América Latina se distanció de Chávez

billyb says on Jan 12, 2008, 23:19:

I have to congratulate Argentina on their position. It looks like our friend to the east has, once again, like a musician with a tin ear, missread the public.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

christobeldawg says on Jan 12, 2008, 23:57:

Give me one more year, and I will be able to understand Spanish enough to actually be able to respond to this article. I am not quite there, at this point.

admittedly, arriving can feel great too

0 funny, 0 helpful.

MitchAlvarez says on Jan 13, 2008, 00:38:

christo let me sum it up. other latin american countries are thanking chavez for assisting in the liberation of clara and consuelo but are asking him to shut his mouth about supporting the terrorists also knows as las farc.

"Ingrid callate la jeta!! Stay in France"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

thur says on Jan 13, 2008, 03:47:

I'm pleasently surprised by the reaction of the president of Ecuador, who is considered a real Chávez ally (not so much as Morales of Bolivia, but still). Nice to see that at least three countries seem more realistic than Chávez.
Greetings,

- www.pbase.com/thur

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 13, 2008, 05:01:

Well that should be indicative of just how unacceptable and undemocratic some of the crap that comes out of his mouth is when allies are starting to distance themselves.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 13, 2008, 05:08:

Ahora ya sabemos qué negociaron Chávez y las FARC

http://www.cronica.com.mx/nota.php?id_nota=342034

El presidente Hugo Chávez destapó él mismo qué negoció con las FARC a cambio de la liberación de Clara Rojas y Consuelo González: sacar a la guerrilla colombiana de la lista negra internacional de organizaciones terroristas.
A cambio de un “plato de lentejas� —dos de más de setecientos secuestrados— Chávez pretende que se legalice un grupo que lleva 40 años aterrorizando a Colombia. De esta manera, Manuel Marulanda Tirofijo podría instalar en Venezuela su “embajada� desde donde dirigir sus operaciones armadas contra Colombia y sus operaciones de narcotráfico desde suelo venezolano a Europa y Estados Unidos.
Ni la recién liberada Clara Rojas, pese a manifestar síntomas del síndrome de Estocolmo, pudo mantenerse impasible ante tan descarada petición y recordó el secuestro es un crimen de lesa humanidad y las FARC retiene en la actualidad a más de 700 personas contra su voluntad en condiciones penosas, como la de los hombres atados con cadenas a los árboles para que no puedan escapar.
Se puede pasar por alto que Chávez sienta afinidad ideológica con los guerrilleros marxistas, se le perdonó que intentara mediante un golpe de Estado imponer un Estado socialista, pero ¿cómo piensa sostener ante la comunidad internacional, y especialmente ante sus vecinos colombianos, que los crímenes contra civiles cometidos por la guerrilla no hay que tomarlos en cuenta y ésta merece ser privilegiada con el estatus de organización política no beligerante?
Es de pena ajena ver cómo el propio Chávez, que no ha dudado en llamar “terroristas� a los estudiantes venezolanos y a la prensa que se oponen a su revolución, pide que le retiren este apelativo a las FARC, que cuenta por miles sus asesinatos.
Me gustaría saber qué pensaría el mandatario venezolano si surgiera en Venezuela una guerrilla que secuestrara civiles, saboteara su industria petrolera y cometiera atentados contra la población para intentar derribar su gobierno, y el presidente �lvaro Uribe recibiera a los rebeldes venezolanos con abrazos, llamándolos camaradas y pidiendo que fueran considerados “organización no beligerante�.
Hay que tener poca vergüenza.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desi1 (Moderator) says on Jan 13, 2008, 05:29:

Catherine, that was just an opinion.
I believe tool that Chavez has made a promise to try to influence the Colombian government to accept the belligerency of the guerrillas. I think that he felt obligated to make that statement; it remains to be seen what is going to happen after that.

(I consider Chavez' demand a blatant and unacceptable intromission in the internal affairs of another sovereign state.)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 13, 2008, 05:34:

Afirman que Chávez les pagó a las FARC por el rescate

http://www.nuevodiarioweb.com.ar/(A(SEXQdSuMyAEkAAAAMjU5NjhiYzMtNDQ1Ny00NmNlLWIzYWItOWIzMDdkODdlNGE5ADOx2-3zvWiO24Yp7_kbJPJ1NCM1)S(gzxof045ak5u2nueqrlihh45))/VerNota.aspx?id=82168&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 13, 2008, 05:36:

Desi, don't be naive. Chavez does'nt feel pressured by farc. He WANTS to help farc destabilize Colombia. It suits his own expansionist ambitions.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desi1 (Moderator) says on Jan 13, 2008, 05:45:

Catherine, the world is alive with rumours. I was not saying that Chavez was pressured by the FARC, only that he just might want to continue having good relations with them, for his own political gain... for whatever reasons. What I'd like to see is the second delivery of a group of hostages out of the jungle as a special thanks for making that outrageous demand. Perhaps even Ingrid could be included and the hostages with severe diseases.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 13, 2008, 05:52:

Desi, I truly hate to say this but Ingrid will be the LAST hostage farc will release.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 13, 2008, 10:55:

Cassini, who cares what you and Piedad have to say? It's pure garbage anyway. Not based on facts but propaganda. I speak because I DO know.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Rikito says on Jan 13, 2008, 15:52:

well...it's better than the intellectual constipation that you suffer.

It is not life that matters, but the journey.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Jan 14, 2008, 14:45:

Cassie, there you again go with your obsession with scatology. Get some help man.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Enrique187 says on Jan 14, 2008, 15:14:

He must have verbal diarrhea since every internet word or phrase out of his mouth pertains to the subject.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gatogris says on Jan 14, 2008, 16:12:

This sort of gaffe was inevitable. Chavez is an instinctive politician, a trait which gives him some powerful advantages, but a characteristic which also will lead to his ineluctable downfall. As Sophocles writes in Oedipus Rex:

The tyrant is a child of Pride
Who drinks from his sickening cup
Recklessness and vanity,
Until from his high crest headlong
He plummets to the dust of hope.

Chavez has the low, bestial cunning of a sub-human trogdylite, and this has allowed him to captilize on two narratives embedded within Latin American consciousness.

1) Suspicion and resentment of the United States. A time-honoured violin, plucking at heart strings across class-boundaries.

2) The populist myth of the will of the people embodied in a father-like leader. A phenomenon as old as politics itself, the best description of which can be found in the disquisitions of Marcus Aurelias.

Neither of these can ever lead to a politics of lasting success. Things are not going Chavez's way; the sleazy suitcases of cash; the rooting around for publicity like a pig for truffles, baby-kissing Emmannuel (even his fanatical supporters felt their stomach's turn at that point), the blatant effort to take credit for yet another gambit in the FARC's trick bag, the domestic economy, the stone cold diss of the King, the loss at the polls he didn't see coming, the fact that Bush is on the way out and someone might run the Yanqui Devils who is less easy to lambaste, and most of all, the slowly growing sense that his country, his 'children', have started to weary of him.

I'm telling you, even he can start to see the signs.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 14, 2008, 16:20:

gatogris, you hit the proverbial head on the nail!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

diabloblas says on Jan 14, 2008, 16:46:

gatogris...Sophocles thought the world was flat

statlin was worse than chavez at his worst...how did he die?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gatogris says on Jan 14, 2008, 16:49:

Neither Sophocles nor I are into predicting death, man. That's just too heavy...

0 funny, 0 helpful.