Chavez: Gaddafi will be remembered as a martyr

[Faithful One]

Source: Eluniversal

From now on, Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi will be remembered as a martyr, according to Venezuela's President Hugo Chávez.

"Unfortunately, Gaddafi's death has been confirmed. He was murdered. It is another onslaught on life," Chávez commented and added that the north-African leader was also a "great fighter."

"We will remember Gaddafi forever as a great fighter, a revolutionary and a martyr," the Head of State told reporters in the Venezuelan Andean city of La Grita.

From the very beginning of the uprising in Libya eight months ago, Chávez jumped in defense of Gaddafi, AFP noted.


Read more: http://www.eluniversal.com/nacional-y-politica/111020/chavez-gaddafi-will-be-remembered-as-a-martyr

---

Poor Hugo lost his friend.

[blueamy66]

1. not by me

nt

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[al bupp]

6. As a former member of that fan club, and I have the t-shirt to proove it...

I have to say that Chavez' (not to mention that of some here on DU's) unyielding support for Gaddafi has been a real eye-opener.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[al bupp]

15. Welcome to DU! /nt

[geek tragedy]

22. One of his fans is in this thread.

The biggest cheerleader got tombstoned finally.

[Odin2005]

32. I support his economic policies. His authoritarianism, not so much.

[txlibdem]

63. Chavez or Gaddafhi??? I'm not sure in this sub-thread who we're talking about

I think that Chavez gets a lot of bad press because he has taken back a lot of the land that the land barons stole from peasants, he has nationalized the natural resources that belong to all (but were profiting only a few -- giving them lavish lifestyles while the poor starved).

I do not like authoritarianism in any form. Only Democracy works. Capitalism does NOT work, as we've seen several times in the past century. Maybe fair taxes that the rich hate and therefore slam and slime Chavez in the corporate-owned media is a good thing...

I thought we WANTED fair taxes here in America... that is, over 70% of Americans do. Same thing with wealth distribution. Chavez is repaying the indigenous peoples for the wanton theft of their assets, their lands, their livelihoods and the rich HATE that too.

Look into the actual outcomes in Venezuela. You will see why the rich hate him and the corporate-owned media follow in lock step with their orders to tear him down and replace him with a puppet so they can go back to stealing from the people as they had been for centuries.

[Odin2005]

66. Chavez.

[txlibdem]

71. Can you answer any of my charges in the post you responded to, please

I'd like to know your take on the charges I made in that post.

[harmonicon]

36. Who on DU has ever supported him?

"Support" has an actual definition, you know?

[joshcryer]

57. Anyone who repeatedly defends his actions using canned talking points.

Easiest way to spot them is the "rule of law" argument.

ie:

Criticism: Chavez has held decree powers for 2/3rds of his reign.

Defense: That's the law in Venezuela. You shouldn't be critical of the laws of other states!

[txlibdem]

61. I supported his choice in body guards!

I want me some o' dat!

[joshcryer]

55. I used to be a supporter of Chavez, back in the Bush years, but yeah.

I had already had a falling out with him after seeing the crime rates skyrocket, inflation explode, the suppression of protesters over the years.

Gaddafi really underscored it.

[Amonester]

2. He lost many other friends also.

Moi.

And lot's of my friends here in Canada.

Adios ex-amigo.

[Little Tich]

I can feel the bile rising

when I read about President Chavez lauding the former dictator of Libya. Gaddafi was a ruthless murderer and a sponsor of terrorism, and I'm glad he's gone. President Chavez ought to be more careful with his tasteless remarks.

[EFerrari]

10. How dare Hugo Chavez disrupt the Official Story?

Who does he think he is?

[Little Tich]

12. Wikipedia entry on Muammar Gaddafi

Source: Wikipedia
(Edited for clarity)

"Muammar Muhammad Abu Minyar al-Gaddafi‎ (7 June 1942 – 20 October 2011), commonly known as Muammar Gaddafi /ˈmoʊ.əmɑr ɡəˈdɑːfi/ or Colonel Gaddafi, was the autocratic ruler of Libya from 1969, when he seized power in a bloodless military coup, until 2011 when his government was overthrown in a civil war which consisted of a popular uprising aided by a foreign intervention. His 42-year rule prior to the uprising made him the fourth longest-ruling non-royal leader since 1900, as well as the longest-ruling Arab leader. He variously styled himself as 'the Brother Leader' and 'Guide of the Revolution'; in 2008 a meeting of traditional African rulers bestowed on him the title 'King of Kings'.

After seizing power in 1969, he abolished the Libyan Constitution of 1951 and civil liberties enshrined in it. He imposed laws based on the political ideology he had formulated, called the Third International Theory and published in The Green Book. Rising oil prices and extraction in Libya led to increasing revenues. By exporting as much oil per capita as Saudi Arabia, Libya achieved the highest living standards in Africa. However, at the same time similarly oil-rich Gulf countries improved their living standards much further, and this fact was visible to ordinary Libyans. Early during his regime, Gaddafi and his relatives took over much of the economy. Gaddafi started several wars and acquired chemical weapons. Gaddafi also supplied weapons to the Provisional Irish Republican Army, a listed terrorist organisation in the United Kingdom and other countries. The United Nations called Libya under Gaddafi a pariah state. In the 1980s, countries around the world imposed sanctions against Gaddafi. Six days after the capture of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein by United States troops, Gaddafi renounced Tripoli's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs and welcomed international inspections to verify that he would follow through on the commitment. A leading advocate for a United States of Africa, he served as Chairperson of the African Union (AU) from 2 February 2009 to 31 January 2010."

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I think Wikipedia pretty much confirms the Official Story. President Chavez is just spouting nonsense.

[RaleighNCDUer]

26. And there is no way any bias could show up in Wikipedia. nt

[geek tragedy]

27. The facts are biased against ruthless dictators.

Qaddafi's supporters are without exception authoritarians on the left--Stalinists, Leninists etc.

Most hate the US for defeating the USSR in the cold war.

[RaleighNCDUer]

35. You are deluding yourself with your own mythology.

The US did not defeat the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union defeated itself - just as we are in the process of doing.

You don't have to be a supporter of Kadafi to recognize that he was killed because he was making overtures to China, which would divert some of Libya's oil from Europe. He spent most the last 10 years being a 'friend' to Europe and the US, in the vain hope that we would leave him alone. He actually seemed to think that Libya had equal rights as a sovereign nation to any other nation in the world - big mistake.

BTW, if you claim we have the right to remove another country's leader by violent action, you MUST grant that same right to remove OUR leaders by any other country. You REALLY want that?

[totodeinhere]

38. So are you suggesting that the teenager who shot him in the head killed him because of

his making overtures to China? Come on now. He was killed because his people hated him and wanted him dead. The uprising in Libya was inspired by the Arab Spring uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt. If it hadn't been for the Arab Spring Qaddafi would probably still be alive and in power today. It has nothing to do with Qaddafi and China. I can't believe some of the crazy conspiracy theories that I read here.

[RaleighNCDUer]

42. If 'his people' hated him so much, why did tens of thousands

defend him? The 'Arab Spring' is a myth - there is no overall movement. There have been a number of vastly different movements in very different places for very different reasons. Check back in in ten years and see how the democratizaion of the (non-monolithic) Arab world is going.

It is notable that the ONLY 'Arab Spring' country which STARTED its revolt with a violent uprising was in an oil nation that the US doesn't like. Tunisia happened so fast we didn't even see it happen. Egypt, we encouraged Mubarak to negotiate, to work things out, until it was obvious he was not going to hold on. Libya, we send sent in CIA operatives with truckloads of weapons. Funny how that works out.

You are much to ready to accept propaganda as truth.

[Throd]

45. Because tens of thousands directly benifitted from his brutality

You can't brutalize everyone. It requires help.

[Psephos]

46. Are you seriously arguing that Gadaffi enjoyed the mass support of the Libyan people?

lol

[RaleighNCDUer]

50. No, I'm saying that MOST the people had no opinion one way or the other

and he had barely more opponents than he had supporters - and if it wasn't for the US and NATO taking direct action against his military, rather than enforcing a no-fly zone which was their mandate, he'd still be in power.

And, as i said above, if we claim the right to overthrow and kill other couontries' leaders, then we have no room to object if they should want to do the same to us.

You just might consider the larger picture, here.

[Psephos]

53. The larger picture...

If another country seriously wants to try overthrowing the US, it will do so because it believes it can. Whether or not we object means squat.

Which is pretty much the way things have worked since the invention of countries and weapons.

I reject out-of-hand the idea that Gaddafi had similar numbers of opponents and supporters. He was a psycho and a narcissist, both vicious and skillful at repression. The continuation of the Libyan government depended on his supporters (officials, apparatchiks, and military) being both deathly afraid of him and reliant upon him for their livelihood. The masses loathed him. This was the first chance they had in more than a generation to do something about it, and they did.

I did not support US participation in the rebel support operations. However, any fool could see that the grim violence Gaddafi was raining down on the Libyans last spring was going to attract foreign action, especially after what came down in Egypt, and especially from Europeans, who were his oil customers.

[dpibel]

59. Rules are for lesser countries, eh?

"If another country seriously wants to try overthrowing the US, it will do so because it believes it can. Whether or not we object means squat."

Which is to say: Might makes right.

"I reject out-of-hand the idea that Gaddafi had similar numbers of opponents and supporters. He was a psycho and a narcissist, both vicious and skillful at repression. The continuation of the Libyan government depended on his supporters (officials, apparatchiks, and military) being both deathly afraid of him and reliant upon him for their livelihood. The masses loathed him. This was the first chance they had in more than a generation to do something about it, and they did."

If you were to substitute "George Bush" for "Gaddafi" here, I don't think you'd find anything else you'd have to change. Is there a difference between "the masses loathed him" and the 30 or so percent support GWB enjoyed in the last years of his reign? Are you arguing that Gaddafi was "a psycho and a narcissist" and Bush was not?

So, under your analytic, NATO, or some other coalition, would have been perfectly within their rights--nay, justified and holy--to launch an assassination effort against GWB?

Don't say, "Let them try." Because then we're back to paragraph one: Might makes right.

[Psephos]

67. Your strawman-fu is weak, young Jedi...

:)

As much as I loathed Bush, and expressed it here and in other fora, I did not fear that his secret police would disappear my family in the middle of the night. I also did not expect him to be in office more than eight years.

Libya was ruled by brute force for decades against the will of its people. Gaddafi did not hold elections.

As for "might makes right," I disagree. It most certainly doesn't make right. It just makes those who have it able to prevail over those who don't.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

56. So did Pol Pot. Most Cambodians enjoyed life under the Khmer Rouge.

If you buy the CIA smear campaign against him you'll never know the real facts. Hey, this is fun.

[geek tragedy]

40. He got killed because his own people overthrew his ass. nt

[txlibdem]

64. Gaddafhi threatened to NATIONALIZE Libya's oil and that is why he is dead today

This is just another oil war.

Proof:
http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/22/libya-gaddafi-oil-biz-energy-cx_ch_0122libya.html

[harmonicon]

37. Fuck it, is that supposed to be an insult?

I'll proudly state that the wrong side won the cold war. I'm not ashamed to embrace ideals of equality, freedom, and liberty.

[geek tragedy]

39. Papa Joe Stalin would applaud you, comrade.

But, yeah, the patriotic left always abhorred the USSR.

[txlibdem]

72. +1, and PS, Stalin was long dead by the end of the cold war. The WRONG SIDE won.

The leaders of the USSR were already giving their people more freedom while maintaining free education for all and free medical care and equality.

Who do you think gave us the idea for LASIK??? (Actually, it's predecessor Radial keratotomy (RK) )

[Bacchus39]

13. you agree with Hugo?? lol n/t

s

[geek tragedy]

23. A few Leninists around here yearn for a strongman

dictator figure to lead the fight against the West.

Now they're left with Baby Assad to champion their cause.

[geek tragedy]

18. My condolences for your loss.

At least you still have Assad.

[tblue]

4. Do you know the history of Hugo Chavez or

are you just buying the MSM meme?

Don't believe everything you hear and read. If there's an agenda, chances are there's a lie in there somewhere.

Might want to read some of Nicholas Kristoff or Greg Palast before you get too set in stone. Time to get real.

"Audacious, provocative, and bombastic, few world politicians are as colorful as Hugo Ch vez, now making international news for his plans to nationalize U.S. owned businesses and his bold opposition to Washington's economic and trade policies."

http://books.google.com/books/about/Hugo_Chávez.html?id=kYGdEtdZrFUC

http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/1414

[fascisthunter]

5. well done!

[Little Tich]

52. Ah yes, Nikolas Kozloff.

He has a blog at http://www.nikolaskozloff.com/blog.htm which is very informative. His writings are mostly about South America with a focus on what happens on the political left. I consider him too uncritical of the various leftist movements he covers, while at the same time trying to pin all the woes in the region on the US. He is still readable though, he wrote an interesting piece about OWS on al jazeera.

What chance a general strike in Manhattan? by Nikolas Kozloff

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/10/2011107135115719238.html

[avengemydeath]

8. babies, incubators..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XorKTwkFPDU">video

[al bupp]

11. The ubiquitous and gratuitous incubator reference is so tiresome,

and "de rigueur" on any Libya thread that I'd say it's become cliche and trite. The video link of the supposed Jamahiriya paradise in Libya is so laden w/ exaggeration and mis-information it hard to know where to begin in critiquing it. In the end, it seems unnecessary to do so, because the Libyans by their actions have done so thoroughly themselves.

[avengemydeath]

17. I'm sure if i spent more time here i'd know that

But things like that are only important to not me. Exaggerations and mis-informations i'd be interested in. Probably insignificant when/if held in front of the more bigger reality.

[geek tragedy]

16. So many dictator-lovers at DU. Barf. nt

[avengemydeath]

21. someone has to check in on the adult childrens

[geek tragedy]

24. Yes, only adults post dictators' propaganda here.

You must be a big fan of Triumph Of The Will.

[avengemydeath]

28. Did you ever get the chance to

spend any time in Libya?

[geek tragedy]

33. Unlike some folks, I never accepted blood money

from Gadaffy's regime.

[RaleighNCDUer]

48. And so many SELECTIVE dictator-lovers -

you know, the ones who are always ready to bash any leftish leaders, but have nary a word to say about the RW dictators the US loves.

[marasinghe]

9. same way the Bushwipes & the US will be remembered as the liberators of Iraq, i presume. n/t

[UnrepentantLiberal]

14. I've said it before, hard core leftists' personalities are a mirror image of the

far right. They believe what they want to believe and nothing will change that. That's why they go strait to the far right when they change philosophies. That's why hard core right wingers turn into unrelenting leftists when they change philosophies. Happens every time.

[Lucinda]

25. That has been my experience also

they go one extreme to the other

[Odin2005]

30. Many neo-cons used to be Trotskyites.

[Psephos]

49. look up Koestler's 1945 essay, "The Yogi and the Commissar"

You will find your thesis elegantly stated and discussed.

There is very little difference between the ultra-left and the ultra-right.

[expatriate2mex]

69. Yep, well said. I'm an old liberal from way back, I don't get the people on the left

who are mirror images of the far right.

[DissedByBush]

19. Hugo wishes he were Gaddafi

Gaddafi was a full-blown autocratic dictator who brutally suppressed rights within his country.

And, yes, like Hugo, Gaddafi increased the quality of life in his country, especially for the poor. They paid for it with their freedom.

Hugo is being smarter, getting there with slow steps, but he needs to hurry up before too many people get wise.

[bhikkhu]

20. I hope Chavez has a more modern notion of term limits than Gadhafi

...and in 20 years I hope he is long-retired, perhaps congratulating the accomplishments of his successors in the orderly and prosperous nation he served.

[Tarheel_Dem]

29. Not much to say after that.

:puke:

[Odin2005]

31. Somebody tell Hugo that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" does not mean...

...you have to like and praise the douche bag.

Oh well, At least Evo Morales is still around as a socialist leader who is not a fool.

[Amonester]

34. Touché!

:thumbsup:

[COLGATE4]

43. Evo is on pretty slippery ground right now facing an uprising by

Indigenous peoples in Bolivia. Stay tuned.

[harmonicon]

62. I wish more people around here would take your point.

Praise for racists gangs of murderous rapists in Libya is pretty fucking sickening to me. Why can't people understand that being against things like execution and wanton plunder does not mean that someone loves Gathafi or his government?

That said, a friend made a point to me years ago which has really become important to me. I think we were talking about Mao, and his point was that, no matter what happened eventually with his government, does not necessarily diminish the importance of the revolution. The same could be said about Gathafi. In some senses he certainly was a dictator, but many of the people who wanted him dead supported the actual dictator that he helped overthrow and want to reinstate the monarchy.

[SupaDopeFlyGuy]

41. If I understand correctly...

I would like to think that in our globally connected and
modern society that at a BARE minimum, world leaders would at
least make an attempt to contemplate the gravity of their
words and the potential ramifications they may have not just
within their own country men, but potentially any man, woman,
politician and most importantly, the youth. How his one sided,
ill-informed and tragically misguided statement of personal
opinion can be interpreted and in turn be a catalyst or
instigator for violence, outrage and ultimately justified
response. 

A martyr. The man in the story who sacrifices him self and
ultimately his own life to save the souls of all mankind was a
martyr. Martin Luther king was a martyr, for rather than sit
back and observe and withstand the blatantly obvious
segregation and violation of basic human rights, he went
against EVERYTHING and in doing so, was murdered. He was a
martyr. A martyr is any person who, no matter the cost or
danger, they stand steadfast in their convictions and in doing
so, sacrifice their life for a greater cause. That being said,
let's examine the idea of how Present Chavez classifies
gadaffi as possessing any and/ or all of those qualities to
warrant being regarded as a martyr.

I am fully aware of the use of dis-information which is
ultimately to shield the masses from a mob mentality and
irrational reactions to certain aspects and truths of the
world and in the interest of national and global security, I
do not believe EVERYTHING I read in the paper or see on any of
the hundreds and thousands of media outlets online. I am not a
sheep. That being said, I am also not an idiot, so I can, more
or less filter through what I read and see and obtain a
somewhat educated guess as to what I can somewhat believe,
what is COMPLETE propaganda and what's being paraded as
"world news" while it's ultimately a smokescreen for
what's ACTUALLY going on, but wouldn't be handled properly if
the public was to know the truth, for any one of a MILLION
reasons. 

I feel pretty strongly, that when the majority of any
countries citizens rise up in unison against their leader and
demand change, which the world at large had already been aware
of, but for political reasons and restrictions, were unable to
intervene in something's actually going on there. The stories
of government ordered abduction and torture for what it
considered to be crimes against the government, when it was
simply a peaceful gathering. The regimes oppression of society
claiming it was trying to preserve it's own cultural
resistance to "western civilizations" influence.
There are more than enough reliable reports of crimes against
humanity under the gadaffi reign, but none of which to me
personally, are more despicable than the reported execution of
at least one or two warehouses where suspected
"revolutionaries" were being detained and tortured
for an unspecified time, all the while being told that they
would be released in the end.

When the "end" came and the regime realized it could
no longer maintain it's grip of the area, it's reported that
gadaffi himself gave the order to eliminate the location and
all those within. With that, the sadistic followers went to
the locations, opened the doors and informed all the terrified
occupants, many of whom were woman and children that they were
now going to be "set free", with that, they tossed
grenades into the warehouse and opened fire killing and
massacring unmercilesly. Many of the authorities reported
being appalled by what they saw upon arrival at the site for
investigation. This is not the only one of such reports of
mass murders ordered by gadaffi during his iron fisted rule
over his country. 

How can any responsible and civilized person refer to this man
as a martyr? Everyone is entitled to an opinion and as we all
know, there are going to be any multitude of opinions on this
topic. Some based on straight religious loyalty, some on
emotion and some for politically motivated reasons, however
there is only one TRUE answer to the simple question: Is
Gadaffi a martyr. That answer is no. He was a dictator, he was
a global agitator of religiously motivated tension and
violence who defied the will of his public and the world and
in the process was responsible for the deaths of thousands of
lives, both government and civilian and worst of all, against
innocent bystanders. In the end and as expected, his regime
ends with his dead body. This does not make him a martyr. This
is not even the definition of the word. The only minds which
this sort or a man would relate to are equally dangerous and
just as likely to find themselves in a very similar situation
whether in the near or the very distant future. This man was a
hazard to society. He embodied EVERYTHING that we as a
"civilized" society are fighting against in an
attempt at global peace and cross cultural understanding. He
was a monster and will most likely find himself surrounded by
familiar faces in the history books as Fidel Castro, Hussein,
hitler and all the other threats to humanity that managed to
land themselves in the seat of ultimate power within their
respective countries and push our society's balance RIGHT to
the breaking point with their zealous, self righteous and
irrational ideology. 

Please, in the interest of common sense, common decency and
common expectation, think about a matter from all angles
before opening your mouth and saying something as
irresponsible and down right wrong as "Gadaffi is a
martyr" 

Some people might have lost their whole family, whole lives
and most importantly their own lives and quality of life
because of this man. Where is your compassion? Where is your
head? And more importantly, why is a person with your
mentality in the ultimate seat of power ANYWHERE in the world?
U personally, along with gadaffi, some of the names mentioned
here and hundreds oof millions of people not listed here are
truly what "wrong" with our society and until the
world at large realizes this, we are doomed to repeat previous
mistakes as well as political tension and turmoil, all in the
name of misguided ideology. 

-Andrew 

[txlibdem]

65. Jim Jones, Jonestown Massacre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones

Mr. Jones was AN AMERICAN religious leader, a cult leader to be more precise.

Power corrupts. Just look at the GOP and the Corporate Democrats for proof of that. That is why unfettered Democracy is the only political system that works. We, today, do not have "unfettered" Democracy in America -- we have Corporate-owned politicians who do their bidding and follow orders of their corporate masters. THAT is not Democracy.

[Quibono]

44. wishful thinking

What is it with these guys? They always think they'll be the
one to end differently and nope, they always end up being
dragged out of some hole they've crawled into like a rat and
then their bloated corpse is made a spectacle of. Hitler saw
what happened to his bud Mussolini which is why he ate the
bullet & had himself toasted. They all end the same way,
always have & always will and yet they're somehow always
the last to get a clue. If Chavez chooses to become the same
sort of vermin, he can expect a similar end.

I see it this way Senor Chavez. Today the Libyan people
squashed a fat cockroach. Good Housekeeping.

[Mosaic]

47. I guess you support the empire

Not a good post for those of us who know the evils of American empire. I suggest you study up on it.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

51. Are you forgeting about Fernando Cardoso, Luíz Inácio Lula da Silva and Dilma Rousseff,

the current and last two presidents of Brazil? They used a mix of socialism and capitalism to turn Brazil into an economic power house. And they did it with term limits and a peaceful transition of power. This is the way it should be done in South America in my opinion.

[joshcryer]

54. They did it without resorting to corrupt populism, though.

Social democracy as opposed to populist socialism.

[Matilda]

58. Chavez is remembering that Gaddafi was a revolutionary hero,

back in the days when he overthrew King Idris.

But like so many heroes, he ultimately became what he'd replaced, and worse. It happened to Mugabe, and before him to Lenin, to Napoleon, and back to Cromwell in the British Civil War, just to pick out a few. History is full of such corrupted heroes.

Chavez is being unrealistic - he should rather mourn how his friend became corrupted, and take note: "There but for the grace of God, go I".

[Odin2005]

60. +1,000,000

[Psephos]

68. Well said. n/t

[Zorro]

70. I think

Hugo will be remembered just as Muammar will be remembered.

[Crunchy Frog]

73. I think probably not. n/t