U.S.

Chavez' arguments with the private press have been that they have encouraged his overthrow, even though that minority view is contrary to the will of the majority. Even so, he has not gone so far as to permanently shut down the private press. His temporary restraints on them were probably a mistake.

On the other hand, Mugabe has not been friendly to the press at all, preferring to stifle it with government edicts. I simply don't know enough about the popular and grassroots movements in Zimbabwe to judge if they are being supported by Mugabe, or if Mugabe is supporting them by rhetoric alone and is substantially enriching himself and his supporters through his land distribution schemes.

The BBC thinks Mugabe has become another archetypical African strongman:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/1709488.stm

And, the European press is not favorable to the anti-press laws initiated by Mugabe:

http://www.mdczimbabwe.org/archivemat/parl/guauk020123aipptxt.htm

Let's face it--we argue here in the U.S. that a free and fair press is absolutely necessary in a democracy, and lament that the press has lately become the lapdogs of the Bush administration, but, we're supposed to ignore Mugabe's muzzling of the press because his reputation is one of a revolutionary for the poor? That's too contradictory a notion for me to embrace.

Cheers.

[PoundSiO2]

31. That pretty much destroys Chavez in my mind

The sooner he and his buddy Mugabe are ousted the better. I can't believe anyone here can honestly defend these dictators. They need to be removed from power before they do any more damage to their people.

[Bombtrack]

33. As I've said before, Chavez should not be embraced by progressives

Unless you're the Ramsey Clark/Internationalanswer/LaRouche kind of nutball leftist

[Mairead]

45. Are you joking?

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

46. Wow!!!

Care to elaborate? I want to know what kind of nutball I am.

[Mairead]

63. Well, you're obviously the sort of nutball certain badly-monickered

people disapprove of. Someone who thinks that the people at the base of the socioeconomic pyramid deserve someone working for their interests rather than those of the 'important' people. My kind of nutball.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

65. Glad to be in good company!

:toast:

[WoodrowFan]

50. nope

and he's right. A thug is a thug, no matter where on the political spectrum they fall, and no matter how much they preach help for the poor.

[Mairead]

64. Well, you know, given the choice between a well-spoken thug who oppresses

the poor and a badly-spoken one who oppresses the rich, to me that wouldn't even be a choice. I know which side I'm on, and I'm so boring that it's the same side every time!

[noiretextatique]

96. is bush a thug?

or is that term reserved only for non-whites who don't do the USA's bidding?

[ButterflyBlood]

109. of course, but that's hardly relevant

first of all, he's not defending Bush, nor is anyone here. Also, the fact that Bush is bad does not make Mugabe good. Bush's crimes do not excuse the crimes of all other despots across the globe. Bush is a thug, just like Mugabe.

If these were freepers you were arguing with you might have a point, but saying no one can criticize Mugabe because Bush is just as bad isn't a good debate tactic against people who hate Bush.

[salin]

52. My question below... can I oppose US intervention in Venezeula

(and other places we quietly try to stage coups) without being an avid supporter?

Well - I can and do. I don't think the two are mutually exclusive.

[lostnfound]

54. Do your keep your purist principles when evaluating mainstream people?

Chavez isn't all good and he's not all evil, but he was elected and he does apparently respond to influence by the otherwise-non-influential lower classes which is a refreshing change from politics as normal.

Calling Mugabe a freedom-fighter was stupid, but it's a far cry from saying that you admire Mugabe for his leadership etc. and it's an even farther cry from providing tangible support to evil dictators.

Merely making a suck-up statement about a brutal dictator is enough to discard Chavez as being worthy of our support..will we judge our own politicians by the same standard? If so, we should probably give up now..or wait for the Second Coming.

Further, what matters is not support for Chavez, it's support for the people of Venezuela that elected him.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

55. The 8oo lb elephant in this discussion is OIL!!!

Venezuela is the 4th largest producer of oil IN THE WORLD! The capitalist establishment wants as little of those riches in the hands of the 80% of the population that is impoverished.

Chavez wants his people to have a share in their country's wealth. That bucks the system and the oil owned Venezuelan media doesn't want him doing this. I'm suspicious of everything I hear and see.

[lostnfound]

57. Agreed. And he & his people are doing a remarkable job..

keeping the wolves at bay, under tremendous pressure.

I'm afraid that the Rulers of the World aren't going to stop until they get what they want in Venezuela. But time is on the side of the Venezuelans, isn't it? The masses will be all that much harder to re-enslave?

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

58. if you ask Mr. Windansea (and his girlfriend) the wolves are

coming and he's one of those driving them on.

[salin]

56. Could you be refering to...

and it's an even farther cry from providing tangible support to evil dictators.

Our support (military and monetary) for.... the House of Saud... for the leader in Uzbekistan who boils to death political opponents... our blessing Mushareff's "pardoning" of the nuclear scientist accused of (illegally) selling nuke technology to "rogue" countries (NKor, Iran, Libya)... or... our own vice president who earlier as sec of defense led a war against Saddam (who they described as a current day Hitler)... but who as CEO of a company oversaw skirting of U.S. law on economic sanction by using a subsidiary to do HUGE business with Saddam - in rebuilding their oil infrastructure - which enabled Saddam to amass more wealth?

[redqueen]

82. It's gone on here for as far back as I care to think about

I guess it's only so horrible that you can't possibly support that person anymore when it's someone in another country (or at least a differennt party). :)

[Vladimir]

38. This is hardly surprising

The anti-colonialists can hardly afford to squabble amongst themselves at this time. I've said it before, I have a profound dislike of Mugabe, but not for the reasons the BBC would want me to dislike him for. Whatever is going on now in Zimbabwe, and lets be honest on both sides here - the information is sketchy at best, Mugabe did spend his early years in government exterminating Marxists. But Chavez has clearly judged that its time to start building a third world block against the neo-colonialists... one just hoped he knows what he is doing.

V

On edit: nice tactic though windandsea, switching to guilt by association now that you've lost all the domestic arguments. I can't wait for what's next.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

47. A lot of his posts link Chavez with Saddam

It's a classy technique. Who else links things to Saddam...?

[salin]

49. Am I the only person who thinks - I can not embrace Chavez but also

be very upset about US intervention in trying to stage a coup in Venezeula? Are these two points mutually exclusive?

I do not think Chavez is great. I think he is very flawed.

However, I also think that our attempts at overthrow are horrendous and need to be rejected. There are many flawed leaders (corrupt, engage in rights abuses against politicial "enemies", and some who we (U.S.) embrace who cavort with/support our "enemies" (e.g., terrorists). I do not believe that we should be going around toppling all of these governments.

Nor do I forget for a moment when the bushthugs were last in power engaged in.... toppling Nicaragua while simultaneously backing the El Salvadorean government and its very active death squads. I do not trust these folks who make distinctions between "good, corrupt tyrants whose totalitarian rule is bolstered by use of terror" and "bad, corrupt tyrants ..."

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

59. Mr Windansea has been known to post photos without their captions

in order to deceive. See this thread for a great example:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1230645#1237782

Don't drink his Kool Aid.

[MrPrax]

60. Bush war!!!

oh not the one I was thinking of...

But take heart Windansea...you man in Port au Prince loves Pinochet and Reagan...

"He says the man he most admires is former Chilean dictator Gen. Augusto Pinochet. He praises the former dictator as the man who "made Chile what it is.'" Next to Pinochet, his second greatest hero is Ronald Reagan. The man is paramilitary leader Guy Philippe, a former Haitian police chief who was trained by US Special Forces in Ecuador in the early 1990s.

The Haitian government and the private US security firm hired in 1998 by Haiti to protect the president accuse Philippe of master-minding a deadly attack on the Police Academy in July 2001 and of an attempted coup in December 2001. When he is discussed in the corporate media, he is almost always referred to simply as a rebel leader, a former police chief. "
http://www.newshaiti.com/index.php?mode=single&page=1&n=508

Well it is good to see the NED bucks being spent wisely and according to Congressional rules...

Oh yeah Mugabe...scum...but in a perfect world...Reagan wouldn't have visited a Nazi cemetary either...

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

61. Is Mr Windansea involved in Haitian politics as well?

Is his girlfriend Hatian also?

[MrPrax]

84. Ghosts Work in Mysterious Ways...

on edit: it should read spooks

[9215]

66. Jeeeez, this topic has alot of people making claims with

no sources and those responding don't seem to care.

Make your opponent document their claims. Otherwise it just turns into a tit-for tat screeching match. Which, IMO, is what the Right wants.

What would be interesting is to compare Mugabe with say Bushista's staunch allies the Saudis. You know the latter and another ally, the Kuwaitis, own slaves. If the smear campaign against Left populists like Chavez, Allende, etc. is any indication "the beast" Mugabe may be a US media creation.

Let's set the record straight.

Anyone on the Right counterpointing better have their facts straight.



Windy,

You never answered the questions at the other topic about the phony photos, the phony 100 lies, and the plagiarized material. You got some explainin' to do pal.

Plus you never answered the question I asked about you and your girlfriend: did you start this crusade against Chavez before or after she caught your fancy?

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

67. Careful - you're about to get hit with Saddam again

and Castro - don't forget Castro. You remember what the Carter Center said!

*sarcasm off*

I've been waiting for the answers to your questions as well.

[9215]

68. Here is the link to windys questionable posts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1230645&mesg_id=1230645

Check down near the bottom.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

69. I posted this link above

somehow you and I are on the same page! Then again we went through that ugly experience together. Where are the other folks who helped expose our windy friend? I'm sure they would have some things to chime in with on this.

[windansea]

88. what phony photos?

I answered the question about the homeless guy photo caption (which I didn't read) here in post 81

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=423478&mesg_id=426722&page=

I posted the source and explanation for the 100 Chavez lies, here it is again. If you think these are phony then disprove them.

http://caracaschronicles.blogspot.com/archives/2004_03_07_caracaschronicles_archive.html#107882789928481325

I also posted apology for not including the link to an article in www.wsws.org in the thread it occurred in. It was an inadvertent error.

I have been postiong about the venezuelan recall for about a month, and have been with my girlfriend for much longer than that.

Attacking me won't help...tell us what you think of Chavez praising Mugabe as a freedom fighter....which is this threads topic.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[9215]

100. So now I'm suppose to prove this hearsay from your source

is not true. This hearsay is the main source you have used to justify your crusade against Chavez.

You just go on and spew this crap and then start another topic.


Your link doesn't work so why don't you tell me all the bad things about Mugabe. In your own words please.

[windansea]

104. need some memory pills?

RE Chavez and the recall I have posted info from Carter Center, AI, HRW, Barney Frank, reporters without borders, Wash Post, Guardian, reuters, yahoo, and also some venezuelan blogs and newspapers

Chavez supporters respond by attacking my sources...even going so far as to try to discredit Carter and Frank...and they also attack me personally for having an opposing view...it's pathetic

Mugabe is a murdering thief...not even close to a "freedom fighter"

see post 71 for more info

[9215]

113. Nice try at taking it off topic. I asked for corroborated and credible

sources for the "Chavez lies". You have a serious and specious reading comprehension problem. Carter and Franks stuff is NOT the issue here.
You do like to evade the question.


Read my reply here for my take on Mugabe: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1242959#

Not that it would do you any good.

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

120. You do seem VERY selective in your corroborations

Just sayin'

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

102. You've been caught ly....I mean exaggerating more than once now.

[9215]

81. Helloooo. Ah Windy are you there?

We have some questions that need answering.

[tom_paine]

91. Ugh! That doesn't exactly endear me to Chavez

I suspect Chavez is much closer to being Bush-like (if not worse) than most of us here at DU think.

Luckily, I am wearing my flame-retardant underware so go right ahead and flame away!

[Vladimir]

92. For starters

at least Chavez was democratically elected

He also hasn't gone around invading sovereign countries which do not threaten his own

He doesn't have offshore concentration camps where enemies of the regime are kept indefinitely. If anything, he was spectacularly lenient towards those who orchestrated the coup in 2002.

He isn't trying to deny women and gays basic rights

He isn't passing economic measures which benefit only the richest segments of the population

I could go on, but is it really necessary? Chavez has his faults, no doubt, but Bush-like? I'd laugh if I wasn't so tired of all this bullshit.

V

[ret5hd]

94. as much as i respect tom_paine...

i'd have to say you pretty much nailed this one on the head. thanks for that particular reality check.

[tom_paine]

98. Thanks for the compliment, ret5hd

:hi:

That's ok. Agreeing to disagree is one of the signatures of the Old American Republic and one which I remain happy to embrace.

Vladimir is right about some of his comparisons, but I wonder just how many political prisoners are in Venezuela. How do they treat dissenters or minorities such as LGB people?

I stand by my words. I would have to know more about the bad side of Chavez (and YES, everyone has those, and I have zero doubt that Chavez is no exception) and what steps he has taken.

Remember, we are not mindless Busheviks. There are more answers than "yes, I support Chavez" or "no, I am against Chavez". My feelings fall into this "shades of grey" area.

My support of Chavez is qualified. I oppose attempts by the Busheviks to unseat him. However, if indeed it did turn out that he was ousted with the genuine support of the majority (and I am NOT saying that's how it would be) with no Bushevik help/influence (yes, I know it would be hard to prove that either way) then I would stand by their decision, if it was possible to know and of course, if Chavez is booted.

So that you know, my qualified sympathies rest slightly to the Cahvez side and always strongly against Bushevik "Chile 1972" maneuvers.

But I cannot be certain that Chavez is worthy of unqualified support. Like Castro, I suspect the answer is "no".

Opposing Chavez being illegally removed does not amount to unqualified support.

And again, thank you for the compliment.

[9215]

99. So now your a fascist symp?

(((Just kidding))). I just wanted to make sure you read my reply,hee.


I don't know alot about Mugabe, but I've come to change my opinion of alot of these Leftie "beasts" as the facts come forth. The link that windy provided doesn't work for some reason. What has Mugabe done that is so bad. I've heard stuff, but don't know alot about it.

[tom_paine]

103. Heh heh...good one

(you sure did insure that I'd read your reply!)

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

Here's some Amnesty Int'l infor. on Mugabe:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/zimbabwe/index.do

http://www.amnesty.org.uk/deliver/document/12739

http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/aireport/ar99/afr46.htm

(this is a 1999 report, I couldn't find later ones)

http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=28502

On Chavez:

http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/venezuela/index.do

(this page links to many more)

I do agree that certainly some things about the "Leftie Beasts" are Bushevik lies (I'd like to go back and see what the Busheviks were saying about Allende in 1972 and I think I agree with you then and now, generally) and fabrications.

I also know that I trust Amnesty Int'l and their assessments.

Just because Bush is evil doesn't make Chavez and Castro good, so to speak.

[9215]

106. Didn't want you to fall asleep on me, hee

Yea, I've been reading up on him, thanks for the effort. I should have dug around more myself. Here is what I posted

at another topic on this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1242959#

[windansea]

95. you are correct

read some of these venezuelan blogs, they are quite informative and have a lot of info on Chavez and the recall you wont see in the pro chavez sources cited by his admirers here.

http://caracaschronicles.blogspot.com/

http://blogs.salon.com/0001330/

http://www.vcrisis.com/

and a list of media in venezuela...the pro Chavez sites are marked.

http://venezuelatoday.net/

PS...you are also correct about needing the flame proof underwear!!

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

101. When Kerry becomes president. If he supports and/or hosts the following:

The Saud Royal Family, Hosni Mubarak, Hu Jintao, Alvaro Uribe, The Northern Allaince, Ariel Sharon, Pervez Musharaf, Islam Karimov and so many others. Will people be talking shit about him as well? Just wondering. Because our present government does and even Bill Clinton was cool with Suharto (mass murdering fuck that he was). Just wondering.

[Zynx]

105. My opinion of Chavez just dropped.

[bobbyboucher]

111. Here we go again. Whoopee!

Another joy ride on Windy's roller coaster of Chavez bashing, brought to you by the RNC.

[Darranar]

115. Chavez is wrong here...

Mugabe is something of a thug.

But expecting perfection in any person, especially politicians and even more so national leaders, is foolish.

[Exgeneral]

118. Is this the official Plan Condor thread?

I could swear it is. Yeah, we need to rid the Americas of anyone who stands in the way of GM GE and Exxon. I think you've about named them all.

I'll call the librarian.