Hugo Chavez Loves Free Speech...

[WildCat]

Eagerly awaiting defense of Fox News and RCTV being equivalent. Much as I hate Fox, they're a teddy bear in comparison. We haven't even gotten into RCTV's behavior post-coup, which was disgustingly irresponsible at best (and yes, way beyond the level of Fox News).

You keep claiming this, yet have failed to provide a single bit of evidence.

Do you have any evidence, or is Hugo's say-so good enough for you?

I love the way you continually make excuses for Hugo while denying you are a Hugo apologist...

 

[WildCat]

No. I do think it's unwise to back insurrection against a democratic government though.

Unless it's Chavez sending hundreds of millions of dollars to FARC to overthrow the democratically elected government in Colombia, right?

 

[Meed]

I repeat my previous post on this. I do get fed up going through hoops in the past for information that is out there from both sides of the argument only for it to be handwaved or ignored. Sorry if that seems harsh but I have gone though this stuff before and do not have much time left this week before I head to mexico.

Like I said, that's your choice, just be aware that you can't convincingly tell me my information is wrong and I should "read blogs" etc. unless you get more specific.

I would say something here. Ignore venezuelaanalysis. If you do want to use it then look to another opposite bias and use thedevilsexcrement. Ignore most of the US reporting on it and look to other media such as the BBC.

I recall scanning venezuelaanalysis briefly and deciding against reading it.

I am saying that all the one I speak to say it. If we use your example of the US, then that is not what happens there. I get many mixed views in the US from feins and colleagues. Soem love Obama, some hate him. Some loved Bush, some hated him. In Venezuela, 100% of the people I have spoken to about it do not like him. Smaller sample size but telling all the same. Similar to my Libya experience. One similarity was the fact that it was not something that was talked about too openly. They know what can happen to you when you are seen as opposition.

It may be because there is a bigger class division of political support in Venezuela compared to the US?

It did, however, make unsupported accusations against Globo.

Huh? I was saying that was an example of a bad/biased post (although not because I made unsupported accusations).

You have yet to support this either. Not reporting something is immediately suppressing something?

I made my case and I think my case supports it. If you disagree with my interpretation that's okay, but you never made much of a response.

No problem. At least you do not descend into the usual "evidence?" single word posts that get increasingly specific and end up as requiring proof to court standards rather than admitting a wrong. They also love the two wrongs make a right arguments. I prefer the two wrongs make a wrong if you know what I mean.

True. I'm trying to be cautious with that, because while I have a problem with RCTV I do worry about slippery slopes and precedent and all that.

 

[Pardalis]

Are they allowed to be critical of Dear Leader?

afaik yes, aslong they spread no false information.

DC, you never explained what you meant by that.

 

[Pardalis]

3rd try.

DC, are you afraid to answer the question because you're afraid of what your answer might be?

How does the State regulate and legislate on truth?

 

[Skeptic]

If it agrees with the dictator's views, it's THE TRUTH. If not, it's a LIE and therefore illegal, and you'll be arrested for spreading lies.

What's the big deal? It's standard operating procedures for socialist countries.

 

[Pardalis]

I think this is indeed at the core of DC's view of what the State can and cannot do (actually, according to DC, there is very little the State cannot do).

With that simple remark "aslong they spread no false information", implying that the State is allowed to close you down based on its notion of truth (if that was true in the US, Prison Planet, Fox News and Al Jazeera among others would have been closed a long time ago, not to mention satirical news outlets like the Onion, what would the State do about that one?) DC showed that he thinks the State has full dominion and authority on truth, and is all knowlegable, because it has to know the "Truth" to be able to act on it to ensure it is used right and not abused.

Maybe that's why DC won't answer, he can't admit it to himself that this is what he thinks about the role of the State.

Nineteen-eighty-four anyone?

 

[NWO Sentryman]

DC, might i ask you something?

Isn'ta ministry of "truth" orwellian? because you are making the state arbiter over what is truth and fiction and i certainly do not want to be living in an orwellian world.

 

[JihadJane]

You already do.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

You already do.

Stundied.

 

[Meed]

I agree to an extent. Orwell has a lot more relevance to today's (and his own period's) societies than many give him credit for.

 

[Pardalis]

I agree to an extent. Orwell has a lot more relevance to today's (and his own period's) societies than many give him credit for.

Is this Platitude Day?

 

[Meed]

Is this Platitude Day?

It's just my honest opinion based on a fair amount of thought and reading over the past year. Platitude? That depends on the reader, I guess. I might have viewed it as such a year ago if someone else said the same thing.

 

[DC]

DC, you never explained what you meant by that.

i hink the courts can deside if something is true or not. that happens all around the world.
and i think the goal of this law is to prevent a coup like in 2002 that was based on lies.
and for not offending the dear leader.

you know the expression the opposition used on TV against Chavez would have brought them troubles also here in Switzerland, not jail, but fines.

but Chavez is clearly abusing those new laws, in my oppinion.

So no ministry of trueth.

 

[DC]

3rd try.

DC, are you afraid to answer the question because you're afraid of what your answer might be?

How does the State regulate and legislate on truth?

im not online every day. so be patient.

 

[DC]

DC, might i ask you something?

Isn'ta ministry of "truth" orwellian? because you are making the state arbiter over what is truth and fiction and i certainly do not want to be living in an orwellian world.

arent courts a sort of "Ministry of truth"

it all depends on how such institutions are runned.

 

[DC]

I think this is indeed at the core of DC's view of what the State can and cannot do (actually, according to DC, there is very little the State cannot do).

With that simple remark "aslong they spread no false information", implying that the State is allowed to close you down based on its notion of truth (if that was true in the US, Prison Planet, Fox News and Al Jazeera among others would have been closed a long time ago, not to mention satirical news outlets like the Onion, what would the State do about that one?) DC showed that he thinks the State has full dominion and authority on truth, and is all knowlegable, because it has to know the "Truth" to be able to act on it to ensure it is used right and not abused.

Maybe that's why DC won't answer, he can't admit it to himself that this is what he thinks about the role of the State.

Nineteen-eighty-four anyone?

leave your prejudice aside for a moment.

the USA are a shining example of freedom of speech. i think no other country has implemented that so radicaly.

But what would happen if some TV stations would conspire and report false stuff that finally leads to a coup off the elected government?

i think thats what Venezuela tries to prevent with this law.
just like we try to stopp the Nazi and Holocaust denial propaganda by banning it. Instead of confront it and debunk it.

alot if not most other countrys follow a diffrent philosophy in that regard.
one of the point most countrys can learn from the USA.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

arent courts a sort of "Ministry of truth"

it all depends on how such institutions are runned.

WTF?

It is like Animal farm, DC, where anyone who is not for "the revolution" is branded "counter revolutionary. The Pigs and men are hard to distinguish now.

Chavez has been using the "truth" laws to shut down anyone who disagrees with him. it basically runs like this.

critic: says something critical of chavez

Chavez: you lied on national tv, which is now a criminal offence.

critic: who decides what is truth and what is lies?

Chavez: Me.

*cue goons draggong away the critic*

 

[DC]

WTF?

It is like Animal farm, DC, where anyone who is not for "the revolution" is branded "counter revolutionary. The Pigs and men are hard to distinguish now.

Chavez has been using the "truth" laws to shut down anyone who disagrees with him. it basically runs like this.

critic: says something critical of chavez

Chavez: you lied on national tv, which is now a criminal offence.

critic: who decides what is truth and what is lies?

Chavez: Me.

*cue goons draggong away the critic*

Zuloaga was later released, but the judge issued an order preventing from leaving the country while prosecutors proceed with their investigation.

from the linked article.

the Judge decides.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

The judge was basing it on laws arranged by Hugo Chavez and his rubber stamp assembly (what else do you call a legislature stuffed with Yes men.) I also see his kangaroo judiciary have been a work as well, ecxecuting his laws.

What a good way of silencing critics though, calling them liars.