ETERAZ

I guess some Iranians

I guess some Iranians believe that shutting down a TV station just because it opposed your government and wanting to become "president" for life is an act of a "democratic leader"!!!

Democratic (My foot) Revolutionaries of .....

Mr. Cahvez is not a "revolutionary," nor is he a "democrat," nor a man of wisdom and much intelligent, but a small dictator who tries to act as the Grand Revolutionaries of the 1950s and 1960s, be it a Mao, a Cheh, or a Castro.

The fact this this misrable character's best friend and buddy is a common criminal, a murderer, and a torturer, Ahmadi Nejad, who is known for having personally murdered political rpisoners in Iran's notorious Evin, is enoguh for any man or woman of honor and integrity not to root for this Banan Republic type of a dicator, the likes of Salazar, or Batista.

Those who root for this little patehtic dictoatr, the buddy of that scum, Ahmadi Nehjad, are the same who root for the IRI, one of the most vile and terrorist entities of the twnetieth century that is a disgrace to Iran's glorious and humane culture and civilization.

Those sahmeful agents of this Hell-bound evil regime that have turned this site into their 7/24 porpaganda for IRI and its despicable, anti-Iraninan policies, would not leave this and similar BBs until IRI is toppled by our people, and then, these patehtic Asghal-Kaleh-Galeh-Galeh supporters of the IRI will get lost and hopefully find a more honorable work (judging by their intelligence, it won't be much of a job, but much better than acting like the mule of the Ghool-e Biyaboon.

Let us pray for that day, the overthrow of the IRI. As to these agents of the IRI, who cares for them in such a KHOJASTEH day.

Yet you have no proof,

Yet you have no proof, facts, statistics or arguments as regards any of your laughable excuses for 'criticism'...and let's speak frankly you're a complete and utter hypocrite, for all the reasons I have previously outlined...I don't simply accuse you of being a stooge out of thin air, you reams of sadistic and snide jibes are enough to testify to that fact...you're free to say whatever you like...it just really irritates me when the likes of you i.e. fascist hypocrites, who liken your enemies to 'parasites' who need to be extirpated from the face of the globe, hide behind the defense of free speech...to reiterate: don't hold back on my account just be prepared to be exposed time and again, because I will not hesitate to unmask your lies at any and every opportunity, and you give me plenty so it looks like I'm going to be busy...

Heeding your motto

Thanks to over usage by the Islamist Republic and the so inclined, the tactic of labeling anyone who disagrees with the pro Islamist Republic agenda as U.S and Israeli interest minded, pro war nutcase is transparently threadbare. The motto on top of your blog reads: “Dissent is the Only Response to Manufactured Realities” and yet you do not heed your own motto and time and again do practice manufacturing realities and when are called on it the labeling begins. So be it, you manufacture and as long as I am not censored by the site, I will call attention to it and others like it and get a mouthful in response for the effort. After all you I am only following your motto of dissent in face of manufactured realities!

Your parochialism leads to

Your parochialism leads to see miss the wood for the trees...for an Iranian you're awfully concerned about the US's and Israel's interests; as for the so-called 'love' of your compatriots, calls to bomb them is a rather counterintuitive strategy, is it not? Fred you insult everyone you disagree with and are absolutely merciless in your willingness to slander and smear your adversaries and contribute nothing positive whatsoever...so please don't patronize readers by claiming to take the high ground now...It's just sad... 

More lies by Fred...And more refutations...

HOW HATE MEDIA INCITED THE COUP AGAINST THE PRESIDENT
 

Venezuela’s press power

By Maurice Lemoine

"We had a deadly weapon: the media. And now that I have the opportunity, let me congratulate you." In Caracas, on 11 April 2002, just a few hours before the temporary overthrow of Venezuela’s president, Hugo Chávez, Vice-Admiral Victor Ramírez Pérez congratulated journalist Ibéyiste Pacheco live on Venevision television. Twenty minutes earlier, when Pacheco had begun to interview a group of rebel officers, she could not resist admitting, conspiratorially, that she had long had a special relationship with them.

At the same time, in a live interview from Madrid, another journalist, Patricia Poleo, also seemed well informed about the likely future development of "spontaneous events". She announced on the Spanish channel TVE: "I believe the next president is going to be Pedro Carmona." Chávez, holed up in the presidential palace, was still refusing to step down.

After Chávez came to power in 1998, the five main privately owned channels - Venevisión, Radio Caracas Televisión (RCTV), Globovisión and CMT - and nine of the 10 major national newspapers, including El Universal, El Nacional, Tal Cual, El Impulso, El Nuevo País, and El Mundo, have taken over the role of the traditional political parties, which were damaged by the president’s electoral victories. Their monopoly on information has put them in a strong position. They give the opposition support, only rarely reporting government statements and never mentioning its large majority, despite that majority’s confirmation at the ballot box. They have always described the working class districts as a red zone inhabited by dangerous classes of ignorant people and delinquents. No doubt considering them unphotogenic, they ignore working class leaders and organisations.

Their investigations, interviews and commentaries all pursue the same objective: to undermine the legitimacy of the government and to destroy the president’s popular support. "In aesthetic terms, this revolutionary government is a cesspit," was the delicate phrase used by the evening paper Tal Cual. Its editor, Teodoro Petkoff, is a keen opponent of Chávez. Petkoff is a former Marxist guerrilla who became a neo-liberal and a pro-privatisation minister in the government of rightwing president Rafael Caldera. The Chávez government is not, of course, above criticism. It makes mistakes, and the civilian and military personnel who surround it are tainted by corruption. But the government was democratically elected and still has the backing of the majority. It can also be credited with successes, nationally and internationally.

When it comes to discrediting Chávez, anything goes. There was a scandal in Caracas in March when a faked interview with Ignacio Ramonet, the director of Le Monde diplomatique, was circulated. In a statement alleged to have been made to Emiliano Payares Gúzman, a Mexican researcher at Princeton University, Ramonet was supposed to have said: "Chávez lacks a respectable intellectual corpus, and that is why his ship is always off course. When he won the elections, it seemed to me that he had something about him. But populism won out, as so often happens in such cases. I have seen videos in which he sings boleros while setting out his economic programme, if indeed he has one. I think those true and verifiable facts speak for themselves, I don’t need to voice my opinion of somebody like that."

Venezuela Analítica (1) immediately posted the "statement" on the web, without checking on its authenticity, and it then became headline news in El Nacional. The paper was delighted to give credence to the idea of Chávez being isolated internationally, and made no attempt to check with the supposed interviewee. When Ramonet denied having made the statement, El Nacional rounded on the hoaxer (2) and, less overtly, without even apologising, on Ramonet.

The "information" that has been published has verged on the surreal. For example, "sources from the intelligence services have uncovered agreements entered into with elements linked to Hezbollah on the Venezuelan island of Margarita, who are controlled by the Iranian embassy. You will remember that when Chávez was campaigning, a certain Moukhdad was extremely generous. That debt had to be repaid, and now Iran is to make Venezuela an operational base, in exchange for training Venezuelans in Iranian organisations for the defence of the Islamic Revolution. Terrorism is in our midst" (3).

On 21 March El Nacional ran the headline: "Hugo Chávez admits to being the head of a criminal network." Next day Tal Cual referred to "the feeling of nausea provoked by the aggressive words he uses to try to frighten Venezuelans". The president was insulted, compared with Idi Amin, Mussolini or Hitler, called a fascist, dictator or tyrant, and subjected to a spate of attacks. In any other country actions would have been brought for libel. "An ongoing and disrespectful attack," was how the minister of trade, Adina Bastidas, put it. "They accuse me of funding the planting of bombs in the streets. And I cannot defend myself. If you attack them, they complain to the United States!"

Chávez responded to this media bombardment, sometimes using strong language, especially during his weekly broadcast Aló presidente! on the only state-controlled television channel. But his regime in no way resembles a dictatorship, and his diatribes have not been followed by measures to control the flow of information. Since Chávez took office, not a single journalist has been imprisoned, and the government has not shut down any media. Yet it is accused of "flouting freedom of information" and of "attacking social communicators".

On 7 January a group of the president’s supporters besieged the offices of El Nacional chanting hostile slogans. Shouting "tell the truth!", they hurled objects at the building. The number of attacks on journalists is increasing, according to Carlos Correa, general coordinator of Provea (4), an organisation for the defence of human rights, and they are being criminalised. "Although there have been no deaths, the situation is serious. Since the media bosses decided to oppose Chávez politically, it is no longer possible to have a reasonable discussion about the country’s problems. But to claim there is no freedom of expression is outrageous."

"You read the newspapers, you watch the TV news and you have the impression that the country is gripped by conflict," says Jesuit Father Francisco José Virtuoso sadly. "Naturally that all adds to the tension." The popular majority is striking back in this war in which it is the target, no longer prepared to tolerate journalists who consider themselves above the law or the anti-democratic control of information.

Incidents are on the increase. The official agency Venpres described three media personalities as "narcojournalists"; the journalists in question - Ibéyise Pacheco (editor of Así es la noticia, a member of the El Nacional group), Patricia Poleo and television presenter José Domingo Blanco (Globovisión) - decided to make capital out of the accusations. After condemning their "persecution" in front of the cameras at the US embassy, they left for Washington, where they got a heroic welcome. The Venpres article, signed by a J Valeverde (5), was repudiated by President Chávez and condemned by the defence minister, José Vicente Rangel; it led to the censure and resignation of the director of Venpres, Oscar Navas. But that did not halt a campaign, in Venezuela and abroad, against a government accused of "muzzling the media".

The media has proved adept at using the self-fulfilling prophecy - both in relation to government supporters and the government. By protesting about infringements of liberty, when under no threat, and using lies and manipulation, the media provoked a reaction, sometimes inciting its victims to do wrong. Those misdeeds were then portrayed as the cause (and not the consequence) of the media’s unhappy relationship with the government and much of the population.

We must condemn the attacks by the president’s supporters on television units or journalists. But how could those supporters tolerate always being described as "Taliban" or as "villains"? We should protest when journalists, even if they are aggressive and completely identified with the oligarchy, are described as "narcojournalists". But those journalists had themselves bombarded the president with false accusations and portrayed him as the accomplice of Colombian "narcoguerrillas".

Led by men of influence and top journalists, the media is taking over from other players in the process of destabilisation: Pedro Carmona’s employers’ association (Fedecámaras), Carlos Ortega’s Confederation of Venezuelan Workers, dissident members of the military, the technocrats of the national oil company (PDVSA) and a few discreet US officials (6). United in the Venezuelan Press Bloc (BPV), the media finally showed its hand when it joined in the first general strike on 10 December 2001.

"Free" opinions published in print -"Time for a change of government" or "Time to overthrow this government" (7) - were reinforced by dubious manipulation of the broadcast media. On 5 April two TV presenters gave their own commentary on a strike of petrol stations that was linked to the PDVSA conflict: "Have you remembered to fill up? Hurry, because tomorrow there won’t be a drop left in the country." By encouraging motorists to rush out to buy petrol, they provoked unnecessary chaos, though the strike was only partial and the stations were still receiving supplies.

On 7 April Ortega and Carmona announced that there was to be a general strike. The editor of El Nacional, Miguel Enrique Otero, stood shoulder to shoulder with them and spoke on behalf of the press: "We are all involved in this struggle in defence of the right to information." Two days later the BPV, which had just been visited by the new US ambassador, Charles Shapiro, decided to back the strike. From then on the television companies broadcast live from the headquarters of the PDVSA-Chuao, the designated assembly point for opposition demonstrations.

"Take to the streets" thundered El Nacional on 10 April (in an unattributed editorial). "Ni un paso atrás! (not one step backwards)" responded the hoardings on Globovisión. Another TV company broadcast: "Venezuelans, take to the streets on Thursday 11 April at 10am. Bring your flags. For freedom and democracy. Venezuela will not surrender. No one will defeat us." The call to overthrow the head of state became so obvious that the government applied Article 192 of the telecommunications law. More than 30 times -for all television and radio channels - it requisitioned 15-20 minutes’ air time to broadcast its views. But the broadcasters divided the screen in two and continued to urge rebellion.

On 11 April military and civilian press conferences calling for the president’s resignation marked the next phase. On RCTV, Ortega called on the opposition to march on Miraflores (the presidential palace). At about 4pm, when the scale of the conspiracy was apparent, the authorities gave the order to block the frequencies used by the private channels. Globovisión, CMT and Televen went off air for a few moments before resuming their broadcasts using satellite or cable. All screens broadcast an image that had been edited to show armed counter-demonstrators firing on "the crowd of peaceful demonstrators". As a result the Bolivarian Circles, the social organisation of Chávez supporters, were blamed for deaths and injuries (8).

The conspirators, including Carmona, met at the offices of Venevisión. They stayed until 2am to prepare "the next stage", along with Rafael Poleo (owner of El Nuevo Pais) and Gustavo Cisneros, a key figure in the coup. Cisneros, a multimillionaire of Cuban origin and the owner of Venevisión, runs a media empire - Organización Diego Cisneros. It has 70 outlets in 39 countries (9). Cisneros is a friend of George Bush senior: they play golf together and in 2001 the former US president holidayed in Cisneros’s Venezuelan property. Both are keen on the privatisation of the PDVSA (10). Otto Reich, US assistant secretary of state for Interamerican affairs, admits to having spoken with Cisneros that night (11).

At 4am on 12 April, to avoid bloodshed, Chávez allowed himself to be arrested and taken to the distant island of Orchila. Without presenting any document signed by Chávez to confirm the news, the media chorused his "resignation". The boss of the bosses, Carmona, proclaimed himself president and dissolved all of the constituent, legitimate and democratic bodies. Venezolana de Televisión, the only means of communication available to the government, was the first broadcaster forced to shut down when Carmona took power (12).

The press greeted the coup (though they censored any use of that word) with undisguised enthusiasm. And for good reason. Interviewing Admiral Carlos Molina Tamayo and Victor Manuel García, director of statistical institute Ceca, at 6.45am, presenter Napoleón Bravo boasted that he had allowed his own house to be used to record a call to rebellion by General González González. García described his role at the dissident military centre of operations at Fort Tiuna: "We were short of communications facilities, and I have to thank the press for their solidarity and cooperation in helping us to establish communications with the outside world and pass on the instructions that General González González gave me."

"One step forward" was the triumphant headline in El Universal. Journalist Rafael Poleo, who had filed the account of the first meeting of the rebel leaders, took responsibility (with others) for the document setting up the new government. During the afternoon "President" Carmona offered Poleo’s daughter, Patricia, the post of head of the central information bureau. The decree establishing a dictatorship was countersigned by the employers, the church and the representatives of a pseudo "civil society", and also by Miguel Angel Martínez, on behalf of the media. Daniel Romero, private secretary of the former social-democrat president Carlos Andrés Pérez, and an employee of the Cisneros group, read it out.

The desire for revenge provoked repression. The interior minister, Ramón Rodríguez Chacín, and a member of parliament, Tarek William Saab, were arrested, and heckled and manhandled by a crowd. RCTV triggered a manhunt by publishing a list of the most wanted individuals and broadcast violent searches live, aping the hectic pace of US news broadcasts. The live broadcast on all channels of attorney general Isias Rodríguez’s press conference was suddenly taken off air after only five minutes when he talked about the excesses of the "provisional government" and condemned the "coup".

On 13 April the Chávez supporters were unleashed, and officers loyal to him retook control. But the only way Venezuelans could get information was through CNN broadcasts in Spanish - available only on cable, or on the internet sites of the Madrid daily El País and the BBC in London. Announcing the rebellion by the 42nd parachute division in Maracay, CNN expressed amazement that the press were saying nothing. The freedom of information that had been clamoured for had been replaced by silence. Screens were filled with action films, cookery programmes, cartoons and baseball games from the major US leagues, interspersed only with repeats of General Lucas Rincón’s announcement of the "resignation" of Chávez.

Thousands logged on to the internet and got on their mobile phones, but only the alternative press was able to beat the blackout. Popular newspapers, television and radio began life in the poor districts, and were an important source of communication and information. Short on experience, they were the first targets of the "democratic transition". According to Thierry Deronne, the presenter of Teletambores, Chávez had never asked them to broadcast his speeches.

But the anti-Chávez powers did not hesitate long after their coup before arresting editorial staff and seizing equipment, ensuring that the only way the people could find out what was really happening was via the opposition press. In Caracas, Radio Perola, TV Caricuao, Radio Catia Libre and Catia TV were searched and personnel subjected to violence and detention.

In the late afternoon of 13 April, crowds gathered in front of RCTV (then Venevisión, Globovisión, Televen and CMT, as well as the offices of El Universal and El Nacional), throwing stones and compelling journalists to broadcast a message calling for "their" president to be restored. It was an intolerable attack on the press; terrified journalists broadcast an appeal for help on air - conveniently forgetting that they were supposed to be on the rebel side. "We too are part of the people; we too are Venezuelans and we are doing our duty. It is not possible that the supporters of Lieutenant Colonel Hugo Chávez [no mention that he was head of state] should consider us their enemies."

It was 20 hours before the state channel Venezolana de Televisión came back on the air with the help of militants from the community media and from soldiers from the presidential guard. The silence was broken and Venezuelans then found out that the situation was changing. Except for Ultimas Noticias, no newspaper was published next day to announce the president’s return. The private television channels broadcast no bulletins. Globovisión alone rebroadcast the information that had been transmitted by the international agencies (13).

Although the restoration of democratic normality did not result in media repression, the media continues play victim. It gives priority to the "coup heroes", speaks of a "power vacuum" and calls for the resignation of Chávez - described as a "murderer". Openly called the "hate media", it claims to be the "coup media".

Chavez over Iranian people

You can call me all the names in the book but it still does not take away from the fact that lefties have a soft spot for Islamist Republic loving tyrants such as Chavez.  Nor contrary to your claim does it refute the fact about what a predator of free media your democratic icon, Chavez is. it is absolutely true that I don’t say a word about as you put it   “Washington's support of the Saudis, Jordanians, Egyptians etc..., and support for the small fascistic oligarchic clique, and some 10% of the 'white' population who previously controlled 50% of Venezuela's resources, and who have no respected for the democratic process and have consistently shown their contempt for the will of the people, predominantly of 'brown' complexion and who they consistently liken to 'monkeys …” I am Iranian, my concern first and foremost is with Iran and the horrible enslavement of my compatriots by the Chavez loving Islamist Republic. The very first day that Iran and Iranians are emancipated from this tyranny I will also have the luxury of defending other people’s rights and fight against wrongs in other places. Till then I leave that to those who feel obligated to champion the likes of Chavez over Iranian people.

But this time, with his

But this time, with his plans for a 21st Century socialist revolution laid out in front of the Venezuelan people, he suffered rejection - albeit by the slenderest of margins.

President Chavez's first move was to come on to state television and acknowledge the result. He also appealed for calm, wary perhaps of the violence that had marred the referendum campaigns.

Among the proposals that were rejected was a plan to shorten the working day and lower the voting age from 18 to 16.

There were also plans to alter the extent of the president's control over the military and remove the autonomy of the Venezuelan central bank.

But by far the most controversial measure was a proposal to grant the president the right to stand for re-election indefinitely.

//news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7124547.stm

He lost the referendum and respected the people's decision...Yet again you slander comes up short...Sorry Fred, when your construction of reality is so far removed from the truth it's difficult to debate someone with even a modicum of knowledge and in possession of a few basic facts...Maybe if you go to the Republican Convention who houses mental midgets like the Christian fundamentalist Pat Robertson who called for the assassination of Chavez (he of course has said plenty of other heinous things), and no one even blinks an eye. Seriously, look at what corrupt and reactionary forces you are allied with??? And let me pre-empt you, Chavez has plenty of problems and I am not a fan of his strategic alliance with the IRI...but your lies and distortion of the facts need to be nipped in the bud so as to stop you misleading yet more people with your mendacity and deceit.

If you want to see just how

If you want to see just how free the 95% opposition owned media is in Venezuela I seriously suggest everyone watch this documentary which shows loads of footage of their propagandist drivel and attempts to distort reality in order to abet the primary agents of the coup:

//iranian.com/main/blog/sadegh/chavez-mossadegh-and-revolution-will-not-be-televised

If CBS was in league with

If CBS was in league with two foreign government's to topple the democratically elected government in Washington, let's ponder for a second what the Bush Administration would do??? Chavez has won two elections and a national referendum pushed through by the opposition on the basis of farbricated signatures...Well done Fred, your support of tyrants everywhere and fundamentally anti-democratic impulses are properly noted...

Such a hypocrite, denouncing the IRI for its lack of democracy and respect of basic human rights, and then you say nothing about Washington's support of the Saudis, Jordanians, Egyptians etc..., and support for the small fascistic oligarchic clique, and some 10% of the 'white' population who previously controlled 50% of Venezuela's resources, and who have no respected for the democratic process and have consistently shown their contempt for the will of the people, predominantly of 'brown' complexion and who they consistently liken to 'monkeys'...I guess you support that also...After the coup planners seized power they dissolved the Supreme Court, the electoral commission, the National Assembly, and kicked out the Attorney General and Ombudsman, is that respect for democracy???

Hypocrisy, hypocrisy and more hypocrisy....This has absolutely nothing to do with Marxist-Leninism, these Latin American leaders all won through the ballot box...you only reveal you real contempt for democracy by condemning them...you just use 'democracy' and 'human rights' as a conveniet stick to beat the autocratic and decrepit regime in Tehran, but you don't believe in such principles even remotely...I also find it amusing that Fred uses a Leninist phrase i.e. the 'useful idiots' in order to smear his adversaries...you and those of your ilk i.e. the neocons, are the real Troskyists, you guys just believe in projecting American power and imposing your will on whoever happens to disagree with your vision of reality...that is the precise definition of tyranny...

Finally, to say that Marxism is passe is an anachronism, of course it is...but to go from that to day that imperialism and class conflict don't exist or are irrelevant is to turn away from reality...Iraq, Afghanistan and the 1000 US American airbases in some 150 countries, not to mention the 1 billion people forced to live in destitute slums, belie that assertion....

chavez is low life

he has tried to shut down T.V stations, media and just about any one that does not like him (so much for democracy!)
his plan of taking land from farmers and distribute it to the poor will destroy Venezuelan agriculture and people will starve. (Mugabeh did the same in Zimbabwe and over night they went from from self sufficiently in food production to starvation and famine)
About the only smart thing Chavez does is going to bed with Ahmadinejad. why, Because
Even he realizes he can exploit IRI! why should leave it to E.U, Russian, Syrian, Arabs and Chinese? There is a cow out there called IRI that provides free milk to any one, so go chavez go!

A Better Chavez Without the IRI

The left is not limited to Chavez or the orthodox communists whose records we saw in the East. It is a vast spectrum and has existed before them. It was scientifically and economically promoted by
Marx. Yet, from Marxism many human and secular ideas can be derived. Therefore, we have many popular, human and secular Social Democratic or Socialist parties in the West.

The orthodox part which cannot adapt itself to democracy and human rights is now outdated and remains a common base between the IRI and the "orthodox" leftists.

Terms like "imperialism, Class Struggles, Dictator of the Proletariat, Contradiction of
Capital and Labour, Economic Planification system, idea of Soviet
State, Class Democracy... which do not match our today's realities are as sectarian and isolated as Islamism and its international base, the IRI.

Let's be flexible to understand David and Irandokhot for their arguments. We must find a line between socialism and patriotism. We should hope for a better Chavez without IRI.

The left, however under democratic and humanitarian aspects can be
inspired from justice and should distance itself itself from
undemocratic form of "left" represented especially as Marxist-Leninist
orthodoxy or ,worse, "anti-imperialist" IRI.

An adaptive left advocates unconditional democracy for all society and
remains a growing alternative and hope against many ills due to the
current capitalist system.

The price of lefty infatuation

//news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6696699.stm

A tyrant who shuts down the

A tyrant who shuts down the critical media,

Lie. The so-called independent media functions completely in the open and is owned by the most powerful oligarchs in Venezuela. They had so much freedom that they in fact were able to orchestrate a propaganda war against the DEMOCRATICALLY elected president. Anyone interested in the truth please watch this documentary which shows just how free the media was during the course of the coup attempt in violation of THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. Fred's lies are very easily exposed.

//video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5832390545689805144&hl=en  

tries to amend the constitution to become lifetime president,

Lie. He removed the limit on the number of terms for which a president can run for. By your definition France, the UK and many other parliamentary systems are dictatorships. 

underwrites terrorist FARC in Columbia and is a bosom buddy with the Castro and Islamist tyrannies  is a ok.

Such a silly simpleton...Everything for Fred is black and white, just like his buddies Ahmadinejad, and George W. Bush... 

After all he is “leftist” and  nothing better is expected of such demagogue and the “useful idiots'”  natural inclination for gravitating to such tyrant.

Insult...that's all you know how to do, you have no arguments, all you can muster is slime...

"leftist" tyrant

A tyrant who shuts down the critical media, tries to amend the constitution to become lifetime president, underwrites terrorist FARC in Columbia and is a bosom buddy with the Castro and Islamist tyrannies  is a ok. After all he is “leftist” and  nothing better is expected of such demagogue and the “useful idiots'”  natural inclination for gravitating to such tyrant.

David you have a point...but

David you have a point...but Iran's domestic situation is not the concern of Iran or any other power for that matter...In the first couple of years of his election he increased the number of health clinics in Venezuela from some 1,600 to 20,000 and increased access to clean drinking water by some 20%. His purely tactical alliance with a few dictators does trouble me, just as the US's alliance with a medieval and corrupt regime in Saudi Arabia troubles me. You mention Brazil as a success story, but then Lula is part of this very phenomenon, he's the leader of the Workers' Party (Partido dos Trabalhadores). I agree that the days of militant vanguardism are most definitely and thankfully over, but a revolution in wealth redistribution of Venezuela's oil wealth is finally taking place through the ballot box after decades of American backed dictators. All due respect, but the comparison of Ahmadinejad to Chavez has no basis in fact, there is no vetting process based on the criterion of 'religiousity' in Venezuela, he has been elected both times fairly and with much popular support. It's his oligarchical rivals whom have no respect for democracy or the constitution...they tried to seize power militarily with the backing of the CIA...David secular tyranny is still tyranny...Chavez certainly has his issues, but understanding every international issue in terms of how it affects Iran is a little parochial...For Venezuela's forsaken 80%, Chavez has made some genuine and life-changing alterations in their living conditions...Respectfully, Sadegh...

Dear David

 The reality is that Chavez is doing so much for Venezuela, protecting the resources, defending the country's right to it's sovereignty, supporting the families and especially working single mothers... The people love him, appreciate him and support him.

If he's doing photo-ops with Ahmadinejad to show his opposition to the US foreign policies, that does not affect his people in a negative way, Our problem is not Chavez. We need to have someone who cares about Iran as much as he cares about his country. I do get annoyed by this buddy business they're flaunting too, but that does not change my regards for what he's doing for Venezuela.

and that's the way I see it  :0)

IRANdokht

Dear Iran Dokht

Enemy of my enemy is not my friend.

End does not justify the means.

The ones with morals observe and expect it everywhere. 

Show me your friends and I tell you who you are.

Sorry I can not justify alliance with terrorist regime of Islamic Republic for any reason.

LOL David

I can't believe you are calling Ahmadinejad our Chavez!!!!

Granted they've hugged and took pictures together, but the democratic government of Chavez and his social economical plans have no similarities with Ahmadinejad.

I think the only reason they seem close is based on the negative relationship they both have with GWB. Chavez's opposition to the American government is real, Ahmadinejad's on the other hand is based on smoke and mirrors.

Please check out all the achievements of Chavez despite the CIA coup and all the bad publicity he gets, It's nothing even close to what is happening in Iran. 

IRANdokht

We already have a chevz, why need another?

//images.google.com/images?hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7GGLL&resnum=0&q=chavez%20ahmadinejad&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

I am so glad the days of those phony leftist revolutions in latin america are over. Today countries such as Brazil have the strongest currency , stock market and have budget surplus.

If Chavez gave a damn about human rights in the world he would not have been in bed with Islamic Republic.

Or still "the end justify the means?" I take capitlaism over revolutionaries such as Ahmadinejad and Chevz anyday !

We need a Chavez too

Someone who stands for the people, helps the poor and fights the foreign powers.

Unfortunately, our people didn't fight for their heroes like they did. They  brought Chavez back to power and showed CIA that they are the ones who make their own decisions. 

I don't get why he's buddy buddies with Ahmadinejad though...

IRANdokht

Chavez is amazing don't buy

Chavez is amazing don't buy into american propaganda and spin. the CIA tried to get rid of him with a coup but he showed them and his people restored him to power