Log in

View Full Version : URGENT! Tookie Williams protest in Union Square in



BattleOfTheCowshed
12th December 2005, 22:12
Everyone, there is going to be a urgent protest against Arnold Schwarzenegger's decision not to grant Tookie Williams clemency. The protest will be in Union Square, at 5:30 PM, TODAY (Monday the 12th). It is currently 5:15 PM EST so you have to get there soon! GO!

RedAnarchist
12th December 2005, 22:25
edited -silly comment since withdrawn

YKTMX
12th December 2005, 22:32
Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 10:25 PM
I wish you good luck and everything, but why would the Governer of California listen to people on the other side of the country?

What a silly comment.

You're an internationalist? :lol:

RedAnarchist
12th December 2005, 22:32
Why is it such a silly comment?

YKTMX
12th December 2005, 22:38
Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 10:32 PM
Why is it such a silly comment?
You want me to go into it, really? OK

Well, firstly, they're protesting against Arnie's decision, he never claimed they were on some grand mission to singlehandedly 'change his mind'.

Presumably they're protesting in favour of Tookie, which means that the question of whether Arnie listens is irrelevant. We might wish to spread the handship of solidarity with a fellow oppressed human being regardless of what Arnie thinks of the matter.

We might wish to get together with brothers and sisters who feel similar on this issue so as we can all know that there are progressive people out there who feel just as appaled by this decision as us.

Would you like me to continue?

RedAnarchist
12th December 2005, 22:48
ah, ok. In that case, it was a very silly comment indeed. I withdraw it.

bed_of_nails
13th December 2005, 02:04
He deserves to die according to many members of this board. He murdered several people I believe. There was (very recently) a heated debate on if murders and rapists should be executed.

Personally, I couldnt care less.

Hasta la vista, Tookie.

which doctor
13th December 2005, 02:13
Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 05:25 PM
edited -silly comment since withdrawn
You're silly comment will be forever immortalized in the quote by YouKnowTheyMurderedX.

Goodbye Tookie, no one deserves to die by the hands of the US prison system.

BattleOfTheCowshed
13th December 2005, 04:35
Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 02:04 AM
He deserves to die according to many members of this board. He murdered several people I believe. There was (very recently) a heated debate on if murders and rapists should be executed.

Personally, I couldnt care less.

Hasta la vista, Tookie.
So would you say that if there was ever a leftist revolution that the revolutionaries should be killed as murderers? I (and many others) view Tookie as another victim of the Class War, exposing the way racism and capitalism create social problems and drive people to form gangs.

RedStarOverChina
13th December 2005, 12:41
Um, excuse me, but wasn't Tookie a racist criminal who murdered 3 asians just cause they were asians?

bed_of_nails
13th December 2005, 13:58
Originally posted by BattleOfTheCowshed+Dec 12 2005, 09:35 PM--> (BattleOfTheCowshed @ Dec 12 2005, 09:35 PM)
[email protected] 13 2005, 02:04 AM
He deserves to die according to many members of this board. He murdered several people I believe. There was (very recently) a heated debate on if murders and rapists should be executed.

Personally, I couldnt care less.

Hasta la vista, Tookie.
So would you say that if there was ever a leftist revolution that the revolutionaries should be killed as murderers? I (and many others) view Tookie as another victim of the Class War, exposing the way racism and capitalism create social problems and drive people to form gangs. [/b]
Anyone dumb enough to believe that they can singlyhandedly wage a revolution by killing a few people deserves to die.

You werent in the CC for that discussion. When (and if) you get in, look up the thread about death penalty for murderers and rapists in a communist society.

Quite honestly, Tookie wasnt your friend. Gang violence is not your friend. I am not saddened that the bastard is dead.

bulrog
13th December 2005, 17:32
Um, excuse me, but wasn't Tookie a racist criminal who murdered 3 asians just cause they were asians?

It was actually related to two robberies, no one knows for sure whether or not he killed them because they were asian.

Forward Union
13th December 2005, 17:40
Sad to see a reformed killer, now peace activist, killed.

Amusing Scrotum
13th December 2005, 19:45
Originally posted by Additives [email protected] 13 2005, 05:40 PM
Sad to see a reformed killer, now peace activist, killed.

As far as I am aware, he hasn't even admitted that he killed those people. So he can hardly be considered a "reformed character."

BattleOfTheCowshed
13th December 2005, 21:08
Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 12:41 PM
Um, excuse me, but wasn't Tookie a racist criminal who murdered 3 asians just cause they were asians?
He murdered people in a robbery, not because they were Asian.

And if the rest of you can't see the connection between a racist, capitalist society and the prevalance of gang warfare, well then I can see why the left is often criticized for being out of touch with humanity. I never said he was trying to wage a revolution single-handedly. I said he was a Class War victim because he was part of a system that drives individuals to crime, to misery, to oppression, to gangs, in order to create any semblance of security or stability in their lives. Tookie was one of the few individuals who was able to see that system for what it is and expose it in his writings. For that I commend him as a true victim of the class war, far more of a victim than any stupid middle-class activist who gets himself arrested. As far as all of you racist, pro-death penalty, middle class assholes, you all can go to hell.

Ownthink
13th December 2005, 21:13
Originally posted by BattleOfTheCowshed+Dec 13 2005, 04:08 PM--> (BattleOfTheCowshed @ Dec 13 2005, 04:08 PM)
[email protected] 13 2005, 12:41 PM
Um, excuse me, but wasn't Tookie a racist criminal who murdered 3 asians just cause they were asians?
He murdered people in a robbery, not because they were Asian.

And if the rest of you can't see the connection between a racist, capitalist society and the prevalance of gang warfare, well then I can see why the left is often criticized for being out of touch with humanity. I never said he was trying to wage a revolution single-handedly. I said he was a Class War victim because he was part of a system that drives individuals to crime, to misery, to oppression, to gangs, in order to create any semblance of security or stability in their lives. Tookie was one of the few individuals who was able to see that system for what it is and expose it in his writings. For that I commend him as a true victim of the class war, far more of a victim than any stupid middle-class activist who gets himself arrested. As far as all of you racist, pro-death penalty, middle class assholes, you all can go to hell. [/b]
So, I guess you could say the same about murdering Imperialists in Iraq? Just "victims" of Class War?

Take your stupid apologist-for-gang-murderers bullshit somewhere else!

I liked your posts up until now, but this is just stupid. The guy murdered some innocent people in a robery, he founded a violently bloody gang, and now he's dead. GOOD!

I'm glad he's dead. :lol:

ReD_ReBeL
13th December 2005, 22:15
hmm im not glad hes dead. i dont wish any1 dead, but some people here seem to be forgetting that he 'apparently' murdered a whole family. now come on u cant honestly kill like 3 ppl and thn become reformed and preach against violene, and now somehow cause u codemn violence is supposed to forget tht u murdered 3 ppl. the people he murdered cannot get theres lifes back and thy where innocent. So i'm not particulary bothered if hes gets executed or not. He's just putting himself and his family in the same situation as he put the people he murdered and there families. so i dont see how some people can be sympathetic. even if it was'class-war' the people he killed did not doa thing to him.
You act liket he US is some sorta evil for executions, while Cuba executes people for bring drugs into the country and other similar drug cases.

RedStarOverChina
13th December 2005, 22:20
He murdered people in a robbery
Oh in that case it's all OK.

Why the hell did he find the need to kill 3 people in a robbery??


As far as all of you racist, pro-death penalty, middle class assholes, you all can go to hell.I'm quilty as charged in the latter accounts (perhaps even the asshole part) but calling me a racist would be a bit far-fetched. Cuz I'm not...and your hero obviously is:


Not to mention tookie also said racial slurs when killing the Yang family...calling them "buddha heads." That's obviously a hate crime. But since he's black...it's not politicaly correct to call this a hate crime.This is the version that I've heard.

Edit: I know the quote is a little incoherent but that's just bad English from my friend. Just concentrate on the "buddha heads" part.

Amusing Scrotum
13th December 2005, 23:16
Been as this event is over and a debate over "Tookie's" character has presented itself. I have moved this topic to politics so that more people will see it.

bed_of_nails
13th December 2005, 23:32
As far as all of you racist, pro-death penalty, middle class assholes, you all can go to hell.

Racist is a pretty heavy term to throw around, especially here. You may want to get to actually know the people before you begin slinging mud.

Tookie was a murderer. I dont care that he has died. There is a huge difference between theft, and the murder of three people.

I dont think anyone would have noticed if he was white.

YKTMX
13th December 2005, 23:39
I dont think anyone would have noticed if he was white.

:blink:

So, ummm, the Death Penalty is anti-white?


It's always good to see the armchair revolutionaries 'let their hair down' in these current affairs thread.


"Ummm, yes, I'm in favour of workers revolution, but that doesn't mean I don't want racist governors murdering wrongly convicted black people in California! I mean, jeez."

Great stuff.

RedStarOverChina
13th December 2005, 23:41
"Ummm, yes, I'm in favour of workers revolution, but that doesn't mean I don't want racist governors murdering wrongly convicted black people in California! I mean, jeez."Would you care to back that up or am I expected to rely on my imagination?

YKTMX
13th December 2005, 23:58
Would you care to back that up or am I expected to rely on my imagination?

Yes, why don't you 'imagine' this scenario?

A known black gang member is arrested by a racist police force. His trial is then purposefully taken out of a largely black area to a, surprise surprise, largely white area. His jury consists of 10 white people, 1 latino and 1 black guy. There's no DNA evidence. Physichal evidence such as fingerprints and bloody footprints can't be traced to him. He's convicted on the evidence of a cop who we know perjured himself, a ballistics expert linking him to the 'scene' and 5 informants all with criminal records and a reason to lie.

BattleOfTheCowshed
14th December 2005, 00:01
So, I guess you could say the same about murdering Imperialists in Iraq? Just "victims" of Class War?

Care to elaborate on your little analogy? I don't believe I ever said all murderers were victims of the Class War. I said Tookie (and millions of other inner-city youth) are because they live in a system that perpetuates violence by forcing people into poverty where crime and violence are rational, logical choices. I dont see how that correlates to Imperialists in Iraq at all. However, I will say that I do consider George Bush and the war-mongers in power to be far more criminal than the soldiers on the field, even if it is the soldiers who are pulling the triggers. For the most part those soldiers are poor, uneducated kids who believe they're doing good. Yes, many of them deserve to be in prison because of the shit they've done, but Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and all the architects of this war are 100x more guilty.


Take your stupid apologist-for-gang-murderers bullshit somewhere else!


This is THE REVOLUTIONARY LEFT. Seeing as you support the death penalty, the American justice system and seem to lack the ability to analyze the class dynamics at work in the American penal system I suggest YOU take YOUR reformist, bourgeois ass outta here.


I liked your posts up until now, but this is just stupid. The guy murdered some innocent people in a robery, he founded a violently bloody gang, and now he's dead.

Yes and he later renounced that past and became one of the best and most vocal analysts of the class structure in America, the origins of inner-city violence and the racist "justice" system. As someone stated earlier, the battle over Tookie was important because of who he was, but its REAL importance lies in the fact that there are millions of men just like Tookie in prison at this very moment. The Class War is real. For some of you middle-class teenage kids who come on here to talk about shit that happened a long time ago that may not seem true, but for REAL workers and REAL people in the ghetto, the Class War is an everyday struggle, a struggle where people are led into poverty, oppression and misery on a daily basis, an oppression that expresses itself in violence and crime. Tookie was lucky enough to realize that, speak out against it and work to divert people to the real class struggle.


I'm glad he's dead.

There is not much to say other than that you are a despicable human being who not only knows nothing about class-struggle and oppression despite hanging out at a website called RevolutionaryLeft, but you also lack compassion. The reformist, religious leaders who often lead the anti-death penalty struggle are 10x more revolutionary than you are.

BattleOfTheCowshed
14th December 2005, 00:04
Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 10:15 PM
You act liket he US is some sorta evil for executions, while Cuba executes people for bring drugs into the country and other similar drug cases.
I do think the US is evil for holding executions, especially when organized in its racist justice system. I would say Cuba is also evil for holding executions, especially of drug users (if your information is correct, I haven't heard this elsewhere). I support jailing drug traffickers and other organized criminals, but I think people should be free to use drugs.

BattleOfTheCowshed
14th December 2005, 00:25
He murdered people in a robbery
Oh in that case it's all OK.

Why the hell did he find the need to kill 3 people in a robbery??

First off, I never said it was OK to murder people in a robbery. I was correcting someone who stated he killed people in a hate-crime. As for your question: for the same reason that criminal and criminal behavior has always existed among members of the working class. When people are economically oppressed and when there is a lack of stability or order, people have a variety of reactions, the most common tend to be: 1. resignation to a life of oppression, or holding out some naive hope in bettering your situation 2. analyze the situation and come to the conclusion that rebellion and a new society is possible 3. attempt to better oneself through illegal means. Tookie started out on a number #3, and then came to be #2 after he was arrested and had time to analyze his life. Did I ever say Tookie was justified in killing people? No. I feel sorry for the people who were murdered. The reality of the situation is that both Tookie and those that he murdered were victims of a capitalist system that perpetuates violence and misery. I supported Tookie's case not because he began writing childrens books or brokered peace truce's between gangs or anything, all that shit is great, but the real reason Tookie's case was important was because he was emblematic of the racist, criminal capitalist system we live in. With questions like this, I have to wonder: what were your thoughts on crime before? Did you just think poor people were evil or something?



As far as all of you racist, pro-death penalty, middle class assholes, you all can go to hell.I'm quilty as charged in the latter accounts (perhaps even the asshole part) but calling me a racist would be a bit far-fetched. Cuz I'm not...and your hero obviously is:


Not to mention tookie also said racial slurs when killing the Yang family...calling them "buddha heads." That's obviously a hate crime. But since he's black...it's not politicaly correct to call this a hate crime.This is the version that I've heard.

Edit: I know the quote is a little incoherent but that's just bad English from my friend. Just concentrate on the "buddha heads" part.

Well in my opinion if you are in favor of the American death penalty (or even the American justice system in general) you are racist. So I full stand by my comments that you are a racist. As for your other quote, yes he used a racial slur, I don't see how that makes it a hate crime. He robbed and killed them for money, not because they were Asian. Are you in touch with reality? Have you ever been to the ghetto? People use racial slurs all the time, doesn't make it right whatsoever, but your allegation that because he used a racial slur against them while committing the crime and is thus a racist is very far-fetched. I suppose you are one of those people who thinks its racist when a black person says the word "nigga"? If anything its indicative of the poor education and societal upbringing he had and of the racially-tense atmosphere he grew up in.

ReD_ReBeL
14th December 2005, 00:26
heres the evidence Comrade , for the death penalty in Cuba..

"The increase in the use of the death penalty appears to have begun just after the introduction in March 1999 of new legislation imposing the death penalty for serious cases of drug-trafficking, corruption of minors and armed robbery. According to the Cuban Commission for Human Rights and National Reconciliation, Comisión Cubana de Derechos Humanos y Reconciliación Nacional, the death penalty is now possible for 112 crimes, 79 of which involve state security violations and 33 involve common crimes."

Whats Corruption of minors?



Full article on Cuban Death penalty (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250291999?open&of=ENG-CUB)

bed_of_nails
14th December 2005, 00:36
A known black gang member is arrested by a racist police force. His trial is then purposefully taken out of a largely black area to a, surprise surprise, largely white area. His jury consists of 10 white people, 1 latino and 1 black guy. There's no DNA evidence. Physichal evidence such as fingerprints and bloody footprints can't be traced to him. He's convicted on the evidence of a cop who we know perjured himself, a ballistics expert linking him to the 'scene' and 5 informants all with criminal records and a reason to lie.

Why do you not take into account more things than race in most of your analysis?

The area he was convicted in could have been heavily populated by his gang. I dont call that a fair trial either.

I would like to thank you for equating all white people to racists. I am not denying the possibility it was a racist determination, but to automatically assume the conviction came because the people were white and he was black is some racist bullshit in itself.

Ballistics is a very reliable source usually. Dont take them lightly.

The informants are sketchy, as with the apparent lack of fingerprints.

Find me evidence that proves he didnt do this in comparison to an analysis which says he might not have done this and I will gladly take your side.

If George W. Bush were to become a communist tomorrow, and the world the day after, would you support killing him?

BattleOfTheCowshed
14th December 2005, 00:36
As far as all of you racist, pro-death penalty, middle class assholes, you all can go to hell.

Racist is a pretty heavy term to throw around, especially here. You may want to get to actually know the people before you begin slinging mud.

Racist is a pretty heavy term. As I explained above, I consider the death penalty and American justice system to be racist. And thus I consider any of its supporters to be racists, if only passive. I stand by my comments.


Tookie was a murderer. I dont care that he has died. There is a huge difference between theft, and the murder of three people.

Since you seem to be arguing on the basis of the murders rather than on any class analysis of the American justice system, I will assume you would have supported the execution of Che Guevara, the Bolshevik Party, Mao Zedong, etc. They were all responsible for the deaths of innocent people, and not just in revolutionary warfare, the Bolsheviks robbed banks/lived outlaw lives before the revolution. Sorry, I think you came to the wrong place, instead of RevolutionaryLeft, I think you meant to go here: www.democraticunderground.com/


I dont think anyone would have noticed if he was white.

(Sarcasm) Wow, jeeze, I'm really sorry I called you a racist, it's very obvious you aren't. (/sarcasm) First off I HIGHLY doubt the assertion, secondly, maybe people wouldn't have noticed if he was white because the majority of whites face nowhere near as much economic and police oppression as blacks. Not to mention the fact that his words would sound rather hollow since gangs are nowhere near as much a problem in white communities as they are in black community.

BattleOfTheCowshed
14th December 2005, 01:08
Why do you not take into account more things than race in most of your analysis?

Because race is a major factor in American society. Racism is extremely prevalent, even if in more subtle ways than in previous eras. Do you live in the US? If so, I would say that if you don't think race plays an important role in society then you are HIGHLY out of touch.


The area he was convicted in could have been heavily populated by his gang. I dont call that a fair trial either.

Well, I would say that it is impossible to get a fair trial in the United States of America, period. To answer your question however, prosecutors would NEVER allow a gang-member or anyone related in any manner to Williams to be on his jury. His trial was moved from Los Angeles city courts where he would have faced a rather ethnically-varied jury from all over the city. His trial was moved to Torrance, CA, a predominantly white and VERY conservative suburb of Los Angeles. I don't call that fair. You claim to express support for the people terrorized by his gang yet you think that they shouldnt be allowed to rule on his case, and instead people in a completely unrelated area should? Right....


I would like to thank you for equating all white people to racists. I am not denying the possibility it was a racist determination, but to automatically assume the conviction came because the people were white and he was black is some racist bullshit in itself.

Stating the reality of the situation is not racist. The American penal system is highly stacked against African-Americans. Why is it that if you get arrested for smoking crack (a drug predominantly used in poor minority ghettos) you get far more time in jail than for using a comparable amount of powder cocaine (an expensive drug predominantly used by wealthier whites)? Everywhere in this country its practically impossible to get a fair trial if you are poor, even harder if you are poor and black (or Latino or Asian, etc). I dont think anyone said all whites are racists, we did state the truth however: a white jury is far more likely to convict a black man than a mixed jury is, regardless of evidence. You have accused of being reverse-racists, what evidence do you have to justify this? What is your analysis of the criminal system? Why is it that two Southern California conservative talk radio hosts (who previously referred to Mexican illegal immigrants as "cockroaches" and support the Minutemen) have been out in front of San Quentin this week with the "Tookie Must Die" hour chanting "Kill Tookie" while they don't even speak out against other criminals? Why is it that a man who completely turned around his life is deemed not to be worthy of clemency, yet people have urged sympathy for Bobby Frank Cherry, who killed four little girls while bombing an African-American church in 1963 even though he long remained a member of the KKK and never turned his life around, just because he was old when convicted? If you address the reality of society you may change my mind.


The informants are sketchy, as with the apparent lack of fingerprints.

A shadow of a doubt is usually enough to stop conviction, yet you apparently believe it is not only not enough for a retrial, but apparently still cause for a state-sponsored execution.


If George W. Bush were to become a communist tomorrow, and the world the day after, would you support killing him?

No, George W. Bush sucks, but hes just a cog in a capitalist machine that has been attacking humanity and the environment for ages. If he genuinely turned his life around I would definitely say he should not be killed. I'm not sure I understand your question, what would it matter if the world turned communist the day after? Are you arguing it wouldn't be a genuine conversion or what?

Hampton
14th December 2005, 01:08
I would like to thank you for equating all white people to racists. I am not denying the possibility it was a racist determination, but to automatically assume the conviction came because the people were white and he was black is some racist bullshit in itself.

I think this is a bit of a strech. I don't think either that all the members of the jury were in fact racist, but I doubt he could have had a fair jury of his peers with an all white jury. Tookie in the 70's was a mountain of man, a gang leader, black, and on trial of multiple murders. In reality, he had no chance.

ReD_ReBeL
14th December 2005, 01:10
erm btw how was Che Guevara responsible for deaths of innocents when they were'nt even in guerilla warfare? this isnt to my knowledge...Che said something along the lines 'killing innocent people is not the way to achieve victory'

YKTMX
14th December 2005, 01:14
Find me evidence that proves he didnt do this in comparison to an analysis which says he might not have done this and I will gladly take your side.


So, now you're basing your support of the execution on the basis that he "might" have done it?

Amusing Scrotum
14th December 2005, 01:14
Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 01:08 AM

I would like to thank you for equating all white people to racists. I am not denying the possibility it was a racist determination, but to automatically assume the conviction came because the people were white and he was black is some racist bullshit in itself.

I think this is a bit of a strech. I don't think either that all the members of the jury were in fact racist, but I doubt he could have had a fair jury of his peers with an all white jury. Tookie in the 70's was a mountain of man, a gang leader, black, and on trial of multiple murders. In reality, he had no chance.

I think it is fair to say an all black jury would have likely sentenced him to death. Especially as at that time he had not "repented" and was likely a very "frightful" individual.

BattleOfTheCowshed
14th December 2005, 01:16
Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 12:26 AM
heres the evidence Comrade , for the death penalty in Cuba..

"The increase in the use of the death penalty appears to have begun just after the introduction in March 1999 of new legislation imposing the death penalty for serious cases of drug-trafficking, corruption of minors and armed robbery. According to the Cuban Commission for Human Rights and National Reconciliation, Comisión Cubana de Derechos Humanos y Reconciliación Nacional, the death penalty is now possible for 112 crimes, 79 of which involve state security violations and 33 involve common crimes."

Whats Corruption of minors?



Full article on Cuban Death penalty (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250291999?open&of=ENG-CUB)
Ummm, first of all, sorry to the mods or whoever for posting so many damn replies in this one thread, as im sure you can see Im just involved in a heated debate.

Corruption of minors probably refers to selling drugs, pornography, etc. to minors.

Anyway, I oppose the death penalty in all capitalist societies. The death penalty in Cuba is very different because it is presumable used as a tool of justice and not one of oppression. Nonetheless, a death penalty for robbery or drug-dealing or whatever still seems a bit harsh to me. Cuba is still not a completely stateless or classless society and as a society that is continually opposed by the capitalist world at large, it still faces many societal problems such as poverty (nowhere near as bad as in the rest of the world, but still present), occasional economic scarcity, isolation from much of the rest of the world, etc. and these should be taken into greater account when determining the justice system there. Thus I am a bit conflicted, overall I'm down for killing some multinational capitalist drug cartels, but some broke kid on the street trying to hustle cash? I dont think so...

BattleOfTheCowshed
14th December 2005, 01:18
Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 01:10 AM
erm btw how was Che Guevara responsible for deaths of innocents when they were'nt even in guerilla warfare? this isnt to my knowledge...Che said something along the lines 'killing innocent people is not the way to achieve victory'
I'm not saying Guevara willfully did it, but I have read reports that some innocent civilians were killed in warfare during the Cuban Revolution. Regardless, I support the Cuban Revolution, Guevara is my hero, and I only use the example to show that pacifism and class struggle do not equate. It was probably a bad example to use...

Nothing Human Is Alien
14th December 2005, 01:35
I think it is fair to say an all black jury would have likely sentenced him to death. Especially as at that time he had not "repented" and was likely a very "frightful" individual.

What planet do you live on?

It's great to see a bunch of "leftists" take up the position of the far right! Classic.

" Intrinsically racist White Americans lynch "strange fruit" like Stan
Williams in American courts of law all the time. In these kangaroo courts,
Black people, innocent or guilty, are convicted and sentenced to death.
Tookie, Black and from the ghetto, was predictably found guilty by a
jury that was not "of his peers"--one Latino, one Filipino and 10 whites. "

"Was he truly proven "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt"? A careful reading of Attorney Verna Wefald’s 88-page appeal to the California Supreme Court to reopen the case strongly suggests that Tookie was framed and railroaded in a trial riddled with inconsistencies, contradictions, lack of physical evidence and false stories spun by a parade of informers trying to save their own necks.

As a founder of the Crips gang, he was assumed to be guilty before he was even charged with four murders. He was "The Black Man Rampant," "The Black Bogeyman" and "The Bigger Thomas of South Central Los Angeles." He was convicted by his notoriety, not by the evidence.

According to Atty. Wefald and federal courts that reviewed Williams' case, Williams' 1981 trial for the murder of Albert Owens, a convenience store clerk in Whittier, and Los Angeles motel owners Yen-I Yang, Tsai-Shaic Yang and their daughter Yee Chen Lin, was based on flimsy circumstantial evidence; the fabricated testimony of five informants having "incentives to lie in order to obtain leniency from the state...." (according to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals); and the perjury of at least one police officer.

Physical evidence such as fingerprints and a bloody boot-print could not be traced to Stanley Williams.

Only one shotgun shell was found at the motel. It ostensibly came from a shotgun purchased legally five years before by Mr. Williams, but the gun itself was actually found under the bed of informants James Garrett and his wife Ester. The Browning shotgun shell was sold at only two local stores, one of which, a Big Five, had been robbed of guns and ammunition by Mr. Garrett the year before.

The Garretts were both being investigated for the murder of their crime partner, Gregory Wilbon. This investigation was dropped, according to Atty. Wefald, after they testified that Mr. Williams "volunteered" a confession to them.

Deputy Gilbert Gwaltney perjured himself when he supported Mr. Garrett, by testifying that the informant had a sound alibi at the time his crime partner Wilbon was murdered. Mr. Wilbon's body was so badly decomposed, Mr. Williams' lawyers write, that it was impossible to establish a time of death and thus impossible to establish an alibi.

Another informant also claimed that Stanley Williams had "volunteered" a confession to him—but only after a police officer had left the police file on Mr. Williams overnight in the informant's cell for him to read before he testified the next day, according to Atty. Wefald.

The prosecutor, who had already been censured twice by the California Supreme Court for discriminatory behavior, threw three Black people off the jury, leaving a majority-White jury with few or no Blacks (at least one juror's racial identity is in dispute).

Atty. Wefald's appeal was turned down by the California Supreme Court on Nov. 30 by a 4-2 vote. This is not uncommon, especially in cases that do not involve DNA evidence.

Every appeal to the California Supreme Court made by wrongfully convicted prisoner Gloria Killean was routinely denied for 16 years, until a federal court overturned her life sentence. And Thomas Goldstein filed repeated appeals to the court for 24 years before being exonerated by a federal court.

And the California Supreme Court’s divided vote "indicates the seriousness of the issues that were raised by the motion," Mr. Williams’ attorney Jonathan Harris said.

But the railroading never ceases. The moment the Dec. 13 execution date was announced in November, authorities rushed Mr. Williams to the holding cell next to the death chamber, three weeks before the usual holding period begins.

Now, the ultimate humiliation is being required of Tookie Williams. Like the innocent women at the Salem witch trials, he is being told he should confess in order to save his own life, a Catch-22 if ever there was one. This he refuses to do. He says he will not compromise his dignity and integrity, the most powerful and precious forces in his life today."

Amusing Scrotum
14th December 2005, 02:14
Originally posted by CompaneroDeLibertad+--> (CompaneroDeLibertad)What planet do you live on?[/b]

Well a poll of people in California showed that 66% supported the death penalty and I'd be willing to be that a large majority of the other 34% would support life imprisonment.

So unless the black population of Los Angeles is around 1-5%, I suspect that a black jury would have convicted.


Originally posted by [email protected]
Like the innocent women at the Salem witch trials, he is being told he should confess in order to save his own life, a Catch-22 if ever there was one.

He possibly didn't commit the crimes he was sentenced for, but calling him "innocent" is I think a stretch. I doubt anyone could become a notorious gang leader without killing anyone.


BattleOfTheCowshed
Thus I am a bit conflicted, overall I'm down for killing some multinational capitalist drug cartels, but some broke kid on the street trying to hustle cash? I dont think so...

Tookie Williams was hardly the "kid on the street" by the time he was tried. He may not have been in the same "league" as the drug cartels, but he was still in the same business.

The drug business reminds me of the "gangster capitalism" which happened during the Capitalists systems youth and happened in Russia after the "demise" of the Russian CP.

And of course even a "gangster capitalist" organisation requires Capitalists, and these obviously are the leaders.
_______

Another point which is missed is the nature of organised crime. During the thirties it was quite common for major capitalists to hire "mafia goons" to break up strikes, pay Union men a "visit" etc. I see no reason why the gangs of today would be any different.

I don't think it is that "far out" to conclude that during upsurges in labour activity various gangs would be hired to "deal with" the strikers.

Which makes the "gangs" just like the police force. Anti-working class organisations.

BattleOfTheCowshed
14th December 2005, 02:41
Originally posted by BattleOfTheCowshed
Thus I am a bit conflicted, overall I'm down for killing some multinational capitalist drug cartels, but some broke kid on the street trying to hustle cash? I dont think so...

Tookie Williams was hardly the "kid on the street" by the time he was tried. He may not have been in the same "league" as the drug cartels, but he was still in the same business.

The drug business reminds me of the "gangster capitalism" which happened during the Capitalists systems youth and happened in Russia after the "demise" of the Russian CP.

And of course even a "gangster capitalist" organisation requires Capitalists, and these obviously are the leaders.
_______

Another point which is missed is the nature of organised crime. During the thirties it was quite common for major capitalists to hire "mafia goons" to break up strikes, pay Union men a "visit" etc. I see no reason why the gangs of today would be any different.

I don't think it is that "far out" to conclude that during upsurges in labour activity various gangs would be hired to "deal with" the strikers.

Which makes the "gangs" just like the police force. Anti-working class organisations.

Well first of all, that quote of mine above was about the death penalty in Cuba and had nothing to do with Tookie, so I don't see why you seem to claim that I was arguing that Tookie was a kid on the street. Second of all, the main point of this discussion in my opinion has been that Tookie took the opportunity to analyze the origins of gangs and the class structure that causes them to exist. Yes gangs are involved in a capitalist enterprise that hurts the working class, that was one of Tookies main arguments when he talked about gangs and why he was against them. As far as the whole Union-busting stuff, is there even any example of a street gang busting up a union? I know bourgeois Mafia-type organized crime groups have done so, but inner-city street gangs? Those Mafia type groups participated in such activities because they were usually in league with corrupt police officers in their enterprises. With very few exceptions, most street gangs are not in league with cops.

Hampton
14th December 2005, 02:46
Another point which is missed is the nature of organised crime. During the thirties it was quite common for major capitalists to hire "mafia goons" to break up strikes, pay Union men a "visit" etc. I see no reason why the gangs of today would be any different.

I don't think it is that "far out" to conclude that during upsurges in labour activity various gangs would be hired to "deal with" the strikers.

Which makes the "gangs" just like the police force. Anti-working class organisations.

I doubt labour bosses are hiring the Crips, Bloods. or Latin Kings to break up strikes yesterday, today, or tommrow.

Gangs like them don't like cops, and you know this.

Amusing Scrotum
14th December 2005, 02:52
Originally posted by BattleOfTheCowshed
Well first of all, that quote of mine above was about the death penalty in Cuba and had nothing to do with Tookie,

I know that you were referring to Cuba. However I was pointing out that there isn't a whole lot of difference between the leaders of "drug cartels" and "Tookie."


Second of all, the main point of this discussion in my opinion has been that Tookie took the opportunity to analyze the origins of gangs and the class structure that causes them to exist.

He made a Marxist analysis of gangs and society? ....I wasn't aware of that.


Yes gangs are involved in a capitalist enterprise that hurts the working class, that was one of Tookies main arguments when he talked about gangs and why he was against them.

Though he repented afterwards. He was very happy to do what gang leaders do whilst he was part of the gang.


As far as the whole Union-busting stuff, is there even any example of a street gang busting up a union?

Not to my knowledge, but I see no reason why it won't happen in the future. Unless of course, street gangs are a more principled version of organised crime.


I know bourgeois Mafia-type organized crime groups have done so, but inner-city street gangs?

Most Mafia men grew up in working class communities, just like gang members do. They were not born bourgeois, their activities and positions made them bourgeois.

"Tookie" was likely leading a better than average life through his gang activities and therefore I see no reason why the leaders of "street gangs" can't be considered at least petit bourgeois.


Those Mafia type groups participated in such activities because they were usually in league with corrupt police officers in their enterprises. With very few exceptions, most street gangs are not in league with cops.

That doesn't mean they won't become tools of the state when the situation arises. It is after all a lucrative position and would definitely be in the interests of the gang members.

Amusing Scrotum
14th December 2005, 02:55
Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 02:46 AM

Another point which is missed is the nature of organised crime. During the thirties it was quite common for major capitalists to hire "mafia goons" to break up strikes, pay Union men a "visit" etc. I see no reason why the gangs of today would be any different.

I don't think it is that "far out" to conclude that during upsurges in labour activity various gangs would be hired to "deal with" the strikers.

Which makes the "gangs" just like the police force. Anti-working class organisations.

I doubt labour bosses are hiring the Crips, Bloods. or Latin Kings to break up strikes yesterday, today, or tommrow.

Gangs like them don't like cops, and you know this.

The Mafia didn't have a particular liking for the "cops" either, but when the situation arises you find people make strange bedfellows.

It may not happen, but there is quite a bit of historical evidence that suggests that if there was an upsurge of labour activity in the US, the various "street gangs" may well ally themselves with the state.

barista.marxista
14th December 2005, 04:06
I'd like to say that I'm extraordinarily impressed by BattleOfTheCowshed's argument here, and while I was (and still am) a fervent and active supporter of the release of Tookie, I honestly cannot contribute anything to this because Battle has covered it all.

Anyone who asserts that people ranging from the infamous (such as Tookie, Mumia Abu-Jamal, or Leonard Peltier) to the unknown (the millions of faceless victims of capitalist society imprisoned for being a product of their system) should be executed has absolutely no understanding of any kind of materialist, Marxist analysis of societal structure. That stance is downright reactionary and counter-revolutionary.

Guerrilla22
14th December 2005, 06:19
Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 12:41 PM
Um, excuse me, but wasn't Tookie a racist criminal who murdered 3 asians just cause they were asians?
supposedly.

deak
14th December 2005, 07:14
The death penalty in Cuba is very different because it is presumable used as a tool of justice and not one of oppression.

um, how is it not used for oppression? You think Cuba is some fairy land where goverments can kill folks and it's magically ok? I don't care if you are in Cuba, a gang leader, or a serial rapist, the death penalty is not a justifiable act if it's not justifiable for EVERYONE. So to say you support killings of these folks but not these folks is mearely your use of arbitrary morality to decide who's lives have more value than others. To say Tookie shouldn't be killed because he was raised on the streets but rapists (or whoever) should is completely overlooking the fact that all crime has a source, be it a circle of generational violence, mental illness, or survival. None are more justifiable or more excusable than the rest, they are just how shit is. Nothing, and I mean nothing is black and white in any situation and to make these arbitrary quantitative values on life is simply ludacris, and counter-revolutionary. So yes, I agree Tookie shouldn't have been executed, however, I also believe that Fidel is as much of a murder for practicing capital punishment as some folks on this board believe Tookie to be. Justice is never found in vengance (which is all the death penalty is), that's just what all those happy westerns Americans watched as a kid tried to teach you. Justice comes from understanding, forgiveness and the williness to try to help someone.

I can already here it now: well liberal appologist don't you think it's justifiable to kill those who are in the power to oppress. To that I say, it's not justifiable or right, but unfortunantly that is how it must be sometimes. I know that if the time came that I had to pick up a weapon and take a life, I would never be able to become so very comfortable in the fact that I was so goddamn right, that any folks actually DESERVED to die. After all, even capatalist army folks are just trying to survive in the same shitty world that Tookie is. Let's not forget, that the same pool of poor that join gangs and shit, also make up a large portion of the US military, if they kill an Iraqi child because they felt joining the army was their only way out, are they any worse than someone who killed people in a robbery (not that he necessarily did, because I wasn't there to know)? You walk a fine line when you start to put value on life, and the line is full of nothing but hypocrasies and missinformation.

PRC-UTE
14th December 2005, 22:23
Most crims like Tookie are just underground capitalists. They fight over resources and territory and kill workers to make a profit like any other capitalist scum. That's why the INLA used to regularly shoot em.

I've seen way more solidarity expressed to Tookie than I see to many more deserving prisoners like Des O'Hare or any other Irish Republican Socialist prisoner. It also turned my stomach to hear people praising this gangster, even calling him a 'revolutionary' while prisoners like Mumia and Peltier are being comparatively ignored.

Of course I agree that the capitalist state, especially one with this much blood on its hands, is absolutely hypocritical to kill a single gangster. That doesn't mean I shed a tear when a violent crim dies. The position that Tookie was some wonderful characdar is so otherworldly that it's hard to know how to respond.

Also, if Tookie 'found God' why was he afraid of dying, the slimey opportunist? :lol:

Ownthink
15th December 2005, 00:16
Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 05:23 PM
Most crims like Tookie are just underground capitalists. They fight over resources and territory and kill workers to make a profit like any other capitalist scum. That's why the INLA used to regularly shoot em.

I've seen way more solidarity expressed to Tookie than I see to many more deserving prisoners like Des O'Hare or any other Irish Republican Socialist prisoner. It also turned my stomach to hear people praising this gangster, even calling him a 'revolutionary' while prisoners like Mumia and Peltier are being comparatively ignored.

Of course I agree that the capitalist state, especially one with this much blood on its hands, is absolutely hypocritical to kill a single gangster. That doesn't mean I shed a tear when a violent crim dies. The position that Tookie was some wonderful characdar is so otherworldly that it's hard to know how to respond.

Also, if Tookie 'found God' why was he afraid of dying, the slimey opportunist? :lol:
I too agree with you here 100%.

Amusing Scrotum
15th December 2005, 01:23
Most crims like Tookie are just underground capitalists. They fight over resources and territory and kill workers to make a profit like any other capitalist scum. That's why the INLA used to regularly shoot em.

I of course forgot about the IRA when I was commented on "gang culture." I'm not sure whether they have actually "crushed" workers actions (I doubt they have) but their history of violence against Irish Socialists should be noted.

Also you have the various Unionist thugs, who have likely suppressed many strikes in the past. However I suspect the "Tookie" fans will say that the Unionist gangs are not as "cuddly" and "nice" as the "Crips."

Eastside Revolt
15th December 2005, 03:53
Originally posted by Armchair [email protected] 15 2005, 01:23 AM
Also you have the various Unionist thugs, who have likely suppressed many strikes in the past. However I suspect the "Tookie" fans will say that the Unionist gangs are not as "cuddly" and "nice" as the "Crips."
I'm no Tookie fan, and I don't think most poeple here are either. But it has nothing to do with cuddly, or as bad. Most of the unionist thugs you are referring to did not grow up in utter slum conditions, and those that did were not often visible minorities. Not only that but exactly what kind of union would you expect a crip to bust? Is there a dope dealing union that recently went on strike?

Most minority gangs are leech off of the lumpen proletariate. The people the gangs suppress rarely have a hope of getting a job worth striking for.

Tookie may likely have been innocent of the particular crime he was murdered for, that is the issue.

Amusing Scrotum
15th December 2005, 15:37
Most of the unionist thugs you are referring to did not grow up in utter slum conditions, and those that did were not often visible minorities.

I very much doubt that growing up in Northern Ireland (a virtual war-zone) was very pleasant for Catholics or Protestants.

I suspect there would have been many poor Protestants who would be very angry about the actions of the IRA (justified or not) and as we all know, most people are definitely concerned with their own survival. In Northern Ireland, a young Protestant would likely feel "safer" if they became a member of an Unionist gang.


Not only that but exactly what kind of union would you expect a crip to bust? Is there a dope dealing union that recently went on strike?

They could bust any Union. Various criminal organisations over the years have busted Unions that had nothing to do with them, I don't see how any of the "street gangs" would somehow avoid this if the situation arose and they were offered large amounts of money to do it.

metalero
16th December 2005, 03:41
Originally posted by [email protected] 13 2005, 07:26 PM
heres the evidence Comrade , for the death penalty in Cuba..

"The increase in the use of the death penalty appears to have begun just after the introduction in March 1999 of new legislation imposing the death penalty for serious cases of drug-trafficking, corruption of minors and armed robbery. According to the Cuban Commission for Human Rights and National Reconciliation, Comisión Cubana de Derechos Humanos y Reconciliación Nacional, the death penalty is now possible for 112 crimes, 79 of which involve state security violations and 33 involve common crimes."

Whats Corruption of minors?



Full article on Cuban Death penalty (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR250291999?open&of=ENG-CUB)
stop making quotes out of context, I think you didn't read the whole article or you are just ignoring facts that can bring a better understanding of cuban reality. Your previous posts on Cuba, Colombia and Latin-America shows your abstraction from historical reality and class struggle development in each country, and I sincerely think you should abstain from making absolutist statements if you don't know them.

let's see the 8 executions that took place in Cuba, in 1999:


CASES

Most of the death penalty cases mentioned are believed to have been convicted for murder with extreme or brutal violence and at least one case of rape. However, detailed information, such as the charges and dates of execution, is difficult to obtain since the government does not normally publish this kind of information and there are severe restrictions on human rights monitoring and freedom of speech.

Those reportedly executed during 1999 were:

CHÁVEZ PALACIO, Francisco Javier
Sentenced to death on 4 April 1997 for the murder of a communist party official during a fight in Bayamo, Granma province. Date of execution not known.

GARCÍA BERMÚDEZ, Carlos
GARCÍA GONZÁLEZ, Félix
Both executed on 10 March 1999 for murdering a 61-year-old peasant in his home during a 1997 robbery attempt in Sancti Spiritus, Sancti Spiritus province.

HERNÁNDEZ INDA, Irovelio
RAMOS RAMÍREZ, Reinaldo Daniel
Both were executed on 26 March 1999, charged with murder and the possession of illegal weapons. Irovelio Hernández Inda was from Camagüey province and Reinaldo Daniel Ramos Ramírez was from Ciego de Avila province. They were charged with a series of murders and the possession of illegal weapons.

MARTÍNEZ DÍAZ, Carlos Mario
Executed in March 1999 for murdering a 56-year-old acquaintance in 1997 in Santiago de Cuba province.

OSORIO ZAMORA, José Luis
Sentenced to death for murdering a child in Manzanillo, Granma province. Date of execution not known.

RODRÍGUEZ GALANO, Roberto
Executed in March 1999 for murdering a 56-year-old acquaintance in 1997 in Santiago de Cuba province.

SÁNCHEZ RAMOS, Félix Joaquín

Executed on 5 March 1999. He was tried in 1998 and found guilty of raping a 13-year-old girl in Las Tunas province in May 1997.

VELÁZQUEZ CABRERA, Luis Carlos
Executed on 5 March 1999. He was tried in 1998 and found guilty of murder, attempted rape and the abduction of a child in Las Tunas province in May 1997.

Reported people under death sentence:

CASTRO PÉREZ, Hermes
He was found guilty of murdering the guard of a nursery school on 18 September 1997 in Las Tunas province. In February 1999 his death sentence was ratified by the People’s Supreme Court.

CRUZ LEÓN, Ernesto Raúl
Salvadorean national Raúl Ernesto Cruz León was detained in September 1997 and subsequently sentenced to death on 23 March 1999. At the trial, which took place on 8 March 1999, he pleaded guilty to the charges. He was charged with "sustained terrorism", "terrorismo con carácter continuado", for carrying out bomb attacks against five hotels and one restaurant in Havana between July and September 1997. An Italian tourist was killed and eleven people were injured as a result of the explosions. He is still awaiting appeal.

DUARTE SCULL, Sergio Antonio
PELÁEZ PRIETO, Carlos Rafael
Sergio Antonio Duarte Scull and Carlos Rafael Peláez Prieto, who were sentenced to death on 22 January 1999, were convicted of killing four foreigners in Cuba. The two men reportedly confessed to murdering two Italian citizens in September 1998, a German citizen in November 1997 and a Canadian citizen in August 1998. They were the first to receive the death sentence following Fidel Castro’s speech on 7 January 1999, in which he stated that drug traffickers should face the death penalty.

Their appeal reportedly took place in late January/early February 1999 before the People’s Supreme Court. It is believed that the death sentences were ratified.

ESPINOSA, Rámiro G.
On 2 October 1996 Rámiro G. Espinosa was sentenced to death following a trial at the Tribunal Provincial Popular, People’s Provincial Court, in Havana. He was accused of assault, robbery and murder. According to reports, on two occasions he entered private homes and robbed and killed the residents. His accomplice, Raúl Calvet Díaz, who was also sentenced to death, had his death sentence commuted to 30 years’ imprisonment. It is believed that Rámiro Espinosa remains under sentence of death but this information is not confirmed.

PORTUONDO MEDINA, Francisco
Francisco Portuondo Medina was convicted of murder for killing a policeman on 31 May 1998 in Santiago de Cuba. He was sentenced to death on 3 March 1999 and is awaiting appeal.

PROENZA TORNES, Jorge L
Sentenced to death in 1998. No further information is available.

REAL SUÁREZ, Humberto Eladio
Humberto Eladio Real Suárez was arrested in October 1994. He was tried and sentenced to death in April 1996, charged with "other acts against state security", "otros actos contra la seguridad del estado", "firing an arm", "disparo de arma de fuego", and "murder", "asesinato". The charges were brought against him for infiltrating the country and the killing of a guard, Arcelio Rodríguez García. Six others involved in the incident were sentenced to 30 years' imprisonment. Humberto Real has still not had his appeal heard by the People’s Supreme Court.

RODRÍGUEZ HERNÁNDEZ, Jorge
Currently held in the Cienfuegos Provincial Prison, Prisión Provincial de Cienfuegos, Ariza, Cienfuegos province. His death sentence was reportedly ratified by the People’s Supreme Court.

RODRÍGUEZ LLERENA, Otto René
Salvadorean national Otto René Rodríguez Llerena was sentenced to death on 30 March 1999, following a trial on 15-16 March 1999. He had been detained in July 1998 and charged with terrorism, after trying to bring explosives into the country. He pleaded guilty to the charge of terrorism for that act and for planting a bomb in a Cuban hotel in August 1997. He is still awaiting appeal.

SARRIA RICHE, Alberto Gregorio
Currently held in the Cienfuegos Provincial Prison, Prisión Provincial de Cienfuegos, Ariza, Cienfuegos province. His death sentence was reportedly ratified by the People’s Supreme Court.

SERRANO CAÑIZAREZ, Boris
He was found guilty of murdering four people, including a five-year-old child in Las Tunas province in February 1998. His death sentence was ratified by the People’s Supreme Court in February 1999.

Name not known
A resident of Holguín

All of these people faced a trial with the due process of law, as is it's said by the own amnesty intl. the some cases are pending on court of appeal ratifying.
Now, this year in US there were more than 50 executions, reaching a number of more than 1000 executed since 1976, including children and mentally disordered people.

"On 1 November 1979 the Cuban Penal Code, Código Penal, (Law 21) became effective which replaced the 1936 Code of Social Defence, Código de Seguridad Social and the Code of Military Justice, Ley de Delitos Militares. According to Article 29 of the Penal Code:

1. Sentence of death is of an exceptional nature and is only to be applied by the courts in the case of offences of a serious nature for which it is an established penalty.
2. Sentence of death cannot be imposed on those who are under 20 years of age or on women who committed the offence while pregnant or who are pregnant at the time the sentence is passed.
3. The death sentence is carried out by firing squad

A new Penal Code came into force in April 1988 (Law 62) , which reduced the number of capital offences.
On 25 August 1997 a new Penal Code was introduced under Decree 175, making stricter rules for crimes, such as corruption, prostitution and drug trafficking. No change was made to the death penalty which was maintained for exceptional cases.

However, on 15 February 1999 Cuba’s National Assembly, Asamblea Nacional del Poder Popular, passed new legislation (Law 87), imposing the death penalty for serious cases of drug-trafficking, corruption of minors and armed robbery"

have you ever asked yourself what happened in 1999 so Cuba took such a strict stance on criminal law? Drug-traffick that linked some cuban bureocrats (not minor offences), child prostitution and provocations by US paid mercenaries ring any bell?

by the way, look at the report on other american countries:

Colombia:
In the first half of 2004, at least 1,400 civilians were killed or “disappeared”. During the year, around 1,250 people were kidnapped and 287,000 were forced to flee their homes
http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/col-summary-eng

USA
Hundreds of detainees continued to be held without charge or trial at the US naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Thousands of people were detained during US military and security operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and routinely denied access to their families and lawyers.
In the USA, more than 40 people died after being struck by police tasers, raising concern about the safety of such weapons. The death penalty continued to be imposed and carried out.
In 2004, 59 people were executed, bringing to 944 the total number of prisoners put to death since the US Supreme Court lifted a moratorium on executions in 1976. Texas accounted for 23 of the year’s executions, and 336 of all the executions in the USA since 1976. Five people were released from death row in 2004 on grounds of innocence, bringing to 117 the total number of such cases since 1973