Venezuela Court Revokes Ban On Violent Photos In Newspapers

[naaman fletcher]

Local press associations, as well as the United Nations, the Organization of American States and the French-based group Reporters Without Borders came out en masse against the court's original ruling, calling it censorship. Many said it was an attempt by the Chavez government to prevent crime and violence from being a focal point in September's elections.

The homicide rate in Venezuela has quadrupled since Chavez took office 11 years ago and the murder rate in the capital city of Caracas is among the highest in the world.



http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20100820-705811.html

[VioletLake]

1. I remember, as a 5-year old in Colombia,

being shocked by the (color) images on the covers of newspapers. One of the images I remember is of assorted body parts arranged on a white bed sheet.

Here in the U.S., a 5-year old is safe from being assaulted in such a way, for walking past a newsstand.

Edit for spelling and grammar.

[gbscar]

2. They are also safe from the permanent trauma that seeing a woman's naked breast would cause...

...which has just as much to do with the original subject or the emergent reason for banning this particular depiction as anything else.

And once again, I'm still curious about whatever tabloids (not because of their ideology but due to editorial approach) exist in Venezuela and how "clean" they really are.

[VioletLake]

3. The court ruling prohibited:

"images, information and publicity of any type that contains blood, guns, alarming messages or physical aggression images that incorporate warfare content and messages about killings and deaths that could alter the well being of children and adolescents."

http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/08/17/1780287/venezuela-bans-violent-photos.html

Of course, to the rightist hypocrite, such a court ruling is acceptable anywhere but Venezuela.

Some people truly are agreeable with exposing children to crime scene photos. I'm not. I wish I had seen pictures of breasts as a child, instead of the gruesome images I have recorded in my mind.

"And once again", if you're curious about Venezuela, go there and see for yourself.

[bherrera]

8. It is reported Venezuela suffers from a very high crime rate

The question I ask myself, why does the crime rate increase so much in Venezuela? I believe it is caused by anarchy and poor police and justice. In third world countries like Venezuela, the courts do not work, the police are corrupt, and crime rises. The Venezuelans don't know how to control crime. And this is evidently the fault of the socialists, because they have ruled Venezuela for something like 10 years. In Europe, we have courts that work, the police are efficient, and there is a much lower crime rate.

[VioletLake]

10. And here's the Spanish "socialist",

to look down his nose at "third world countries like Venezuela".

Perhaps what Venezuela needs, bherrera, is a cultured fascist king. I bet I'd never see you again around here.

[bherrera]

11. I think they need better government

it is very easy to see, these Venezuelan "socialists" are amateurs. If the crime rate increases in the 10 years they are in charge, and this crime is impacting more the poor, then they are not good. They lack governance skills. Maybe this is more a government of people who like crime and corruption. Who knows? They are not true socialists, they are ruled by an autocrat who seeks conflicts and lacks proper manners.

[VioletLake]

12. If Chavez were an autocrat,

this topic wouldn't be here. Have a nice day.

[bherrera]

16. Chavez is an autocrat

Chavez is an autocrat. Autocracy means there is no balancing of the powers of government, and this is evident in Venezuela, where the autocrat, Chavez, dictates to the Congress, and the Congress then behaves as if they were marionettes. The justice system is also in the hands of the executive, as shown by the Judge Afiuni case, which has become a famous case here in Europe, the woman is going to be the Nelson Mandela of Venezuela.

The autocracy is reality, but it is now becoming worse, as shown by the way the man gives speeches, and the emerging personality cult. I also read the man has demanded his party members declare personal loyalty to him. This highly unusual, and means the man is clearly an autocrat. Also, I have seen his interviews, he is a coarse megalomaniac. In a sense, he reminds me of the infamous Roman Emperor Neron. And he is also, like Neron, effectively destroying Venezuelan society. This man is not a socialist, he is a fascist disguised to lie to the people and eventually reach absolute power, like the other famous dictator in Latin America, Fidel Castro. They give socialism a bad name.

In Europe, we socialists practice the true socialism, allowing for democracy to flourish, and are willing to face a defeat in elections, knowing that if we do not perform well, then we must improve, and thus win the next elections. This is civilized democracy, and not the utterly ridiculous socialism they practice in Latin America, with caudillos who want to perpetuate themselves in power even if they are 80 years old and senile old fools muttering about Iran starting a nuclear war.

[VioletLake]

19. Chavez reminds you of Nero?

I knew Nero, and Hugo Chavez is no Nero.

At least you and your colorful fascist talking points are good for a few laughs, bherrera.

My family has been in South America since the 16th century. Have you ever been to the "colonies"? I was in Spain in 1985, and the people were still numb from 4 decades of fascism. What a tragedy the civil war was, especially for people like those who post on this site.

[Wilms]

13. "seeks conflicts and lacks proper manners"

You mean the Teabaggers, obviously.

I think Chavez and the the VZ majority (who vote for him) would like improvements. With the Teabaggers and the media outlets they own, it makes it a bit hard.

Still, life generally keeps improving for all but the super rich. I guess that's why the majority votes for Chavez.

[naaman fletcher]

14. "life improving for all but the super rich"?

What about the crime rate in Caracas? Wait wait.. let me guess... You all deny that crime is way down in Colombia, so you also deny that it is way up in Venezuela, right? (Note to Peace Patriot: I only read the first three or four sentences of your replies, so please don't bother with the three page lecture about something that happened 30 years ago).

[bherrera]

17. Do not presume

I do not mean the Teabaggers. I am not discussing USA politics in this Latin American forum. The majority of Venezuelans have voted for him, and they may vote for him in the future. But Hitler was also a very popular man in his days, and he was a fascist megalomaniac who achieved his country's destruction. When it was over, dazed Germans wondered with regret, why did they made such a poor choice? Also, we have to remember the Bush regime, as terrible as it was, was also a result of American democracy. Chavez thus may have some popularity, this doesn't mean he is not an autocrat and bad for his country. And I would like to know, in a fair election where the government money and TV stations and media control are not used to suppport the ruling regime, do any of them win the elections? Governments perpetuate themselves in power using the most unethical practices to deceive the portion of the population which lacks brains. And this is very common in the Americas.

[Wilms]

18. *cough* Latin American Teabaggers

They'd be as likely as their Amrican counterparts to make shit up.

So now this democratically elected leader is an "autocrat". Trying to mask "dictator" as an obviously ridiculous characterization. Autocrats don't suffer electoral losses on reforms they want. They don't tolerate elections. And the VZ media...? Who controls that? And the Hitler reference is so adolescent it begs the end of this reply.

You know people that buy your line. Go play with them.

See ya.

[bherrera]

20. I do not say dictator, I say autocrat

I used the word autocrat, not dictator. Mr Chavez is the archetypal elected autocrat. Lee Kuan Yew, the Prime Minister of Singapore, can be conaidered an autocrat. Mr Lee was quite effective and Singapore evolved to become a very rich nation during his autocratic rule. I have investigated this term in the web, and I found this definition which I find very useful:

•autocratic - offensively self-assured or given to exercising usually unwarranted power; "an autocratic person"; "autocratic behavior"; "a bossy way of ordering others around"; "a rather aggressive and dominating character"; "managed the employees in an aloof magisterial way"; "a swaggering peremptory manner"

This description very much fits Mr Chavez. Other definitions do include the term "dictatorial", but I believe there should be a difference in the terms. The word dictatorial describes other figures, for example the ruling military junta (the Videla-Viola-Gualteri triumvirate), the Castro brothers, the North Korean Kim dinasty, the Somoza dinasty, and others like that. Thus Mr Chavez should not be called "dictator", but he can definitely be termed a "fascist autocrat". He is definitely not a socialist.

[Wilms]

21. Are you done with the Teabagging bellyaching?

:eyes:

[VioletLake]

22. Thank goodness for the Web,

for making it possible to look up the meanings of words.

[Wilms]

4. Shitstirrers Without Borders?

Otto Reich, a controversial Reagan-era diplomat who served as assistant secretary of state for hemisphere affairs during George W. Bush’s first term, is a long-time U.S. political operative with close ties to right-wing factions in Latin America. A Cuban-American who has been a vociferous anti-Fidel Castro militant, Reich was implicated in the Iran-Contra scandal as a result of his work in Ronald Reagan’s Office of Public Diplomacy, the propaganda outfit charged with planting op-eds that disparaged critics of Reagan’s Latin American policies and lauded Contra leaders.

http://www.rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Reich_Otto

[naaman fletcher]

5. What does Otto Reich have to do with this?

Did I miss something in the article?


Last I checked, Reagan hasn't been President for a long time.

[Wilms]

6. Yes. You overlooked Shitstirrers Without Borders.

So save me the snark and start googling. K?

[naaman fletcher]

7. Oh I see...

Reporters without borders thinks the photo ban is a bad thing, therefore its a good thing? Or is it, reporters without borders thinks its a bad thing, then it didn't happen? Why comment you address the issue on its own merits without first seeing who is on which side?

[Wilms]

9. Keep googling. n/t

This time open your eyes at the same time.

[Judi Lynn]

15. Sad, for sure. It's not exactly a secret. It was even discussed here, not long ago,

either in this forum or LBN.

What an odious, dirty little scum he is. He's lucky he's not in prison, where he easily could've been sent when Congress caught him practising illegal forms of propaganda. His senile, idiotic President apparently pulled some strings for him.

Otto Reich was also an assistant to supreme right-wing racist Jesse Helms. Jesus.

Why someone wouldn't follow your advice and try to get to the truth about Reich and S.W.B. is deeply mysterious. I chalk it up to either fear or complete awareness of the connection already, and inability to acknowledge it..