http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7059309.stm i found this story rather intresting, specificaly: its odd, we are told that they live in an oppressive regime, when the fears of these students is already a reality in our countrys (refering to the us and uk) i find it so odd that the bbc would publish a stroy like that without even batting an eyelid, concidering the extended detension period that citizens can be held for here without being charged, and the indefinite detension period citizens of our closest ally are subject to. thoughts people?
Perhaps the Venezuelan government has declared them enemy combatants first and then held them without legal representation indefinitely.... oh wait... that's the U.S. Silly me.
Imagine having Stalin for a first name like the student in the BBC story, That's like being called Hitler or Mao or murdering despot.
The BBC has reported a world news event. that's it's purpose. The fact that the Venezuelan government is painted in a negative light is possibly because reporters themselves are seeing our own government's actions in those of a "bad" government. Though to be honest there was far less a fuss amid the populous in the Uk about the destruction of civil liberties as there seems to be in Venezuela.
Maybe, but this is just the tip of the iceberg in Venezuela. Add these events to the situation in Venezuela as a whole. What is going on in GB and the US is nothing compared to what Chavez is doing. I can't speak for Britain, so could you provide a couple of examples where this is happening? As for the United States, I have been hearing the accusations about "oppression" of the peoples civil liberties for decades. Usually it was from nut jobs, but with the current world climate there are people who are legitimately concerned about potential errosion of civil liberties. But that seems to be it, they are mostly concerned about the potential, not events that have already transpired. However, if you really feel that the US is suffering from this problem, can anyone name a situation where this is happening? I am not saying that there aren't, but I would be curious as to which of these situations is held out to be the prime example of the errosion of American civil liberties. EDIT: This is my fault for only reading the synopsis provided and not the article as a whole. But do you understand what the article states is going on? 1) By eliminating the ban on his re-election, he is setting himself up as president for life. 2) By allowing himself to bypass legal controls, he can rule by fiat. As a king. Chavez already proposed a law that any regulation that he proposes needn't be approved by the legislature for 18 months. Is this article referring to this law, or is this law in addition to the 18 month law?
You are right. Chavez is in many ways a more progressive leader and Venezuela is in many ways a much freer place politically.
1) in the UK the primeminister can be re-elected indefonatly, 2) while your president can't by-pass legal contorls per say, he is free to interprite bills in anyway he sees fit, and often completly circumvents the intention of the bill twisting it to fit his neo-con agenda of centrasising power into the presidential office. he certianly bypasses legal controls on declaring war, abusing his role as master in chief, and moving troops into countrys before congress has voted on rataifying the war there have been cases of innocent people held in G-bay for very prolonged periods of time (years) without charges being brought against them, that have eventualy turned out to be cases of mistaken identity, while i can't site specific cases at the moment, rest assured i will get them, i just have to dig through my lecture notes from last year. im aware that im not talking about the main thrust of the artical, though the frindges are far more intresting.
The extended detention period of suspects fro police questioning, I'm sure you've heard of it. Gitmo would be the most famous example.
Oh, lets see. - Domestic wiretapping without a court order. - The elimination of writ of habeas corpus by the Military Commission Act of 2006 which denies any prisoners deemed 'enemy combatants' the right to a trial or even the consideration that their imprisionment is just and warranted. - Alberto Gonzalez who claimed that articles of the Geneva Convention that related to prohibitions on torture were "quaint" and not applicable to the US's "War on Terror" (tm). Paving the way for "enhanced interrogation" techniques by US agencies. - Abduction of citizens (both domestic and foreign) deemed "suspicious" and transported to secret prisons in other countries for "enhanced interrogation". These are just the ones I pulled off the top of my head. I am sure others could be found with a little digging.
i dont know if it was overturned or not, but it certianly was completly unnecesseray since the CIA had only ever been refused a court order for a wire tape on a token number of cases, it jsut seemed like a senceless attempt to further centralse power outside elected positions. there are somany instances of blatent civil rights curtailement happening all around us, and to turn a blind eye untill it directly effects your life is a big mistake, by the time that happens it will be tolate to fight back.
