Venezuela and Iran sign eleven strategic agreements

[News_Editor]

Venezuela and Iran sign eleven strategic agreements

2010-10-21 09:42:45 GMT+7 (ICT)

TEHRAN, IRAN (BNO NEWS) -- Venezuela and Iran on Wednesday signed eleven strategic agreements before Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez departed to Syria, the state-run IRNA news agency reported.

The Memorandums of Understanding signed in Tehran related to joint projects of bilateral significance on housing, small businesses, commerce, industry and energy. Chavez said that one of the most important agreements involves Iran assisting Venezuela in the construction of houses as it is an urgent matter in the South American nation.

"This has been a long, productive day that impulse furthermore the Venezuelan and Iranian people. Our nations continue creating objective conditions for the establishment of a new world order," Chavez said.

In order to speed that agreement, Chavez informed that an Iranian specialized delegation on housing and industry will arrive to Caracas. In addition, a Venezuelan commission will work in Tehran on the matter in two-week's time.

Other significant agreements were the establishment of a joint oil company; the involvement of the Venezuelan Oil Company in Phase 12 of the South Pars oil-gas field, one of the richest in the world; the construction of a refinery in Syria; cooperation in liquefied natural gas and oil tanker activities; and cooperation in the petrochemical and energy sectors.

Before his meeting with Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Chavez visited the new town of Parand located approximately 35 kilometers from Tehran. Parand is an example of the Iranian method for settlement construction.

Parand was designed to create a balance in the settlement pattern of Tehran, a proper environment for the extra population of the Iranian capital and an alternative to unsystematic settlements.

On Tuesday, Iran and Venezuela announced the creation of a joint maritime society in order to strengthen exportation and oil transport as part of the bilateral cooperation between the two nations.

Chavez arrived to Tehran on Monday as part of his international tour that began last week. The Venezuelan leader had already visited Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. He will continue his official visits in Syria, Libya and Portugal.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2010-10-21

[Pakboong]

The Jerusalem Post headline for this same event was:

Chavez, Ahamadinejad say US is headed for 'the graveyard'

What was actually said was:

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said their countries are "united in efforts to establish a new world order" that will eliminate Western dominance over global affairs.

Chavez said any efforts to stop Iran's and Venezuela's progress would fail, and he denounced US "imperialism" saying it is headed for "the graveyard."

[SergeiY]

Haters Gonna Hate

[Ulysses G.]

Like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is real peace-lover.

[bulmercke]

Lebanon - Venezuela - Iran - China - North Korea - Russia - Yemen - Syria

versus the Rest of the World. Not much different to the Axis powers of WWII.

[SergeiY]

Lebanon - Venezuela - Iran - China - North Korea - Russia - Yemen - Syria

versus the Rest of the World. Not much different to the Axis powers of WWII.

Is it already Friday night?

Btw. Who would be the 'Rest of the World'? The USA? And who else?

[Pakboong]

Like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is real peace-lover.

Just because he is an anti-semite doesn't make him a war lover. Virtually any leader of a nation in close proximity to Israel could be called an anti-semite and most of those nations have had recent wars with Israel. In all the middle east conflicts involving Israel, Iran has not been a participant on record. Ahmadinejad's comments do not suddenly make Iran an aggressor nation. All attacking nations use pre-emptive reasons as an excuse for that aggression.

If my memory is correct, the last time Iran attacked a foreign nation was in the early 1700's when they attacked India. They were attacked many times to include the Turks, Russians and Iraq. They as a country do not have a history of aggression.

I just don't see how the current leader's anti-semitism changes anything. The guy before him and the guy before him were also likely anti-semites.

The way you want it to be is not necessarily the way it is.

[SergeiY]

Like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is real peace-lover.

Just because he is an anti-semite doesn't make him a war lover. Virtually any leader of a nation in close proximity to Israel could be called an anti-semite and most of those nations have had recent wars with Israel. In all the middle east conflicts involving Israel, Iran has not been a participant on record. Ahmadinejad's comments do not suddenly make Iran an aggressor nation. All attacking nations use pre-emptive reasons as an excuse for that aggression.

If my memory is correct, the last time Iran attacked a foreign nation was in the early 1700's when they attacked India. They were attacked many times to include the Turks, Russians and Iraq. They as a country do not have a history of aggression.

I just don't see how the current leader's anti-semitism changes anything. The guy before him and the guy before him were also likely anti-semites.

The way you want it to be is not necessarily the way it is.

true words.

[Ulysses G.]

Just because he is an anti-semite doesn't make him a war lover.

You are speculating about his intentions. I think that it is more sensible to take him at his word.

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,"

- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

[SergeiY]

Just because he is an anti-semite doesn't make him a war lover.

You are speculating about his intentions. I think that it is more sensible to take him at his word.

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,"

- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Source? You got probably lost in translation and propaganda and take quotes out of context.

[Jingthing]

Just because he is an anti-semite doesn't make him a war lover.

You are speculating about his intentions. I think that it is more sensible to take him at his word.

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,"

- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Source? You got probably lost in translation and propaganda and take quotes out of context.

Here is the context. You are wrong. He does talk that way, and he has a number of times.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/27/israel.iran

[britmaveric]

Ahmadinejad = Chavez =

[SergeiY]

Just because he is an anti-semite doesn't make him a war lover.

You are speculating about his intentions. I think that it is more sensible to take him at his word.

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,"

- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Source? You got probably lost in translation and propaganda and take quotes out of context.

Here is the context. You are wrong. He does talk that way, and he has a number of times.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/oct/27/israel.iran

pfff

Read the article? Read it until the end? Read the added footnote? NO.

Lost in translation and propaganda? YES.

And take quotes out of context? YES.

[Jingthing]

pfff

Read the article? Read it until the end? Read the added footnote? NO.

Lost in translation and propaganda? YES.

And take quotes out of context? YES.

I read the article and footnote, and you are STILL wrong. Clearly. He DID say --

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,"

- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

and he has an entire career of saying similar inflammatory things about Israel, Jews, and the holocaust.

What is your agenda exactly? To try to suggest he isn't militantly anti-Israel, to suggest he isn't a holocaust denier, to suggest he isn't an antisemite? If so, good luck, nobody is going to believe that.

[SergeiY]

pfff

Read the article? Read it until the end? Read the added footnote? NO.

Lost in translation and propaganda? YES.

And take quotes out of context? YES.

I read the article and footnote, and you are STILL wrong. Clearly. He DID say --

"Anybody who recognizes Israel will burn in the fire of the Islamic nation's fury,"

- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

and he has an entire career of saying similar inflammatory things about Israel, Jews, and the holocaust.

What is your agenda exactly? To try to suggest he isn't militantly anti-Israel, to suggest he isn't a holocaust denier, to suggest he isn't an antisemite? If so, good luck, nobody is going to believe that.

NO, my little patriotic troll. You are wrong.

That is not a correct translation and the not correct translation is subject of much propaganda and there was also a little bit controversy about it. Probably not in the new channel you are frequenting.

What is your agenda - spreading anti Iran hate propaganda?. Preparing for a war against Iran?

[britmaveric]

^sorry SergeiY the average Iranian on the street thinks Ahmadinejad is a nut. End of story mate - can't defend the indefensible.

[SergeiY]

^sorry SergeiY the average Iranian on the street thinks Ahmadinejad is a nut. End of story mate - can't defend the indefensible.

No reason to bring false quote or mistranslated quotes into the debate that are just parts of an American propaganda in a preparation for a future war.

[Jingthing]

^sorry SergeiY the average Iranian on the street thinks Ahmadinejad is a nut. End of story mate - can't defend the indefensible.

No reason to bring false quote or mistranslated quotes into the debate that are just parts of an American propaganda in a preparation for a future war.

Only one of the quotes translation was controversial. Not the one we were mentioning here. I think it may actually be YOU who is the victim of Russkie propaganda. Growing up in a country with such a rich tradition of antisemitism, not much of a surprise.

Who wants war with Iran? No country I know.

[geriatrickid]

Like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is real peace-lover.

Just because he is an anti-semite doesn't make him a war lover. Virtually any leader of a nation in close proximity to Israel could be called an anti-semite and most of those nations have had recent wars with Israel. In all the middle east conflicts involving Israel, Iran has not been a participant on record. Ahmadinejad's comments do not suddenly make Iran an aggressor nation. All attacking nations use pre-emptive reasons as an excuse for that aggression.

If my memory is correct, the last time Iran attacked a foreign nation was in the early 1700's when they attacked India. They were attacked many times to include the Turks, Russians and Iraq. They as a country do not have a history of aggression.

I just don't see how the current leader's anti-semitism changes anything. The guy before him and the guy before him were also likely anti-semites.

The way you want it to be is not necessarily the way it is.

Why did Iraq invade Iran in the first Persian Gulf conflict of 1980? Wasn't it because Ayatollah Khomenei was threatening to export his shia revolution? Wasn't the initial support for Iraq drawn exclusively from the Arab world with support from Russia and Warsaw Pact members? The US only became involved after Iran started attacking non implicated neutral parties during the "Tanker war" of 1983-1984. The arab Gulf States were in a panic. Extreme pressure was brought to bear by the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia on the west as the Persians were attacking the Arabs.

I find it odd, that of all the countries Iran is angriest at, it has picked the country that historically supported Iran's independence. After all, it was the Russians that had refused to leave Iran in 1946 until they received oil concessions. It was the British that led the subterfuge in the 1950's when Iran nationalised its oil industry.

It was Russia and the Arab world that supported the Iraqi invasion of Iran. The USA was excluded from that party.

Iran has a screwed up economy and can't take care of its own population, yet it can find the money to support Chavez and his adventures. Chavez already ahs the USA by the testicles. Venezuala supplies oil and owns Citgo.

[SergeiY]

^sorry SergeiY the average Iranian on the street thinks Ahmadinejad is a nut. End of story mate - can't defend the indefensible.

No reason to bring false quote or mistranslated quotes into the debate that are just parts of an American propaganda in a preparation for a future war.

Only one of the quotes translation was controversial. Not the one we were mentioning here. I think it may actually be YOU who is the victim of Russkie propaganda. Growing up in a country with such a rich tradition of antisemitism, not much of a surprise.

Who wants war with Iran? No country I know.

As i said it above Haters Gonna Hate.

What is "Russkie propaganda"? How you wanna know where i grow up?

What has the OP (and so the topic) to do with antisemitism?

YOU are a HATER and use every little chance to smear your hate campaigns.

[britmaveric]

^odd coming from a propagandist himself?

[Jingthing]

What has the OP (and so the topic) to do with antisemitism?

Answer. A LOT.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/06/venezuelas-jews-fear-more_n_164791.html

So you're not Russian? Then what are you if you care to share that, up to you?

[SergeiY]

What has the OP (and so the topic) to do with antisemitism?

Answer. A LOT.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/06/venezuelas-jews-fear-more_n_164791.html

So you're not Russian? Then what are you if you care to share that, up to you?

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

so now - nuke yourself troll.

[Ulysses G.]

As i said it above Haters Gonna Hate.

I searched your content pages on Thai Visa and the odious posts that came up are perfect examples that this is true (and most of the other posters that share your views fall into the same category).

Is is kind of ironic to throw the phrase around so much.

[Ulysses G.]

Lost in translation and propaganda? YES.

Some proof would be nice for a change.

[canuck1941]

The Jerusalem Post headline for this same event was:

Chavez, Ahamadinejad say US is headed for 'the graveyard'

What was actually said was:

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said their countries are "united in efforts to establish a new world order" that will eliminate Western dominance over global affairs.

Chavez said any efforts to stop Iran's and Venezuela's progress would fail, and he denounced US "imperialism" saying it is headed for "the graveyard."

Headlines are like covers on a book, not necessarily related to what's inside. Their only function is to entice you to read the story, that's all. that's what headline writers are paid to do. It's always wise to get news from multiple sources.

[canuck1941]

^sorry SergeiY the average Iranian on the street thinks Ahmadinejad is a nut. End of story mate - can't defend the indefensible.

I agree. The average Iranian on the street, and I've been to the country twice, is in dismay at their government, which besides the Army, controls the Revolutionary Guard whose self-interest is in maintaining the status quo. Power to the Irans who seek freedom to disagree.

[Pakboong]

^sorry SergeiY the average Iranian on the street thinks Ahmadinejad is a nut. End of story mate - can't defend the indefensible.

I agree. The average Iranian on the street, and I've been to the country twice, is in dismay at their government, which besides the Army, controls the Revolutionary Guard whose self-interest is in maintaining the status quo. Power to the Irans who seek freedom to disagree.

Probably not that much different than what the American people feel about their present government.

Again, I only have my opinion and I personally find it odd that a country that refuses to sign the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty wants the treaty enforced on a country that has signed. That hubristic notion is converting indifferent gentiles into card carrying Anti-Semites at an alarming rate.

I am a betting man and I would bet it all that the odds of an Iranian first strike are quite low and the odds of an Israel first strike are quite high. If those odds are correct and time will tell, Israel loves war, not Iran. Of course, Israel will maintain the necessity of a pre-emptive strike much as a wife beater would claim he told his wife to stop nagging.

[Ulysses G.]

I am a betting man and I would bet it all that the odds of an Iranian first strike are quite low...

You would probably win that bet, but only because the chance of Iran ever getting the chance to use the bomb are incredibly low. All of the surrounding Muslim countries want them stopped and are much more concerned about an Iranian nuke than an Israeli one.

[Pakboong]

I am a betting man and I would bet it all that the odds of an Iranian first strike are quite low...

You would probably win that bet, but only because the chance of Iran ever getting the chance to use the bomb are incredibly low. All of the surrounding Muslim countries want them stopped and are much more concerned about an Iranian nuke than an Israeli one.

Yes, the hatred among the Shiites and the Sunnis for each other runs very deep.