Slashdot Mirror


The Science of Hugo Chavez's Long Term Embalming

Hugh Pickens writes writes "Discover Magazine reports that Hugo Chavez will apparently get an embalming job designed to keep him looking alive for decades similar to that of Russia's Vladimir Lenin, whose body still lies in a mausoleum in Moscow's Red Square, nearly 90 years after his death. So how do you preserve a human body for decades without it turning into a pile of melted tissue? First, get to work quickly. Upon death, the human body starts decomposing immediately. The way to stop it is with formaldehyde, a preservative used for the past century, which inhibits the enzyme decomposition as well as killing bacteria. 'You pump the chemical in, and as the formaldehyde hits the cells of the body, it firms up the protein of the cell, or fixates it,' says Vernie Fountain, head of the Fountain National Academy of Professional Embalming Skills in Springfield, Mo. 'That's what makes them stiff.' With a body that will have to be on display for years, it's likely to require a top-shelf, super-strong solution. 'If I were doing Hugo Chavez, I would strengthen the solution and use more preservative product,' says Fountain. Next, get a good moisturizer. Formaldehyde preserves, but it also dries out the body. Vaseline or other moisturizers can preserve the look of skin, according to Melissa Johnson Williams, executive director of the American Society of Embalmers. Finally keep cool. Heat decomposes a body so for long term preservation, the body has to be kept at the temperature of a standard kitchen refrigerator, somewhere in the mid-40s. Lastly, if Venezuelans really want to keep Hugo Chavez around forever, like many other world figures, there's only one solution that works, according to Fountain. 'The best form of preservation is mummification.'"

215 comments

  1. Yay Missouri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're famous for something!

  2. Re:Call me skeptical by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

    If they could pull it off, he would still be "alive" today.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

  3. uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Red/blue political mud wrestling match coming 3... 2... 1...

    1. Re:uh oh by gandhi_2 · · Score: 1, Funny

      Look for Democrats to do something similar for THEIR communist hero when Obama dies of old age, still in office, 30 years from now.

    2. Re:uh oh by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 4, Informative

      That word, I don't think it means what you think it means...

    3. Re:uh oh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      Yep, looks pretty dead-on.

    4. Re:uh oh by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but the more accurate "fascist" has too many negative connotations to be acceptable.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    5. Re:uh oh by Uberbah · · Score: 2

      Yes, but the more accurate "fascist" has too many negative connotations to be acceptable.

      As opposed to "communist", which has nothing but warm fuzzy connotations? But yeah, Obamacare is fascism, straight up. Forcing citizenry to buy junk products from a bloodsucking industry...and there's that whole continuation of the Unitary Executive thing....

    6. Re:uh oh by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      There are many people who are not aware that communists are historically greater mass-murderers than fascists. Many people associate fascists with evil and communists with good intentions (when in fact, communists have historically been at least as evil as fascists).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  4. Plastination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They should really look into plastination.
    The whole process is specifically designed to put dead people on display.

    1. Re:Plastination by Hal_Porter · · Score: 1

      How about Plasticination?

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdAeDEHEneA

      You could easily dub a Chavismo soundtrack onto this actually. Notice how the white skinned European Comprador/Kulak exploiter puppet has all the stuff at the beginning and sends the brown skinned and presumably native puppet, Hugo, away.

      Pretty soon Hugo will mount a coup and, the murder rate will go up eleventy million percent and they'll have food shortages, hyperinflation and so on. Then Hugo will force all the TV stations to broadcast a four hour TV show and the white skinned exploiter puppet will leave for Argentina and take all the stuff with him and Hugo will denounce him angrily.

      Incidentally this is an interesting article about Chavez

      http://www.redpepper.org.uk/whats-happened-to-venezuelas-dream-of-progress/

      Teacher Herma Marksman was Chavez's partner and lover for nine years. It was the early 1980s when they met; she was in her 30s, and he was a talkative army officer in his 20s. Marksman studied history in the 1960s. Her mother was a peasant and her German immigrant father a union organiser for ironworkers. She is a classic example of those in the lower middle classes who believed in Chavez.

      "We were preparing for the time when we would be in government," Marksman recalls. "We wanted to establish a state in which the law was respected, to abolish corruption, to develop our basic industries and to do a real restructuring of the education system. None of that has happened. If anything, there has been a turning for the worse. Today there is more injustice, and no sign of that group of democrats who voiced, and accepted, different opinions. We live under an autocrat who does not respect the separation of powers. There is a chief justice who does not act, a financial comptroller who does not control, an ombudsman who only defends government interests. So where is the Bolivarian project?"

      Marksman last spoke to Chavez on 28 July 1993. She now supports the opposition. Responding to the accusation that it comprises coup plotters, fascists and oligarchs, she asks whether it is possible that million-strong demonstrations can consist entirely of such people.

      Another former Chavez ally is Pablo Medina, a leading member of the radical Causa R party. Medina provided cars, housing and logistics for the then aspirant leader. But the pair had a legendary bust-up in 1999. Now Medina says: "The civilian-military movement turned into a military-civilian government, and that changed order definitely altered the product." For Medina, Chavez has become "authoritarian, corrupt and neo-liberal".

      Medina reserves his strongest criticism for Chavez's anti-globalisation 'posturing'. "This government has presided over a period of the largest net export of capital in our history," he says. "It has been incapable of renegotiating the foreign debt, and it has left the door open for further privatisations." Chavez's anti-imperialist, anti-globalisation rhetoric is, Medina adds, just "Chavez-speak".

      Back at the university, Muñoz stares out across the campus. "I am not asking Chavez to be the most radical of radicals. What I ask of him is honesty about what he is doing. I did not ask for a revolution, just to aim for things that are possible." He cites the zero-hunger programme of Brazilian president 'Lula' da Silva. "So, OK, he is not going to go against the liberal state, against globalisation, against capitalism. No, his [target] is zero hunger. Let us say he only manages to lower the rate of hunger from 100 to 30 per cent. Good. That"s what we wanted in Venezuela, and there was a real consensus here to do just that. But what does Chavismo say? "No, we are going to make a revolution!" And in those big words and that confusion everything got lost."

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  5. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Why do we preserve the turds or our species?

    1. Re:Why? by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · · Score: 1

      Does it have to be one or the other?

    2. Re:Why? by sycodon · · Score: 1

      Nice

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  6. A refridgerator with a temperature in the mid-40s? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sounds like it's broken.

  7. Or be a saint by michaelmalak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Or be a saint, blessed with incorruptibility.

    1. Re:Or be a saint by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Doesn't work with politicians. I mean, incorruptibility... c'mon, that's begging for tasteless jokes.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Or be a saint by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      How did it work for Popes then?

      It's a list of successful frauds. The people that perpetrated them are long dead and the tourist traps are still in full swing, centuries later.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  8. Super Cooling by pubwvj · · Score: 4, Informative

    "the body has to be kept at the temperature of a standard kitchen refrigerator, somewhere in the mid-40s."

    No, store it at 27 degrees F which is -2.78 degrees C if you want to keep the meat fresh, not frozen and stop microbial action.

    This is the temperature that we store fresh meat at. It is below standard refrigerator temperatures. Meat freezes at 25ÂF which is below the freezing point of water because of the salts in the blood and cellular fluid. A lot of research has been done on this - initially regarding the storage of fish for Norway's trawlers and later for the storage of pork.

    For the absolute best results adjust this freezing temperature to account for the preservative solution which will likely change the freeze point downward - then stay just above that point of freezing for the meat.

    There is a lot of science behind this in the meat industry that could be applied to Hugo.

    1. Re:Super Cooling by mabhatter654 · · Score: 2

      You don't want him "fresh" you want him to slowly turn to jerky rather than totally dried out crispy like King Tut.

    2. Re:Super Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      He was jerky enough when he was alive

    3. Re:Super Cooling by pubwvj · · Score: 0

      You want him to appear to be fresh as the day he was dyed. :)

    4. Re:Super Cooling by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      You don't want him "fresh" you want him to slowly turn to jerky rather than totally dried out crispy like King Tut.

      Reindeer jerky I've done. Likewise 'gator and 'roo.

      But... No, just No.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    5. Re:Super Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not Cryonics? http://www.cryonics.org

      There's no reason you couldn't make a see-through dewar.

  9. Re:Call me skeptical by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

    But I highly doubt they're going to be able to do this properly.
    I doubt their embalming job would last a year.

    They just don't strike me as the kind of people who can pull it off.

    Check out the web site for "Fountain National Academy of Professional Embalming Skills". If these guys do embalming with the same professionalism they utilize with web site creation, they'd get better results if they stuck Chavez in a blender.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  10. mid 40s by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    kinda hot

  11. boil him in rat piss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    then slice thinly on the bias
    serve over wilted lettuce

  12. "So how do you preserve a human body for decades" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "So how do you preserve a human body for decades without it turning into a pile of melted tissue?"

    Botox!

  13. Irradiation ? by Rollgunner · · Score: 1

    Does wonders for produce by killing the living heck out of bacteria... Not sure if there would be 'harmful' side effects though.

    1. Re:Irradiation ? by philip.paradis · · Score: 1

      Don't worry, radiation probably won't bring him back to life.

      --
      Write failed: Broken pipe
    2. Re:Irradiation ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Zombies?

  14. Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by BoRegardless · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And gave it away to the likes of Cuba and Bolivia and Iran for influence, while the citizens who elected Hugo Chavez received no benefit and the petro industry in Venezuela degraded due to lack of upgrades.

    1. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by mabhatter654 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The petrol industry pays for their OWN upgrades... What Chavez did was increase the amount of rent the country charged to pump its oil... So the private industry retaliates by dragging their feet causing delays.

      Remember said industry tried to violate the laws of the country and depose him... They FAILED, do he has no reason to play fair and not convert his country to be as anti-budiness as possible.

    2. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "while the citizens who elected Hugo Chavez received no benefit"

      They disagree.

    3. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Darinbob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In the same way that Chavez violated the laws of the country and attempted a coup of a lawfully elected government and failed at it. Oh the irony...

    4. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Ah, I get it. It's only class war when the people fight back.

    5. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah, that's the great tragedy of Hugo Chavez. A charismatic leader who entered the scene with wild popularity in his country and could have done so much to change things in his problem-plagued country. Instead he squandered the opportunity.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget the US. Chavez was giving away oil to the poor in the US while Obama was busy cutting budgets and safety nets.

    7. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Bullshit. Venezuela did sell oil for cheap to Cuba, but Cuba helped Venezuela with education. Cuba also helped with doctors, although they'd probably send them even without receiving money, since they do a lot of work in poor countries already. The poorest Venezuelans are better off today than when they gave all the oil money to foreign corporations, just look at the numbers. All that and Chavez finally managed to get Venezuela into Mercosur. And before you start it, Chavez won two elections (ending the two party duopolly) so whatever he did had the support of the majority of the people.

    8. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1, Insightful

      And before you start it, Chavez won two elections (ending the two party duopolly) so whatever he did had the support of the majority of the people.

      This is a half-truth. It is true that Chavez had support of the majority (though a huge minority hates him, he's a polarizing figure).

      However, Venezuela doesn't have freedom of speech. How can the people support or oppose Chavez's policies if they don't even know what he's doing? It's a farce. That is why for democracy, freedom of speech is more important than election processes. Remember even the Soviet Union had elections.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    9. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Gavagai80 · · Score: 2

      Cutting poverty in half is no benefit? You mean the rich received no benefit.

      --
      This space intentionally left blank
    10. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if you can do this:
      Millions of people leaving extreme poverty in a short time in an historically poor country, all while you have the people who control prices and products in the opposition (which also means artificial shortages), the CIA and the US govt. actively organizing and paying to disinform and to destroy internal economy and political stability (as they did against Allende in Chile, and against many other, which is well known and documented), under an international economic crisis, with food prices increasing since (if I recall correctly) 2008, with consumption rising because of people leaving poverty (and, from there, prices), etc.
      None in the poor-hating, racist and xenophobe Venezuelan upper class, none of the previous presidents did anything like that before Chavez, they are mostly foreigners who don't care about their own workers (same as in all Latin America).

      Cuba didn't receive oil for "free", they gave LOTS of medics and teachers in exchange to Venezuela, and it's the same for every other country: Chavez exchanged help.

      How stupid can people be to believe everything media says, knowing that the mass-media and international "news" agencies are controlled by big holding corporations, kept in their place by corporate marketing and PR? Same for Venezuela. The "freedom lovers" there were a little group of the same kind of people and corporations, that was instrumental in the coup attempt. You can't have real freedom if you don't have basic education, or even food.

      Yeah, it's easy to do anything from your computer and/or mouth. Not all has been good, obviously, but Venezuela has changed for good, there is no doubt about that, and even the opposition recognizes it (and even imitates, saying Capriles is a leftist, the same thing Obama has done).

      I guess this is the kind of advances and the country you like, don't you?

    11. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      The first election he won, the opposition did not participate at all. They left because it was a joke and because Chavez assassinated opposition leaders. It was an election of Chavez versus nobody.

      In the second election, he rigged the votes so that the ones coming from his supporters counted double or even triple in the final tally. I mean, the last election he won, he got about 35-45% of the votes while the "opposition" (all other parties merged in one single party) had 55-65%.

      So stating that Chavez won elections is misinformation, the "red gorilla" or "hugolini" was a fascist that previously participated in a violent revolution to access the power through force. When in power he banned all media and tv that he didn't like, and he had his own tv channel in which he talked for hours and could have sudden urges to "expropiate" or "expulsate" whatever crossed his mind.

    12. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yours is a half-truth:

      According to Venezuela's Communication Ministry (Minci), some 70% of Venezuela's radio and TV stations are in private hands with just under 5% are state-owned. The rest are community media organisations, most pro-government.
      [...]
      Opposition broadcasters have been under pressure since a short-lived coup against Mr Chavez in 2002, in which he says they played a key role.

      ("He says" my ass, even in youtube you can find evidence of that)
      Think about it this way: What if a third party won the elections in the U.S.? What would the media do, if they already have bias towards Ds or Rs? If you had the media in the hands of the same people who has the control of the economy, backed by the CIA and the U.S. govt., I guess you wouldn't be very happy...

      As I already said, you can't have freedom if you don't even have food.

    13. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they left because they already knew he had the popular vote.
      As you may know, when the coup happened, people decided they wanted Chavez back in the goverment, and after that, the opposition lost all credibility, was ashamed and defeated.
      Back in the day, Chavez was a Marxist, not a fascist.

    14. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by MrSteveSD · · Score: 1

      How can the people support or oppose Chavez's policies if they don't even know what he's doing?

      Well if they watched the privately owned media in Venezuela, they will certainly have no idea what he was doing. The hugely powerful privately owned media spent most of the time writing stories about how he is insane or a criminal. It was the private media that took an active part in the coup attempt against Chavez in 2002. There was plenty of incredibly critical coverage of Chavez in Venezuela, make no mistake about that.

    15. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      However, Venezuela doesn't have freedom of speech.

      And what is your source for that?

      I understand there are many venezuelian medias opposing the governement, and I wonder who managed to make you believe such a blatant fallacy.

    16. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      FYI there was news critical of the government in Soviet Russia too. Don't be so stupid as to believe that criticism is the same as free speech.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    17. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      "Was" is a key word there. Read here if you are interested.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    18. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Your source is the Venezuelan Communication Ministry? Why don't you cite Pravda while you're at it? I mean, are you really that stupid?

      Also, you CAN have freedom and food at the same time. It happens.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    19. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by gwolf · · Score: 5, Informative

      Umh...

      However, Venezuela doesn't have freedom of speech.

      Others have already questioned your saying. Yes, some years ago he cancelled a critical TV chain's title of concession (permit to transmit on air). That is, however, within his legal power, and at least in many other countries, I know of similar facts. But printed media, radio and TV can (and do) strongly oppose the government.

      Remember even the Soviet Union had elections

      There are several differences and important points:

      • The USSR had *single party* elections, while Venezuela has multi-party elections. When they have held referendums, of course, the options were "yes" and "no" - But when they voted for president, governors and congress, they had many parties to choose from. Last year he won by almost 60% to 40%, and they had only two running candidates.
      • The USSR was (and Cuba is) in many senses more democratic than the USA is now. Think of the system: It is a pyramid of indirect elections. Exemplifying quite simplisticly: Anybody in your block could run for, say, representing the block in the city council. The city governor is elected in the city council, from within the city council members. The provincial government is elected among city governments. The country is elected from within the provincial governments.
        That means that, yes, you have to be aligned with The Party (as in the USA you need to be aligned with Either of The Two Parties), and if you want to go up, you have to be a great politician (just as it stands in our current pseudo-democracies).
        Yes, for the people at large, getting an issue pushed up to the President was incredibly hard. But it is not perfect (although much better, yes) for us today.
    20. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      Paraphrasing the best obituary I have read - "Chavez was neither as evil as his critics claim, nor as benign his supporters claim. He will be remembered in the same light as his personal hero Simon Bolivia, a man who asserted South American independence".

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    21. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you have a bus to blow up some where in the name of "the people"?

      Populist bullshit like this is spouted by all autocratic governments. Chavez kills and oppresses and he's a hero to you. Says a lot about the kind of person you are, a scared, angry liberal who's favorite dictator has died.

      Hurt much you piece of shit?

    22. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, my source is the bbc
      Forgot to mention...

    23. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      As an oil company, or any business for that matter, you don't invest in the infrastructure and expect to take a net loss because some dickhead want's to nationalize a resource for populist support. BTW, this isn't the first time Venezuela has pulled this kind of crap.

      And as a Texan living in Houston, fuck CITGO for flying the American flag half-mast in his (Chavez) honor. I refused to pump gas at one of those places, now I'm going a step further and recommending that no one else pump there too. It's anti-American to support CITGO!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    24. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you have a bus to blow up some where in the name of "the people"?

      Populist bullshit like this is spouted by all autocratic governments. Chavez kills and oppresses and he's a hero to you. Says a lot about the kind of person you are, a scared, angry liberal who's favorite dictator has died.

      Hurt much you piece of shit?

      Kill? He killed anyone? When? How? I see, you watch too much TV.
      Ignorant BS like this is spouted by idiots like you, who only read the govt.-approved corporate media and call themselves "free".
      Liberal? lol, shut the fuck up, you piece of sick gringo.
      Says a lot about the kind of person you are, a greedy, misanthrope fascist who hates poor people.

      Talk about FREEDUMBs and the GUBMINT...
      Enjoy being raped by the TSA, the police and CEOs, you fucking lunatic.

    25. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by BlackSabbath · · Score: 1

      A. This was done openly.
      B. The guy was popular and never lost an election.

      Maybe the citizens of his country value different things to the citizens of your country. Which I can see might be a problem if one of the things valued in your country is telling everyone else what they should value.

    26. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      You are trying to say that the USSR and Cuba had better democracy than the USA, and you expect the rest of your points to be taken seriously? Really?

      Reports Without Borders explains some of the problems with Venezuelan freedom of the press. If you don't have freedom of speech, then you can't have a good democracy.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    27. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      They were citing the Venezuela Communication Ministry. You might as well ask the Pope if God is good.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    28. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then this and this if you want to see another point of view about "journalism" and "human rights" organizations (funded by mass-media and the U.S. govt., probably).
      It's not like they are angels or something...
      And btw, from here:

      Also, you CAN have freedom and food at the same time. It happens.

      I said No food => No freedom , you said freedom & food.
      These are two different statements, and it looks like you didn't even understand what I said.

    29. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Reports Without Borders explains some of the problems with Venezuelan freedom of the press. If you don't have freedom of speech, then you can't have a good democracy.

      That's not even a link to an article. That's a link a page of articles tagged Venezuela.

      But, lets go ahead and say RWB has some articles on Chavez, Venezuela, and the press. Do they mention the fact that some of those media outlets "repressed" by Chavez openly backed coup attempts against him?

      What would have been the reaction here in the United States if it turned out that Air America had tried to overthrow the Bush Administration?

    30. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Uberbah · · Score: 2

      As an oil company, or any business for that matter, you don't invest in the infrastructure and expect to take a net loss because some dickhead

      Less profit is not a loss. Dickhead.

      And as a Texan living in Houston, fuck CITGO for flying the American flag half-mast in his (Chavez) honor. I refused to pump gas at one of those places, now I'm going a step further and recommending that no one else pump there too. It's anti-American to support CITGO!

      Did you vote for McCain/Palin in 2008? Cuz you do know that Palin increased oil royalties for people living in Alaska, right?

    31. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "while the citizens who elected Hugo Chavez received no benefit"

      They disagree.

      We agree.

    32. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't the more apropos comparison be Bush vs. Gore? Hello, Florida?

      Of course, then you couldn't get your rocks off Obama bashing...hate to let facts get in the way of that. Carry on.

    33. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      How is it that you so horribly fail to understand freedom of the press? Being able to say that a government should be replaced is one of the most crucial elements of freedom of speech. Do you not remember how many people were calling for the impeachment of Bush?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    34. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by u38cg · · Score: 1

      Giving out free champagne is fun until the hangover kicks in. The worst thing about Chavez dying now is that it will cement his cult, because all the good things are conveniently coming to an end after his death.

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
    35. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Yomers · · Score: 1

      Poor people do not really need freedom of speech - they need to eat first, then they need proper place to live, then comes education and all stuff like this, and only some time after that, next generations, when they are fed and healthy and educated, may demand freedom of speech. And in Venezuela opposition candidate got a bit less than a half votes for last election - so apparently they have opposition TV and other media, otherwise it just could not happen.

    36. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once again, the only post in the thread to say anything useful gets no upmods.

    37. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      The voices in my head used to agree, but no longer.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    38. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      FYI there is news critical of major corporate transnationals in the USA, too. Don't be so stupid as to believe that criticism is the same as free speech.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    39. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Advocating impeachment != advocating a coup d'état, hello?

    40. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      They shall be known by their actions.

      Hugo adopted all the hallmarks of a dictator -- jailing opposition press, seizing private property, and assuming the power to pass law by decree (the "dictate" part of "dictator".)

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    41. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      And yet both are important for free speech.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    42. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Poor people do not really need freedom of speech

      Yes they do. Why do you think they don't need freedom of speech? They need that protection even more than rich people.

      they need to eat first, then they need proper place to live, then comes education and all stuff like this

      Somehow you've gotten the idea that freedom of speech prevents people from eating. You are wrong, stop thinking such stupid things. It is entirely possible for people to both eat and have free speech. Really.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    43. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by Xest · · Score: 1

      "Last year he won by almost 60% to 40%, and they had only two running candidates."

      Isn't it amazing how if you round one figure up, and one figure down, you can turn a 10% difference in popular vote into a 20% difference and simply pretend the candidates who got next to no votes didn't exist at all.

      Between that and pretending the USSR/Cuba are more democratic than the US I don't know how anyone upvoted you, let alone to +5.

      I guess it shows how many dumb mods Slashdot really does have now, if you say something populist it's +5, no matter whether true or not.

      A bit like the way Chavez won the Venezuelan elections in fact, well, this time at least. Last time he just rigged the vote instead.

    44. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by gwolf · · Score: 1

      A bit like the way Chavez won the Venezuelan elections in fact, well, this time at least. Last time he just rigged the vote instead.

      The Venezuelan elections are among the most watched by international observers. Maybe the best known among them is the Carter Foundation, but I have talke with people that have been repeatedly to Venezuela from different countries in Latin America — I have taken interest in that because I have been working on the opposition to electronic voting. Venezuela started with e-vote over 10 years ago, and nobody has found anything leading to think the votes were not counted properly. Of course, you'll surely understand that it would undermine the whole regime's legitimacy... I did expect to find something, but couldn't.

      This is not the same as saying that the elections are fair — Contenders have very different funding and air opportunities. This is, however, not very different (although it has a different form) than what happens in Mexico, where I live, or in the USA.

    45. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      FYI there was news critical of the government in Soviet Russia too. Don't be so stupid as to believe that criticism is the same as free speech.

      What are you talking about? Did Soviet Russia have numerous private owned press and TV that criticized the government? Venezuela has this.

      Just use your favorite search engine with the name of a media that Chavez is supposed to have silenced, and you will find it is still alive and kicking

    46. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Don't be so stupid as to believe that criticism is the same as free speech.

      Yes, yes, I'm glad we clarified that.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    47. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? Did Soviet Russia have numerous private owned press and TV that criticized the government?

      You seem to have trouble understanding, so I'll spell it out: the press is free to criticize the government, when the government approves of the criticism. When the government doesn't approve, it stops the press from speaking. Check it out.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    48. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Someone who started with good intentions but ended as a dictator?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    49. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      When the government doesn't approve, it stops the press from speaking. Check it out.

      Thank you for answering my original question : your source is Reporter Without Borders

      We have a lot of documentation now that suggests this particular NGO is not neutral, and had lied about Venezuela in the past. Use your favorite search engine and search for RSF (french acronym for Reporter Without Borders), NED (US propaganda agency giving money to RSF) and Venezuela.

      That source is tainted. Do you have another one?

    50. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Yes, but everyone knows that Venezuela has shut down and harassed the media. If you don't, it's merely your own ignorance.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    51. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but everyone knows that Venezuela has shut down and harassed the media. If you don't, it's merely your own ignorance.

      "Everyone knows" is a good definition for propaganda. Are you talking about RCTV, that was supposedly shut down by the Government? They just not renewed their air wave license, and RCTV persisted on cable and satellite, still free to critcize the government. And they did!

    52. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      RCTV? That station that carries such classics as "Mi Prima Ciela?" and "Calle Luna Calle Sol?" That's some hard hitting reporting there. Do you have an example of RCTV criticizing the government?

      RCTV didn't renew their air wave license, they switched to satellite.

      In addition I can't believe how stupid you are. Do you even read? Here's an example of where the Venezuelan government explicitly forbade the media from talking about a subject. Not as subtle as China, but clear censorship.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    53. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 1

      There's a fundamental difference. Impeachment is well within the legal bounds of the constitution governing the United States. Advocating, openly supporting and assisting a coup d'état against the democratically elected government as Venezuelan media did is something entirely different. If it had happened in the US, the responsible would likely have been on death row by now.

    54. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      There's no freedom of speech in Venezuela. I don't know if you don't realize this because you're bad at research, or because you've been listening to propaganda, but you're wrong.

      Furthermore, it is hard for me to believe you think it's ok to arrest someone for speaking against the government. Are you really that stupid? Do you also think Assange should go to jail for creating wikileaks?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    55. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 1

      There is most certainly freedom of speech in Venezuela, the Venezuelan media lambastes the government on a daily basis, on a vitriolic level rarely seen in western democracies.

      There's a big difference between outing government actions which have been kept from the people and assisting a coup d'état against a democratically elected government. The first is most certainly protected speech and well within the bounds of freedom of speech, but the latter is plotting to overthrow a democratically elected government and most certainly warrants a prison sentence. Consider what has happened to Bradley Manning simply for leaking not-so-secret documents, can you even imagine what would happen to someone who assisted in the attempted violent overthrow of a US president?

    56. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      In addition I can't believe how stupid you are. Do you even read? Here's an example of where the Venezuelan government explicitly forbade the media from talking about a subject. Not as subtle as China, but clear censorship.

      Sure, you don't know how stupid I am. As Stalin said, when you cannot fight ideas, fight the speaker

      I cannot comment on this particular algae issue, as I do not know the background. I just note this is a tribunal decision, not an executive one. I also note that executive free speech constraints exist in supposedly free countries. There are National Security Letters in the US, for instance.

    57. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I cannot comment on this particular algae issue, as I do not know the background.

      You would be wise to realize that about almost everything about Venezuela.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    58. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      What criticism of the government in Venezuela? I hope you're not talking about this kind of crap. I haven't seen much real criticism of the government by the media in Venezuela lately, and the government definitely tells them not to talk about certain topics, so if you have a link to that criticism I'd love to see it.

      Consider what has happened to Bradley Manning simply for leaking not-so-secret documents, can you even imagine what would happen to someone who assisted in the attempted violent overthrow of a US president?

      If you don't understand the situation of Bradley Manning, then you're talking out of ignorance. It's not illegal to publish top secret documents in the US.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    59. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      You would be wise to realize [you do not know the background] about almost everything about Venezuela.

      Given the amount of propaganda that exists both from pro-Chavez and anti-Chavez, it would be extremely unwise to give up critical thinking and just blindly trust someone I do not know.

      You did not answer about the court decision being no executive decision. Do you claim that venezuelian courts are government puppets?

    60. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    61. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 1

      Why are you linking to a US tv station? What possible evidence of anything could that be? Even RCTV which was taken off the public airwaves continue broadcasting their hatred of the government via cable and satellite, something which is very cheap and publicly available in Venezuela.

      No, it *should not* be illegal to publish documents in the US, yet there he is. What I'm saying is if the US detains someone under torture-like condition simply for releasing "secret" documents, the people responsible for a TV station which aided a violent coup against the President of the United States, in which the President was physically abducted (which was the case in Venezuela in 2002), would be in deep trouble, no matter how much you believe otherwise.

    62. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Even RCTV which was taken off the public airwaves continue broadcasting their hatred of the government via cable and satellite,

      Then show me. Link to it if you can. Find that serious criticism. Most likely you're just a typical idiot, pretending to know something when you don't.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    63. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      With this kind of stuff going on?

      The least I can say is that this paper is not neutral. Chavez is called "populist and authoritarian" by the journalist, and nothing is said why Lopez fraud charges could be irelevant

      Being banned from election because of fraud is not extraordinary. A french court just decided that for former Paris mayor Jean Tiberi.

    64. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      lol he is a populist and an authoritarian.

      I know your type. You like to think you know something, but you don't know how to find evidence. You think Chavez is a good leader, so you ignore any evidence to the contrary.

      Not only that, if someone suggested that you look for evidence that he is a bad leader, you wouldn't do it.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    65. Re:Preserved To Show Who Took over $100 Billion... by manu0601 · · Score: 1

      lol he is a populist and an authoritarian.

      I was not commenting whether these two adjective are accurate for Chavez or not. It is just that they are negative adjectives, and they are used by the journalist, not by a source been quoted by the journalist. This makes the article an opinion paper rather than an information paper, since the journalist chose its side.

      I understand you are going to tell me that this is information, not opinion since you believe Chavez was pure evil, like an iranian or north korean leader. The point is that there are a lot of people that have a positive opinion on him. Did you notice that several south America nations decided on several national day of mourning for him? And that there are millions of venezulian people that regret him? A fair article would have balanced the view on Chavez, quoting pro-Chavez and anti-Chavez sources, and explaining why Lopez was convinced, and on what basis this conviction was contested by some Chavez oponents.

      I know your type.

      Sure, you know everything.

  15. Yes but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How are they planning to preserve his massive ego?

    1. Re:Yes but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They will replace his penis with a horse cock.

    2. Re:Yes but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all the U.S. leftists will make a pilgrimage to Venezuela to suck it.

  16. But they don't need to preserve him forever. by John+Hasler · · Score: 1, Funny

    Until the current "left wing" populist government falls will suffice. The "Right" will promptly bury him. Then when the revolution comes again the "Left" can dig him up and put him back on display, nicely (or nastily) mummified.

    Perhaps they should build a pyramid...

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    1. Re:But they don't need to preserve him forever. by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised they didn't cast him in a giant bronze statue with the citizens wailing in front of him like a fallen demigod. Chavez must have envied the Kim dynasty of N. Korea. That mans lust for power and fame was ravenous!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:But they don't need to preserve him forever. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was not about ego, but notoriety.
      He wanted everyone to see what he was doing, but the international mass media was obviously more worried about showing him as a dictator than showing his actions. Not even Venezuelan media could destroy his image, because he had this daily show in which he talked for hours...
      It's funny to see USians talking about him as egocentric and power hungry, because he did exactly the contrary: he was wide open to his people. When you take things out of context and you get used to some kind of politicians (right-wingers, almost fascists), you don't see what' really going on, I guess.
      Really sad.

  17. Embalming, shudder by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In high school the essay Behind the Formaldehyde Curtain made a big impression on me; embalming was described as really creepy and artificial, which I suppose it is in any instance, but do they really need to circulate three to six gallons of dyed and perfumed solution of formaldehyde, glycerin, borax, phenol, alcohol and water through the stiff? It was much like when I found out that "milk" on the breakfast cereal on TV was actually glue. We're being scammed! Sort of.

    Dumping all that junk into the ground doesn't seem very good for the environment, either - I imagine in the years since (late 60s) the essay was published a bit of attention has been paid to making embalming a bit less toxic - or was that not an issue in the first place? At any rate, cremation for me, thank you - although after losing both parents I've found out that isn't cheap, either.

    1. Re:Embalming, shudder by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      That's why you are buried in a steel box, inside a waterproof concrete box... So you don't leech into the soil

    2. Re:Embalming, shudder by ChrisMaple · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Post-death processing is heavily regulated in most states, and like most regulation it tends to drive up prices and limit entry into the field. It is a splendid example of Fascism. My experience is in Connecticut: you can't process the estate to hand out inheritances until you have a death certificate. Only funeral homes can originate death certificates.

      Disposing of a corpse should probably cost about $200. In Connecticut, it's over $6000 (year 2009).

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    3. Re:Embalming, shudder by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      Since when are coffins made of steel?

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    4. Re:Embalming, shudder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently you've never buried a loved one and browsed the options at a funeral home.

    5. Re:Embalming, shudder by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I decided long ago that after I no longer need my body I'll hand it to some med students. Maybe they can learn something from my mistakes.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:Embalming, shudder by ultranova · · Score: 1

      Post-death processing is heavily regulated in most states, and like most regulation it tends to drive up prices and limit entry into the field. It is a splendid example of Fascism.

      Actually, no it isn't. In fact it has nothing to do with fascism whatsoever. It might, however, be an example of regulatory capture.

      Do you just use words like "fascism" randomly with no understanding whatsoever of their meaning?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    7. Re:Embalming, shudder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Conect-ta-kit,

      Land of the Democrats.

    8. Re:Embalming, shudder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He probably thinks a guy in a long black coat measures the dead and custom builds a coffin out of wood. Looks kind of like a loading pallet.

    9. Re:Embalming, shudder by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Personally, my plan is to stay alive until we achieve cybernetic immortality and then just live until the heat death of the universe. But if you want to die, that's your choice I suppose. More energy for me.

      Anyway, need to? Of course not. But some people find seeing the deceased one last time comforting. Having it the very next day isn't feasible, and having an obviously rotting corpse is not comforting.

      I've never been to a funeral where an open casket did anything besides creep me out. Two of the four elderly relatives, I saw them in the hospital shortly before they died. They weren't in a condition I'd like to remember them in, but at least they were alive, and there was some closure. The other two, the funeral itself provided closure. And I have pictures. The open viewing casket was just disturbing. They looked fake.

      A closed casket, natural burial makes a lot more sense to me. Cheaper than cremation, and you end up as normal stuff rather than pollutants. Maybe when I make the jump to robot brain and body, I'll bury it in a thin pine box six feet under and plant a garden above it.

    10. Re:Embalming, shudder by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

      No actually I haven't browsed the coffin offerings. Steel still rusts so unless you mean stainless steel...

      --
      Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
    11. Re:Embalming, shudder by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Do you just use words like "fascism" randomly with no understanding whatsoever of their meaning?

      Link for the GP.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    12. Re:Embalming, shudder by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Lot's of steel coffins in the middle price range. They compete with wood.

      Below that is Fiberglass, then (only to hold the stiff until cremation) fiberboard, then cardboard. You don't really want to know what a cardboard box to burn the body in costs.

      Above it is bronze, then unobtainium, then they start to get really expensive.

      If you want to be buried the way to go is request the Jewish package. They have specific rules. Pine box with holes already drilled in, no embalming. Legal in all 50 states and most of the rest of the world (thanks Hebrew friends). Don't try to weasel into the Jewish parts of the boneyard though.

      Never buy the coffin at the funeral home, in CA they lost their rights to charge handling fees for outside boxes. So now their is a Walmart style box store up the road from many boneyards.

      BTW if you are ever offered a IT/programming job in that industry, RUN AWAY. The whole place is run by and for the salesmen's benefit. Same as any other industry that sells identical products to emotional people who don't want to deal with it. Weasels are everywhere. Which brings up a bad memory, came in on Saturday to feed backup tapes (cheap bastards), and walked up on the office manager (Holy roller, 50s, _way_ too much makeup, bitch from hell) fucking one of the regional sales coordinators (Late 40s, Married, Obese) on the conference table. Neither was an attractive person. If it happened now, I'd likely extort the fucker, but I was a kid (and didn't have a camera on me).

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    13. Re:Embalming, shudder by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      That's why you are buried in a steel box, inside a waterproof concrete box... So you don't leech into the soil

      The concrete box isn't waterproof. All a scam. No need to bury people in all that. Good old wood box is plenty, or better yet - nothing. Just stick them into the ground. After all, just who do we think we are? Especially Hugo. He's fit for the garbage dump. That's where I'd put him.

    14. Re:Embalming, shudder by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      People are quite toxic when you shove dead ones shoulder to shoulder hundreds to an acre. The land chosen for graveyards isn't usually the best anyway (to wet, to dry, too rock for crops) so it would become a problem.

    15. Re:Embalming, shudder by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

      People are quite toxic when you shove dead ones shoulder to shoulder hundreds to an acre. The land chosen for graveyards isn't usually the best anyway (to wet, to dry, too rock for crops) so it would become a problem.

      Depends. If we didn't stick such toxic stuff in them and left them as they died it shouldn't be a problem. I can recall reading about battles from long ago where Romans battled. The land was very good after that because of all of those bodies. My point in fact. 100 years from now I should be totally recycled. My parents will probably still be around 2000 years from now. Buried about 8' down, in a big vault and pumped full of stuff to preserve them for a very long time. Where it is, it isn't likely to get a lot of water. So they're probably set unless at some point they dig them up and do something. My father didn't see the point either. Not much you can do if you want an open casket in most states.

    16. Re:Embalming, shudder by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      There are numerous programs for free cremation for whole body donation. There is a grisly one around here where they harvest all the medically useful parts such as skin, bones, etc. and then cremate what is left over. It's about 20 lbs, often less.

      I think it makes a lot of sense. Nobody is using the body anymore, why not put it to use? Why not spare the estate the cost of cremation?

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  18. Re:Call me skeptical by Yomers · · Score: 1

    They are asking Russians to do it, so Chaves will be ok :)

    I would love to live in a world where all presidents or whatever called heads of a state are embalmed and stored in a mausoleums for the amusement of the next generations.

  19. I've seen Lenin by OzPeter · · Score: 1

    And he looked plastic/waxy to me. So he may be preserved .. but lifelike only goes so far.

    --
    I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
  20. Confession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Just like I was rooting for the cancer, I'll be rooting for the bacteria.

    1. Re:Confession by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I used to burn ants with a magnifying glass when I was a kid, after luring them to a likely spot with a few stray bits from my Zagnut bar.

  21. Why Try So Hard? by dwye · · Score: 1

    Just make a really good wax head and a fake body, like Madame Tusseau's. Seal the fake up in a thick glass coffin and who will be able to tell the difference?

  22. I started the embalming process years ago by Grayhand · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm up to single malt whiskey now and plan to switch to Everclear by my 70s. If I drop in my 80s they should be able to prop my corpse in the corner and use it as a coat rack.

    1. Re:I started the embalming process years ago by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      You're a fucking fire hazard.

    2. Re:I started the embalming process years ago by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Eat more convenience store food; beef jerky, cookies, cakes etc.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  23. Have they considered plastination? by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 3, Interesting
  24. Re:Call me skeptical by Yeff · · Score: 1

    > They are asking Russians to do it, so Chaves will be ok :) He's dead, Jim.

    --
    "Freedom Through Vigilance"
  25. Re:Call me skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Didn't the Russians fail with Lenin and they displayed a waxwork instead?

  26. Re:Call me skeptical by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They are asking Russians to do it, so Chaves will be ok :)

    I would love to live in a world where all presidents or whatever called heads of a state are embalmed and stored in a mausoleums for the amusement of the next generations.

    What somewhat surprises me is that they don't get the wacky plastination guy in on the project. The actual product isn't really a preserved body in any useful sense(as the name suggests, the original tissue is largely replaced by polymers); but the replacement occurs down to impressively tiny details, the results look fantastic, and they last nobody-knows-how-long-but-a-long-time under normal indoor conditions.

  27. I find this rather nauseous... by Bearhouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've been lucky enough to have travelled around the world, including Moscow and Peking.
    Never felt the need to visit the chemically-preserved remains of "great" men there.

    Can anybody please cite me a truly humane, visionary leader who was embalmed in modern times, for public display?
    How about "despots"?
    Candidates should include Tito and Ataturk?

    Nope, not one. They did not need it, and neither did the population they left behind.

    1. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      Good old Jeremy Bentham makes an entertaining visit...

    2. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Wanting to have this thing done to their corpse is a clear sign of having a personality disorder.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    3. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Mao's Mausoleum is pretty much a standard stop in Tiananmen Square. It's like going to DC and giving the Washington Monument a miss. Are you like that guy who's always talking about how he doesn't own a television?

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    4. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 2

      Chavez has done a lot of good for his country and for getting Latin America out from under the thumb of US domination, he was loved by many, but yes embalming seems a bit over the top, I can see no reason to do this. Keep the spirit of what he was trying to achieve alive, this will be a much better way to honor his memory than by putting his body on display.

      Oh and for anyone interested in an in-depth and more balanced story about Chavez than the sound-byte propaganda put out by the mainstream media, read this excellent article. You may also be interested in watching this with Amy Goodman and Democracy Now!

    5. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Can anybody please cite me a truly humane, visionary leader who was embalmed in modern times, for public display?

      Nine words too many.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    6. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      It ain't all that different from having their likeness carved as a statue or even naming an airport or highway after the person. It is the same instinct at work. I think they are all excessive though.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    7. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, the Washington Monument is a creepy preserved decades-old human corpse? I always thought it was just an obelisk.

    8. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by snspdaarf · · Score: 1

      Well, Samuel Dinsmoor seems to have been a nice guy. Not sure I would call him a leader, though

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    9. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by mike1222 · · Score: 1

      Those are not "in-depth and more balanced" reports about Chavez, those are propaganda articles written by murder-crazed totalitarians who think Pol Pot was a moderate and that Stalin was too soft on the Kulaks.

    10. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by Sulphur · · Score: 3, Funny

      Good old Jeremy Bentham makes an entertaining visit...

      But is it utilitarian?

    11. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by Marxdot · · Score: 1

      Oh yes, that murder-crazed totalitarian Amy Goodman, and those Stalinist despots at Democracy Now!

      Of course Chavez was even worse than Hitler and Pol Pot combined because he didn't give preferential treatment to US businesses and he dared survive the subsequent coup attempt. What a tyrant. A-bloo-fucking-bloo.

    12. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    13. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Neither did Lenin. IIRC it was Stalin's idea to put him on display.

      Hey, religions need a god. And those Christians only got a corps on a stick, we have ours in a preserving jar!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    14. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      It's the fossilized... well, let's say the rest of the corpse is still under ground.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    15. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by adolf · · Score: 1

      But is it utilitarian?

      Is visiting any relic, site, or exhibit utilitarian?

      (The answer is, of course: Perhaps. An architect might study architecture in person while abroad, a painter might find some utility in seeing some works in person, and an embalmer might find utility in viewing a guy who has been dead for decades.)

    16. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by estestvoispytatel · · Score: 1

      Nikolay Pirogov https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikolay_Pirogov comes to mind, but, well, for him the embalming was probably more of another scientific experiment.

    17. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Precisely!!! He claimed to be a 'Bolivarian' Socialist, whatever that means. Did his self-proclaimed hero, Simon Bolivar, feel the need to do that? Then why did he?

      At any rate, if he felt the need to be embalmed, his successors could get their Russian friends to send them to Mars, where the temperature is pretty much fixed, have a TV camera sent attached to it, and have a 24/7 broadcast like the one in Baghdad after the ouster of Saddam. Those so inclined can turn on their channels to it, and watch it. It saves the expense (not to mention the carbon footprint) of keeping him artificially frozen in a near equatorial climate, and instead, have him naturally cooled in space. His broadcast can be recorded so that if ever the satellite link is lost, or any actual damage is done to the body, they can just replay all the recorded footage on repeat for those obsessed over that aspect of Comrade Hugo.

    18. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 1

      Ah yes, the "murder-crazed totalitarians" Greg Grandin, NYU professor of history, pulitzer prize finalist, Yale PhD, and Amy Goodman, award-winning investigative journalist, arguably the best and most principled American investigative journalist at least I know of... Please, get a brain and use it, it's a powerful tool used correctly, but it requires development of some critical thinking skills, you won't get this by blindly swallowing anything Fox News tells you.

    19. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by mike1222 · · Score: 1

      Oh yes, that murder-crazed totalitarian Amy Goodman

      Exactly.

      and those Stalinist despots at Democracy Now!

      As I said, they no doubt think that Stalin was too soft on the Kulaks, thereby making them to the left of Stalin. Stalin represented the more moderate wing of the Bolsheviks.

    20. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by mike1222 · · Score: 1

      Appeals to authority will get you nowhere with me, and even more worthless are "awards" given to commies by pinkos.

    21. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Hah! Bravo.
      I suppose someone will say, "Ghandi", but even that's probably a load of shit.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    22. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I watch 'Democracy Now' as opposition research. They are clearly disassociated from reality so I like to keep an eye on how they've twisted their thinking this week.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    23. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      I believe 'Screaming Lord Sutch' founder of the Monster Raving Loony Party might have ranted about some such thing, including a pyramid. It was never executed though.

      I'm only post because 'Screaming Lord Sutch' was clearly a truly humane, visionary leader. We need more like him, only with the power to actually tow Britain south to improve the weather.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    24. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      But is it utilitarian?

      Is visiting any relic, site, or exhibit utilitarian?

      (The answer is, of course: Perhaps. An architect might study architecture in person while abroad, a painter might find some utility in seeing some works in person, and an embalmer might find utility in viewing a guy who has been dead for decades.)

      Your point about embalmers is excellent.

    25. Re:I find this rather nauseous... by Marxdot · · Score: 1

      Nah; either you're trolling or your head is filled with bollocks.

  28. Re:Call me skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do we have to wait for them to die naturally first?

  29. Re:Call me skeptical by Razgorov+Prikazka · · Score: 1

    I was wondering about the same thing. Gunther von Hagens (or Liebchen if you like) has a very nice and apparently working method of getting corpses preserved. Also he does it in such a way that people can learn from this.
    My suggestion; only leave the skin so people can have a good look inside on how 'red' he actually was ;-)
    Besides, I think that he doesn't really fit in with men like Mao and Lenin who actually got stuff done. He was anti-american, but that's about it, he didnt really do any paradigm-shifting stuff IMHO.
    How low can Hugo?

    --
    rm -rf --no-preserve-root / ...and let /dev/null sort them out...
  30. Here's hoping by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 5, Funny

    After they have him stuffed they fit him with animatronics so he'll jump up every so often to scare the shit out of tourists.

    --
    Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
    1. Re:Here's hoping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was at his wake.
      He asked me to make less noise.

      Was he dead?
      Some said he was; some said he wasn't.

      I said nothing; it was none of my business.

    2. Re:Here's hoping by nbauman · · Score: 1

      After they have him stuffed they fit him with animatronics so he'll jump up every so often to scare the shit out of tourists.

      Didn't they do that with Ronald Reagan?

    3. Re:Here's hoping by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      After they have him stuffed they fit him with animatronics so he'll jump up every so often to scare the shit out of tourists.

      They would need a bobsled ride going through the mausoleum so that he could jump out as the trains go by. I can hear it now, "Permanecer sentados por favor".

    4. Re:Here's hoping by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      Only in Ronnie's case, they did it before he was inaugurated.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  31. Re:Call me skeptical by Razgorov+Prikazka · · Score: 1

    P.S.
    Maybe this is the reason he is not doing the plastination:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/06/world/europe/06corpses.html?_r=0
    <Quote> But Mr. Hagens, who turns 66 on Jan. 10, has told the German tabloid Bild that he is suffering from Parkinson&rsquo;s disease and that his wife 'will plastinate my body,' and 'my plastinated corpse will then stand in a welcoming pose at the entrance of my exhibition.' A man who has always loved publicity and controversy, Mr. Hagens gave no indication of how long he expected to live, but typically patients with Parkinson&rsquo;s, a degenerative disorder of the central nervous system, live for years after a diagnosis. </quote>

    --
    rm -rf --no-preserve-root / ...and let /dev/null sort them out...
  32. It stinks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tell you...

  33. Re:Call me skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    No, Lenin's body is still on display. I checked Wikipedia and you're thinking of Klement Gottwald (Czechoslovakia).

  34. Re:Call me skeptical by phantomfive · · Score: 2

    link.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  35. Re:Call me skeptical by williamyf · · Score: 1

    They can not do the plastination.... A while ago chavez expeled the "Bodies revealed" expo from venezuela, and denounced it as inmoral.

    Embalming him using that procedure would be an about face that his supporters could not aford...

    --
    *** Suerte a todos y Feliz dia!
  36. Incorruptible? Chavez? by billstewart · · Score: 1

    No, I don't think so.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  37. Keeping him dead's easier than keeping him alive by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Of course, we could find that Venezuela has been developing zombie technology, and he could hang around undead for a while.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  38. One word by cigawoot · · Score: 1

    Taxidermy!

  39. Re:Call me skeptical by Guillermito · · Score: 2

    Ironically, in 2009 Chavez ordered to confiscate one of these body exhibitions that was on tour in Caracas, because he said it was immoral to put unsepulchered bodies on display.

    http://news.sky.com/story/676071/chavez-blocks-venezuela-dead-body-art-show

    In case you understand Spanish, you can hear it from the man himself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2MfLT-U2qo

  40. Re:Embalming, shudder... Everybody Sing along! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  41. Brains.... by mousse-man · · Score: 0

    He'll probably crave for brains, never having had any in his life. I mean, he was damn inefficient at redistributing money - like all socialists.

    1. Re:Brains.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, capitalists are pretty efficient "craving" for everyone's money and resources, aren't they?

    2. Re:Brains.... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      The only reason capitalists are more efficient at redistributing money is simple self interest. If I redistribute everything to myself, well, DUH, of course I strive for efficiency!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Brains.... by ultranova · · Score: 1

      I mean, he was damn inefficient at redistributing money - like all socialists.

      This rises a question: how to model our economics from now on? After all, socialism failed. So did capitalism. So is there any model that gives Joe Average a reasonable standard of living - including financial security - and doesn't result in economic meltdowns every few years?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    4. Re:Brains.... by dave420 · · Score: 1

      You can look to many parts of Europe for just that - security, prosperity, great quality of life, and so on. But that's socialism, which clearly doesn't work.

  42. First, get to work quickly. by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    Make sure he's dead

    *BANG!*

    Okay, now what?

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  43. Dogfood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They should look into canning him and serving up to a pack of starving dogs in the barrios of Caracas.

  44. Re:Keeping him dead's easier than keeping him aliv by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Write to Congress, a few of them people there look like they already perfected the art.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  45. Re:A refridgerator with a temperature in the mid-4 by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    I was thinking the same. If they need a fridge to get it to the mid-40s, Venezuela is a hotter place than I originally thought.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  46. got hyperbole? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is another word that you should know.

  47. Re:Call me skeptical by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    A while ago chavez expeled the "Bodies revealed" expo from venezuela, and denounced it as inmoral.

    If that was about the time when the reports came out that the bodies were those of executed Chinese political prisoners then maybe he wasn't so crazy. This one time.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  48. Re: Call me skeptical by SolitaryMan · · Score: 1

    Yeah, also just keep the heads, they are of the most interest anyway. I feel like there is futurama joke hidden here somewhere, but I can't find it.

    --
    May Peace Prevail On Earth
  49. to correct the article... by gerardrj · · Score: 1

    Formaldehyde is a gas a room temperature. The substance used in labs and embalming is formalin, a room temperature liquid of water and formaldehyde.

    For a geek site, you should get these sort of things right to start with.

    --
    Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
  50. Re:Call me skeptical by jadv · · Score: 0

    This is about embalming, it's not rocket science. Just how technologically advanced do you think the Venezuelans would need to be, to achieve what the Russians and Chinese did several decades ago? Or are you one of those ignorants bigots who think everybody in South America lives in shanty towns, just because that is how they see it on TV and movies?

  51. Re:Call me skeptical by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    It always fascinates me to think that guy can get any viewership at all for his show. Why do people watch it? What do they get out of it? I don't understand.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  52. Re:Call me skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep looks like one dude with a god complex

  53. Re:Call me skeptical by arielCo · · Score: 1

    His most ardent followers are downright fanatical. For everyone else, like or not the guy was the epicenter of the government and many announcements were made amid his endless prattle. Supporters were expecting new handouts, and detractors feared new expropriations, threats and draconian abuse of power. I knew that I'd have a full report on the web the day after, tops.

    --
    This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
  54. Re:Call me skeptical by Yomers · · Score: 1

    In a perfect world - no waiting, but I'm unsure how it could work. But at least I would like to see all the previous deceased rulers of my country from Lenin to Yeltsin - why not? They were going in this direction - at first they did put Stalin in mausoleum, but then Khrushev spoiled everything - buried Stalin and stopped this awesome tradition. Pity. Mummified corpses are fun and profit!

  55. Re:Keeping him dead's easier than keeping him aliv by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

    Sorry to tell you this, but now that Jesse and Strom are gone, that joke is, too.

    --
    Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
  56. Stallman on Chavez by unixisc · · Score: 1

    I visited Stallman's site to see what he had to say on the passing of his comrade Chavez, and it didn't disappoint. But what he cited was a hoot - blaming Venezuela for global warming, er, heating, due to them exporting their oil.

    Only problem - Chavez too needed money, and Stallman never explained to him how he too could be better off by ending Venezuela's oil exports and selling free, sorry, libre software instead. Now, if only Stallman could put together an online petition suggesting that Chavez's body be made available for necrophilia - Stallman's own #2 choice after scientific experimentation.

    1. Re: Stallman on Chavez by Archwyrm · · Score: 1

      If you knew anything about Stallman, you would know that he prefers the term 'free' as in freedom (does that ring any bells?).

      --
      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -- Mussolini
    2. Re: Stallman on Chavez by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Well, then, why did he replace it w/ 'libre'? Reason he did was that too many people think 'gratis' when he means 'libre'.

  57. Re:Call me skeptical by karnal · · Score: 1

    Well, it certainly looks like it's been in the same form for a long time, so I'd say we have a winner.

    --
    Karnal
  58. Put him in a tank ... by PPH · · Score: 1

    ... of formaldehyde. Like this.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  59. Re:Call me skeptical by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    How much of 'Lenin's body' is now wax? By total weight and surface area please.

    They're not saying. A assume the numbers are something like 30%/100%

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  60. Re: Keeping him dead's easier than keeping him ali by Archwyrm · · Score: 1

    You seem to be forgetting at the very least the venerable Senator Orrin Hatch, whose only necessary campaign slogan is 'experience'. Indeed I wouldn't trust anyone with any less experience to take so many campaign contributions from lobbyists.

    --
    Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -- Mussolini
  61. Re:Call me skeptical by Hentes · · Score: 1

    The conspiracy theory is that Lenin's body was replaced by a wax statue once it started to deteriorate. Wouldn't be that surprising to be honest, the bolsheviks have lied about bigger things.

  62. Re:Call me skeptical by Sir+Holo · · Score: 1

    I saw BodyWorlds in 1999. I learned more human anatomy during that two hours than I had in all of my life to that time.

    The art pieces are a bit freaky, but they also have several exploded-view (think engineering drawings) versions of human bodies, with the organs all clearly in their original shape, showing clearly how everything fit together.

    They also prepare and sell individual organs/parts that are plastinated to medical schools/colleges. These last far longer and are more tactile than formaldehyde-preserved jars of guts. it saves money.

  63. Re: Call me skeptical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe we have this where famous persons' heads are stored - thank you Futurama!

  64. Re:Call me skeptical by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

    What somewhat surprises me is that they don't get the wacky plastination guy in on the project.

    They want a result that will last for decades to a century. "Plastination" has only a couple of decades of proven track record. It may well have good potential to last a lot longer, but that isn't the same as having a record.

    Given that, I'd stick with the best of proven techniques for conventional embalming (including literally getting him into the fridge while he's still warm, to stop him being warm). You're not going to get a second chance with "Plastination" (capitalised, as IIRC it's a trademark), but repair techniques with conventional embalming have been in work for decades, so you do have second chances. By the time that Hagen's children (if he bothered to have any ; cousins otherwise) are dead, if the first Plastination specimens are still in good condition, then you could realistically consider the technique for preserving a body to last for 2+ generations, after which it really is of academic interest only.

    Oh, doesn't Plastination involve continuously soaking the body in a vat for months? While most of embalming can be done by pumping a new batch of formaldehyde into the blood stream (and guts, surely?) during the night, and letting it soak into the stiff through a day on the podium? That would make a big difference too.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  65. Re:Call me skeptical by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    lol no clue if you are serious, but I was talking about Chavez, not bodyworlds. I can understand why people see BodyWorlds for sure!

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."