Did Che really die facing his executioner ?

[guevarism]

Well its said often of Guevarist courage .People speak highly of the moment when he turned front facing the bullet shots .Just wondering if it actually did happen or just a historical myth

[CallInTheDogs]

I found a link describing a chronology from the American led Bolivian task force based from testimony and declassified documents. It says I can't post links until I have at least 25 posts. But yeah he did

[guevarism]

I found a link describing a chronology from the American led Bolivian task force based from testimony and declassified documents. It says I can't post links until I have at least 25 posts. But yeah he did

But I think , isnt it all way covert and unclear ?

[GLF]

When Che was captured he told his captors not to shoot. But once he realized it was over for him and he couldn't talk or bargain his way out, he became resigned to his fate.

He did in fact die facing his executioner.

"Shoot coward. You'll only kill a man." - Che Guevara, feminist extraordinaire.

[willowtooth]

Not sure why it matters but yes that is what happened
According to one source, the top ranking officers in La Higuera instruct the noncommissioned officers to carry out the order and straws are drawn to determine who will execute Che. Just before noon, having drawn the shortest straw, Sergeant Jaime Terán goes to the schoolhouse to execute Che. Terán finds Che propped up against the wall and Che asks him to wait a moment until he stands up. Terán is frightened, runs away and is ordered back by Colonel Selich and Colonel Zenteno. "Still trembling" he returns to the schoolhouse and without looking at Che's face he fires into his chest and side. Several soldiers, also wanting to shoot Che, enter the room and shoot him. (Harris, 129)Félix Rodríguez has stated that, "I told the Sargento to shoot....and I understand that he borrowed an M-2 carbine from a Lt. Pérez who was in the area." Rodríguez places the time of the shooting at 1:10 p.m. Bolivian time. (Rodríguez:2)
In Jon Lee Anderson's account, Sergeant Terán volunteers to shoot Che. Che's last words, which are addressed to Terán, are "I know you've come to kill me. Shoot, you are only going to kill a man." Terán shoots Che in the arms and legs and then in Che's thorax, filling his lungs with blood. (Anderson, 796)


http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB5/#chron

I remember an account from an executioner (I think he was from taliban controlled afghanistan) where he said that when someone is facing execution they dont scream or plead for their lives or try to fight back they become very still and completely resigned to their fate

[pastradamus]

When Che was captured he told his captors not to shoot. But once he realized it was over for him and he couldn't talk or bargain his way out, he became resigned to his fate.

He did in fact die facing his executioner.

"Shoot coward. You'll only kill a man." - Che Guevara, feminist extraordinaire.

Yes, It's well documented that he did in fact say that. Jon Lee Anderson noted this in his book, and that man is meticulous.

[willowtooth]

Yes, It's well documented that he did in fact say that. Jon Lee Anderson noted this in his book, and that man is meticulous.
While Jon lee anderson did a great job trying to be as non-bias as possible when writing Che's biography. He was sitting in his office in New york when Che was killed. Our only sources are CIA documents, which are always heavily edited and redacted, and sometimes are completely false. There are multiple accounts about how Che died. The story we now have is the one that the CIA wanted to tell. We have the autopsy of his exhumed remains (and even that can be changed if deemed necessary)

It's possible Che died mysteriously and was simply found dead, he might've committed suicide, might have been killed in a simple robbery. He might have been tortured for days or weeks before finally passing. One thing that I find strange is that Che at that time would've been far more valuable alive than dead. But to keep him alive and in prison with public trials has little value. It is possible Che is still alive today sitting in Guantanamo bay or some other secret prison somewhere in the world. The story seems to be trying to turn him into a hero or inspiring figure, which some communists did not want, especially those with ties to Castro. We have little to go on, we have conflicting autopsy accounts that dont match. The fingerprints from severed hands, and conflicting stories, like did he get buried alone or in a mass grave, was he buried naked or was he wearing clothes? The whole story reeks of disinformation.

It reminds me of the US story of Osama's death, that he reached for a machine gun just as troops were kicking down his door, despite a god damn helicopter crashing into his house

[pastradamus]

While Jon lee anderson did a great job trying to be as non-bias as possible when writing Che's biography. He was sitting in his office in New york when Che was killed. Our only sources are CIA documents, which are always heavily edited and redacted, and sometimes are completely false. There are multiple accounts about how Che died. The story we now have is the one that the CIA wanted to tell. We have the autopsy of his exhumed remains (and even that can be changed if deemed necessary)

First up, It doesn't matter if Jon Lee Anderson was in his New York office or not, he went out there and recovered Che's body - Which was proven 100% by both Dental records and DNA. On the CIA - They have absolutely no interest whatsoever in painting Che as a brave man, the record does however state: "Sergeant Terán entered the hut to shoot him, whereupon Guevara spoke to Terán which were his last words: "I know you've come to kill me. Shoot, coward! You are only going to kill a man!" - Why would they give him such romantic words? A man that studied literature and poetry his whole life may have but why would they say this? Makes no sense. Seem's legit is what i'm saying, it sounds like him.



It's possible Che died mysteriously and was simply found dead, he might've committed suicide, might have been killed in a simple robbery.

On what basis? You have nothing backing this claim up.


He might have been tortured for days or weeks before finally passing.

He was.


One thing that I find strange is that Che at that time would've been far more valuable alive than dead. But to keep him alive and in prison with public trials has little value. It is possible Che is still alive today sitting in Guantanamo bay or some other secret prison somewhere in the world. The story seems to be trying to turn him into a hero or inspiring figure, which some communists did not want, especially those with ties to Castro. We have little to go on, we have conflicting autopsy accounts that dont match. The fingerprints from severed hands, and conflicting stories, like did he get buried alone or in a mass grave, was he buried naked or was he wearing clothes? The whole story reeks of disinformation.

It has all been heavily researched. No need for conspiracy theories.

It reminds me of the US story of Osama's death, that he reached for a machine gun just as troops were kicking down his door, despite a god damn helicopter crashing into his house
On the otherhand that did sound bullshit. But che's death isn't. Comrades accounted for Che not Osama.

[guevarism]

Osama and Che both were liberators who took discreet pathways in their efforts to emancipate

[ckaihatsu]

Osama and Che both were liberators who took discreet pathways in their efforts to emancipate


You sound like you're on a fishing expedition, with a provocative statement like that one.

The two really aren't comparable:





Usama bin Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden (/oʊˈsɑːmə bɪn ˈlɑːdən/; Arabic: أسامة بن محمد بن عوض بن لادن‎‎, usāmah bin muḥammad bin ‘awaḍ bin lādin; March 10, 1957 – May 2, 2011)[7] was the founder of al-Qaeda, the organization that was responsible for the September 11 attacks on the United States, along with numerous other mass-casualty attacks worldwide.[8][9][10] He was a Saudi Arabian, a member of the wealthy bin Laden family, and an ethnic Yemeni Kindite.[11]

Bin Laden was born to the family of billionaire Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden in Saudi Arabia. He studied at university in the country until 1979, when he joined Mujahideen forces in Pakistan fighting against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. He helped to fund the Mujahideen by funneling arms, money and fighters from the Arab world into Afghanistan, and gained popularity among many Arabs.[12] In 1988, he formed al-Qaeda.[13] He was banished from Saudi Arabia in 1992, and shifted his base to Sudan, until U.S. pressure forced him to leave Sudan in 1996. After establishing a new base in Afghanistan, he declared a war against the United States, initiating a series of bombings and related attacks.[14] Bin Laden was on the American Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) lists of Ten Most Wanted Fugitives and Most Wanted Terrorists for his involvement in the 1998 U.S. embassy bombings.[15][16][17]




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden





Ernesto "Che" Guevara (Spanish pronunciation: [ˈtʃe ɣeˈβaɾa][4] June 14, 1928 – October 9, 1967)[1] was an Argentine Marxist revolutionary, physician, author, guerrilla leader, diplomat, and military theorist. A major figure of the Cuban Revolution, his stylized visage has become a ubiquitous countercultural symbol of rebellion and global insignia in popular culture.[5]

As a young medical student, Guevara traveled throughout South America and was radicalized by the poverty, hunger, and disease he witnessed.[6] His burgeoning desire to help overturn what he saw as the capitalist exploitation of Latin America by the United States prompted his involvement in Guatemala's social reforms under President Jacobo Árbenz, whose eventual CIA-assisted overthrow at the behest of the United Fruit Company solidified Guevara's political ideology.[6] Later, in Mexico City, he met Raúl and Fidel Castro, joined their 26th of July Movement, and sailed to Cuba aboard the yacht Granma, with the intention of overthrowing U.S.-backed Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista.[7] Guevara soon rose to prominence among the insurgents, was promoted to second-in-command, and played a pivotal role in the victorious two-year guerrilla campaign that deposed the Batista regime.[8]

Following the Cuban Revolution, Guevara performed a number of key roles in the new government. These included reviewing the appeals and firing squads for those convicted as war criminals during the revolutionary tribunals,[9] instituting agrarian land reform as minister of industries, helping spearhead a successful nationwide literacy campaign, serving as both national bank president and instructional director for Cuba's armed forces, and traversing the globe as a diplomat on behalf of Cuban socialism. Such positions also allowed him to play a central role in training the militia forces who repelled the Bay of Pigs Invasion[10] and bringing the Soviet nuclear-armed ballistic missiles to Cuba which precipitated the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.[11] Additionally, he was a prolific writer and diarist, composing a seminal manual on guerrilla warfare, along with a best-selling memoir about his youthful continental motorcycle journey. His experiences and studying of Marxism–Leninism led him to posit that the Third World's underdevelopment and dependence was an intrinsic result of imperialism, neocolonialism, and monopoly capitalism, with the only remedy being proletarian internationalism and world revolution.[12][13] Guevara left Cuba in 1965 to foment revolution abroad, first unsuccessfully in Congo-Kinshasa and later in Bolivia, where he was captured by CIA-assisted Bolivian forces and summarily executed.[14]




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevara

[GLF]

Osama and Che both were liberators who took discreet pathways in their efforts to emancipate

While we agree on many things, I have to respectfully disagree with you on this one.

Che was a great man and a true revolutionary who fought for the rights of common people everywhere. I may disagree with him on some things (embracing violence, the whole north/south revisionism, the reasons behind his disillusionment with Russia, etc), but he was a hero and someone I greatly respect.

Osama Bin Laden, on the other hand, was a murderous fascist.

[guevarism]

To both of you - GLF AND Kaihatsu , you being Americans praise the uni-polar domination for ethnic roots , which is certainly racism between the Asian and the White .
At a time when US was plundering the East and killing the Mid-easterners to exploit their oil fields Osama tried to resist and he wasnt a fascist ...
Did Che not order the killing of the commons on political precautionary grounds once they got "Cuba" in hold was it not something you were speaking of as a murderous instinct ?

[guevarism]

Well m not romanticising my respect for the al-qaeda's(which I oppose to a small degree) , yet Osama played a role in diminishing the myth of the US might in other mid nations which were exploited and made to suffice White interests and frankly I hate Whites(of whom 99% are Racists and Unscientifically oriented towards collour based distinctions be it political or apolitical in nature)...

Being whites it quite instinctively impulsive for you to support US documentary fabricated facts and uphold the White ruling hand above and all ...

- - - Updated - - -

It seems Trump is painting the US political landscape with Capitalist hues and communists want to compromise communism a little with leninist feelings of mediating the strife with mutual agreement for ............ a bit of reactionary revisionism

[ckaihatsu]

To both of you - GLF AND Kaihatsu , you being Americans praise the uni-polar domination for ethnic roots , which is certainly racism between the Asian and the White .


This is *ludicrous* -- just because we don't support a reactionary Saudi monarchy out-faction that happens to be competitively anti-U.S., doesn't mean that we're against Arabs and/or Muslims on any kind of *racialist* basis. Revolutionaries do *not* uphold 'domination [by] ethnic roots', nor are we 'American' in the sense of supporting the U.S. nation-state above all others.





At a time when US was plundering the East and killing the Mid-easterners to exploit their oil fields Osama tried to resist and he wasnt a fascist ...


Semantics.

Just because someone is intolerant of the status quo doesn't automatically put them into the *revolutionary* camp. Bin Laden was capitalist-competitive, and did *not* represent working-class interests.





Did Che not order the killing of the commons on political precautionary grounds once they got "Cuba" in hold was it not something you were speaking of as a murderous instinct ?


And here you're imputing that all killings amount to murder, always.

You should take a position on this portion of history:





As second in command, Guevara was a harsh disciplinarian who sometimes shot defectors. Deserters were punished as traitors, and Guevara was known to send squads to track those seeking to go AWOL.[79] As a result, Guevara became feared for his brutality and ruthlessness.[80] During the guerrilla campaign, Guevara was also responsible for the sometimes summary execution of a number of men accused of being informers, deserters or spies.[81] In his diaries, Guevara described the first such execution of Eutímio Guerra, a peasant army guide who admitted treason when it was discovered he accepted the promise of ten thousand pesos for repeatedly giving away the rebel's position for attack by the Cuban air force.[82] Such information also allowed Batista's army to burn the homes of peasants sympathetic to the revolution.[82] Upon Guerra's request that they "end his life quickly",[82] Che stepped forward and shot him in the head, writing "The situation was uncomfortable for the people and for Eutimio so I ended the problem giving him a shot with a .32 pistol in the right side of the brain, with exit orifice in the right temporal [lobe]."[83]




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevara#Cuban_Revolution


---





Well m not romanticising my respect for the al-qaeda's(which I oppose to a small degree) , yet Osama played a role in diminishing the myth of the US might in other mid nations which were exploited and made to suffice White interests


You have *respect* for al-Qaeda, and you only 'oppose [it] to a small degree' -- ??

Again, just because an armed force happens to oppose the U.S. doesn't mean that they're somehow automatically anti-imperialist. Bin Laden would sooner set up a Caliphate-type (ISIS-like) organization and nation-state than oppose the U.S. empire on any kind of politically-principled grounds.





and frankly I hate Whites(of whom 99% are Racists and Unscientifically oriented towards collour based distinctions be it political or apolitical in nature)...

Being whites it quite instinctively impulsive for you to support US documentary fabricated facts and uphold the White ruling hand above and all ...


While white-supremacist-type cultural imperialism is certainly an active dynamic in domestic and world power politics, it *doesn't* translate to 'all whites benefit from white hegemony', because racist aggression only goes so far as a social strategy in our current times. Social minority self-organization *counters* racist opportunism, and poor working-class whites have no objective stake in the class-elitist system, anyway.





It seems Trump is painting the US political landscape with Capitalist hues and communists want to compromise communism a little with leninist feelings of mediating the strife with mutual agreement for ............ a bit of reactionary revisionism


You're saying that communists are 'sell-outs' during the Trump Administration -- ? That's quite a claim, and you're providing *no* evidence for such a contention.

[guevarism]

This is *ludicrous* -- just because we don't support a reactionary Saudi monarchy out-faction that happens to be competitively anti-U.S., doesn't mean that we're against Arabs and/or Muslims on any kind of *racialist* basis. Revolutionaries do *not* uphold 'domination [by] ethnic roots', nor are we 'American' in the sense of supporting the U.S. nation-state above all others.





Semantics.

Just because someone is intolerant of the status quo doesn't automatically put them into the *revolutionary* camp. Bin Laden was capitalist-competitive, and did *not* represent working-class interests.





And here you're imputing that all killings amount to murder, always.

You should take a position on this portion of history:







---





You have *respect* for al-Qaeda, and you only 'oppose [it] to a small degree' -- ??

Again, just because an armed force happens to oppose the U.S. doesn't mean that they're somehow automatically anti-imperialist. Bin Laden would sooner set up a Caliphate-type (ISIS-like) organization and nation-state than oppose the U.S. empire on any kind of politically-principled grounds.





While white-supremacist-type cultural imperialism is certainly an active dynamic in domestic and world power politics, it *doesn't* translate to 'all whites benefit from white hegemony', because racist aggression only goes so far as a social strategy in our current times. Social minority self-organization *counters* racist opportunism, and poor working-class whites have no objective stake in the class-elitist system, anyway.





You're saying that communists are 'sell-outs' during the Trump Administration -- ? That's quite a claim, and you're providing *no* evidence for such a contention.

All points in my reply are quite naturally self-explanatory

[ckaihatsu]

All points in my reply are quite naturally self-explanatory


Yeah, but you're acting like everyone reading your posts would just naturally *agree*, with no discussion or debate on what you've written.

I've made pointed responses to your points, which you've left unaddressed.

[guevarism]

Well for that I would just spend some hours in an attempt to present a brief synopsis in an attempt to equate Al-Qaeda as a revolution , above all I believe Revolution is a mere delusion without terrorism in praxis , be it an attempt to coalesce the dispersed reactionary masses into a struggle to overthrow the unjust .......Let that be dystopian for imperialist Capitalist breeds .....I will b there in a short while to express more of it from a Vertical stance or should you try to incline me towards America into some sort of polar - continentalism
But I promise to add more of it

[ckaihatsu]

Well for that I would just spend some hours in an attempt to present a brief synopsis in an attempt to equate Al-Qaeda as a revolution , above all I believe Revolution is a mere delusion without terrorism in praxis , be it an attempt to coalesce the dispersed reactionary masses into a struggle to overthrow the unjust .......


You're defending the Bin Laden faction on the grounds that 'Al-Qaeda [is] a revolution'.

Reactionary people *wouldn't* overthrow a reactionary ruler like Bin Laden because they're all in the same camp. (Consider the right-wing 'opposition' forces in Venezuela as a parallel.)





Let that be dystopian for imperialist Capitalist breeds .....I will b there in a short while to express more of it from a Vertical stance or should you try to incline me towards America into some sort of polar - continentalism
But I promise to add more of it


I'm not for 'America' or any continent in particular -- you've just called for a *reactionary* movement in the Middle East.

This is *not* revolutionary politics. As an Admin I'm giving you a warning -- if you persist in touting reactionary politics you will be banned from this board.

[guevarism]

I guess I am being hushed , let me condem Ladenism but this fact remains true , Conservatsm=forceful sppression of ideological standponts and where are uu debating

[ckaihatsu]

I guess I am being hushed , let me condem Ladenism but this fact remains true , Conservatsm=forceful sppression of ideological standponts and




where are uu debating


You *call* yourself a 'guevarist' (by extension), but you were just recently characterizing al-Qaeda's actions as a 'revolution'.

Here's from post #14 -- shouldn't a 'guevarist' be able to provide *some* kind of explanation for Guevara's actions here -- ?





You should take a position on this portion of history:





As second in command, Guevara was a harsh disciplinarian who sometimes shot defectors. Deserters were punished as traitors, and Guevara was known to send squads to track those seeking to go AWOL.[79] As a result, Guevara became feared for his brutality and ruthlessness.[80] During the guerrilla campaign, Guevara was also responsible for the sometimes summary execution of a number of men accused of being informers, deserters or spies.[81] In his diaries, Guevara described the first such execution of Eutímio Guerra, a peasant army guide who admitted treason when it was discovered he accepted the promise of ten thousand pesos for repeatedly giving away the rebel's position for attack by the Cuban air force.[82] Such information also allowed Batista's army to burn the homes of peasants sympathetic to the revolution.[82] Upon Guerra's request that they "end his life quickly",[82] Che stepped forward and shot him in the head, writing "The situation was uncomfortable for the people and for Eutimio so I ended the problem giving him a shot with a .32 pistol in the right side of the brain, with exit orifice in the right temporal [lobe]."[83]




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Che_Guevara#Cuban_Revolution

[Inquilabzindabad]

CIA does all things covertly , if USA was a super power why did it encroach or had to intrude into a Foreign land to kill its malefactor , I hold this view that Guevara's and Laden's tale I'd quite unclear and was Guevara really killed as and when CIA reported of his being shot dead by the Bolivian force , if so why were those pictures of Guevara's autopsy kept upto Bolivia and US , neither do we have proper records of Bin Laden isn't US murderous and hyper-fascist that spreads terrorism covertly but quite actively in a manner which is quite suspicious

[GLF]

Well m not romanticising my respect for the al-qaeda's(which I oppose to a small degree) , yet Osama played a role in diminishing the myth of the US might in other mid nations which were exploited and made to suffice White interests and frankly I hate Whites(of whom 99% are Racists and Unscientifically oriented towards collour based distinctions be it political or apolitical in nature)...

Though it's not dialectically sound, even as a so-called white person I don't blame you at all for hating white people...but I really don't see how this relates to Osama Bin Laden. He wasn't concerned with racism. He didn't give two shits about white supremacy or even imperialism except inasmuch as it conflicted with his narrowly defined, aggressive and inherently tyrannical Islamist agenda. In fact, there were "whites" in the west that converted to Islam for reactionary purposes and fought side beside with Bin Laden. They're still doing it today (fascist whites joining Islamists) - even Hitler had a hard on for radical Islam and many Nazis are starting to co-opt radically Islamist terms to use themselves (i.e white sharia). As for radical Islamists such as Bin Laden, racial equality or even race itself means nothing to these people (radical Islamists) - they want a fascistic, Islamist world order where gays are thrown off rooftops, Jews and Christians are burned alive, and outspoken women stoned. They are as diametrically opposed to communism as one can possibly be. The enemy of our enemy...is still very much our enemy. And I would reluctantly say he was the greater enemy (though not the greater threat). Religion is a cancer. I'll defend religious minorities such as Muslims, Jews and sometimes Christians (in other countries), but I'll never consider them true allies. Bin Laden, however, was extreme and completely opposed to everything for which we stand - try and keep things in perspective comrade. You're still young.

[guevarism]

Though it's not dialectically sound, even as a so-called white person I don't blame you at all for hating white people...but I really don't see how this relates to Osama Bin Laden. He wasn't concerned with racism. He didn't give two shits about white supremacy or even imperialism except inasmuch as it conflicted with his narrowly defined, aggressive and inherently tyrannical Islamist agenda. In fact, there were "whites" in the west that converted to Islam for reactionary purposes and fought side beside with Bin Laden. They're still doing it today (fascist whites joining Islamists) - even Hitler had a hard on for radical Islam and many Nazis are starting to co-opt radically Islamist terms to use themselves (i.e white sharia). As for radical Islamists such as Bin Laden, racial equality or even race itself means nothing to these people (radical Islamists) - they want a fascistic, Islamist world order where gays are thrown off rooftops, Jews and Christians are burned alive, and outspoken women stoned. They are as diametrically opposed to communism as one can possibly be. The enemy of our enemy...is still very much our enemy. And I would reluctantly say he was the greater enemy (though not the greater threat). Religion is a cancer. I'll defend religious minorities such as Muslims, Jews and sometimes Christians (in other countries), but I'll never consider them true allies. Bin Laden, however, was extreme and completely opposed to everything for which we stand - try and keep things in perspective comrade. You're still young.

So what exactly have you done so far ?
Have you actively participated in taking a forceful stance ? You are still reactionary within and so whom are ypu blaming ?

[ckaihatsu]

So what exactly have you done so far ?
Have you actively participated in taking a forceful stance ? You are still reactionary within and so whom are ypu blaming ?


This is wildly inappropriate -- you're recklessly name-calling and blaming ('reactionary'), and referencing a member's own political activities, which borders on violation of security culture:


Security Culture Information

https://www.revleft.space/vb/threads/100034-Security-Culture-Information


This is a board for *discussion*, and you're showing yourself to be a moralist by attacking others and by previously touting a reactionary ideology (bin Ladenism).

I don't know what you expect to do here, but you're on thin ice -- make your next contributions *very* carefully.

[guevarism]

Really , its a shame that still she(GLF) despite being a commie likes to call herself a white ,I guess white commies and most Americans deserved a bin laden to break their thin ice of aristocracy and domination ,

- - - Updated - - -

I nevwr support Islam and the dominating aggressive American uni-polar culture or rather I feel American commies can never bring a guerilla revolt like what its now in parts of India cause they cant live without aristocracy

[ckaihatsu]

Really , its a shame that still she(GLF) despite being a commie likes to call herself a white ,I guess white commies and most Americans deserved a bin laden to break their thin ice of aristocracy and domination ,


You're saying that whites on the far-left, together with most people in the U.S., compose an 'aristocracy' of 'domination', and so bin-Ladenism was 'justified'.

This runs counter to your statement at post #19 where you 'condemned' bin-Ladenism.

If you [1] don't recant your tacit support for the reactionary position of Islamism, or [2] make *one* more statement anytime from now on that states or implies support for reactionary terrorist organizations like that of bin Laden, I will ban your account from RevLeft permanently.





I nevwr support Islam and the dominating aggressive American uni-polar culture or rather I feel American commies can never bring a guerilla revolt like what its now in parts of India cause they cant live without aristocracy


Here you're disparaging communists in the U.S. for allegedly being in thrall to an American 'aristocracy'.

This statement is spurious and no-better for the overall environment of discussion here.

[GLF]

Really , its a shame that still she(GLF) despite being a commie likes to call herself a white ,I guess white commies and most Americans deserved a bin laden to break their thin ice of aristocracy and domination ,

- - - Updated - - -

I nevwr support Islam and the dominating aggressive American uni-polar culture or rather I feel American commies can never bring a guerilla revolt like what its now in parts of India cause they cant live without aristocracy

When I said "so-called" white person, what I was trying to covey is that society would refer to me as white. I take part in white privilege inasmuch as white privilege is a real thing, and yes, I try to do my part to change this.

We have enough problems on the left, particularly the online left, when it comes to infighting and factionalism. I actually agree with you that the American aristocracy and western domination is something that should be challenged, from both within and without, but obviously you and I have very different ideas on a constructive way of even discussing this.

[pastradamus]

Osama and Che both were liberators who took discreet pathways in their efforts to emancipate

What?

Che Guevara was a liberator, no doubt.

Osama bin Laden orchestrated the flying of two planes into the twin towers - A direct attack on the working class, he didn't give a fuck about workers, he came from a Saudi Bourgeois family and never gave a fuck about anything but himself and his fanatical religious bullshit. He coaxed thousands of people into suicide attacks but never quite had the balls to fucking do it himself - Does that sound like a benevolent liberator to you?

Discreet? ....Don't get me started.

[pastradamus]

CIA does all things covertly , if USA was a super power why did it encroach or had to intrude into a Foreign land to kill its malefactor , I hold this view that Guevara's and Laden's tale I'd quite unclear and was Guevara really killed as and when CIA reported of his being shot dead by the Bolivian force , if so why were those pictures of Guevara's autopsy kept upto Bolivia and US , neither do we have proper records of Bin Laden isn't US murderous and hyper-fascist that spreads terrorism covertly but quite actively in a manner which is quite suspicious

Possibly my own misreading here, but what is your point comrade?