Iran, Venezuela strengthen ties (Chavez calls Ahmadinejad his 'brother')

[Herman Munster]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070113.wchavez0113/BNStory/International/home

Caracas — Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — fiery anti-American leaders whose moves to extend their influence have alarmed Washington — said Saturday they would help finance investment projects in other countries seeking to thwart U.S. domination.

The two countries had previously revealed plans for a joint $2-billion (U.S.) fund to finance investments in Venezuela and Iran, but the leaders said Saturday the money would also be used for projects in friendly countries throughout the developing world.

"It will permit us to underpin investments ... above all in those countries whose governments are making efforts to liberate themselves from the (U.S.) imperialist yoke," Mr. Chavez said. "This fund, my brother," the Venezuelan president said, referring affectionately to Mr. Ahmadinejad, "will become a mechanism for liberation." "Death to U.S. imperialism!" Mr. Chavez said.

Mr. Ahmadinejad, who is starting a tour of left-leaning countries in the region, called it a "very important" decision that would help promote "joint co-operation in third countries," especially in Latin America and Africa.

Iran and Venezuela are members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, and Mr. Chavez said Saturday that they had agreed to back a further oil production cut in the cartel to stem a recent fall in crude prices.

[misteriobanderas]

1. not a fan of chavez

I am not a fan of MR. Chavez. he is too inflammatory.

[Herman Munster]

2. anyone cozying up to fucking IRAN

is NOT OK in my book.

[Say_What]

35. So you condone the US running covert opts into Iran

because the blood thirsty NeoCons can't wait for another war to *bring democracy to the Middle East*.

[originalpckelly]

49. You don't have to support the Likud position on Iran...

to criticize Ahmadinejad. Why are you such an extremist? The world is not as simple as black and white. You can dislike someone without having to bomb them.

[Say_What]

54. "You can dislike someone without having to bomb them."

Tell that to El Mono Bush--he's the one that bombed Afghanistan and Iraq back to the stone age and is now making threats to Iran.

And you wonder why Ahmadinejad and others are trying to gather all the allies and power they can so the same doesn't happen to their countries? A little naive to say the least. Read the fucking headlines for keeerist's sake.


US military strike on Iran seen by April, 2007: Kuwait media

Russia Blasts US Raid on Iran's Consulate General

US defends action against Iranian targets inside Iraq

Israel, US camouflage Iran attack plans

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=iran&btnG=Search+News

[shance]

58. May I ask what has Iran done to you Herman?

n/t

[BayCityProgressive]

10. you mean

too truthful?

[originalpckelly]

20. No, he wasn't being truthful about Bush being the devil...

he's only one of his earthbound henchmen. :-)

[newyawker99]

25. Hi misteriobanderas!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[pretzel4gore]

3. not anti american, but anti bush imperialism...sheese

nt

[jsamuel]

6. Does Chavez himself make that distinction?

[pretzel4gore]

9. if Gore was president, d'you think Mr Chavez would still be this way?

i mean bush and his pigmedia have warred upon the USA for years, lying and basing acts upon lies, and vast numbers of people fear bush, even americans, cuz he's a milk fed sissy who kills easily, like ted bundy, but w/out bundy's gravitas...

[BayCityProgressive]

12. Chavez had no problem with Clinton

[Say_What]

36. and Clinton had no problem with Chavez n/t

[rman]

26. So you've never actually listened to Chavez.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GZmsbbiUZ0

"...our brother and sisters in the US... the threat is in their own house..."

[arcos]

44. The US has been imperialistic for far longer than 6 years...

I agree, it is not anti-American, but it is not anti-Bush only. It is anti-traditional-imperialistic-US-policy.

[originalpckelly]

4. While I don't think we should bomb Iran, I don't support their leader's anti-Semitism...

and I guess this is just another problem with Hugo Chavez. There are plenty of people in the world to call your "brother" instead of an anti-Semitic asshole like Ahmadinejad.

[Herman Munster]

7. he's also calling on OPEC to cut supply

to raise our oil prices.

[Say_What]

39. US consumes 25% of world energy resources but is only 4% of planet's population

time to find some new alternatives to OIL.

[originalpckelly]

48. Yes, but what you aren't getting from this is that they are purposefully...

reducing the amount of oil they produce to increase the price of oil. That translates eventually into higher gas prices for poor Americans/middle class Americans.

[Say_What]

59. What YOU aren't getting is that it is OPEC who is considering the reducing

Venezuela and Iran are major players of OPEC and support the reduction.

You need to learn how to read through the MSM bullshit as they regularly try to demonize and discredit Chavez.

<clips>

OPEC Talks Again About Oil Price Talks

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--For the second time in less than three months, OPEC is considering calling an emergency meeting to rescue plunging crude oil prices. It’s enough to give oil traders a sense of deja vu, harkening back to October when futures prices swirled amid a flurry of will-they or won’t-they headlines.

Prices swayed in a broad $1.45 range Friday on the OPEC talk, settling $1.11 higher, at $52.99 a barrel, heading into a holiday weekend which shuts New York Mercantile Exchange floor trade Monday.

But the first gain after four straight declines hasn’t eased market nerves. For OPEC, the feeling of a rerun scenario in the market dates back further - to the 1998 price crash that slashed oil prices in half, to $11 a barrel.

Back then, it took two years and several output cuts by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to restore prices to levels before that crash, brought by an OPEC decision in Jakarta to raise output quotas by 10%, the start of the Asian economic crisis and an extremely warm winter caused by a strong El Nino weather phenomenon.

OPEC, which has already pledged to cut 1.2 million barrels a day from Nov. 1 to combat the 25% fall in prices between July and October, said it has learned the lesson from Jakarta, and will act aggressively to avoid a replay.

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/content.asp?contentid=97624

[Say_What]

60. Complete BULLSHIT!! It is OPEC that is calling for the reduction n/t

[pretzel4gore]

11. ahmadinejad is a semite...as much as olmert, or sharon etc

his anti semitism might be anti zionism, or something...anyway, trying to link hitler's white supremacy/racism to ahmadinejad's anti israeli stand seems rather eccentric, at best. bush's racism, which we saw re katrina and 650 thousand dead iraqis, doesn't upset as much as ahmadinejad's supposed racism which mainly is gained from cnn/foxnews and other white racist news orgs, which one would hope earns a larger contempt...

[Spider Jerusalem]

14. No, he's not.

The Iranians are not a Semitic people; they're Persian. There IS a difference. And "anti-Semitic" has ALWAYS specifically meant "anti-Jewish"; the word has no other meaning. To attempt to insist otherwise is at best ignorant and at worst intellectually dishonest.

[pretzel4gore]

29. they all seem to love killin each other

to paraphrase a freeper friend: a pox on ALL their houses (with israel in the line)
those goddam people seem backward and fulla mischief (to paraphrase dr laura)
they're ciphers (sayeth barbara frum)

[originalpckelly]

15. Alright, Ahmadinejad doubts the Holocaust.

That's enough to put him down in the anti-Semitic crowd. Of course, if you don't call it that, then call it whatever you want, but it's an utter hatred of Jewish people.

[rman]

27. Actually he doesn't

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=385&topic_id=11132&mesg_id=11132

[NYCGirl]

32. No, I guess he's just misunderstood.

:eyes:

"They have invented a myth that Jews were massacred and place this above God, religions and the prophets," Ahmadinejad said in a speech to thousands of people in the Iranian city of Zahedan, according to a report on Wednesday from Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/12/14/iran.israel/

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has told German Chancellor Angela Merkel that the Holocaust may have been invented by the victorious Allied powers in World War II to embarrass Germany, the semi-official news agency Mehr reported on Monday.

The remarks by the outspoken Ahmadinejad, who has repeatedly questioned the veracity of the Holocaust, came in a letter sent to Merkel in July whose contents have not been disclosed until now.

"Is it not a reasonable possibility that some countries that had won the war made up this excuse to constantly embarrass the defeated people ... to bar their progress," Ahmadinejad said in the letter.

"The question is if these countries, especially Britain, felt responsible for the Holocaust survivors, why they did not settle them in their own countries?" it said.

http://www.mg.co.za/articlepage.aspx?area=/breaking_news/breaking_news__international_news/&articleid=282239

[rinsd]

64. In the video provided by rman, he actually says IF it happened.

He does so at least twice saying "If this happened"

So I do not know how rman can claim this video absolves Ahmadinejad.

[originalpckelly]

45. If someone has to hold a convention on whether or not the Holocaust occurred...

that about does it for me. Quit making excuses for a dictator. It's absolutely pathetic that you don't have enough decency to see the world in more than black or white. He can be an awful SOB without us and/or Israel having to bomb Iran back to the stone age.

[rman]

47. "us and/or Israel *having to* bomb Iran back to the stone age"

such arrogance.

[originalpckelly]

51. What arrogance? I didn't just say that...

I was making the point that you don't have the view the world in polar opposites of only good and evil. That's why I said that.

And by the way, I watched the video, he said "if this event happened" as if there was a debate as to whether it did. It did happen. There is no debate about it in the absolute sense. Maybe a debate about how many were killed, but never a debate as to whether there were or were not Nazi death camps.

[rinsd]

63. What video are you watching? See time frame around 3:20

Quote "If this happened, where did it happen?"

He also repeats the line IF later on in the interview around 6:00.

When someone says IF the holocaust happened they are holocuast deniers.

Why is that so freaking hard?

[sabbat hunter]

16. the accepted definition

of antisemetism is anti jewish. i am quite tired of people trying to make it anything other than that.

[Dorian Gray]

18. Persians are not Arabic...

therefore they are not Semitic.

[originalpckelly]

19. Oh now, that doesn't matter, because anyone who criticizes Ahmadinejad must be a toadie...

for the Likud Party.

[Dorian Gray]

21. And then there's that!

Of course. :)

[originalpckelly]

46. ...

:rofl:

These people who make excuses for dictators, just so that they can have a black and white image of the world, they make me sick. They're whats wrong with this world.

I say an end to extremism.

[doublethink]

53. Hugo Chavez - elected or dictator?

Hugo Chavez was elected and re-elected by the people of Venezuela in transparent elections certified by the Organization of American States, The European Union, and the Carter Center (Jimmy Carter). Too bad the same can't be said of either of George Bush's elections in the U.S. A quick check on Google will turn up plenty of information for you on Chavez.

Dictators? Black and White Image of the World? Extremism? They're What's wrong with this world? ...... damn maybe you should be a little slower to speak, take a look in the mirror and devote a bit more time to research, just a thought. Ignorance breeds ignorance, and maybe that's what's wrong with this world. All the best and Peace.

[rinsd]

62. When you host a Holocaust denial conference, you reap the "rewards" (nt)

[rinsd]

65. LOL. The old semite canard falls short on facts!

[htuttle]

5. Lest anyone ever think the world is *actually* polarizing around religions...

...keep in mind that Chavez is a fairly enthusiastic Catholic (considering how often he refers to the New Testament), albeit of the now-out-of-fashion Liberation Theology school (which puts him at odds with Venezuela's bishops, of course).

The new 'power poles' seem to have the most to do with who's got something and who wants it, in spite of propaganda to the contrary.

[EdwardM]

8. Chaves makes me hate him more and more everyday.

Ahmadinejad is complete trash who has no respect for human rights at all. Just because he hates Bush, doesn't mean he is doing anything good. I know chavez, has been shutting down some TV stations lately and this is a road I'd rather he not travel.

[pretzel4gore]

13. mygod, he's trying to serve his people...

Edward, the newsmedia who tells us how awful Chavez is, itself lies almost constantly to US! - in the afterlife, when all is put on the scales for final judgement, i expect you'll find the very souces of your hatred for President Chavez was itself the costliest thing that ever happened to you, your nation and your world...

[EdwardM]

22. Uh yeah...

Is this supposed to be sarcasm, I don't get it...

[Say_What]

38. Propaganda works!!

You're a perfect example... Anyone who takes at face value anything is the MSM deserves whatever they get. Here you go, get an education:

<clips>

More Media Owners

While every topic addressed in this special Nation issue is vital to America's future, one issue binds them all together: media ownership reform. Whether it's the war in Iraq or the latest Supreme Court decision, how and where Americans receive their news is critically important. But deregulation has paved the way for a few media companies to dominate the country's information distribution system. Congress must step in to reverse the trend toward media consolidation.

Changes in media ownership have been swift and staggering. Over the past two decades the number of major US media companies fell by more than one half; most of the survivors are controlled by fewer than ten huge media conglomerates. As media outlets continue to be gobbled up by these giants, the marketplace of ideas shrinks. New and independent voices are stifled. And the companies that remain are under little obligation to provide reliable, quality journalism. Stories that matter deeply to the country's well-being have been replaced by sensationalized murders and celebrity gossip.

How did we get here? During the Reagan Administration the Federal Communications Commission made abrupt changes to loosen media regulations. Since then our government has favored benefits to big media over the interests of the people. One of the most blatant examples came in 2003, when then-FCC chairman Michael Powell attempted to implement new rules to allow a corporation to own--in a single local market--up to three TV stations and eight radio stations, along with the area's cable TV system, numerous cable channels and its major (or only) daily newspaper. A federal court temporarily blocked those new rules, but the door remains dangerously open for similar changes to be made under Powell's successor, Kevin Martin. And with President Bush appointing right-wing judges, courts could easily swing in favor of the conglomerates, eliminating a last opportunity for recourse.

That makes Congressional action imperative. Last year I founded the nonpartisan Future of American Media Caucus, which holds briefings designed to give members of Congress new perspectives on pressing media issues. I've also introduced the Media Ownership Reform Act (HR 3302). MORA would restore the Fairness Doctrine--a provision, overturned by the FCC in 1987, that required broadcasters to offer alternative points of view on controversial issues. MORA would reinstate a national cap on radio- and TV-station ownership. It would also lower the number of outlets one company can own in a local market and require more independent programming. In addition to restoring some of the key regulations that have been axed since the 1980s, the bill would insure that broadcasters meet the needs of local communities and would mandate public outreach and public input into programming decisions.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060206/hinchey

[EdwardM]

67. I'm glad for the "education." Thank you for assuming I'm an idiot.

I don't know what the Fairness Doctrine or the FCC has to do with anything in Venezuela, but I support freedom of speech period. And sometimes freedom isn't "fair" that comes with freedom. What Hugo did by shutting down an opposing station is censorship pure and simple. I cannot support his actions in doing it. I don't care about any "media conglomerates" or whatever, but if he has a problem with it, he can talk about it in his government funded TV station. It's not like he is repressed in his country.

[EFerrari]

55. Chavez doesn't renew the licenses of stations that collaborated with

the criminal US coup against him and you *hate* him?

In that case, he probably doesn't need your support.

[EdwardM]

66. actually I said this time is was calling Mahmoud a brother.

[Dorian Gray]

17. Getting in bed with Ahmadinejad will not

garner Chavez any good will.

[pretzel4gore]

28. bush said 'you're either for us or agin us' and that pretty well says it

Prersident chavez was legal 1st minister of his nation when the cia backed a bs coup (only thrwarted by Venezuelan hero soldiers refusing to go along) which saw Mr Chevez's life weighed like a bushel of grain with decision to strangle him unto death put off outta fear of them very soldiers (who had the principle putchists at gunpoint by then)
the american people have ALLOWED a CRIMINAL regime like bushgod's to prosper: can anyone expect a sensible official like Hugo Chavez to comply with utter nonsense? Venezuela, like the rest iof Latin America, is bush's sworn enemy: so is most of europe and 3rd world- even canada the majority despise bush and all he represents.
if you judge by the company kept, lookit gannon guckert, or rush limbah-humbug sleeping in lincoln's bedroom! or bill o'whorelly runnin around naked in the east wing! Using out taxmoneys to pig out!
sheeese!

[Dorian Gray]

30. I didn't say anything negative about Chavez

other than getting in bed with Ahmadinejad is a bad thing. Your arguments that he is the rightful leader of Venezuela are all well and good, but unnecessary. I know all that. I didn't criticize him, other than say getting in bed with Ahmadinejad is wrong. I think that Ahmadinejad is an Anti-Jewish bigot. He is a megalomaniac, and just because he dislikes Bush and America doesn't mean that he is a good partner for Chavez. Also, more importantly, even if Chavez would have a better relationship if Kerry, Gore or any other Democrat were in charge here, do you think that distinction would be made with Ahmadinejad? I certainly don't. He's a dangerous partner, and in embracing him, Chavez will garner more distrust and anger than he currently has. It certianly won't make the majority of Americans trust him.

[pretzel4gore]

40. explain to me the value of trust?

to all intents and purposes Chavez is untrustworthy; as shown already by the '02 failed coup? who trusts him? we don't! nothing neg or pos, just the facts....

[Dorian Gray]

41. Are you responding the the right person?

The only thing that I've said would negate trust is his relationship with Ahmadinejad. Since whatever I write will be completely ignored by you, I'm not going to expand upon that idea in this post. :eyes:

[Say_What]

37. Like Chavez should kowtow to Tio Sam??? What planet do you live on?

There hasn't been any *good will* between the US and Venezuela since the US engineered the failed coup in 2002.

Amazes me how you murikans always think you own the planet. Read my sig line.

[Dorian Gray]

42. For the record

I never ever ever said anything about Chavez kowtowing to "Tio Sam." I never said anything about him OTHER THAN GETTING INTO BED WITH AHMADINEJAD is a bad idea. BAD IDEA.

I personally think Ahmadinejad is dangerous. Are we dangerous? Possibly, but that isn't the point as Chavez is NOT getting into bed with us. For someone who is embraced by many on our website, I'm surprised that there isn't more fear or nervousness about his calling Ahmadinejad a "brother." It's disturbing. All they have in common is a distrust for George W. Bush and (possibly) America in general. I certainly hope that Chavez does not share Ahmadinejad's Holocaust views, or his desire to eradicate the state of Israel. Oh, and I also hope that Chavez will not embrace the hard-line Islam that the rulers of Iran seem determined to foist upon the people of Iran, despite the moderate leanings of the majority who live in that country.

Iran is a country filled with many vastly educated people. That people of that country could contribute a ton to our world, and they are being held back by the backwards government. Ahmadinejad is a puppet, an enabler, and a leech. For Chavez to get into bed with him is an atrocity that we should ALL be wary of. It doesn't bode well for him. For someone with progressive ideals, he is getting in bed with a reactionary goverment, the sole reason being that they both don't like George W. Bush?

"The enemy of my enemy" blah blah blakcakes is truly a messed up way to attack the world. You compromise your ideals and lose all that is of value. I don't want to see Chavez bend over backwards, sideways, or even stick his little pinky finger out of whack in order to appease the likes of Ahmadinejad and the current crop of rulers in Iran, who I definitely perceive to be a danger equal to the megalomania of George W (who we only have in office for two or so more years).

[Say_What]

57. "Getting in bed with Ahmadinejad will not garner Chavez any good will."

Your words, not mine.

Ahmadinejad is also meeting with Ortega, Correa, and Morales.

http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2007/01/11/knORTEGA_narrowweb__300x448,0.jpg
Nicaragua's President Daniel Ortega (centre) with Venezuela's Hugo Chavez (left) and Bolivia's Evo Morales.

[Dorian Gray]

61. It will garner them little good will, as well...

and if they start calling him "Brother," then I suspect that more people will question their motives.

[SanCristobal]

23. Without commenting on Iran or Venezuela,

I'm glad to see we are making so many friends in the world. I just wish they were friends with us...

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

24. Can't Stand Chavez, Can't Stand Ahmadinejad, Can't Stand Bush.

I look forward to the day when all 3 no longer wield any power, as I consider all 3 of them to be detriments to the concept of peace.

[melody]

31. well said

A dictator is a dictator is a dictator. I don't like the so-called "benevolent" ones any more than the malignant ones.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

34. Of the three, only Ahmadinejad is arguably a dictator, and even he probably isn't.

I despise Bush and deeply distrust Chavez, who has to be a candidate for "man most overidolised by DUers", but neither of them is a dictator.

Ahmadinejad is a head of state who came to power without a democratic mandate (he was elected, but the election was anything but free and fair), but given how much power the (completely unlected) "Guardian Council" wields in Iran, it's not clear that it's accurate to say that Ahmadinejad is a dictator. Total bastard, yes, but arguably not dictator.

[Say_What]

33. Now that's a stretch...

mind telling us how Chavez is a "detriment to the concept of peace" ?

Last I read it is only the USSA that's bombing the Middle East into *democracy* and running covert operations into Iran because that blood thirsty cabal of NeoCons can't wait for another war.

[EFerrari]

56. In that case, you're overlooking the long hard work Chavez has done

to get Latin America out from up the heel of American corporations.

[Zhade]

43. Globe and Mail...

Take it with...

[oblivious]

50. It's AP, but the same advice applies.

[Zhade]

52. True!

I'll have to see what Chavez actually said before I decide what I think about this story.