Venezuela's Jews Defend Leftist President in Flap Over Remarks

[IndianaGreen]

Thanking 1932 for finding this article! This is not the first time that SWC has supported neocon policies, or been a party to PNAC goals!

Venezuela's Jews Defend Leftist President in Flap Over Remarks
By MARC PERELMAN
January 13, 2006

The Venezuelan Jewish community leadership and several major American Jewish groups are accusing the Simon Wiesenthal Center of rushing to judgment by charging Venezuela's leftist president, Hugo Chavez, with making antisemitic remarks.

Officials of the leading organization of Venezuelan Jewry were preparing a letter this week to the center, complaining that it had misinterpreted Chavez's words and had failed to consult with them before attacking the Venezuelan president.

"You have interfered in the political status, in the security, and in the well-being of our community. You have acted on your own, without consulting us, on issues that you don't know or understand," states a draft of the letter obtained by the Forward. Copies of the letter are also to be sent to the heads of the World Jewish Congress and the American Jewish Committee, among other Jewish groups.

"We believe the president was not talking about Jews and that the Jewish world must learn to work together," said Fred Pressner, president of the Confederation of Jewish Associations of Venezuela. The confederation is known by its Spanish acronym, CAIV. He added that this was the third time in recent years that the Wiesenthal center had publicly criticized Chavez without first consulting the local community.

Last week the Wiesenthal Center wrote to Chavez, demanding that he apologize for what the center said was a negative reference to Jews during a Christmas Eve speech. The center also asked the governments of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay to "freeze the process" of incorporating Venezuela into Mercosur, a regional trade bloc, unless the Venezuelan president publicly apologizes.

http://www.forward.com/articles/7189

[lvx35]

1. Good for them.

There seems to be some paranoia in some of these American/Canadian jewish organizations. When I heard that wacko conspiracy theorist David Icke, who believes that extra-terrestrial lizards are infusing their genes into humanity, was being protested as anti-semitic I knew that it had gone too far. Still, Chavez's comments were stupid. If they weren't about jews (probably not) they were about whites, and they are bad mojo nevertheless, whatever "minority" he was refering to.

[1932]

2. He was talking about the minority of the powerful.

You should read Leonardo Boff.

[Solon]

4. You can't critisize the comments as anything without knowing the context..

from within his country and culture. First, they critisize a translation, a communication that was NOT intended for those outside of the culture in question to understand. All nations, as a general rule, have at least two sectors for language use. One is the common use, the language most people learn and most of the population speaks. This includes a lot of slang, idioms and etc. that make little to no sense or can be misconstrued by others that are not native to either the culture or language. The "other" language of sorts is the legalistic or diplomatic section, such as legal documents, like Constitutions or laws, and also treaties, etc. This use of the same language cuts down on idioms and other uses of language that do not translate well, down to the bare bones, so to speak. Basically, Chavez did absolutely nothing wrong, in this context, unlike our own President, he seems to command his own language as well as anyone within his own country. This communication was intended for a specific audience, the people of Venezuela, no one else.

[lvx35]

6. The operative word is "descendants"

Whatever it was translated from. When talking about the enemy as a "minority" who are the "descendants" of such and such you are talking about a genetic group...I'm not disagreeing with you, but rather pointing out the spot that may be the source of confusion if you are indeed right. Perhaps the spanish word can be taken to mean "descendants in spirit".

[Karmakaze]

10. Give me a break!

Even in English, "descendants" is not used purely to denote genetic groups - in fact that is its LEAST used meaning. We may say that one person is descended from another and mean genetics, but we also may say one school of thought is descended from another, and NOT mean genetics.

To try and force the meaning to be ONLY genetics is wrong, and not borne out by a plain reading of the statement.

What Chavez was saying, and it is not even obscure but is clear on a plain reading of the text, is that the powerful of today are the descendants (in the sense of how they act) of the powerful of then - working against and even KILLING anyone who dared to question their authority, or tried to make things better for ordinary people.

[lvx35]

53. You're talking like its obvious and its not.

Take an example: I'm talking about the minority who descended from african slaves brought to this country. Who am I talking about? I'm talking about the minority who descended from the people who crossed the ice bridge from siberia. Who am I talking about? In America at least, the most common meaning for minority is ethnic, and that meaning is brought more to the front when a minority is denoted as being descendants of somebody or other. This was pretty clear to these jewish groups, though the attack was probably not directed against them.

[TheBaldyMan]

3. thanks to 1932 and IG for the link

I think a lot of DUers will be vindicated in their defence of Chavez after the SWC's accusations.

One official noted that Latin America's so-called Liberation Theology has long depicted Jesus as a socialist and consequently speaks of gentile business elites as "Christ-killers."

this section set me straight about my concerns about 'Christ-Killers'

[tatertop]

5. Common sense is a wonderful thing

[Behind the Aegis]

7. Context is everything.

I don't fault the SWC for their initial reaction, but instead of asking for an apology, it would have more prudent (and diplomatic) to ask for a clarification, explaining why one was needed.

[Karmakaze]

11. None was EVER needed.

And as the Venezuelan Jewish group said, if SWC had bothered to ask THEM they would have found that out. But oh no! SWC doesnt need to know or even attempt to find out what the facts are, they can just make demands for apologies or demands for explanations, and everyone else should clear everything they have to say with SWC to avoid even a non-sensical accusation of anti-semitism.

In fact as far as I am concerned, the SWC was the only organisation to act in a racist way here - by assuming that a non-Jew MUST be an anti-semite.

[pinerow]

17. The SWC needs to employ their own translators and

not depend on the neo-convicts for their translations...I would glady volunteer...I don;t have a dog in this fight...sheesh.

[pinerow]

18. The SWC needs to employ their own translators and

and not depend on the neo-convicts...sheesh.

[pinerow]

19. The SWC needs to employ their own translators and

not depend on the neo-convicts...sheesh.

[pinerow]

20. Mods...please delete dupes..I have no idea how that happened...

:blush:

[Judi Lynn]

8. When I saw the second thread a short time ago, concerning yet another

backlash to a Hugo Chavez speech made to the people of his country, I thought, “Jezus Christ, not AGAIN!”

The first thread on that speech was locked, finally, after a poster or two,bit the dust:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=2020953#2023723

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So many people were hot to wade in and start landing blows without having the vagueist idea of what was actually said. They were told again and again they didn't grasp the context, didn't have an accurate translation, and it didn't slow them down one bit. Why take time to actually get informed on the subject, anyway, when you can be out there swinging away wildly and hoping to get some great insults launched which might stick and discredit a few Democrats.

Indiana Green, you are to be commended for your superior constraint, patience, and decency. I don't know how you do it.

Long live Hugo Chavez, and may fate allow him to make the important progress in his elected position which the vast majority of the country has needed for so very, very long, having suffered so much for so long from the Venezuelan MINORITY which owns and controls almost everything, almost all the land in Venezuela, forcing the people into "living" conditions not really even healthy enough for the simplest animals.

Only a leader like Chavez started the ball rolling on getting this problem SOLVED. The European-descended MINORITY was more than happy to leave these people clinging to the sides of mountains, getting swept down in mudslides in rainstorms, and burned in great numbers by fires raging through their cardboard and tin shacks.

It's wry to have learned that the MINORITY decided they'd better arm themselves heavily after Chavez was elected, expecting the desperately poor to become emboldened and dangerous.

[Karmakaze]

12. Racism...

The people jumping on the bandwaggon were speaking from a racist perspective. For example many posters said that "killers of Christ" is a codeword for Jew, and thus he MUST be anti-semetic. Of course it is a codeword among WHITE CHRISTIANS, and they just assumed that that means it is for EVERYONE. Racism. We do it so they must do it too.

An ignorance of other cultures to the point of willfulness is, in my opinion the most common form of racism, and exists even among those who would argue tooth and nail that they are NOT racist. They don't know about "Liberation Theology" and it is not a part of their culture, so it must be less likely to be the explanation than something that is (ie. a codeword for Jew).

The rest of their arguments is based on that extremely low level racism, and makes sense to them becuase they do not even recognise the racist underpining of their belief. Thus trying to force "descendant" to mean only "genetic heredity" rather than the way it is more commonly used to mean RELATED TO whether by blood, action or thought.

Thus no-one says that skinheads are blood relatives of Hitler, but no one would question me saying that they are descended from the German Nazi party. They share common ideals beliefs and actions. This is the common usage of "descended", but that doesn't reinforce their racist view that a Venezuelan must use the same cultural "code words" as they do, and thus this common usage has to be overlooked.

Add into the mix their desire for Chavez to be seen as bad, for at least SOME reason, and believing he is an anti-semite is far more likely to occur than them questioning their OWN beliefs.

Sad, but common, even here on DU.

[Judi Lynn]

13. Great points. Especially insightful is your remark,

"An ignorance of other cultures to the point of willfulness is, in my opinion the most common form of racism, and exists even among those who would argue tooth and nail that they are NOT racist."

That point is so accurate. It's widespread, too, isn't it? That ignorance assumes inferiority, unworthiness in others, with no responsibility to treat them with respect. Sad.

[Karmakaze]

14. To be perfectly honest we ALL suffer from it to one degree or another

The only thing we can do is to pay attention to our own ASSUMPTIONS about other cultures and question ourselves "Is that what they believe, or is that what *I* believe they believe?".

The truly willful people are the ones who would argue that that is "moral or cultural relativism" - they KNOW that other cultures are different but believe that others' must be FORCED to be the same as theirs. To them, even suggesting that cultures do not do things the same way, and that what they see as wrong another culture may see as acceptable, is a veiled way of saying that THEIR culture is wrong.

In any case, I do believe that this IS the most widespread form of racism, and is especially strong amongst wealthy nations - nations whose cultures are becoming more similar as they intertwine their economic, political and social lives with each other. "The Western World" is their way of saying "our culture" and "The Third World" is their way of saying "not YET our culture, but it soon will be if we have our way".

Sadly, Christianity is the most to blame for this form racism, because they have long carried it out in the form of missionaries attempting to "civilise" the world. Many cultures were in reality FAR MORE civil by any definition of the term than the European Christian culture, but the mere fact these other cultures existed, was reason enough to eradicate them if not by sword, then by bible.

[bemildred]

23. Yes.

You begin with a healthy dose of humility and an open mind and heart.
:headbang::applause::grouphug:

[bvar22]

30. Like....

not even bothering to count their deaths in a WAR bush* started?

or not being concerned that these deaths are not being counted?



In EVERY case, "Barriers to Trade" and "Restrictions on Corporations" were created to protect something valuable!

The Democratic Party is a BIG TENT, but there is NO ROOM for those
who advance the agenda of THE RICH (Corporate Owners) at the EXPENSE of LABOR and the POOR.

[UncleSepp]

38. It's not racism - it's ordinary misunderstanding

Here's how it works.

"Christ killers" is an idiom in the Euro-American cultural context meaning Jews, with a very negative connotation. "Christ killers" in the cultural context of liberation theology is an idiom meaning the exploitative wealthy. As with many idioms, the speaker of the idiom does not realize he is using idiomatic speech. Speaker and listener assume that both attach the same non-literal meaning to the idiom.

Usually, when the language of the speaker and the language of the listener differ, the idiom used by the speaker will not exist in the language of the listener, and the idiom comes across as nonsense. For example, a German speaker saying in English to an English speaker "Press your thumbs" will expect that the listener will understand that he means "good luck". The well-wishes of the German speaker in this case will be merely confusing. Imagine the insult that might happen should the English speaker respond in German with "Break a leg"!

In the "Christ killers" case, the idiom exists in both cultural contexts and both languages. The best example for miscommunication by using idiomatic expressions isn't words, but hand signs. Think of how easy it is to get in trouble with a thumbs up or an OK. Even waving goodbye (with your hand pointed away from your body) or waving hello (with your palm toward the other person) could get you in trouble in some places. If someone were to ask for one more in a bar in the US by pointing one finger in the air - and it were his middle finger - it would be understandable for the American bartender to think he was being flipped the bird. It is also understandable for someone in Iran being shown the thumbs-up not to find that ok.

The "Christ killers" idiom is even more deeply difficult to translate than simple words, phrases, or hand gestures because it is also a cultural reference that can't be simply explained in a few words. Cultural references like this come up most often when people quote movies, television, or pieces of literature to each other. If someone says "I'm wet, and I'm still hysterical" when they mean "That thing you/I did to try to fix my/your situation seems to have made it worse, but it's actually pretty funny", it won't make sense to the listener if the listener hasn't seen The Producers.

This particular idiom as Chavez used it requires an understanding of a particular school of Christian theology, and to understand it as it was understood by the SWC requires an understanding of a different school of Christian theology and also an understanding of European history. It is a very loaded, very complex idiom.

Idioms are difficult to translate, and I think that's what happened here - an ordinary translation problem. This is why it's good, when your speech is likely to be translated into many languages immediately or within a short period of time, to avoid idioms and instead to speak literally.

In my opinion, there's no racism required to explain this misunderstanding. It's a common kind of mistake.

[0007]

52. Thank you very much, I just read your link to the thread that

was locked.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Thank you again. I failed to see it the first time. Kudos also to IG.

Your photos are great as always.

[The Backlash Cometh]

9. My respect for the latin American intellect grows every day.

[TomClash]

15. What a surprise

Only people ignorant of Latin American politics and history would see Chavez as an antisemite.

Good job by The Forward in exposing the Simon Wiesenthal Center's errors.

[TomClash]

16. Curious how the SWC tied an "apology"

to Venezuela's entry into Mercosur.

It's the SWC that should apologize.

[Peace Patriot]

21. Why has the Wiesenthal Center ignored local Jews THREE times?

When this flap first broke, people here at DU were saying it was just a cultural mistake on the part of the Wiesenthal Center. I'm not so sure. Re-read this part...

"He (Fred Pressner, president of the Confederation of Jewish Associations of Venezuela) added that this was the THIRD time in recent years that the Wiesenthal center had publicly criticized Chavez without first consulting the local community." (emphasis added)

So, the Wiesenthal Center has repeatedly failed to consult local Jews about Chavez. Not just this once. Not just regarding this misinterpretation of his remarks. But on two other occasions. Why would that be?

The first thing that occurred to ME, upon reading this--that they've done this three times--is that they have a vendetta against Chavez, just like the Bushites do, and that it might have to do with the Wiesenthal Center's support for Bush's war in the Middle East (or support for that war by individual members and leaders of the Center, if not official policy of the Center). This may be a tit for tat. 'We support your war, ergo any enemy of yours is an enemy of ours.' So, they pile onto Chavez, for no good reason at all--but because the Bushites hate him.

Chavez is the FIRST brown-faced man of indigenous origins to become the leader of ANY South American country. (A second was just overwhelmingly elected in Bolivia--Evo Morales.) He represents the vast population of poor brown people who have never before been served by government, who have never before been represented in government, and who have been ruthlessly exploited by Venezuela's own oil elite, and by global corporate predators, for centuries. He is a just and peaceful and honestly elected, democratic president, with big support in Venezuela. As such, the Simon Wiesenthal Center should be CELEBRATING his success, not dissing him--not leaping to criticize him, and ignoring LOCAL Jewish opinion, and doing that repeatedly.

So I question the Wiesenthal Center's motives. I think they owe the local Venezuelan Jewish community and the rest of us an explanation. Why are they criticizing a head of government in South America whom they should be praising, and whom they should be helping to protect from Bush's fascist, racist death squads? And I they owe both Chavez an apology.

[TomClash]

22. Two possibilities

This organization is either carrying water for Bush and the PNAC or it is fronting for Israel, attacking Chavez because of Venezuela's improved ties with Iran.

The failure to consult the jewish community in Venezuela three times seems to make the likelihood of a mistake quite remote.

[1932]

27. I think it has to do with the way they get their funding, and I think this

applies as well to organizations like HRW, and even Amnesty International.

Many of these organizations get significant portions of their funding from corporations and from very wealthy individuals who didn't get wealthy helping the poor. And face it, corporations don't give a lot of money to organizations unless they can justify the donations to their shareholders as having some positive influence on their bottom line.

Even if 99% of the activities of a corporate-funded NGO are cool as shit, it just takes one board member and their pet-hiree to start injecting the NGO with a pro-corporate line of propaganda.

I suspect that whoever has the Latin American or Venezuelan desk at the SWC has an agenda that is influenced by the interests of at least one (but not all) of the board members.

See my tripple (!) post below. I think that my unsublte analogy explains the motivation.

[1932]

24. Answer might be in their proposed punishment for Ven: Mercosur membership

"The center also asked the governments of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay to "freeze the process" of incorporating Venezuela into Mercosur, a regional trade bloc, unless the Venezuelan president publicly apologizes."

This has been their proposed punishment two of the three times they complained about Chavez. (The other times were when Chavez invoked Hitler in describing former extreme right-wing Spanish president Aznar, and when he described his political opposition as being like the "wandering jew" (the guy who mocked Christ on his way to the crucifixion -- Christ told him that he would wander the earth until his return)).

It seems like a kind of off-the-wall sort of punishment. It's sort of like if one were a corporate funded NGO afraid in the mid-90s that the EU was going to become more powerful than the US and undermine US corporate power and so, say, everytime the president of France or PM of Germany said something that you could spin into a negative connotation, you then argued that they shouldn't be allowed in the EU because your real goal was to keep the EU powerless (by targeting most powerful potential members) so that the corporate interests which supported you could still have their hefty profit margins and not be forced into competition with European businesses, or faced with a large federal goverment which took anti-trust law more seriously than the US did.

I guess that analogy isn't so subtle.

[IndianaGreen]

28. SWC raising the issue of MERCOSUR is a red flag

which to me indicated motives not related to the issue of anti-Semitism, but that SWC (or someone with influence with SWC) feared that Venezuela's entry in MERCOSUR would create a powerful block of countries to deter America's neo-liberal policies in Latin America.

Howard Dean's cheap and underhanded attack on "leftward" governments in Latin America is another red flag (no pun intended) that the elites in our country are getting concerned that Bush's war in Iraq will lead to the loss of Latin America.

[dailykoff]

31. Very sad.

That makes all too much sense.

[Peace Patriot]

29. Well, "wandering Jew" is certainly an ill-advised usage, although, as with

the other two things that the Wiesenthal Center has cited, it depends a lot on how you feel about Chavez. I would as soon believe that Chavez is an antisemite as I would believe that, oh, say, Martin Luther King was an antisemite. It's just not in the man. He doesn't think that way. He is a better person than that. So I would dismiss it as an acceptable literary/Biblical reference. (I mean, it IS true that Jews have wandered--that's what the establishment of the state of Israel is all about, isn't it? To end the Diaspora.) But if you have an agenda against Chavez, then you could jump on that, and on the other two statements, and misinterpret them.

On the Hitler one, I would defer to the Spanish-speaking for how sensitive one should be to the fascist tendencies in the Spanish rightwing. The Spanish left took a direct hit.

On "descended from the Christ-killers," I think it's believed among MOST progressive Catholics--the majority of Catholics, in my opinion, the "grass roots" (whether found in South America, Ireland or Los Angeles, or anywhere else)--that Jesus was a threat to the rich and the privileged, whether Jewish, Roman, or, today, Bushites and Venezuelan oil elites. He lived with the poor, communally. He spoke constantly about the poor. He was conveying the heart-message of Judaism, compassion--which some Jews had strayed from, into hypocrisy. But just because Jesus was a Jew, and was trying to reform Judaism, doesn't mean that the abuse by the rich and privileged is confined to one race. It very obviously is not.

Historically, bigoted Christians, and the Church itself, used this accusation to inflict pogroms and confiscation of property--and much worse--on Jewish communities, so Jews do have reason to object to any such implication. But the Church also used the Inquisition against "witches" to confiscate property--as well as its persecutions of Protestants (and visa versa). We have a long history of bigotry and venal motives for bigotry--of which the Jews have taken, by far, the worst consequences. It dates back at least to the 5th Century A.D., and the pogroms against the Jews in Alexandria, by one of the earliest "Church Fathers," Bishop Cyril.

The bishops of that era were probably the ones who inserted this purported Jesus curse into their selected set of gospels (along with inserting a lot of other lies--I swear, they are just like the Bushites.) They were into property and material wealth, and were also viciously anti-Pagan. Cyril was the one who had the famous philosopher and teacher Hypatia slain, in one of the foulest deeds of the early "Church Fathers"--she was allied with the Roman Prefect, Orestes, who was a PROTECTOR of the Jews, and of the great Alexandrian tradition of religious tolerance.

Anyway, what I'm getting at is that a man whom I see as being in the great tradition of the Enlightenment--Chavez--could NOT be an antisemite. One of Chavez's chief goals is creating schools in poor communities and ending illiteracy. To me, this forms a direct line back to Hypatia, who might be considered the founder of the modern Enlightenment, which then took a thousand years to catch up with her. She was first of all, and most of all, a TEACHER, and believed in the education of the common citizen, and the promulgation of learning. Way back then.

And people who tend to bigotry of any kind don't tend to be the ones supporting universal education. There are exceptions, I'm sure. (There always are.) But as a general rule. Bigots foster stupidity and ignorance. Chavez seems to be an open minded, open handed, highly intelligent man who sees education as the key to his peoples' future, and would seem to be the last person on earth to hate anybody for their race. He doesn't even hate North Americans. He seems to see right through the Bushite garbage to the truth that we, too, are poor and oppressed.

----------------

Given all of this--the great unlikelihood (and with the testimony of the local Jewish community) that Chavez is an antisemite--I think we need to investigate this problem at the Wiesenthal Center, and try to understand what is really going on. It seems to me an identifiable goal of Corporate Rulers and Bushites to SUBVERT good, progressive causes and organizations--organizations that the great progressive majority in this country depends upon. The Democratic Party, for instance. The New York Times. NPR. News organizations in general. And, on the matter of electronic voting, handicapped advocacy groups, and even the League of Women Voters. And I've also seen it in the environmental movement (just outright co-option). Wrought by money, mostly--and with considerable forethought and planning.

So is that what's going on here? Subversion by oil corporations, war profiteers, beneficiaries of the "war on drugs," or other corporate interests? Ask who would have an interest in keeping a strong, populist democracy like Venezuela out of the South American regional trade group, or who among the Wiesenthal Center's major donors has an interest in high heating oil prices, and we may find who is behind the Wiesenthal Center attacks on Chavez.

[K-W]

32. I dont see how it is ill advised really.

The people who he is talking to understand what he is saying and the powerful will find lies to tell about him no matter what he says. Chavez isnt and shouldnt censor himself to avoid being taken out of context by reactionary institutions in the US. Chavez isnt from our culture, he cant be expected to be politically correct by our standards.

[fishwax]

81. it doesn't matter if his audience understand

it only matters how Americans react. Why should Venezuela expect the privilege of it's own culture? :sarcasm:

It just boggles my mind how some expect foreign leaders to some how filter their comments for our cultural context. :eyes:

And this is also spot on: the powerful will find lies to tell about him no matter what he says

[1932]

50. "wandering jew" at Wikipedia, IIRC, lists many literary references

and I don't think most of them would be considered anti-semitic.

[1932]

25. dupe

[1932]

26. trip

[Behind the Aegis]

33. I am horribly saddened by many of the comments on this thread.

Some of the reactions here are disgusting, but not unexpected, sadly.

[IndianaGreen]

34. I think that the comments by SWC regarding MERCOSUR raises...

a legitimate issue regarding SWC real motives in recently taking an anti-Chavez line. We know how money has corrupted our governmental institutions and our politicians. One cannot dismiss the possibility that the same corruption may be present in organizations that are supposedly non-partisan.

[Behind the Aegis]

35. I can agree to that comment...

...but you have to admit some of the posts here are down-right despicable. I am just waiting for the torch-wielding villagers to go and burn the SWC to the ground.

[IndianaGreen]

36. The Bush dictatorship are experts at pushing our buttons

I would like to know the means by which SWC came to issue their anti-Chavez statement, who was behind it, and the sources that it relied upon. If there are one or more persons in SWC that are trying to use the organization as a tool of neo-liberalism, they need to be quickly exposed before they taint SWC's reputation.

[NorthernSpy]

37. oh, get a hold of yourself...

...but you have to admit some of the posts here are down-right despicable. I am just waiting for the torch-wielding villagers to go and burn the SWC to the ground.

:eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes::eyes:....................


Sometimes, there just aren't enough eyes to roll...

:eyes:

[Behind the Aegis]

41. get a hold of yourself...while your at it...

...understand that I can express my opinion any way I see fit, as within the rules of DU.

So... :eyes: indeed!

[K-W]

42. Who said you couldnt express your opinion? EOM

[Behind the Aegis]

43. No one said it, including me. eom.

[oblivious]

49. I've read the whole thread and can't see anything despicable.

The discussion seems reasonable, the criticism of SWC's accusations justified. Your harsh adjectives don't quite fit.

edit: spelling

[1932]

51. Yes. Also, is it despicable to agree with CAIF regarding SWC?

[Behind the Aegis]

64. Thank you for your opinion.

However, mine still stands.

[Colorado Blue]

39. Agreed. One wishes to barf.

[IndianaGreen]

40. SWC giving Rupert Murdoch an award is enough reason to barf

Murdoch is no more a friend to Israel than Pat Robertson. The fact that SWC has allied itself with the likes of Murdoch and against the progressive government of Venezuela speaks volume as to how SWC has been subverted from within.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,1658,5096117,00.jpg

Rupert Murdoch feted
Adam Harvey
13jan06

FOR once, there was no sign of Nicole Kidman's constant companion. But Keith Urban's ring was clearly visible on the actor's left hand in New York last night, as she presented News Corporation chairman Rupert Murdoch with a humanitarian award.

"As you are probably aware we are both from a place we call "Down Under", said Kidman, explaining why she had been chosen to present the Simon Wiesenthal Center's Humanitarian Laureate Award to Mr Murdoch.

The award recognises Mr Murdoch's support for Israel. Mr Murdoch thanked "his real friend and great sport" for agreeing to present the award.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,17804871%255E663,00.html

[Colorado Blue]

44. That may be. But several of the above comments are OTT

and indicate a great misunderstanding about the raison d'etre of the SWC.

I myself felt that Chavez' comments were questionable. Surely they left a very large area for misinterpretation.

Also, I've been reading recently, over on LU, that Chavez himself isn't exactly a saint. Perhaps you know more about this than I do, I'm just beginning to learn about it.

[Violet_Crumble]

60. Read post #12 on racism and culture...

Also, that forum you mention that says Chavez isn't a saint is populated by bigots and conservatives and has little other purpose than in slagging off DU and other progressive sites. I doubt that there'd be anything intelligent or honest being said about Chavez there, and surely there are much better places on the net to be learning about Chavez...

Violet...

[Violet_Crumble]

57. Now THAT was barf-worthy....

Urgh....

[FlemingsGhost]

45. Thicker skin might help ...

Then again, some aren't happy unless they're saddened and disgusted.

[IndianaGreen]

46. SWC's comments about MERCOSUR are a big CLUE

that there is a hidden agenda in here, which is why I would like to know who among SWC's board and supporters has a financial stake in neo-liberal globalist policies, and wants the elites to be restored to power in Venezuela and elsewhere in Latin America.

SWC tipped its hand when it mentioned MERCOSUR, because the nations that make up MERCOSUR were the ones that opposed FTAA and challenged Bush to his face.

Money is the great corruptor of all, and money is at the heart of SWC's anti-Chavez crusade, a crusade that is being led by neo-liberal opinion makers such as the NY Times.

On edit:

The DLC is also opposed to Chavez and the "leftward" trend in Latin America. The DLC has infected the Democratic Party with its version of Reagan's trickled down economics and its support of neo-liberal globalism.

[Colorado Blue]

54. I did a little research on the Jewish community in Venezuela.

It is tiny - only about 15,000 people - and there has been antisemitism there.

http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2002-3/venezuela.htm
http://www.tau.ac.il/Anti-Semitism/asw2003-4/venezuela.htm

This link describes a raid on a Jewish school, and details the fact that many in Venezuela have linked the coup which temporarily ousted Chavez to Jews:

http://www.jewishjournal.com/home/preview.php?id=13373

I think it's wise to have perspective about the subtext here.

Those who are flying off the handle and saying we need "thicker skin" should go read a history book or two.

[Violet_Crumble]

58. Ah, so CAIF are lying? I don't think so...

The clear subtext is that even when confronted by the Venezuelan Jewish community own words that what Chavez said wasn't anti-Semitic, and that this is not the first time that Jewish groups in Venezuela have asked that SWC consult with them before making attacks on Chavez, the hatred of some towards Chavez is so great that they'll just try to find some other slant to come at with their ridiculous claims that Chavez is anti-Semitic...

Violet...

[1932]

77. That raid was the police following a tip re murder of Danilo Anderson

Here are two articles that shed light on the raid:

http://venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1434 : gov't had tip that weapons used by suspects were stored at the school on their way to being transported to a gun club -- it looks like the tip wasn't accurate.

However, some those suspects -- the muscle -- ended up being convicted with overwhelming evidence (while the people accused of providing the money and insipiration are released on bail): http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news.php?newsno=1854

[Behind the Aegis]

48. This is true...

Of course, some aren't happy unless they're making others sad and making disparaging remarks.

[Colorado Blue]

55. Please see my post, #54.

[Jim Sagle]

56. While others aren't happy unless they cause sadness and disgust.

[goforit]

47. Now this is impressive!!!.......Time to kick those extremists out!

[Xipe Totec]

59. Great post. Thank You!

You got to admit, Chavez's statement has to be read very carefully to understand that the target of his barb is not Jews, but the white oligarchy.

I am genuinely relieved to hear that Chavez is not anti-Semite, and that the Jewish community in Venezuela supports him.

[Fredda Weinberg]

61. "in the security" ...

Dude, you don't see the forest - but I suspect you may not want to. These people are basically prisoners saying that their captors want to hear ... and this was the code word that should have warned you.

Maybe you've never been surrounded by a crowd shouting, "Christ Killer", but if you had, it might change your perspective on Chavez's remark - and I support his Bolivarian revolution!

[Colorado Blue]

62. That's the point. The demographics alone tell a story.

The Jewish community is down to 15,000. According to the TAU reports, only a few years ago there were 22,000 out of Venezuela's total population of about 22,000,000.

These comments are not an attempt to discredit Chavez. There are some on this forum who would like to think so, but they're wrong. I for one want very much to believe in Chavez.

However, for a liberal website to dismiss out of hand the observations of the SWC, and look for A Plot, or accuse people who found the comments alarming of trying to undermine a leftist, as if we aren't leftists, or undermine a brown person, as if Jewish people aren't brown, is disturbing.

[K-W]

66. nevermind eom

[Dutch]

71. I see

So it's outrageous to suggest that the SWC was acting as a tool of the Bush regime, but it's fine to dismiss, indeed smear, the CAIV as merely acting, under pressure, as Chavez mouthpieces; even though there is zero hard evidence for this, and the very proposition itself involves buying into the Bushite fantasy of Venezuela as an undemocratic tyranny?

Personally, I don't think either organisation is a tool of anyone but themselves, although I do think the SWCs initial outburst was rooted in an imperialistic worldview, as is the continuing refusal of some DUers to view chavez' remarks in the context of the culture to which he belongs.

[Judi Lynn]

63. For those who haven't taken the time to read it when it was offered TWICE

already, you can save yourself a lot of time now by reading this article concerning information from the Venezulean Jewish Community. It was posted by poster 1932, then Indiana Green reposted it, in hope people fumbling in the dark might find their way back to reality. It will surely save you a lot of time, and embarrassment, to get focused on the valuable information therein:

Venezuela's Jews Defend Leftist President in Flap Over Remarks
By MARC PERELMAN
January 13, 2006

The Venezuelan Jewish community leadership and several major American Jewish groups are accusing the Simon Wiesenthal Center of rushing to judgment by charging Venezuela's leftist president, Hugo Chavez, with making antisemitic remarks.

Officials of the leading organization of Venezuelan Jewry were preparing a letter this week to the center, complaining that it had misinterpreted Chavez's words and had failed to consult with them before attacking the Venezuelan president.

"You have interfered in the political status, in the security, and in the well-being of our community. You have acted on your own, without consulting us, on issues that you don't know or understand," states a draft of the letter obtained by the Forward. Copies of the letter are also to be sent to the heads of the World Jewish Congress and the American Jewish Committee, among other Jewish groups.

"We believe the president was not talking about Jews and that the Jewish world must learn to work together," said Fred Pressner, president of the Confederation of Jewish Associations of Venezuela. The confederation is known by its Spanish acronym, CAIV. He added that this was the third time in recent years that the Wiesenthal center had publicly criticized Chavez without first consulting the local community.
(snip/...)

http://www.forward.com/articles/7189

[Behind the Aegis]

65. And I say...

post #7

[IndianaGreen]

67. Clearly someone connected to SWC has a financial stake in Venezuela

We saw in the Abramoff case how money can corrupt any institution, SWC may be the same case.

[Colorado Blue]

68. Respectfully, I don't see why that should be so.

Perhaps they jumped to conclusions but when I read those comments my skin crawled. "Christ-killers who have all the money", more or less, is pretty specific and it's especially specific within the framework of a Catholic culture. And Jews to many Socialists and Communists are specifically seen as parasites, etc. and de facto evil representatives and enablers of capitalism.

So there's a double-whammy implied here.

Also, there was talk that Jews were involved when Chavez was temporarily deposed.

We Jews in the US speak up and complain BECAUSE WE CAN. We feel safe here, and I hope that will continue to be the case. But it is becoming increasingly respectable to disrespect Jews in everyday discourse. My nieces report a pretty depressing level of nasty commentary, slang and other forms of verbal abuse, that is just part of the culture, the background noise, of their world. I grew up with it, but it seems to getting more open and in places one wouldn't expect to find it.

I think the point that Fredda Weinberg made above is well-taken. The fact that the Jewish community in Venezuela felt compelled to complain to the SWC as least in part, because their security and safety was threatened by the SWC's comments, speaks volumes to me. Would we here feel unsafe if somebody in France complained about an American leader's rhetoric?

Don't you agree that's revealing? Read how their statement is phrased.

Maybe there's no point in complaining about this stuff. I'm beginning to think it's so deeply ingrained in the culture that people don't even know it's there - until it erupts, as it periodically has for 2,000 years - and it's too late to do anything about it. I don't think it's ever going to go away.

[IndianaGreen]

74. May I point out that Jews were the backbone of Lenin's revolution

And Jews to many Socialists and Communists are specifically seen as parasites

Not true at all! Marx was Jewish, as was Trotsky who founded the Red Army. Several of Lenin's top aides were also Jewsih. Stalin was the only anti-Semite in the group, but then so was Walt Disney, Willima Randolph Hearst, and other American capitalist icons.

Jews were and continue to be at the forefront of the fight against oppression. As a matter of fact, the entire deal with the Rosenberg prosecution was to frighten the liberal Jews from opposing American imperialism and interventionism in Iran, Guatemala, Greece, etc.

The only parasites, from a Marxist point of view, are the capitalists!

[Colorado Blue]

76. Of course we were instrumental in the creation of Marxism.

And it goes without saying that Jews lead the fight against oppression. There was an eloquent post in I/P, by an African American who said it would be his last here on DU, in which he recalled the fact that the only white faces in the civil rights marches of the '60's, were Jewish. The topic was, I believe, the President of Iran and his Holocaust Denial. Israel, which is constantly tarred and feathered as an apartheid, racist state, is in fact the only state in the region where people of all faiths and all sexes and all colors, live together, vote, and are equal citizens under the law. Many of the original Zionists were idealistic Socialists.

Beyond that, the capitalists blamed us, and still blame us, for the Bolshevik Revolution. This as you point out, was a problem shared by many powerful Americans and Europeans. Henry Ford put copies of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" in the glove compartment of every car he sold. The impact of the Bolshevik Revolution on the REALLY powerful bankers had awful consequences on Jews, including those in the Palestine Mandate.

When I was growing up, the slander was that we Jews were members of The Zionist Communist World Domination Conspiracy.

Now, it's The Zionist Neocon World Domination Conspiracy.

Times have changed.

Logic and rationality have nothing to do with this. The Soviet Union IN FACT was notorious in its treatment of Jews. Many on the Left are IN FACT, antisemitic but they cloak their language in terms of Zionism, "neocons", "PNAC", Israel, elite bankers, or Joe Lieberman.

And Trotsky got shot.

Here's a good article on this subject, which discusses this bigotry on the "New Left", which has adopted Israel as its pet bugaboo. I'm not eloquent or smart enough to really get my point across but I think this author is:

http://www.axt.org.uk/

The title of the article is

A DISCOURSE OF DELEGITIMISATION: THE BRITISH LEFT AND THE JEWS

By Ben Cohen

You have to enter the site, click on "European Extremism" and it will take you to the article, along with some others.

By the way I appreciate the conversation. My mom was a Socialist, and my aunt and uncle were Communists. I believe in the principles, to each, from each. I was raised with the idea that Making A Contribution was a sacred commitment, and that sharing is essential, that economic justice is fundamental to the creation of a peaceful and prosperous community.

But I can't close my eyes to what I've been seeing.

[killbotfactory]

69. Too late. The damage is done

I have already seen "moderates" on other message boards denouncing Chavez as an anti-semite and making quips about him "defending" Iran.

[IndianaGreen]

75. Those are the same stupid Americans that oppose filibuster of Alito

and see nothing wrong with torture and Guantanamo. You are seeing the cancer that is eating the Democratic Party away, the cancer of "Me Too" when it comes to GOP policies and wars.

[Judi Lynn]

70. It would be productive if folks took the time to read the article

in the original post, and spent a moment trying to grasp its meaning. How hard is it to understand, anyway? Many posts were already made by DU'ers who already speak and read Spanish fluently who recognized there was a problem with Americans who neither speak Spanish nor have any understanding of the actual context of the speech over which many people have been pouring, hoping to find proof of something which simply isn't there.

As the _Bush administration would claim, it's giving satisfaction to the enemy. The enemy, in my view, would be the propagandameisters who have been riding this man's back like the furies from the very moment _Bush seized power.

From the article too few have acknowledged:

Both the AJCommittee and the American Jewish Congress seconded the Venezuelan community's view that Chavez's comments were not aimed at Jews. All three groups said he was aiming his barbs at the white oligarchy that has dominated the region since the colonial era, pointing to his reference to Bolivar as the clearest evidence of his intent.

One official noted that Latin America's so-called Liberation Theology has long depicted Jesus as a socialist and consequently speaks of gentile business elites as "Christ-killers."

[Dutch]

72. Hmm

I guess the AJCommittee and the American Jewish Congress were just bullied into saying that by the evil Chavez...:sarcasm:

[Judi Lynn]

73. Riiight! As anyone would guess, a man who is from a mixed background

of Native Venezuelan and African Venezuelan, a man who has been targeted with poisonous hatred by the very white European Spanish Venezuelan elite, which has publically labeled him an ape, peasant, etc., etc. in their own elite-owned mass media for years, would be the very first to seeth with racism toward others. :eyes:

Oh, yeah, a new Hitler has been born. :sarcasm:

People who won't take the time to learn anything don't seem to be aware that in Latin America, the "minority" groups are the ones who have controlled with great cruelty the vast masses of the very, very poor for hundreds of years. A bit of awareness would go a long way, wouldn't it?

[Colorado Blue]

78. I think that a little awareness that racism isn't limited to

certain groups, or should only be fought when directed at certain groups, is also in order here. And I don't think that one should be blind to the fact that Jewish people, indeed a minority, have suffered bigotry in Latin America as well as everyplace else in the world.

Does the fact that "minorities" have controlled the wealth in Latin America - which isn't exactly a secret to me, thank you - give people a pass to take shots at Jews, or any other group for that matter, whether directly or indirectly, or make comments that are couched in terms historically associated with destructive religious and political bigotry?

Also, you've implied that people of color, or people who've experienced bigotry, are immune to racism toward others. Is that really true, that people who've suffered persecution are immune from being racist? If that's so then all the leftwing arguments about Israel being racist because she wants to remain a predominantly Jewish state - even though Sweden for example is predominantly Swedish - go right down the tubes.

I don't think that fighting racism means fighting it only on behalf of certain groups, or that others should be victimized or forgotten in the process. And, I don't think one can dismiss out of hand the wording of the protest to the SWC.

Again, the fact that the term "security" is used implies that "insecurity" is possible. Please reread that statement. It says, "You have interfered in the political status, in the security, and in the well-being of our community."

Americans wouldn't respond that way. We'd just say, f*** off, you're wrong, go pee up a rope. We wouldn't say, "you've endangered us by your comments."

As far as cancers eating away at the core of the Democratic Party, blindly accusing people of plotting or having imperialist designs on the world, or otherwise ignoring the shades of gray that exist everywhere, or desiring men on horseback to rescue us, those are very real problems. Associating the fight against antisemitism with the right wing isn't doing us a bit of good either. The idea that there is some sort of imperialist motive behind the SWC's condemnation of remarks that are ambiguous at best, is really very odd. At least, the benefit of the doubt should be given, in view of historical fact.

The Democratic Party is not well served by ignoring ambiguity and complexity, or trying to oversimplify a very complicated world, attributing imperialist motives to people trying fight antisemitism, or canonizing politicians.

I remember a few months ago everybody was admiring Galloway, who has turned up on British TV imitating a cat.

[Fredda Weinberg]

79. Really? Where?

I've just run a search

liberation theology "christ killers" -chavez

and all I see are references to Jews or Isrealis.

I don't remember ever hearing this term used in this context before and I've been following LT since the mid 80's.

[dailykoff]

80. Welcome to the swiftboat, guys.

Or as we call it here in the US, "our freedom."