Ok that proves it. Chavez is more sane than Fox news. I bet that reporter went home and cried after such a beatdown.

He totally dodged the question but only by pointing out that Fox doesn't really deserve to ask questions. Contempt for Fox = palpable

that's what I'm saying. I'd rather FOX answer those questions he asked then he answer theirs.

Haha. Intellectualism Fail.

Chavez' argument has 2 parts:

1. Fox News is intellectually illegitimate because they criticize X (Ahmadinejad) but refuse to criticize Y (Bush), which is of the same type as X. (A fair argument, depending on your perspective.)

2. I, Chavez, am noble because I criticize Y, but refuse to criticize X, which is of the same type as Y. (Not a fair argument from any perspective.)

Chavez needs all the friends he can get! I see your point, though.

*quality

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by RhesusMonk.

>> ^chilaxe:
Haha. Intellectualism Fail.
Chavez' argument has 2 parts:
1. Fox News is intellectually illegitimate because they criticize X (Ahmadinejad) but refuse to criticize Y (Bush), which is of the same type as X. (A fair argument, depending on your perspective.)
2. I, Chavez, am noble because I criticize Y, but refuse to criticize X, which is of the same type as Y. (Not a fair argument from any perspective.)


Umm... huh? Good work on pointing out that criticising X should be equivalent to criticising Y, but why is one approach only fair "depending on your perspective" and the other "Not a fair argument from any perspective?" Your logic is a little faulty here. Sure, accuse Chavez of being a hypocrite (i.e. "intellectually illegitimate"), if you want, but this must also apply to Fox News and others, surely?

The arguments are:

1) If you criticise X you should criticise Y, else you are a hypocrite.
2) Fox News criticises X but does not criticise Y.
therefore, 3) Fox News is a hypocrite.

and

1) If you criticise Y you should criticise X, else you are a hypocrite.
2) Chavez criticises Y but does not criticise X.
therefore, 3) Chavez is a hypocrite.

Actually, Chavez's "argument" is simpler still -- I refuse to answer questions from a propaganda arm that endorsed and then covered up Bush's war crimes in Iraq.

He never attempts to justify his own actions, he just more or less declares that they have insufficient humanity to ask him questions, since they're obviously subhuman worms.

I kinda like that strategy for responding to Fox, personally.

*worldaffairs
*controversy

Adding video to channels (Controversy, Worldaffairs) - requested by NetRunner.

I wish I got all my questions through an interpreter.

I love it. Everyone should respond to FOX like this. Just laugh at them. If FOX wants to be respected, they need to earn it just like everyone else.

I understand Chavez isn't a scientist, but he doesn't have to be an intellectual dwarf who's unaware that he's engaged in the exact thing for which he's criticizing others.

Here's his argument (which I support) against Fox News: If you criticize dictators, criticize even those who are politically inconvenient to criticize.

There's nothing consistent with progressivism about giving holocaust-deniers your blanket support . ('He's my friend; I refuse to acknowledge anything negative about him when pressed.')


Re:"they have insufficient humanity to ask him questions, since they're obviously subhuman worms."

Netrunner, did you really write that? Bronze age liberalism is beneath you. You should be a leader of progressivism instead of someone who drags it into filth.

^Netrunner is right. FOX has no interest in objective journalism. They are a right wing propaganda outfit and Chavez understands this. FOX doesn't give a shit about the holocaust, they dislike Chavez because he nationalized Venezuela's petroleum industry.

How do you say "pwnd" in Spanish?

DFT, even if our enemies don't uphold their vows, we still need to uphold our vows.

My first vow is that I have to oppose all anti-intellectualism. When a figure admonishes his enemies and then breaks his own advice within 10 seconds, that's anti-intellectualism to me.

Perhaps I'm missing the point. Perhaps liberalism is supposed to be anti-intellectual, because that's what we want. If that's the case, then I'm not a liberal.

The fact that the Fox employee has to talk via an interpreter takes all the sting out of their usual strategy of shouting down the interviewee.

I never understood how Holocaust Denial hurts anyone. This is the prime reason why I love the United States, because you can say whatever you want and the state cannot intervene (that's the idea anyways and it was hard fought).

Why does anyone care about Amadinejads opinions on the matter of the holocaust, it's completely irrelevant. It's nothing more than a soundbite to be used against a dictator that's in a very important region and out of our control which is unacceptable.

Chavez may be a bit of a hypocrite but by how much? Do we want to compare George Bushes crimes with Amadinejads? It might actually be quite revealing...except the part where we find out how culpable we are.

Chilaxe, which do you think would be a better means of positively influencing Iranian politics?

a) Talking shit on FOX news.

b) Building rapport based on mutual respect.

Intellectualism doesn't require world leaders to answer disingenuous questions from ethically challenged news channels.

I love how the interpreters mood mirrors Chavez's

There is little the western world can do to change the prevailing attitude in the Muslim world that the holocaust is not real. It's ingrained in their culture, and our opinions on the matter are about as welcome to them as their opinions would be to our own religious right. This is something that can only be changed from within.

I believe diplomacy and respect is the way to encourage this, not by fear and the threat of violence.

Fox won that conversation, because that's how they'll frame if for their viewers... and many will believe it... because all they watch is Fox News.

"In moy cuntry, zer iz a bug we call d'eh Fox-Bug. It is about yah big, and it seets on z'eh skin, biting at one's arm. It sucks d'eh blood from i'z victim like leech. It is true d'at if one flexes one's muscle as it sucks, the constreected muscle traps ze bug, squeezing one's pores upon i'z stinger. Thus sending the trapped blood it was feeding shooting into ze bug'z body and causing it to explode. ...I believe you call it mosquito."

>> ^Yogi:
I never understood how Holocaust Denial hurts anyone.


Whether he believes the holocaust actually happened or not, many in the middle east see it as an excuse to create a arbitrary nation with "stolen" land. They do not see it as a good enough reason to partition the land for the surviving victims of genocide. The actual creation of Israel is a bit more complex, but attitudes do not always share the subtleties of the issues involved.

People care what Ahmadinejad thinks because he controls very real military and political power, so his view of the legitimacy of Israel is a big issue. He sees the Jews as foreign occupiers operating under the guise of victimization, so he and many others would love to remove them by force. If he publicly claims that the holocaust never happened, without anyone contradicting him, then more people in that region may believe it and feel even more animosity towards Israel.

The goal, at least for the western powers, is to defuse the tensions between Israel and Arabs so they can coexist without war. Having a leader from one of the Arab countries going around claiming the Jews were never victimized only inflames the situation and makes conflict more likely.

If they want to defuse tensions between Israel and Arab nations, they should tell Israel to GTFO already. But that won't happen. The US and Israel have been in bed together for a long while, and if the US support Israel, well, the rest of the Western world can't really do much about it.

^{Btw, please help get this sifted: http://www.videosift.com/video/USrael-The-Influence-of-the-Israel-Lobby}

>> ^Psychologic:
>> ^Yogi:
I never understood how Holocaust Denial hurts anyone.

Whether he believes the holocaust actually happened or not, many in the middle east see it as an excuse to create a arbitrary nation with "stolen" land. They do not see it as a good enough reason to partition the land for the surviving victims of genocide. The actual creation of Israel is a bit more complex, but attitudes do not always share the subtleties of the issues involved.
People care what Ahmadinejad thinks because he controls very real military and political power, so his view of the legitimacy of Israel is a big issue. He sees the Jews as foreign occupiers operating under the guise of victimization, so he and many others would love to remove them by force. If he publicly claims that the holocaust never happened, without anyone contradicting him, then more people in that region may believe it and feel even more animosity towards Israel.
The goal, at least for the western powers, is to defuse the tensions between Israel and Arabs so they can coexist without war. Having a leader from one of the Arab countries going around claiming the Jews were never victimized only inflames the situation and makes conflict more likely.


So the short version of that answer is No Holocaust Denial hurts nobody.

Also the goal of Western Powers (US, Britain) has never been to defuse tensions or create an enduring peace between Israel and Arabs. It's been to block any sort of peace for the past 35 years. That's why it's called a Peace Process, because it's what we're engaged in, and it's never ending.

>> ^EndAll:
If they want to defuse tensions between Israel and Arab nations, they should tell Israel to GTFO already. But that won't happen. The US and Israel have been in bed together for a long while, and if the US support Israel, well, the rest of the Western world can't really do much about it.
^{Btw, please help get this sifted: http://www.videosift.com/video/USrael-The-Influence-of-the-Israel-Lobby}



The Israel lobby has very little influence in US Policy. Why would they listen to a little country like Israel anyways? It's makes more sense and has been proven time and time again that the Lobby and US Interests have coincided. Chomsky has a very good debate with a professor about this...I'll try finding it.

>> ^Yogi:
>> ^EndAll:
If they want to defuse tensions between Israel and Arab nations, they should tell Israel to GTFO already. But that won't happen. The US and Israel have been in bed together for a long while, and if the US support Israel, well, the rest of the Western world can't really do much about it.
^{Btw, please help get this sifted: http://www.videosift.com/video/USrael-The-Influence-of-the-Israel-Lobby}


The Israel lobby has very little influence in US Policy. Why would they listen to a little country like Israel anyways? It's makes more sense and has been proven time and time again that the Lobby and US Interests have coincided. Chomsky has a very good debate with a professor about this...I'll try finding it.


I don't believe that's true. Did you view the video I linked to?

I like how the newsman tries to talk over Chavez, through an interpreter. Good luck with that, O'Reilly Jr.

>> ^chilaxe:
Re:"they have insufficient humanity to ask him questions, since they're obviously subhuman worms."

Netrunner, did you really write that? Bronze age liberalism is beneath you. You should be a leader of progressivism instead of someone who drags it into filth.


I was paraphrasing Chavez's attitude. Politics is as much about anti-intellectual arguments as anything, and I think this may be partially a cultural difference between our politics and the politics in Latin America. I didn't see Chavez defend himself to Fox, I saw him say "you're dishonest, and evil, and so I'm not going to tolerate you questioning me or my behavior" and walking away. I got the distinct feeling he wanted to use words more along the lines of what I said, since they're more colorful and striking.

I kinda empathize with that position, even if I think Chavez isn't exactly the most fine upstanding guy in the world himself.

Awesome translator.
Talk and listen and translate and repeat.
I can hardly do that with my own thoughts.