Che Guevara

Anyone know any decent works on Che Guevara? I am looking at his iconic status- deserved or not- and would appreciate any snippets of information

uh-oh

Confusion33 wrote: Anyone know any decent works on Che Guevara? I am looking at his iconic status- deserved or not- and would appreciate any snippets of information

Hmmm... Iconic works.

How about the following.

"How I killed Thousands over a number of years across Latin America"

or

"How I managed to live in luxury in Cuba while thousands of people were locked up in political prisons on my orders"

or my personal favourite

"How I managed to completely fool millions of stupid lefty bastards across the world into paying pver the odds for my image on a crappy s hirt made in South East Asia, leaving my descedants to make millions out of it"

Some good resources here

Uncle Liam wrote:

Confusion33 wrote: Anyone know any decent works on Che Guevara? I am looking at his iconic status- deserved or not- and would appreciate any snippets of information

Hmmm... Iconic works.

How about the following.

"How I killed Thousands over a number of years across Latin America"

or

"How I managed to live in luxury in Cuba while thousands of people were locked up in political prisons on my orders"

or my personal favourite

"How I managed to completely fool millions of stupid lefty bastards across the world into paying pver the odds for my image on a crappy s hirt made in South East Asia, leaving my descedants to make millions out of it"

Some good resources here

You know, Liam, you used to strike me as a fairly sensible person. While I have no doubt that you're a decent fella, have your personal politics always been so apeshit looney or has this been a slow degeneration? :p

His Holiness, The Pope wrote:

Uncle Liam wrote:

Confusion33 wrote: Anyone know any decent works on Che Guevara? I am looking at his iconic status- deserved or not- and would appreciate any snippets of information

Hmmm... Iconic works.

How about the following.

"How I killed Thousands over a number of years across Latin America"

or

"How I managed to live in luxury in Cuba while thousands of people were locked up in political prisons on my orders"

or my personal favourite

"How I managed to completely fool millions of stupid lefty bastards across the world into paying pver the odds for my image on a crappy s hirt made in South East Asia, leaving my descedants to make millions out of it"

Some good resources here

You know, Liam, you used to strike me as a fairly sensible person. While I have no doubt that you're a decent fella, have your personal politics always been so apeshit looney or has this been a slow degeneration? :p

I dunno he's just what we call a libertarian... :)

I lol'd at his answers tho

C-Ro wrote:

His Holiness, The Pope wrote:

Uncle Liam wrote:

Confusion33 wrote: Anyone know any decent works on Che Guevara? I am looking at his iconic status- deserved or not- and would appreciate any snippets of information

Hmmm... Iconic works.

How about the following.

"How I killed Thousands over a number of years across Latin America"

or

"How I managed to live in luxury in Cuba while thousands of people were locked up in political prisons on my orders"

or my personal favourite

"How I managed to completely fool millions of stupid lefty bastards across the world into paying pver the odds for my image on a crappy s hirt made in South East Asia, leaving my descedants to make millions out of it"

Some good resources here

You know, Liam, you used to strike me as a fairly sensible person. While I have no doubt that you're a decent fella, have your personal politics always been so apeshit looney or has this been a slow degeneration? :p

I dunno he's just what we call a libertarian... :)

I lol'd at his answers tho

Libertarian?! I used to consider myself a libertarian and my views certainly aren't as rightist as Liam's. I don't think you'll find many libertarians who would think the same way, except perhaps on economic issues.

Uncle Liam wrote:

Some good resources here

I don't necessarily agree with the politics of the site...but I do agree with making fun of trustafarians

His Holiness, The Pope wrote:

C-Ro wrote:

His Holiness, The Pope wrote:

Uncle Liam wrote:

Confusion33 wrote: Anyone know any decent works on Che Guevara? I am looking at his iconic status- deserved or not- and would appreciate any snippets of information

Hmmm... Iconic works.

How about the following.

"How I killed Thousands over a number of years across Latin America"

or

"How I managed to live in luxury in Cuba while thousands of people were locked up in political prisons on my orders"

or my personal favourite

"How I managed to completely fool millions of stupid lefty bastards across the world into paying pver the odds for my image on a crappy s hirt made in South East Asia, leaving my descedants to make millions out of it"

Some good resources here

You know, Liam, you used to strike me as a fairly sensible person. While I have no doubt that you're a decent fella, have your personal politics always been so apeshit looney or has this been a slow degeneration? :p

I dunno he's just what we call a libertarian... :)

I lol'd at his answers tho

Libertarian?! I used to consider myself a libertarian and my views certainly aren't as rightist as Liam's. I don't think you'll find many libertarians who would think the same way, except perhaps on economic issues.

I'd hate talking about him in the 3rd person but what makes him right-wing? Is this true right wing or joe average's definition of it? I've never seen him say anything socially conservative at all..

C-Ro wrote:

His Holiness, The Pope wrote:

C-Ro wrote:

His Holiness, The Pope wrote:

Uncle Liam wrote:

Confusion33 wrote: Anyone know any decent works on Che Guevara? I am looking at his iconic status- deserved or not- and would appreciate any snippets of information

Hmmm... Iconic works.

How about the following.

"How I killed Thousands over a number of years across Latin America"

or

"How I managed to live in luxury in Cuba while thousands of people were locked up in political prisons on my orders"

or my personal favourite

"How I managed to completely fool millions of stupid lefty bastards across the world into paying pver the odds for my image on a crappy s hirt made in South East Asia, leaving my descedants to make millions out of it"

Some good resources here

You know, Liam, you used to strike me as a fairly sensible person. While I have no doubt that you're a decent fella, have your personal politics always been so apeshit looney or has this been a slow degeneration? :p

I dunno he's just what we call a libertarian... :)

I lol'd at his answers tho

Libertarian?! I used to consider myself a libertarian and my views certainly aren't as rightist as Liam's. I don't think you'll find many libertarians who would think the same way, except perhaps on economic issues.

I'd hate talking about him in the 3rd person but what makes him right-wing? Is this true right wing or joe average's definition of it? I've never seen him say anything socially conservative at all..

Missed all the threads about Muslims, did you?

And of course, as soon as he wakes up, he'll launch into his usual bit about how every thread dissolves into an argument over him somehow. Set 'em up and knock 'em down....

Well, you have kind of proven my point.

And theres nothing particularly wild about what i said about Guevara. Those are all widely known facts about him.

His Holiness, The Pope wrote:

Missed all the threads about Muslims, did you?

And of course, as soon as he wakes up, he'll launch into his usual bit about how every thread dissolves into an argument over him somehow. Set 'em up and knock 'em down....

I read them...there was nothing hateful in what he said, basically that one group shouldn't get more rights than others...or take away another groups rights in the name of sensitivity--what's not libertarian about that?

Uncle Liam wrote: Well, you have kind of proven my point.

And theres nothing particularly wild about what i said about Guevara. Those are all widely known facts about him.

blah.. I'm not trying to argue about you---I just don't see the "omg evil".

Sorry tho.

C-Ro wrote:

His Holiness, The Pope wrote:

Missed all the threads about Muslims, did you?

And of course, as soon as he wakes up, he'll launch into his usual bit about how every thread dissolves into an argument over him somehow. Set 'em up and knock 'em down....

I read them...there was nothing hateful in what he said, basically that one group shouldn't get more rights than others...or take away another groups rights in the name of sensitivity--what's not libertarian about that?

What makes Liam's comments right-wing populism (or at least how that rabble-rousing populism functions over here) is his perpetuation of the mythology that "Muslims are getting more rights than others" when in fact "Muslims" (or at least those people who claim to speak on behalf of 'Muslims') are just finally being listened to after being marginal for decades.

Darky gets a voice; whitey gets angry and convinces him/herself that their country/way of life/traditions/whatever are "under seige" when, in truth, that's about as far removed from reality as it's possible to get. Surely this is just basic kneejerk resentment of so-called "uppity niggers" all over again??

And, as ever, all this is couched in the rhetoric of 'common sense', a 'common sense' perpetually undone by 'do-gooders', 'loony lefties' and so on.....

Martin,

My complaint wasnt that "Muslims are getting more rights that others." It was that the rights of others are being either ignored or denied to accomodate certain sections of the Islamic community. Muslims make up, at a guess, 3 or 4% of this countrys population, yet the Muslim council of Britain has disporopertionate amount of influence on thsi country. It is a much more powerful organisation that say, The Church Of England, or indeed any other religious organisation in this country.

Bear in mind that papers in Iran publish anti western, anti jewish, anti Israel cartoons on a near daily basis. We see British and American flags being burnt on TV ona regualr basis. What is the reaction? Nothing, pretty much.

But look at the reactions we have seen in the last 18 months over some cartoons, and over the fact that Jack Straw *ASKS* Muslim women (not demands- as has been misreported by certain organisations, not least the Muslim Council of Britain) which have seen the principle of Free Speech, the very concept that Liberalism is based upon, be discussed in the context that it should be curtailed.

Immigration has been happenning in this country for decades, yet no particular group have caused this discussion to even take place. Why is that?

And my point, Liam, is that this is waffle: I agree that those towards the hard-line end of the muslim spectrum are making soem pretty outrageous demands, but I can't for the life of me see either (a) that those demands are being met or (b) that anyone else is 'losing out' because of those demands. As you point out, the muslim population of the UK is pretty small: they're pretty loud these days, but that's only 'cos, post-9/11, they're considered an important voice much amplified by the media: I'm not sure that there have been any great changes because of those highly vocal protests.

As I've said before on here, surely the recent high-profile (and transparently strategic) Labour 'backlash' against veils and so on has dumped any notion that the Government is bending over backwards to help muslim folk at the expense of other minorities and/or Middle England into the dustbin.

What you are saying is a widely-held popular belief; that doesn't make it any less misguided.

But surely the fact that the discussion of free speech is even taking place is at least a trifle concerning? Regardless of any change that may or may not happen.

(The Good Doctor) Martin Fradley wrote: And my point, Liam, is that this is waffle: I agree that those towards the hard-line end of the muslim spectrum are making soem pretty outrageous demands, but I can't for the life of me see either (a) that those demands are being met or (b) that anyone else is 'losing out' because of those demands. As you point out, the muslim population of the UK is pretty small: they're pretty loud these days, but that's only 'cos, post-9/11, they're considered an important voice much amplified by the media: I'm not sure that there have been any great changes because of those highly vocal protests.

As I've said before on here, surely the recent high-profile (and transparently strategic) Labour 'backlash' against veils and so on has dumped any notion that the Government is bending over backwards to help muslim folk at the expense of other minorities and/or Middle England into the dustbin.

What you are saying is a widely-held popular belief; that doesn't make it any less misguided.

I'm someone who falls under the the "rights of one shouldn't trump the rights of another" crowd and a lefty. I can not for the life of me believe some of the horrible anti-islamic (and anti-religious) shit that gets said here with regards to things freedom of religious expression and not so religous expression.

Everyone wants freedoms for what they agree with and to veto the other side before it comes out.

Anyway, what I'm saying is I agree with Fradders and want to have his e-babies...

BUT Liam isn't a right winged nutjob...because the second that the government would give into taking rights away from one group to give rights to another--then everything he's saying applies.

Uncle Liam wrote: But surely the fact that the discussion of free speech is even taking place is at least a trifle concerning? Regardless of any change that may or may not happen.

It's all playing up to the electorate though, isn't it? No real balls behind it?

Hi, from argentina, where el che guevara is from...going back to the main topic in this thread, some people may don´t like Cuba and Fidel´s goverment, but what el Che did during the revolution was to try to give all the people the same opportunties as others...so, if that you think is crap, well you´d better start re consider you points views... leo.

From IMDB:

Soderbergh To Direct Back-to-Back Che Biopics

Ocean's Eleven director Steven Soderbergh is set to shoot two back-to-back films about Latin American revolutionary Ernesto 'Che' Guevara. Soderbergh and Benicio Del Toro, who will play Guevara, have been working on the movies since they made Traffic together in 2000. The films will also likely star Javier Bardem, Franka Potente and Benjamin Bratt, who are currently in talks for key roles. Both films pick up after the formative Guevara years captured in Walter Salles' film The Motorcycle Diaries. The first movie, The Argentine, begins as Guevara and a band of Cuban exiles - led by Fidel Castro - reach the Cuban shore from Mexico in 1956. The second film, Guerilla, begins with Guevara's trip to New York City, where he spoke at the United Nations in 1964 and was celebrated in society circles. He then disappeared into the jungles of South America. When he tired to use Bolivia as the catalyst for more revolution, he was captured and executed. The movies will be shot back-to-back beginning next May in Mexico and South America.

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Hi, from argentina, where el che guevara is from...going back to the main topic in this thread, some people may don´t like Cuba and Fidel´s goverment, but what el Che did during the revolution was to try to give all the people the same opportunties as others...so, if that you think is crap, well you´d better start re consider you points views... leo.

So, he didn't run political prisons and he didn't have people whacked????

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Hi, from argentina, where el che guevara is from...going back to the main topic in this thread, some people may don´t like Cuba and Fidel´s goverment, but what el Che did during the revolution was to try to give all the people the same opportunties as others...so, if that you think is crap, well you´d better start re consider you points views... leo.

Yes, Genocide across an entire continent. Fantastic!

Get your facts right sunshine.

Genocide? Uh, about those facts, sunshine...

"che guevara reader writings on politics and revolution" ISBN 1-876175-69-9

BTW i am the first person to actually answer your question :)

Tex wrote:

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Hi, from argentina, where el che guevara is from...going back to the main topic in this thread, some people may don´t like Cuba and Fidel´s goverment, but what el Che did during the revolution was to try to give all the people the same opportunties as others...so, if that you think is crap, well you´d better start re consider you points views... leo.

So, he didn't run political prisons and he didn't have people whacked????

You mean like W?

Yes, what a wonderful thought to share a country with the leader of Australia's Muslim Community, who recently stated with regards to immodestly dressed women: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it … whose fault is it, the cats' or the uncovered meat's? The uncovered meat is the problem. If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab [veil], no problem would have occurred." or with regards to a recent gang rape case: "There are women who sway suggestively and wear makeup and inappropriate clothes, and then you get a judge without mercy who gives you 65 years". He went on to say that women are "weapons" used by Satan to control men, and when it comes to adultery the responsibility falls on the woman 90 per cent of the time. There are now calls from within the Muslim community to hold a rally in his support. What a great way to use your freedom of speech - wonder what the response would be in a Muslim country if someone suggested that alcohol should be served and that all women should have the freedom to wear short skirts? Public decapitation within the hour?

Genocide???...dou you really know the meaning of genocide?...Genocide is what the US Goverment is doing in Irak, or what the Military Goverments did here in Argentina in the 70´s supported by the the US goverments by that time....and they were the same who sent che guevara get killed...get killed a person who was fighting for the equality of the peolpe...is that wrong?...

Unle Liam wrote:

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Hi, from argentina, where el che guevara is from...going back to the main topic in this thread, some people may don´t like Cuba and Fidel´s goverment, but what el Che did during the revolution was to try to give all the people the same opportunties as others...so, if that you think is crap, well you´d better start re consider you points views... leo.

Yes, Genocide across an entire continent. Fantastic!

Get your facts right sunshine.

Now i just read through this thread. WTF was it about again? Are all political threads gonna turn into a Muslim whinge from now on or summink?

Strange lot. I almost ended up agreeing with Fradders halfway through, then the thread turned all weird again.

Now can someone sum it up for me in plain well constructed English, and i might chip in, if I'm bored one day.

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Genocide???...dou you really know the meaning of genocide?...Genocide is what the US Goverment is doing in Irak, or what the Military Goverments did here in Argentina in the 70´s supported by the the US goverments by that time....and they were the same who sent che guevara get killed...get killed a person who was fighting for the equality of the peolpe...is that wrong?...

What about the Malvinas, ya cheeky feckers? No reason for bringing it up, but i haven't had a corned beef sandwich since 1982. Perhaps thats what's missing from my life.

shot bru wrote: Yes, what a wonderful thought to share a country with the leader of Australia's Muslim Community, who recently stated with regards to immodestly dressed women: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it … whose fault is it, the cats' or the uncovered meat's? The uncovered meat is the problem. If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab [veil], no problem would have occurred." or with regards to a recent gang rape case: "There are women who sway suggestively and wear makeup and inappropriate clothes, and then you get a judge without mercy who gives you 65 years". He went on to say that women are "weapons" used by Satan to control men, and when it comes to adultery the responsibility falls on the woman 90 per cent of the time. There are now calls from within the Muslim community to hold a rally in his support. What a great way to use your freedom of speech - wonder what the response would be in a Muslim country if someone suggested that alcohol should be served and that all women should have the freedom to wear short skirts? Public decapitation within the hour?

Yep, it's vile; as is the veil (geddit?!) which reeks of misogyny through and through. Thing is, I know/have known plenty of white British men who hold not dissimilar views about women: there was a survey not so long ago in the UK and something like 50% or respondents felt that a woman in a short skirt (say) was at least "partially responsible" if she was sexually assaulted - whaddaya gonna do: 'ban' them as well?? To this end, I'd also argue that Nuts/FHM/Loaded/Zoo and so forth are just another side of the same coin: women either put out (lads mags/our culture in general) or cover up (da veil). Both are equally reactionary, both reek of masculine paranoia and the desire to control, and both stink of the same casual loathing of women: it's the same attitude in diferent clothing (or unclothing, as it were....)

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Genocide???...dou you really know the meaning of genocide?...Genocide is what the US Goverment is doing in Irak, or what the Military Goverments did here in Argentina in the 70´s supported by the the US goverments by that time....and they were the same who sent che guevara get killed...get killed a person who was fighting for the equality of the peolpe...is that wrong?...

Unle Liam wrote:

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Hi, from argentina, where el che guevara is from...going back to the main topic in this thread, some people may don´t like Cuba and Fidel´s goverment, but what el Che did during the revolution was to try to give all the people the same opportunties as others...so, if that you think is crap, well you´d better start re consider you points views... leo.

Yes, Genocide across an entire continent. Fantastic!

Get your facts right sunshine.

Ok, let me get this straight. US (allegedly) killing thousands of people in Iraq, wrong. But "el Che" killing thousands of people across latin America, ok?

Roll Up Roll Up. We've got a new champion for stupidest NOOLer.

Burt Reynolds wrote:

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Genocide???...dou you really know the meaning of genocide?...Genocide is what the US Goverment is doing in Irak, or what the Military Goverments did here in Argentina in the 70´s supported by the the US goverments by that time....and they were the same who sent che guevara get killed...get killed a person who was fighting for the equality of the peolpe...is that wrong?...

What about the Malvinas, ya cheeky feckers? No reason for bringing it up, but i haven't had a corned beef sandwich since 1982. Perhaps thats what's missing from my life.

What about Malvinas?...you tell me what about malvinas?...do you really know why was all about?....did you know that Malvinas are Argentinean islands stolen by her majesty´s army...did you know that?...that happened during the 19th century, and when we tried to get them back...what happened was thw war...I am against wars, i think that wasn´t the right way to get them back....but first what happened it was that the british Empire stole them as they did whith many atoher places in the world ansa started to call them "colonies"...you we are right!

"you we are right"

What the fuck is that supposed to mean?

Uncle Liam wrote:

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Genocide???...dou you really know the meaning of genocide?...Genocide is what the US Goverment is doing in Irak, or what the Military Goverments did here in Argentina in the 70´s supported by the the US goverments by that time....and they were the same who sent che guevara get killed...get killed a person who was fighting for the equality of the peolpe...is that wrong?...

Unle Liam wrote:

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Hi, from argentina, where el che guevara is from...going back to the main topic in this thread, some people may don´t like Cuba and Fidel´s goverment, but what el Che did during the revolution was to try to give all the people the same opportunties as others...so, if that you think is crap, well you´d better start re consider you points views... leo.

Yes, Genocide across an entire continent. Fantastic!

Get your facts right sunshine.

Ok, let me get this straight. US (allegedly) killing thousands of people in Iraq, wrong. But "el Che" killing thousands of people across latin America, ok?

Roll Up Roll Up. We've got a new champion for stupidest NOOLer.

No, of course is not right...but did you think or know why he started the revolution?...did you know how things were in Latin america during that period?...do you how it feels to be controlled by military govermentes and you don´t have the right to do nothing?...where there is no democracy?....do you know how does it feel?...did you know that all those military goverments in Latin Amercia were supported by the US goverments...and others were also supported by the british royals and goverments, as it was with chile?, when Mr Pinochet hepled the English during the Malvinas war and after too?....do you know how does it feel all that?...of course not... I love England, it is great country, actually i lived there some time ago...during the nineties i lived in Norwich and in London for a couple of months, and many times before and after i went on holidays to visit friends....so it does bother me that people like you talk or write about topics that you don´t actually don´t know o lived through?...the only think you know is what you read or been told... leo.

Uncle Liam wrote: We've got a new champion for stupidest NOOLer.

Just 'cos you're the existing champion, you don't get to pick the new one!

It doesn't matter who's historical right it is to own the Falklands, you just can't have foreigners putting flags all over your territory - it makes you looks bad in front of other countries.

And if we can get at that oil - all the more reason to be glad we hung on to them.

Leo Paciarotti wrote: ...the only think you know is what you read or been told...

Brilliant idea!

Let's send Liam to Cuba! He can experience it for himself and tell us all about it when he gets back.

We'll contribute anything we raise at AO Day towards the ticket

We'll get you a one way ticket and you can earn the money to fly home when you get there

Ah, now I understand. Just because I didnt live through something means I dont have the right to comment on it! Sorry, for a minute I lost myself a bit. And yes, i am totally aware that quite a few (not all, as you said) were supported by the US. Its called protecting ones own interests.

You seem to be under the impression that Che Guevara and his merry men turned Cuba intom some kind of paradise. This is of course, nonsense. Since the revolution, Castro has been a military dictator, and a quite brutal one at that. Your idol Che, is nothing less than an international terrorist (and if you want, go and check out a few definitions of terrorism and compare it with a few neutral biographies of Guevara) who is responsible for mass human rights violations across latin America, as well as Genocide in Cuba and Bolivia, amongst other places.

And going back to my first point, according to your profile, you are 31 years old, so the liklihood of you living through the Cuban Revolution is at best unlikely, and more realistically, impossible, unless of course, you are a bare faced liar.

Liam, will you bear my children?

If you'd asked me this 4 days ago, I would have said "Yes, of Course I would."

But, since your wild accusations at the start of this very thread, i am going to have to respectfully decline. :p

Uncle Liam wrote: ...i am going to have to respectfully...

Are you feeling okay, Liam?

Of course not.

The copious amounts of free booze last night has seen to that.

Uncle Liam wrote: If you'd asked me this 4 days ago, I would have said "Yes, of Course I would."

But, since your wild accusations at the start of this very thread, i am going to have to respectfully decline. :p

You still didn't answer my question from the beginning of the thread. Or maybe you did....

Uncle Liam wrote: mass human rights violations across latin America, as well as Genocide in Cuba and Bolivia, amongst other places.

Again with the "genocide"?

Does anybody understand the meaning of the word anymore?

From the Convention on Genocide:

genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Well i've always understood genocide to be mass murder of a particular group of people on the grounds of religion, ethnicity of political belief.

Uncle Liam wrote: Well i've always understood genocide to be mass murder of a particular group of people on the grounds of religion, ethnicity of political belief.

I edited above to include the definition from the Convention on Genocide. Religion or ethnicity, yes, that would qualify as genocide.

Do you have examples of Che's alleged genocidal actions?

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote:

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Hi, from argentina, where el che guevara is from...going back to the main topic in this thread, some people may don´t like Cuba and Fidel´s goverment, but what el Che did during the revolution was to try to give all the people the same opportunties as others...so, if that you think is crap, well you´d better start re consider you points views... leo.

So, he didn't run political prisons and he didn't have people whacked????

You mean like W?

While my statement about che are proven facts, your assertions about the President are Democratic Underground/ Daily Kos fuled delusion.

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Uncle Liam wrote: Well i've always understood genocide to be mass murder of a particular group of people on the grounds of religion, ethnicity of political belief.

I edited above to include the definition from the Convention on Genocide. Religion or ethnicity, yes, that would qualify as genocide.

Do you have examples of Che's alleged genocidal actions?

There is plenty of evidence documented In the Black Book of Communism

Tex wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote:

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Hi, from argentina, where el che guevara is from...going back to the main topic in this thread, some people may don´t like Cuba and Fidel´s goverment, but what el Che did during the revolution was to try to give all the people the same opportunties as others...so, if that you think is crap, well you´d better start re consider you points views... leo.

So, he didn't run political prisons and he didn't have people whacked????

You mean like W?

While my statement about che are proven facts, your assertions about the President are Democratic Underground/ Daily Kos fuled delusion.

There's no question that W is running a prison in, of all places, Cuba-- how's that for irony-- where people are denied the most basic of legal rights. There's no question that some of these people are not "combatatnts" or "terrorists." And yet they rot in jail.

There's no question that W is running "secret" prisons in Eastern Europe. There's no question that "extraordinary renditions" have transferred prisoners to countries where torture is legal. There's no question that W's government has argued strenuously for the authority to torture, even as they deny, to this day, that they torture. There's no question that W's government has argued that the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to prisoners captured in its war without end.

There's no question that W is Commander in Chief of a military which has been "whacking" people under his orders since 9/11/01.

No question. Except in Jesusland.

Uncle Liam wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Uncle Liam wrote: Well i've always understood genocide to be mass murder of a particular group of people on the grounds of religion, ethnicity of political belief.

I edited above to include the definition from the Convention on Genocide. Religion or ethnicity, yes, that would qualify as genocide.

Do you have examples of Che's alleged genocidal actions?

There is plenty of evidence documented In the Black Book of Communism

Yeah, but humor me. Give us some examples of genocide so we don't all have to go out and buy the book and read it** before we know what you're referring to.

** Or was that your devious plan?

Well, the genocide that took place in the immediate years after the Cuban Revolution, in which Guevara either had people locked up in the political prisons, which he founded, or were indiscriminately murdered on his orders.

Ditto, in Bolivia. The battle that Guevara led which led to the indiscriminate killings of tens of thousands of people during the mid 60's just because they didnt support him.

And, moving away from genocide. There was the whole Congo thing in 1965, which was getting involved in a war he had no business in. Now whose supporters have criticised other people doing that before?

Uncle Liam wrote: Well, the genocide that took place in the immediate years after the Cuban Revolution, in which Guevara either had people locked up in the political prisons, which he founded, or were indiscriminately murdered on his orders.

Ditto, in Bolivia. The battle that Guevara led which led to the indiscriminate killings of tens of thousands of people during the mid 60's just because they didnt support him.

Were these killings based on nationality, ethnicity, or religion? Because if they were they based instead on opposition to his armed forces, then you'd have to say the UK and US armed forces currently in Iraq are also practicing genocide, in which case, W and his love slave are also genocidal murderers. Surely there must be more to genocide than merely killing large numbers of people? Something like targeting large numbers of people for their nationality, ethnicity, or religion?

And, moving away from genocide. There was the whole Congo thing in 1965, which was getting involved in a war he had no business in. Now whose supporters have criticised other people doing that before?

So the U.S. intervening in the Congo was acceptable, but when Che intervened to counter U.S. intervention, he had "no business" there? That's an interesting analysis. Care to elaborate?

I didnt say that! I just mentioned that guevara supporters are mainly the same people who oppose US intervention in things...

Uncle Liam wrote: I didnt say that! I just mentioned that guevara supporters are mainly the same people who oppose US intervention in things...

Well, I think it follows that if the U.S. is intervening to support a right wing agenda somewhere, that left wing "revolutionaries" might also intervene, and that it wouldn't necessarily be hypocritical to still oppose U.S. intervention, while supporting left-wing counter-intervention.

On the other hand, if one were to oppose U.S. intervention anywhere, but support left-wing intervention everywhere, that has the potential for hypocrisy: "Intervention is wrong! (except when we do it)", although it's not not necessarily hypocritical (spreading democracy, spreading socialism, etc.).

Isn't arguing about Guevara (a) just a bit passe, and (b) just a wee bit studenty, and not to mention (c) just a wee bit passe in a crap 80s-studenty way??

Liam????? Riiiiik??????

* i'll drink to all of this*

i never understood why people in my high school were walking around wearing che guevara t-shirts like he was some god or something. if he had killed half their family, i'm sure they wouldn't be running around with that fucker on their shirts. the guy is pretty much bacon.

(The Good Doctor) Martin Fradley wrote: Isn't arguing about Guevara (a) just a bit passe, and (b) just a wee bit studenty, and not to mention (c) just a wee bit passe in a crap 80s-studenty way??

Liam????? Riiiiik??????

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote:

Tex wrote:

Leo Paciarotti wrote: Hi, from argentina, where el che guevara is from...going back to the main topic in this thread, some people may don´t like Cuba and Fidel´s goverment, but what el Che did during the revolution was to try to give all the people the same opportunties as others...so, if that you think is crap, well you´d better start re consider you points views... leo.

So, he didn't run political prisons and he didn't have people whacked????

You mean like W?

While my statement about che are proven facts, your assertions about the President are Democratic Underground/ Daily Kos fuled delusion.

There's no question that W is running a prison in, of all places, Cuba-- how's that for irony-- where people are denied the most basic of legal rights. There's no question that some of these people are not "combatatnts" or "terrorists." And yet they rot in jail.

There's no question that W is running "secret" prisons in Eastern Europe. There's no question that "extraordinary renditions" have transferred prisoners to countries where torture is legal. There's no question that W's government has argued strenuously for the authority to torture, even as they deny, to this day, that they torture. There's no question that W's government has argued that the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to prisoners captured in its war without end.

There's no question that W is Commander in Chief of a military which has been "whacking" people under his orders since 9/11/01.

No question. Except in Jesusland.

Club Gitmo is not a political prison. YOU don't know that each and every prisoner currently at Gitmo is not a combatant or terrorist.

If our Eastern friends have questions for terrorist in our capture, why should we not share them?

What "torture" has the government lobbied for? What "torture" is the government currently engaged in?

The Geneva Convention doe not apply to Gitmo. It's because the conflict with al Qaeda is not governed by the Geneva Conventions, which applies only to international conflicts between states that have signed them. Al Qaeda is not a nation-state, and its members--as they demonstrated so horrifically on Sept. 11, 2001--violate the very core principle of the laws of war by targeting innocent civilians . While Taliban fighters had an initial claim to protection under the conventions (since Afghanistan signed the treaties), they lost POW status by failing to obey the standards of conduct for soldiers: wearing uniforms, a responsible command structure, and obeying the laws of war.

There is no question about this. Except in secular progressive-land.

Tex wrote: Club Gitmo is not a political prison.

True. But the irony of pointing in horror at --gasp!!-- political prisons in Cuba has seemed to escape your notice. Guantanamo isn't a political prison, but then it's not quite a penal prison either, is it? No, it's just a place where prisoners waste away without even the most basic of legal rights. Does that sound like the America you were born in? 'Cause it sure doesn't sound like the America I was born in...

YOU don't know that each and every prisoner currently at Gitmo is not a combatant or terrorist.

Nor do YOu know that any of them are terrorists or combatants. So putting aside what we don't PERSONALLY know, there have been some fairly convincing reports that at least some of the prisoners-- you know, those guys with no legal rights-- are neither enemy combatants or terrorists.

If our Eastern friends have questions for terrorist in our capture, why should we not share them?

Our "Eastern friends" in Poland have questions for Afghans in our capture? Or perhaps, our "Eastern friends" in Poland do our bidding because it suits their national interest?

What "torture" has the government lobbied for? What "torture" is the government currently engaged in?

I presume you've heard of the Attorney General? The Vice President? I presume you're not as dumb as you're playing now?

The Geneva Convention doe not apply to Gitmo. It's because the conflict with al Qaeda is not governed by the Geneva Conventions, which applies only to international conflicts between states that have signed them. Al Qaeda is not a nation-state, and its members--as they demonstrated so horrifically on Sept. 11, 2001--violate the very core principle of the laws of war by targeting innocent civilians . While Taliban fighters had an initial claim to protection under the conventions (since Afghanistan signed the treaties), they lost POW status by failing to obey the standards of conduct for soldiers: wearing uniforms, a responsible command structure, and obeying the laws of war.

There is no question about this. Except in secular progressive-land.

AKA the civilized world.

Here we go again. Speaking of current politics, I need to vote early this weekend.

What would Jello do?

Christopher Owens wrote:

What would Jello do? Kill this guy first...

Interesting, considering that I just came from an aborted screening of The Motorcycle Diaries at school tonight.

I say "aborted" not because of the controversial subject matter, but because the DVD was fucking up and finally I gave up about an hour into it. I was not the first to leave the screening tonight because of the technical difficulties, and I probably wasn't the last. But I did stick around for about the first hour of the film before the "Stop-Start-Stop Theater" just got to be too much.

Anyway, the film itself was pretty good despite the mess-ups. He's presented in a sympathetic light to be sure, but that's to be expected as it's based on his writings. But I think something that should be noted: films aren't meant to be historical documents for the most part (and the ones that are often get it wrong). So it's an enjoyable film (what I got to see of it). And it's got some genuine lol moments as well

T-Shirt Sales For Dummies

My damn uncle never gave me a nickle for all those shirts.

El Jarvo wrote:

(The Good Doctor) Martin Fradley wrote: Isn't arguing about Guevara (a) just a bit passe, and (b) just a wee bit studenty, and not to mention (c) just a wee bit passe in a crap 80s-studenty way??

Very much so. But then Liam's a big Smiths fan too. Remember them?

It's 1984 all over again.

Can we talk about the poster of the tennis girl scratching her arse instead, please?

Or, indeed, the one with the hunky topless fella cuddling the cute little baby.

So dreamy.......

Guevara.... pah!

he should take lessons off Ewan McGregor on how to milk a motorcycle journey

Arkentina/Cuba - too far away.

Che - dead.

Therefore,

It's a very pissy argument to complain about any violent reaction that occurs when you opress a group of people to the point where they are forced to act in defense.

If you take the piss out of people, you'd better be ready for their reaction. It's no good treating everyone like shit, losing the revolution and then complaining that people got hurt in the trouble.

I think Liam should shut the fuck up

is this thread still happening?

It's just what happens when people keep replying to it.

Diamond White wrote: It's just what happens when people keep replying to it.

oh, i'd better stop doing that then.

El Jarvo wrote:

(The Good Doctor) Martin Fradley wrote: Or, indeed, the one with the hunky topless fella cuddling the cute little baby.

So dreamy.......

Did you see the recent documentary on him? He drinks a cocktail of his own spunk every morning and never uses deodorant as he reckons his body odour attracts the girls.

Er, I did see that documentary and I remember him being a bit of a lush, but I clearly missed the spunk drinking. And it's not the kind of thing I'd miss.

Sure you didn't, like, imagine it???

[This thread: still happening]

Hey, what's going on in here?

"I'm standing outside Che Stadium, named after the legendary Cuban revolutionary Che Stadium, and it was here...well, not here in the parking lot, but in the stadium over there, that the Rutles came in 1965."

sorry to intervene in your 'is che good or bad' discussion, but to go back to the original question there is a good book by noam chomsky called revolutionaries. it's not all about che by any means but it's a good start, especially if you like chomsky.

if you don't like chomsky it's terribly left-wing and will make your head explode, so don't read it.

The problem with Chomsky is he's terribly pessimistic and sees conspiracies everywhere. Of course, not hard to fall into pessimism if you have any awareness of the world beyond your own skin...

Comrade Shampanyov wrote: The problem with Chomsky is he's terribly pessimistic and sees conspiracies everywhere. Of course, not hard to fall into pessimism if you have any awareness of the world beyond your own skin...

i'd be pessimistic if i taught at a math-based university, as well. that and i'd feel lonely.

AgentWood wrote:

Comrade Shampanyov wrote: The problem with Chomsky is he's terribly pessimistic and sees conspiracies everywhere. Of course, not hard to fall into pessimism if you have any awareness of the world beyond your own skin...

i'd be pessimistic if i taught at a math-based university, as well. that and i'd feel lonely.

Says it all, then.

El Jarvo wrote:

(The Good Doctor) Martin Fradley wrote: Or, indeed, the one with the hunky topless fella cuddling the cute little baby.

So dreamy.......

Did you see the recent documentary on him? He drinks a cocktail of his own spunk every morning and never uses deodorant as he reckons his body odour attracts the girls.

Has our Dad been on telly? He always says that on the deodorant front..He kept the spunk drinking quiet mind

I'm more of a H. Marcuse person myself.