Venezuela expels Human Rights Watch campaigners - bravo!
Fri, 2008-09-19 04:57
#1
Venezuela expels Human Rights Watch campaigners - bravo!
Fri, 2008-09-19 04:57
#2
[url=http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/09/19/venezuela-humanrights.html?ref=...
quote:
Venezuela's government expelled senior members of U.S.-based Human Rights Watch late Thursday after the group released a report saying President Hugo Chavez's government was undercutting democracy and fundamental rights in the country. ...Both human rights campaigners had been acting at the behest of the U.S. government, the foreign minister said.
In a report released earlier Thursday, Human Rights Watch said Chavez's government had used a 2002 coup by opposition leaders and army officers as "a pretext for a wide range of government policies that have undercut the human rights protections" laid out in the constitution. ...
The New York-based group said Chavez "has encouraged his subordinates to engage in discrimination by routinely denouncing his critics as antidemocratic conspirators and coup-mongers — regardless of whether or not they had any connection to the 2002 coup."
Human Rights Watch, an ideological arm of the U.S. ruling classes, has been getting a free ride for too long in world media. Hopefully, this will be the beginning of the end for this false-flag organization.
[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]
Fri, 2008-09-19 05:35
#3
Good. The US has no moral authority to talk to any government when theirs is so seriously screwed, undemocratic and fraudulent.
Fri, 2008-09-19 06:13
#4
What if their right?
If we can't trust HRW, is their an organization we CAN trust when it comes to reporting on human rights. I don't think it's wise to trust what governments say about themselves. I mean, look at the way Canadians have been tricked by our governments.
Fri, 2008-09-19 06:22
#5
quote:
Human Rights Watch, an ideological arm of the U.S. ruling classes
What could they possibly be right about?
Fri, 2008-09-19 06:34
#6
M. Spector
[url=http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/HRW.html]Who is behind Human Rights Watch?[/url]
[url=http://www.electricpolitics.com/2007/02/human_rights_watch_in_service.ht... Rights Watch in Service to the War Party[/url]
[url=http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/fascism_and_war/hrw.htm]Human Rights Watch and hate rituals[/url]
[url=http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=705]Human Rights Watch's shameful position on Gaza[/url]
----
quote:
Human Rights Watch distinguished itself during the attack on Lebanon with a set of spurious attacks on Hezbollah for allegedly deliberately targeting civilians with its rocket-fire. It later emerged that while Israel's claims that Hezbollah hid its rocket launchers among civilians were bogus, [url=http://bureauofcounterpropaganda.blogspot.com/2008/01/human-shields.html... had certainly located prime military targets right among its population centres.[/url] HRW blithely insisted that this made no difference to its claim that Hezbollah indiscriminately attacked civilians. The point isn't really that HRW and like organisations are inconsistent in their determination of criminality. On the contrary, they are consistently biased toward the purlieus of power when they systematically fail to acknowledge or take account of prior, ongoing aggression. In the almost exclusive emphasis on the civilian-military distinction (which matters, I make no bones about it), they reproduce an ideological formation which holds that the incineration, shredding and dispersing of those designated combatants is perfectly acceptable: even if there are other options; even if the war need never have taken place; even if the murder is being perpetrated by aggressors who have it within their power to terminate hostilities at any point. - [url=http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/01/limits-of-humanitarianism.html]So...
Fri, 2008-09-19 07:35
#7
It is actually heartening to see a number of intelligent responses to the original article on the CBC website.
Fri, 2008-09-19 07:41
#8
M. Spector
I avoid reading the responses to stories on the CBC website.
It rots your brain.
Fri, 2008-09-19 07:52
#9
Generally I would agree, that is why I was surprised.
Fri, 2008-09-19 08:45
#10
Sven
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
[b]...is their an organization we CAN trust when it comes to reporting on human rights[?] I don't think it's wise to trust what governments say about themselves. [/b]
Good question.
Fri, 2008-09-19 09:00
#11
Human rights watch is essentially a branch of the U.S. government with a pretense of independence.
Fri, 2008-09-19 10:55
#12
N.Beltov
The disgraceful role of HRW in regard to trivializing the deaths and downplaying the numbers of deaths in South Ossetia did it for me. I have nothing but contempt for this bunch. Of course, even a broken watch is correct, briefly, twice a day, but that's only by accident.
Fri, 2008-09-19 11:03
#13
Key to the success of U.S. imperialism is hoodwinking so-called "liberals" and "progressives." Human Rights Watch performs this function very well.
Fri, 2008-09-19 21:07
#14
M. Spector
[url=http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/7424/]The Truth Suffers in Human Rights Watch Report on Venezuela[/url]
Fri, 2008-09-19 21:35
#15
Sven
I think it's worth reiterating CMOT Dibbler's question: "is their an organization we CAN trust when it comes to reporting on human rights"?
[ 19 September 2008: Message edited by: Sven ]
Sat, 2008-09-20 06:33
#16
M. Spector
Another rhetorical question: Is there an English-language daily newspaper you can trust to report the truth?
Sat, 2008-09-20 08:03
#17
I didn't ask the right question.
So I'll try again:
I am perfectly willing to accept that the US may be using human rights organizations as a tool to promote their own agenda in Latin America. After all, the Bush administration used human rights as an excuse to invade Iraq. I'm just curious as to whether there is an independent human rights organization within Venezuela that can hold Chavez to account. If he does do something really dictatorial.
Sat, 2008-09-20 08:17
#18
First tell me what an "independent human rights organization" means.
Independent of those who finance it?
ETA: To improve my understanding, please give me an example of an independent human rights organization within Canada that can hold Harper to account - if he does something really dictatorial, that is.
[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]
Sat, 2008-09-20 10:25
#19
M. Spector
CMOT, Venezuela is a liberal democracy. It is in fact far more democratic than Canada. If anybody is to "hold Chбvez to account" it is the people of Venezuela.
We don't have any "human rights" organizations in Canada that hold Stephen Harper to account. The ones we do have are too busy "holding to account" the countries that don't fall within the control of the axis of weasels.
Sat, 2008-09-20 11:44
#20
Sven
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]CMOT, Venezuela is a liberal democracy. It is in fact far more democratic than Canada. If anybody is to "hold Chбvez to account" it is the people of Venezuela.We don't have any "human rights" organizations in Canada that hold Stephen Harper to account. The ones we do have are too busy "holding to account" the countries that don't fall within the control of the axis of weasels.[/b]
Sounds like you favor a laissez faire approach to other countries' human rights standards: Canadians shouldn't worry about Venezuelan or American human rights issues (and Venezuela and America should ignore what goes on in other countries as well).
Personally, I generally agree that that would be ideal.
Sat, 2008-09-20 12:56
#21
quote:
We don't have any "human rights" organizations in Canada that hold Stephen Harper to account.
We should have some then.
Sat, 2008-09-20 12:59
#22
Who finances B'tselem?
Sat, 2008-09-20 13:58
#23
quote:
Canadians shouldn't worry about Venezuelan or American human rights issues (and Venezuela and America should ignore what goes on in other countries as well).
Big difference there. The US is busy either trying to bomb the shit out of other countries, or directly overthrowing democratically elected leaders they do not like (Chavez is a case in point. See also Cuba). Venezuela spends its time HELPING other countries (even the US) while the US does Sweet FA to actually assist anyone but themselves.
Funny that as a lawyer, you can't figure out this huge difference.
Sat, 2008-09-20 14:12
#24
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
[b]Who finances B'tselem?[/b]
[url=http://www.btselem.org/english/About_BTselem/Donors.asp]Here[/url] are the institutional donors - including the Ford Foundation.
B'tselem does a good job IMO, but it operates within strictly defined limits. It focuses on wrongdoing in the Occupied Territories, which is important and necessary, but seems to ignore the injustice involved in the 1948 expulsion and the apartheid nature of the state itself.
Sat, 2008-09-20 14:36
#25
It dosen't go after really big fish, so it dosen't run the risk of being shut down by government big wigs?
Sat, 2008-09-20 14:38
#26
quote:
including the Ford Foundation.
Would that be Gerald or Henry?
[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]
It's OK, I now know wich ford started the foundation.
[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]
Sat, 2008-09-20 15:27
#27
quote:
CMOT, Venezuela is a liberal democracy. It is in fact far more democratic than Canada. If anybody is to "hold Chбvez to account" it is the people of Venezuela.
Democratically elected leaders have the ability to be arrogant, cruel, and as slippery as a greased eel. Just look at Harper, Trudeau or Arafat
The people in a state cannot throw a government out if they don't know what that government is doing in the first place. Governments need watch dogs. Otherwise true democracy is not possible.
[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]
Sat, 2008-09-20 16:11
#28
Sven
quote:
Originally posted by Stargazer:
[b] Big difference there. The US is busy either trying to bomb the shit out of other countries, or directly overthrowing democratically elected leaders they do not like (Chavez is a case in point. See also Cuba). Venezuela spends its time HELPING other countries (even the US) while the US does Sweet FA to actually assist anyone but themselves.Funny that as a lawyer, you can't figure out this huge difference.[/b]
May I direct you to two key words in what I wrote: "should" and "ideal". I wasn't describing what is actually happening but, instead, what should be happening.
Capiche?
Sat, 2008-09-20 16:47
#29
quote:
Originally posted by Sven:
[b]May I direct you to two key words in what I wrote: "should" and "ideal". I wasn't describing what is actually happening but, instead, what should be happening.
Capiche?[/b]
It is possible to disagree with Stargazer without becoming the cyberspace equivelent of a swaggering mafia hardman with a testosterone hangover.
[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]
[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]
[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]
Sat, 2008-09-20 16:50
#30
M. Spector
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
[b]The people in a state cannot throw a government out if they don't know what that government is doing in the first place. Governments need watch dogs. Otherwise true democracy is not possible.[/b]
How is the watch dog supposed to know what the people don't? "Human rights" organizations don't have special access to secrets.
Canada doesn't have a watch dog. So how come we know so much about what our government is doing? Hell, we even know all about what the governments of Venezuela, Zimbabwe, the USA, and Iran are doing, to the extent that we seem to have all sorts of advice to offer them about human rights.
Sat, 2008-09-20 16:59
#31
Sven
quote:
Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
[b]It is possible to disagree with Stargazer without becoming the cyberspace equivelent of a swaggering mafia hardman with a testerone hangover.[/b]
Thank you for the admonition, daddy.
Sat, 2008-09-20 17:07
#32
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]How is the watch dog supposed to know what the people don't? "Human rights" organizations don't have special access to secrets.Canada doesn't have a watch dog. So how come we know so much about what our government is doing? Hell, we even know all about what the governments of Venezuela, Zimbabwe, the USA, and Iran are doing, to the extent that we seem to have all sorts of advice to offer them about human rights.[/b]
I guess they don't have access to secrets and maybe human rights organization is the wrong word. But somebody has to keep an eye on our elected leaders, and, no, we don't know everything our leaders are doing. But Venezuela does have an opposition party which helps to keep the government on the straight and narrow. So I guess I'm belly aching over nothing. I just wonder if we will end up in a situation similar to what occurred when Stalin was alive. Hugo may become a dictator, and some leftist may support him no matter what.
Sat, 2008-09-20 18:41
#33
It's to bad that that opposition is made up of, in large part, the spoiled, rich, right wing decendents of castillian shitkickers.
[ 20 September 2008: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]
Sat, 2008-09-20 18:56
#34
Yes - Canada.
Sat, 2008-09-20 19:19
#35
Actually I think I'll delete that last bit. Chavez may have his quirks, but he isn't evil, and he certainly isn't as nasty as the people who oppose him. He hasn't pulled a Mugabe either, which says something. I guess I'm just looking for social democratic needles in a post colonial haystack where there aren't any, at least none that the people want.
Sat, 2008-09-20 19:24
#36
quote:
Originally posted by Sven:
[b]Thank you for the admonition, daddy.[/b]
Are you hitting on me? [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]
Sat, 2008-09-20 20:10
#37
laine lowe
Groups like Human Rights Watch and so-called human rights academics like Ignatieff and Dershowitz have transformed the field of human rights into a suspect propaganda industry that reflects the will of the US and other western power brokers.
There are many grass roots organizations around the world that do much to advance human rights causes but tend to avoid branding themselves as human rights activists since the term has become rather tainted in the last few decades. These smaller groups tend to focus on specific causes and issues.
Sun, 2008-09-21 14:23
#38
[url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10286]Threat to Democracy in Latin America[/url]
quote:
On September 10 President Evo Morales of Bolivia declared the US ambassador persona non grata. On September 11 (the 35th anniversary of the military overthrow of Salvador Allende in Chile) the president of Venezuela asked the US ambassador there to leave the country. President Hugo Chбvez believed he was facing the possibility of an imminent coup d'etat in which he said the US administration were involved. President Morales believed that his government was facing serious destabilisation which was also being fomented by the US. A third country, Paraguay, announced 10 days previously that it had detected a conspiracy involving military officers and opposition politicians.Latin America now faces its most serious crisis since the reintroduction of democracy at the end of the 20th century. The plot against democracy in Venezuela centred on a conspiracy, revealed in telephone conversations between senior military officers broadcast on national television, to assassinate the democratically elected head of state. In Bolivia, the separatist prefects of the five eastern and southern departments have begun a campaign of violence and economic sabotage designed to destabilise the democratic regime.
These events show unequivocally who defends democracy and who threatens it today. We are appalled by the failure of much of the international media to provide accurate and proportionate coverage of these events. All democrats throughout should rally to defend democracy in Latin America.
Signed:
Harold Pinter, John Pilger, Tony Benn, Ken Loach, Jean Lambert MEP, Ian Gibson MP, Kelvin Hopkins MP, Billy Hayes, General secretary, CWU, Bill Greenshields
[url=http://www.onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_308.shtml]The new Gladio in action?[/url] 2005
quote:
The new techniques of warfare include the use of both lethal (violent) and nonlethal (nonviolent) tactics. Both ways are conducted using the same philosophy, infrastructure, and modus operandi. It is what is known as Cyberwar. For example, the tactic of swarming is a fundamental element in both violent and nonviolent forms of warfare. This new philosophy of war, which is supposed to replicate the strategy of Genghis Khan as enhanced by modern technologies, is intended to aid both military and non-military assaults against targeted states through what are, in effect, "high tech" hordes. In that sense there is no difference, from the standpoint of the plotters, between Iraq or Ukraine, if only that many think the Ukraine-like coup is more effective and easier
[url=http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/CIA/Gladio_Death_Democracy.html]Gladio: Death Plan for Democracy[/url] Peter Chamberlin 2008
Mon, 2008-09-22 06:05
#39
quote:
I have nothing but contempt for this bunch. Of course, even a broken watch is correct, briefly, twice a day, but that's only by accident.
[img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
Wed, 2008-10-22 23:29
#40
M. Spector
[url=http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/3882]Smoke and Mirrors: An Analysis of Human Rights Watch’s Report on Venezuela[/url]
by Greg Wilpert
Thu, 2008-10-23 10:26
#41
Even without the evidence that most of these NGOs are compromised by their sponsors, what passes as a "Human Rights" frame of reference is really a diminished version, a "National Individual Rights".
What is most telling about these organizations that purport to focus on nations and Human Rights, is the de-coupling, or downplaying, of the extraterritorial activities of a nation--and the avoidance of ranking them in a "foreign aggression index".
On one hand you can have domestic governments that are internally repressive but not given to extraterritorial aggression, and others relatively better in domestic human rights but highly destructive of the Human Rights of non-nationals.
What greater attack on Human Rights than imposing external political will on others in other regions by way of unjustified military incursions, the denying the political will of its victims by the means of destruction, occupation and death.
Thu, 2008-10-23 12:26
#42
quote:
We don't have any "human rights" organizations in Canada that hold Stephen Harper to account.
Yes we do. It's called parliament. more specifically the NDP. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]