[Jordan]

What the Americans are doing is absolutely normal for a world power. The Greek, Roman, British, and one of the Persian Empires all exported their culture (americanization), took over economics of other countries, built powerful armies, supressed potential threats or created them then crushed them to gain populairty etc...

[Renegade]

I'm a lil too tired to read all the responses but ill get back to you shortly!

[Slade]

I don't think the status quo ever defines what should be done...

[J m HofMarN]

But Jordan, all of those empires eventually became corrupt due to their own power mongering and were crushed violently with great loss of life. Isn't it therefore preferable that the US take a different course from ancient Rome?

[Renegade]

Alright time to ruckus some republicans!

Renegade!

On the question of Saddam: Hey, I never said the guy was Barney the fuggin dinosaur, I said he didn't deserve to be photographed in his underwear. Do you really think that's justice? Hey I'd love to see both George Bushs tried and hung for crimes against humanity, but I think forcing them to pose naked for photographs would be a trifle vindictive. That dosnt make their victims feel any better, and it's not justice.

On your bullshit charges against His Excellency:
The US government says Cuba likes to kill people so it MUST be true. And the Organization of American States was at that time a US puppet organization. Any claims made by these two groups are moot.
So the previous moron you quoted says as high as 100000 and this guy says 5-10 thousand? You capitalists could at least keep your false accusations remotely consistent. Why not just say he killed a million? In fact, hey, since I, as an American, am forbidden from traveling to Cuba and thus unable to disprove these wild accusations, why not just say that His Excellency killed the entire population of Cuba and now sits atop a throne of bones drinking the blood of the innocent?
Ok, we have a group of ANTI-CASTRO CUBAN TRAITORS claiming 400. We have a well respected international organization that says 7. SEVEN. SEVEN. SEVEN. The US arrested more political prisoners than that at just one of the protests I went to. The US holds at least a hundred political prisoners - BPP members, Indian Lib personnell, brothers and sisters of the Black Bloc, protest organizers, etc etc. And you rag on Cuba for seven?

And just how does your estimate of 100000 dead gel with Amnesty's estimate of 7 political prisoners? A government that kills a good chunk of their population only has seven political prisoners? Give me a fucking break!
Texas exectutes more people than that every single month for less serious crimes. Hijacking a vessel is an act of terrorism. Cuba is accused, falsely, by the pigs in Washington of supporting terrorism, so they had to strike hard against any Cubans commiting terrorism. Remember, this was AFTER 9/11 (Which His Excellency strongly condemned and offered aid to the survivors)
So lets get this striaght. The government (which is in a position to know since they'd have records) say he was a policeman under a regime that is openly known for evil deeds. They also say he was planting bombs. In his defense he claims that WHILE ON A HUNGER STRIKE AND DELIRIOUS he remembers his guards being mean to him. Hey, when your only witness is a potential terrorist/torturer who was delirious at the time, YOU HAVE NO CASE.
Hey if a high ranking officer is using his position to deal drugs, he's a traitor. And the opposition to this comes, once again, from opponents of the Castro regime and a guy who admits he was a friend of the criminal. Sorry, I'm not buying it and neither would any jury in the world.
This year the pig government spent millions trying to overthrow His Excellency. Just where do you think that all goes? Yes, to Cuban slave agents. I am glad that His Excellency stopped them before they could do any harm to Cuba.
Do you disagree with this?

On the persecution of gays, does the US let gays into their government? Are there any gay senators or congressmen or governors? Aren't gays kept out of most positions of power in society here? I definately don't agree with this policy, but the US does it as well, so theres no reason to point fingers. I don't see any evidence cited that gays have been arrested or harassed by the government in Cuba, just a statement with no source.
Ah, here we go, some actual evidence of persecution. Yes, Castro did apparently have labor camps, though I don't see any sources cited or proof from international human rights groups. But he has clearly ceased these policies, and I wouldnt be surprised if the USSR didnt have something to do with the matter. I might also point out that it wasnt the US or their servants who helped get the camps shut down, it was patriotic Cubans who, despite what you seem to think, actually were allowed to differ from their government's opinions and indeed change the opinions of the leader. When was the last time this happened here? I've gone to a march at least once a year to get marijuana legalized, to free Mumia, to end the imperialist aggression, and yet none of it has happened and they're even considering heaping on more repression with new PATRIOT ACTs and anti-gay ammendments to hte constitution.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

1) First off, no i don't think it vindictive to take pictures of him in his underwear. Quite frankly I don't give a shit about him, so I don't really feel any remorse for the picture being taken. His victims and their families wish that there "vindictive" punishments could of been as bad as Saddam's own fucking crimes and torture. I still have yet to see you even attempt to explain your hypocricy with this situation when you justify Palestinian terrorism because of supposed worse terrorism by Israel. It's just hellarious though that you think taking a single shot of him in his underwear was this cruel abomination though.

2) Your bullshit that numbers are inaccurate argument is ridiculous. Realistically its impossible to state how many die at the hands of a person or in a country such as Cuba. Right now in Iraq the numbers of how many we've killed ranges from 30k-100k, so because that range is so wide, does it mean the numbers are completely in accurate? NO. Different studies use different methods to collect their data and as such, they can only state the exact amount of people that died under THEIR guidelines. Why is that such a hard concept to understand? And ofcourse EVERY STUDY is propaganda by capatalistists?

3) Basically we've concluded that you think a state that is unstable and perhaps under attack has the right to take away people's rights. So I guess America arresting and imprisoning people they believe are terrorist cells is justified because oh well, people DO what to kill us so that money must be going somewhere. Stop justifying fascism one place and condemning it somewhere else.

4) Actually there are gay senators in the US or atleast congressmen, look it up. And gays here don't get widespread discrimination by the govt, even if unelected, its because people simply don't want to vote for them, not because their is a govt policy to prevent them from running (unlike Cuba). And I don't even see how thats relevant, my point isn't whether Castro is BETTER than America, my point is that Castro HAS commited acts of injustice. You just have to always change the argument back to OMG America to stop yourself from having to defend the actions of the fascists and/or dictators that you support. And I just gave you a source of how he discriminated against gays with the camps and his own quote, but I guess I'll have to find even more proof of this because I highly doubt you'll go lookin up things that might question your existing beliefs.

5) ZZZZzzzzz. So if he had one time DID have labor camps, he HAS done things that have been unjust am I not correct? You said he was perfect and never has done anything wrong against his people in anyway a few posts ago. And nothing has changed here based on the people? Listen just because your legalize drugs so you can get high rally doesn't work doesn't mean ACTUAL matters don't change. See in a democracy, you have this thing, where people elect officials when they want policy to change, and as such policy changes. You don't need to do a protest everytime you disagree with somethin because every 2-4 years you have a choice on who represents you. Now, there is moments of extreme cases obviously where the people do have to protest, ie. civil rights and vietnam but generally speaking its not necessary. And speaking of which, civil rights and vietnam are two cases in which govt policy HAS changed directly from widespread popular criticism and demand.

[Patrick Bateman]

Jm Hoffmarn (may have spelt that incorrectly, sorry)
Let's get down to brass tacs.
Hopw can you justify anything, given you support a man who has risen to power through bloodshed and continues to rule under a system where he is the only option. I hate GW as much as the next guy, but at least he played the system, he didn't disregard it.

[J m HofMarN]

Renegade - #1: Ok, so it's acceptable to take humiliating pictures of people if they're bad and use them for propaganda. So I'm sure you're a big fan of Abu Ghraib too.

As for why Palestinian freedom fighters are justified, they're fighting to free their nation from illegal and genocidal foreign occupation, and they're using the only means available to them. If you want the freedom fighters to stop using "terrorism" than send them a few F14s and guided missiles so they can target the people who really need to pay.

2: I didn't discount every study as propaganda. But most of those you cited were either US government estimates or US government puppet organizations such as Cuban exiles or the OAS. That's like letting Nazi Germany give you all your facts about Jews. I'm sure that some people died in the Cuban revolution, just like some died in every revolution. But the American government making outrageous claims about His Excellency killing a hundred thousand people is just nonsense.

3: America is not under attack the way Cuba is. America is being randomly attacked by a group of men desperate to change our foreign policy so we'll stop killing people. Cuba is being systematicly terrorized, isolated, accused, threatened, and even attacked by the imperialists. As soon as some other government starts spending millions to overthrow the US government, as soon as they assassinate several of our leaders, and as soon as another government tries to invade us once or twice, then you'll have a half way decent analogy. The other difference is that Cuba has only been free of foreign rule ofr fifty years. That means there are plenty of people there who can remember when Cuba was ruled by the US. Somehow I think if they wanted to go back to that they'd have done something by now, but instead the people have been generally supportive of His Excellency. Perhaps, despite what blasphemy it sounds like, people don't like imperialism.

4: The US government dosnt discriminate against gays? Yeah, I suppose banning gay marriage everywhere they can isnt a form of discrimination at all. Your continued attack against his Excellency has turned up at worst that he holds a few people prisoner for conspiring with the imperialists, that people were killed during his revolution, and that he did have a problem with gays at one point in time. Of all these only the third one is really anything bad at all, and as we already established this was a mistake and was corrected, but I'm sure it makes you feel better about what the US is doing against Cuba to know that Cuba's government isn't entirely perfect.

5: I said Castro was perfect? I may have said he's a model ruler, but not perfect. If the government listened to the people we'd be out of Iraq or never even have gone there. The media controls the people, the corporations control the media and the government. Its very rare for government policy to change. Rather they just make new policies. That's just one small sign of corruption. Vietnam ended largely because hte government couldn't win the war, not because of the people's opinion. However I claim it as a victory for the people, because a victory for the Vietnamese freedom fighters was a victory for the American people as well.

As for civil rights, just exactly what changed? Tell me that? After Martin Luther King died blacks were still being gunned down by government pigs, and the government still treats them like criminals, and there are still disproportionately few African Americans in government. Black people are still on death row for crimes they didn't commit, the suppression of the black panther movement happened AFTER civil rights, so what exactly changed? All I see is that black folks have the ability to participate in the same sham elections as the rest of us, and that dosn't seem like much. The basic racism fundamental to the American system remained.

Patrick- People like George Bush are the system. They ruled Cuba ever since conquering it from Spain. I see nothing wrong with His Excellency not playing by their rules.

[Patrick Bateman]

Democracy isn't exactly 'their' rules dude. I believe the Greeks may have been involved somehow

[Slade]

No, "their" rules are more of an oligarchy where status is determined by wealth. The Greeks really weren't that much better. If I recall, only male landowners could be involved in the governmental process, though I'm not sure, and education was only availble to the elite back then as well...

[civilian_number_two]

Hoff: saying "His Excellency" whenever you mean to say "Castro" or "The President of Cuba" is like saying "Her Majesty" whenever you mean to say "Elizabeth II" or "Queen Elizabeth" or "The Queen of England. Like saying "His Holiness" whenever you mean to say "Pope Benedict" or "The Pope." It sounds sycophantic and a bit stupid.

Carry on.

[Slade]

I am tempted to get out those akimbo silver russian pistols and sneak up behind you in the Temple, Civ. But I won't.

[J m HofMarN]

Patrick- Why do you think the US wants elections in Cuba? It aint so Cuba can democratize, it's so that that the US can buy and own as many candidates as possible, use fear to alter election results, and have some guy named Georhe Busman get elected president of Cuba. They did it in Guatemala, Iraq, and if Cuba held democratic elections they'd do it there too. Not because the Cubans like imperialism, but because between threats and bribery all the candidates would either join the imperialists or disappear. That's the American idea of democracy.

Civ- That may be true, but His Excellency has done a great deal more to earn that title from his people than any of those whom you mentioned. Many in Cuba have simply chosen to call him "Padre" which is of course Spanish for father. You find the same thing with His Excellency The President of Palestine, whose people called him "Abu Amar" which is "father of us all" in Arabic. So I don't think it to be too out of line to refer to him with such a title as it's clear that many people believe he's earned it.

[civilian_number_two]

I am tempted to get out those akimbo silver russian pistols and sneak up behind you in the Temple, Civ. But I won't.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dare you try! Grenade Launchers, -4 Health, Archives!

[civilian_number_two]

Civ- That may be true,  ...  I don't think it to be too out of line to refer to him with such a title as it's clear that many people believe he's earned it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you agree that it is sycophantic and a bit stupid, and somewhat out of line. Ok.

[J m HofMarN]

I'm sure it could be viewed as such, but it really dosn't seem so to me. There are plenty of people who have titles they really don't deserve, and are called by those titles merely as supplication by their underlings. If you don't believe he deserves the title than you probably would view it as being a bit stupid. It all depends on the view you take on the person. An admirer of the former pope wouldn't have gone about calling him John.