New Che Play [Archive]

theraven

7th July 2006, 11:59

Originally posted by Raj Radical+Jul 7 2006, 02:30 AM--> (Raj Radical @ Jul 7 2006, 02:30 AM)
[email protected] 7 2006, 12:39 AM
haha cool does it talk about him massacering people in cuba? ooohh how about when he begged for mercy when the bolivans captured him?
I love how you butchered the Che quote in your signature. Didnt even take the time to get it right.

Are you also going to add:

“I don't care if I fall as long as someone else picks up my gun and keeps on shooting.”

“I know you are here to kill me. Shoot, coward, you are only going to kill a man.”

“Whenever death may surprise us, let it be welcome if our battle cry has reached even one receptive ear and another hand reaches out to take up our arms.” [/b]
well since i doubt he said those (outside of the imagitnaiotn of u comies) wh would i put them in my quote? (except maybe the last one-becaue he was probably convincing some poor peasent to go do some mass murder.

somebodywhowantedtoleaveandnotcomeback

7th July 2006, 14:55

theraven, the quote you use in your signature is historically incorrect, it was made up by anti-communist propaganda makers. Unbelieveable how many idiots still fall for that :lol:

theraven

7th July 2006, 15:08

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 11:56 AM
theraven, the quote you use in your signature is historically incorrect, it was made up by anti-communist propaganda makers. Unbelieveable how many idiots still fall for that :lol:
How is my quote historiclly incorrect? the only people who saw him die were bolivian anti-communsit soliders...so the chance that they reported his last words as being "go ahead kill me...you're only killing a man" is nil. same with the chance tht the solider had trouble killing him. far more likely he had no last words, they just saw him, shot him, and then brought him into a village so the people would see that the mass monster was gone.

Si Pinto

7th July 2006, 15:08

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 09:00 AM
well since i doubt he said those (outside of the imagitnaiotn of u comies) wh would i put them in my quote? (except maybe the last one-becaue he was probably convincing some poor peasent to go do some mass murder.
The guy's diary is obviously not good enough evidence for you??

I can imagine what your diary says....

7pm - Bravely taunted the 'commies' on RedLeft.

7.15pm - Jerked off

It must be great to be so intellectually gifted.

Tell me, do you ever bet on horse racing?

theraven

7th July 2006, 15:19

The guy's diary is obviously not good enough evidence for you??

he wrote his last words down in his diary :lol: ?

I can imagine what your diary says....

7pm - Bravely taunted the 'commies' on RedLeft.

7.15pm - Jerked off
actually it reads

7 am- get up

7:15 am-taunt hippies on revleft (though they don't see my posts till they wake up at 12 pm)

7:30 am- go to work or class (depending on the day)

random times throughout the day-poke fun at revlefters when i get the chance (its the little things that make life good)

5 pm come home, study or hang out with my girlfirend.

weekends it varies more but you get the picture.
versus yours that says "masterbated to ches picture all day. parents wanted to know when I would get a job, I told them I'd never be a "wage slave". they yelled at me, now im going to smoke some weed".

It must be great to be so intellectually gifted.

it really is....

Tell me, do you ever bet on horse racing?

If I am at the races i'll put down 5 bucks to make the time intereasting, but as a rule I dislike to gamble.

Si Pinto

7th July 2006, 17:10

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 12:20 PM
he wrote his last words down in his diary :lol: ?
Of course not, so how do you know what he said, you don't, you just make up petty little quotes so you can say "Hey!! look at me I'm hard aren't I. I can make fun of Che. I'm so fucking 'street' I am".

Why do you enjoy lampooning people who fought and died for what they believe in?

I don't agree with the US invasion of Vietnam, but I'm not going to lampoon those who fell and died there. Poor bastards.

It might impress your friends (if your friends are anything like you, that is), but to anyone with any sort of conscience you just appear to be a self-important, vindictive little twat.

theraven

7th July 2006, 18:34

Of course not, so how do you know what he said, you don't, you just make up petty little quotes so you can say "Hey!! look at me I'm hard aren't I. I can make fun of Che. I'm so fucking 'street' I am".

um no. I put that quote in there after a discussion on che here. It is as probable he said that as the ridiculous quotes some of you have him saying. making fun of che isn't "street", nor is idolizing him.

Why do you enjoy lampooning people who fought and died for what they believe in?

che was a mass murderer, being made fun of on a message board he'll never read is the least of his worries.

I don't agree with the US invasion of Vietnam, but I'm not going to lampoon those who fell and died there. Poor bastards.

well thats good, because they were doing their duty. the difference between our soliders and ernesto is so vast its not even logical to compare the two.

It might impress your friends (if your friends are anything like you, that is), but to anyone with any sort of conscience you just appear to be a self-important, vindictive little twat.

people with a consceince feel bad about making fun of your ole boy ernesto? why?

somebodywhowantedtoleaveandnotcomeback

7th July 2006, 19:10

Originally posted by theraven+Jul 7 2006, 01:09 PM--> (theraven @ Jul 7 2006, 01:09 PM)
Originally posted by s3rna+Jul 7 2006, 11:56 AM--> (s3rna @ Jul 7 2006, 11:56 AM) theraven, the quote you use in your signature is historically incorrect, it was made up by anti-communist propaganda makers. Unbelieveable how many idiots still fall for that :lol: [/b]
How is my quote historiclly incorrect? the only people who saw him die were bolivian anti-communsit soliders...so the chance that they reported his last words as being "go ahead kill me...you're only killing a man" is nil.[/b]

Yet they did :

Originally posted by National Security Archive
Southern Command, Activities of the 2nd Ranger Battalion and Death of Che Guevara:
The U.S. Special Forces Group, which trained the Bolivan military units that captured Che Guevara, conducted an extensive debriefing of members of the 2nd Ranger Battalion. This report, based on interviews by a member of the U.S. Mobile Training Team in Bolivia with key Bolivian commanders, documents the military movements, and engagement with Che Guevara's guerrilla band. The sources also provide key details and descriptions of his capture, interrogation and execution, although it makes no mention of the CIA official, Félix Rodríguez, who was present. Guevara's last words to the soldier who shot him are reported as: "Know this now, you are killing a man."
Source (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB5/index.html)

Doesn't that tell you something? :lol:

[email protected]
same with the chance tht the solider had trouble killing him. far more likely he had no last words, they just saw him, shot him, and then brought him into a village so the people would see that the mass monster was gone.
This part of your post alone proves you are entirely ignorant on the subject. Ernesto was captured alive, held for some time, and then shot.

From the very same paragraph:

National Security Archive
Southern Command, Activities of the 2nd Ranger Battalion and Death of Che Guevara:
The U.S. Special Forces Group, which trained the Bolivan military units that captured Che Guevara, conducted an extensive debriefing of members of the 2nd Ranger Battalion. This report, based on interviews by a member of the U.S. Mobile Training Team in Bolivia with key Bolivian commanders, documents the military movements, and engagement with Che Guevara's guerrilla band. The sources also provide key details and descriptions of his capture, interrogation and execution, although it makes no mention of the CIA official, Félix Rodríguez, who was present. Guevara's last words to the soldier who shot him are reported as: "Know this now, you are killing a man."

So far for your intelligence :lol:

theraven

7th July 2006, 19:36

Originally posted by s3rna+Jul 7 2006, 04:11 PM--> (s3rna @ Jul 7 2006, 04:11 PM)
Originally posted by theraven+Jul 7 2006, 01:09 PM--> (theraven @ Jul 7 2006, 01:09 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 11:56 AM
theraven, the quote you use in your signature is historically incorrect, it was made up by anti-communist propaganda makers. Unbelieveable how many idiots still fall for that :lol:
How is my quote historiclly incorrect? the only people who saw him die were bolivian anti-communsit soliders...so the chance that they reported his last words as being "go ahead kill me...you're only killing a man" is nil.[/b]

Yet they did :

Originally posted by National Security Archive
Southern Command, Activities of the 2nd Ranger Battalion and Death of Che Guevara:
The U.S. Special Forces Group, which trained the Bolivan military units that captured Che Guevara, conducted an extensive debriefing of members of the 2nd Ranger Battalion. This report, based on interviews by a member of the U.S. Mobile Training Team in Bolivia with key Bolivian commanders, documents the military movements, and engagement with Che Guevara's guerrilla band. The sources also provide key details and descriptions of his capture, interrogation and execution, although it makes no mention of the CIA official, Félix Rodríguez, who was present. Guevara's last words to the soldier who shot him are reported as: "Know this now, you are killing a man."
Source (http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB5/index.html)

Doesn't that tell you something? :lol:

[email protected]
same with the chance tht the solider had trouble killing him. far more likely he had no last words, they just saw him, shot him, and then brought him into a village so the people would see that the mass monster was gone.
This part of your post alone proves you are entirely ignorant on the subject. Ernesto was captured alive, held for some time, and then shot.

From the very same paragraph:

National Security Archive
Southern Command, Activities of the 2nd Ranger Battalion and Death of Che Guevara:
The U.S. Special Forces Group, which trained the Bolivan military units that captured Che Guevara, conducted an extensive debriefing of members of the 2nd Ranger Battalion. This report, based on interviews by a member of the U.S. Mobile Training Team in Bolivia with key Bolivian commanders, documents the military movements, and engagement with Che Guevara's guerrilla band. The sources also provide key details and descriptions of his capture, interrogation and execution, although it makes no mention of the CIA official, Félix Rodríguez, who was present. Guevara's last words to the soldier who shot him are reported as: "Know this now, you are killing a man."

So far for your intelligence :lol: [/b]
except the stories seem to change frequently:

where my quote comes from

1:30 p.m.: Che’s final battle commences in Quebrada del Yuro. Simon Cuba (Willy) Sarabia, a Bolivian miner, leads the rebel group. Che is behind him and is shot in the leg several times. Sarabia picks up Che and tries to carry him away from the line of fire. The firing starts again and Che’s beret is knocked off. Sarabia sits Che on the ground so he can return the fire. Encircled at less than ten yards distance, the Rangers concentrate their fire on him, riddling him with bullets. Che attempts to keep firing, but cannot keep his gun up with only one arm. He is hit again on his right leg, his gun is knocked out of his hand and his right forearm is pierced. As soldiers approach Che he shouts, "Do not shoot! I am Che Guevara and worth more to you alive than dead." The battle ends at approximately 3:30 p.m. Che is taken prisoner. (Rojo, 219; James, 14)

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB5/

Fidel Follower

7th July 2006, 20:17

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 03:35 PM
che was a mass murderer,
Yeah he killed people like you.

Fidel Follower

7th July 2006, 20:19

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 12:20 PM

5 pm come home, study or hang out with my girlfirend.

Where do you live? Didn't know your allowed to have sheep as girlfriends?

Si Pinto

7th July 2006, 21:31

che was a mass murderer, being made fun of on a message board he'll never read is the least of his worries.

So why don't you lampoon Hitler, or Himmler or Genghis Khan or Pol Pot.

I'll answer that for you, because you think that lampooning Che on a leftist website is 'cool', 'street', whatever word you want to call it.

So I'm right, you are just a vindictive little twat, trying to impress his 'friends' thanks for proving it.

well thats good, because they were doing their duty. the difference between our soliders and ernesto is so vast its not even logical to compare the two.

Yes, one had a choice, the other didn't, can you guess which one?

Do you think the average vietnam soldier was fighting because he agreed with what he was doing (I know your answer before you've even typed it).

people with a consceince feel bad about making fun of your ole boy ernesto? why?

People are dying of starvation in your country Raven, dying because of the lack of medical care, struggling to feed themselves or their familes because their wages (if they have any) simply don't keep up with the cost of living, their are kids in your country who will struggle to get a basic education, never mind anything better!

All of this is in YOUR COUNTRY RAVEN!!!

Your super 21st century USA.

The glorious USA, land of the free, land of opportunity, liberty for all.

Someone with a 'conscience' wouldn't be sitting at their computer typing the bullshit you are just to get their 'kicks' out of it.

I don't give a fuck if your Left, Right, MOR or a bloody 'druid priest'.

Don't you have a CONSCIENCE!!!

theraven

7th July 2006, 23:20

So why don't you lampoon Hitler, or Himmler or Genghis Khan or Pol Pot.

If this weree a nazi or mongol or maoist board I would.

I'll answer that for you, because you think that lampooning Che on a leftist website is 'cool', 'street', whatever word you want to call it.

So I'm right, you are just a vindictive little twat, trying to impress his 'friends' thanks for proving it.

No, I am doing it becuase you lot whorship him, its not like i make jokes about che in everday life. why the hell would lampooning che on a leftist site be "cool" since most leftists like che? or do you think i am doing this to imprses rightwign friends? do you think i have my friend huddleed around my computer while I type this stuff? wow im not sure if your egotistical or stupid.

Yes, one had a choice, the other didn't, can you guess which one?

well che wasn't "doing his duty" he was a leader of a rebellion, not a fighter fufilling an oath. some/most amreicans fighting in vietnam were draftees (not positive on the exact number) some however were volunteers.

Do you think the average vietnam soldier was fighting because he agreed with what he was doing (I know your answer before you've even typed it).

I am sure it varied from solider to solider, and from year to year. I know you were expecting a yes, but i am well aware thats not the case.

People are dying of starvation in your country Raven, dying because of the lack of medical care, struggling to feed themselves or their familes because their wages (if they have any) simply don't keep up with the cost of living, their are kids in your country who will struggle to get a basic education, never mind anything better!

Honestly I find it hard to believe people are "dying of starvation" in america, and if they are I doubt its a number in the hundredths of a percentile (.0X%). I would bet most people starving are on diets.

yes some people suffer fro mlack of medical care. this would be remedied if we were allowed to build more hopstials and license mroe doctors, but the doctors don't liek that idea.

people who are strugglign to feed their family are generally on some sort of social asstiance fo some sort, thus are usually in subsidized housing/food stamps and that sort.

No the US doesnt' have the best social welfare ssytem in the world, but we make up for it by having one o fthe better economies.

All of this is in YOUR COUNTRY RAVEN!!!

Your super 21st century USA.

The glorious USA, land of the free, land of opportunity, liberty for all.

and what country are you from that so outshines the US?

Someone with a 'conscience' wouldn't be sitting at their computer typing the bullshit you are just to get their 'kicks' out of it.

I don't give a fuck if your Left, Right, MOR or a bloody 'druid priest'.

Don't you have a CONSCIENCE!!!

people with a conscience don't make fun of your pal ernesto? I dont' think whorshippign che is nesscary to have a conscience..

theraven

7th July 2006, 23:23

Yeah he killed people like you.

You mean hard working and law abiding people who aren't fond of murderious gurellias?

Where do you live? Didn't know your allowed to have sheep as girlfriends?

what cant' think of anything but hick jokes (ps I am from a city )

spanishinquisition

8th July 2006, 02:06

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 12:39 AM
haha cool does it talk about him massacering people in cuba? ooohh how about when he begged for mercy when the bolivans captured him?

haha cool does it talk about him massacering people in cuba?

Indeed, Che butchered thousands in Cuba. There were no fair trials. Che called them decadent bourgeioise institutions, or something. I think it is a crime against humanity and Che should be considered along with the likes of Stalin.

ooohh how about when he begged for mercy when the bolivans captured him?
I also heard he squealed like a girl as they raised their guns to shoot him? Can someone confirm this?

theraven

8th July 2006, 02:11

Originally posted by spanishinquisition+Jul 7 2006, 11:07 PM--> (spanishinquisition @ Jul 7 2006, 11:07 PM)
[email protected] 7 2006, 12:39 AM
haha cool does it talk about him massacering people in cuba? ooohh how about when he begged for mercy when the bolivans captured him?

haha cool does it talk about him massacering people in cuba?

Indeed, Che butchered thousands in Cuba. There were no fair trials. Che called them decadent bourgeioise institutions, or something. I think it is a crime against humanity and Che should be considered along with the likes of Stalin.

ooohh how about when he begged for mercy when the bolivans captured him?
I also heard he squealed like a girl as they raised their guns to shoot him? Can someone confirm this? [/b]
nah-ches no stalin. he didn't do enough. hes like a wannabe stalin.

MKS

8th July 2006, 03:59

Well back to the topic:

Do you think the play will be any good? I was thinking of seeing it, but am hesitant because it might paint che in an almost "martyr" role instead of examining his true nature and character.

The play is derived from an interview with a teacher who was granted permission to speak with Che while he was imprisoned in Bolivia before his execution.

Another fact: The CIA agent who gave permission for Che's execution is alive and well, living in Miami I think. I also think his name is Felix Gonzalez; he has a photo of him with Che right before the Bolivians shot him.

Raj Radical

8th July 2006, 05:45

Originally posted by theraven+Jul 7 2006, 11:12 PM--> (theraven @ Jul 7 2006, 11:12 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 11:07 PM

[email protected] 7 2006, 12:39 AM
haha cool does it talk about him massacering people in cuba? ooohh how about when he begged for mercy when the bolivans captured him?

haha cool does it talk about him massacering people in cuba?

Indeed, Che butchered thousands in Cuba. There were no fair trials. Che called them decadent bourgeioise institutions, or something. I think it is a crime against humanity and Che should be considered along with the likes of Stalin.

ooohh how about when he begged for mercy when the bolivans captured him?
I also heard he squealed like a girl as they raised their guns to shoot him? Can someone confirm this?
nah-ches no stalin. he didn't do enough. hes like a wannabe stalin. [/b]
Now he's a pacifist. :)

spanishinquisition

8th July 2006, 08:00

People are dying of starvation in your country Raven, dying because of the lack of medical care, struggling to feed themselves or their familes because their wages (if they have any) simply don\'t keep up with the cost of living, their are kids in your country who will struggle to get a basic education, never mind anything better!
The same could be said of Cuba or any socialist country. And where is the starvation in the United States? It happens to be the fattest country on Earth so I suppose if there is starvation in the US, then other countries must be in a massive famine. I bet you anything there is no starvation in the US. Show me pictures of this starvation quote unquote.

All of this is in YOUR COUNTRY RAVEN!!!

Your super 21st century USA.

The glorious USA, land of the free, land of opportunity, liberty for all.

Someone with a conscience wouldn\'t be sitting at their computer typing the bullshit you are just to get their kicks out of it.

I don\'t give a fuck if your Left, Right, MOR or a bloody \'druid priest\'.

Don\'t you have a CONSCIENCE!!!

He doesnt have a conscience becasue he lampoons a mass murderer(?x100000)

Raj Radical

8th July 2006, 08:54

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2006, 05:01 AM

People are dying of starvation in your country Raven, dying because of the lack of medical care, struggling to feed themselves or their familes because their wages (if they have any) simply don\'t keep up with the cost of living, their are kids in your country who will struggle to get a basic education, never mind anything better!
The same could be said of Cuba or any socialist country. And where is the starvation in the United States? It happens to be the fattest country on Earth so I suppose if there is starvation in the US, then other countries must be in a massive famine. I bet you anything there is no starvation in the US. Show me pictures of this starvation quote unquote.

All of this is in YOUR COUNTRY RAVEN!!!

Your super 21st century USA.

The glorious USA, land of the free, land of opportunity, liberty for all.

Someone with a conscience wouldn\'t be sitting at their computer typing the bullshit you are just to get their kicks out of it.

I don\'t give a fuck if your Left, Right, MOR or a bloody \'druid priest\'.

Don\'t you have a CONSCIENCE!!!

He doesnt have a conscience becasue he lampoons a mass murderer(?x100000)
40 million people and 14 million families go "hungry" (hungry defined by the USDA) every year, and it has been steadily rising for quite some time, in the richest county in the world.

It may not be the rampant starvation and death of 30.000+ each day in the exploited areas of the world (easten europe, africa, latin america etc.), and it may not be a convienient statistic, but its happening.

Si Pinto

8th July 2006, 13:15

If this weree a nazi or mongol or maoist board I would.

Don't you hate ALL mass murderers ALL of the time? Don't you think that Hitlers record deserves lampooning before Che's?

What about Pol Pot, surely he would rank a lot higher than Che on your murderer list?

Nope, your just picking Che (even though he's not a mass-murderer), thereby demonstrating your wish to appear like 'the big anti-commie tough guy".

If I was a moderator on this forum I'd suspend you until you change your signature, because you can't prove it, and you seem to have no interest in trying to. It's purely there to offend people who think Che was a good guy, and provoke the response that it has.

If I made a signature up about your relationship with your mother would you like that? or perhaps make a signature questioning your sexuality?

Of course not, and you'd have every right to be offended. However, I'm not a scumbag like you so I wouldn't. I DO have a conscience.

and for the record I'm not a Che 'worshipper', I don't 'worship' anything. If you knew the first thing about Che you'd know what he thought about 'worship' of any kind.

do you think i am doing this to imprses rightwign friends? do you think i have my friend huddleed around my computer while I type this stuff?

a) It wouldn't surprise me if you did.
b) If you are there just typing this crap for your own satisfaction then YOUR the one with the ego problem not me. Like I said before 'self-important, vindictive little....' you know the rest by now.

well che wasn't "doing his duty" he was a leader of a rebellion, not a fighter fufilling an oath. some/most amreicans fighting in vietnam were draftees (not positive on the exact number) some however were volunteers.

Don't you see how stupid you look when you type crap like this?

Che WAS doing his duty, that's how he saw it and how I see it.

Fulfilling an oath???? What like the SS?? Your turning your American GI's into a lot of automatons with no self-control mechanism in them.

As for
some/most amreicans fighting in vietnam were draftees (not positive on the exact number) some however were volunteers.

and

I am sure it varied from solider to solider, and from year to year.

IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT WHY TALK ABOUT IT!!!

There are thousands of sites out there that WILL give you the correct figures about draftees and volunteers and how the average GI felt about it all, then maybe you wouldn't try and argue points that you don't know about.

I would bet most people starving are on diets.

What type of sick fuck are you???

Without an immediate retraction in your next post. I would recommend the board ban you for that comment.

Suspended and Banned in the same post!!! Your doing well Raven.

yes some people suffer fro mlack of medical care. this would be remedied if we were allowed to build more hopstials and license mroe doctors, but the doctors don't liek that idea.

Bullshit!!! They suffer from lack of medical care because they can't afford medical care. Your precious USA doesn't see fit to allow it's citizens 'free' health care. What do you want more hospitals for?? So you can rake in more money?

No the US doesnt' have the best social welfare ssytem in the world, but we make up for it by having one o fthe better economies

Personal wealth before personal welfare? Spoken like a true blue American.

and what country are you from that so outshines the US?

I'm not from any country that 'outshines' the US. All imperialist countries that promote a 'I'm allright jack' attitude in their society, whilst citizens of that country and many millions more around the world are dying because of lack of basic human requirements, are sick!!!

Do you disagree with this??

people with a conscience

I'll finish that quote for you.....people with a conscience would not sit at their computer advocating a society that allows millions to die and suffer.

and if you don't advocate it, are you doing anything about it?

No I guessed you wouldn't be.

That would be too much to ask for wouldn't it?

Don't expect further replies.

spanishinquisition

8th July 2006, 14:15

Si Pinto, I want to see photographs of the American/Auchwitz skeletons before you accuse the US gov of allowing its citizens to starve. I and many others here I am sure find your claims amazing in the extreme and therefore would like to see some proof, especially considering the numbers of charities volunteering support to the unfortunate.

Quotes from your idol:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Che_Guevara

Crazy with fury I will stain my rifle red while slaughtering any enemy that falls in my hands! My nostrils dilate while savoring the acrid odor of gunpowder and blood. With the deaths of my enemies I prepare my being for the sacred fight and join the triumphant proletariat with a bestial howl!

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. He gasped for a little while and was dead. Upon proceeding to remove his belongings I couldn\'t get off the watch tied by a chain to his belt, and then he told me in a steady voice farther away than fear: \'Yank it off, boy, what does it matter.\' I did so and his possessions were now mine.

The great lesson of the guerrillas\' invincibility is taking hold among the masses of the dispossessed. The galvanization of the national spirit; the preparation for more difficult tasks, for resistance to more violent repression. Hate as a factor in the struggle, intransigent hatred for the enemy that takes one beyond the natural limitations of a human being and converts one into an effective, violent, selective, cold killing machine. Our soldiers must be like that; a people without hate cannot triumph over a brutal enemy.

And perhaps most chilling of all:

El conocimiento nos hace responsables.
-Knowledge makes us accountable.

Swell guy huh? Much as you romanticise over this revolutionary, the fact cannot dissapear that Che murdered those who sought to make a difference by enriching Cuba. A more advanced society cannot be acheived by killing.

theraven

8th July 2006, 14:23

I'll give response later-work today

Vladislav

8th July 2006, 14:30

Oh wow quotes from wikipedia. What a reliable, definite, unedited source.

spanishinquisition

8th July 2006, 14:42

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2006, 11:31 AM
Oh wow quotes from wikipedia. What a reliable, definite, unedited source.
True, but Che said this stuff. Not the nice guy you thought he was huh? Now, some among you might say it was necessary for Che to do these things for the glory of the revolution right? .................WRONG! For what sort of society can bloodshed produce but a bloodstained progeny?

Si Pinto

8th July 2006, 14:44

I'm not going to post every site that has reference to the poverty in the US (try using your search engine for christs sake!!), but here is one to start with.

http://www.citymayors.com/features/uscity_poverty.html

Si Pinto, I want to see photographs of the American/Auchwitz skeletons before you accuse the US gov of allowing its citizens to starve.

Why don't you ask

the numbers of charities volunteering support to the unfortunate.

to provide you with details of the poverty levels in the US. I'm sure they'd be glad to.

Don't you think about your posts BEFORE you post them? :lol:

Quotes from your idol:

:rolleyes:

Swell guy huh? Much as you romanticise over this revolutionary, the fact cannot dissapear that Che murdered those who sought to make a difference by enriching Cuba.

Enriching Cuba!!! Exploiting a country for it's wealth whilst keeping it's population illiterate is enriching is it!!

Oh I forgot your an American....of course. Silly me.

A more advanced society cannot be acheived by killing

Oh that tops the lot that does, that is the 'crowning turd in your waterpipe'.

Coming from an American imperialist that is fucking hysterical. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Korea
Vietnam
Nicaragua
Iraq
Afganistan
Iraq again

and they are just the ones I can be arsed posting!!!

Whilst your perusing over that little collection of 'American Gems', you might like to tell that to the millions of native Americans who you butchered to achieve your 'advanced society'.

Ever heard of the expression "two-faced".

TTFN

spanishinquisition

8th July 2006, 15:35

From your site:

On average, 18 per cent of the requests for emergency food assistance are estimated to have gone unmet during the last year.
This is hardly hunger, or even starvation. Going without food for even a few days, (if it happens..... i doubt it) is not exactly a starvation situation. There will never be starvation in the US so long as you can raid your neighbour\'s trash for unopened food.

QUOTE
Swell guy huh? Much as you romanticise over this revolutionary, the fact cannot dissapear that Che murdered those who sought to make a difference by enriching Cuba.

Enriching Cuba!!! Exploiting a country for it\'s wealth whilst keeping it\'s population illiterate is enriching is it!!

Oh I forgot your an American....of course. Silly me.

Capitalism enriches countries. Capitalist countries will always be richer than socialist ones. Look at Havanna, full of beautiful buildings frmo the horrible Batista era and nothing much built by Casto. Full of cars from the evil Batista era and nothing imported or built from elsewhere and don\'t cry embargo because there are plenty of countries other than the US to do business with.

I suppose we have to ask, If communism is better, why is Batista\'s Cuba still with us? Didnt Castro want to fix that one up?

QUOTE
A more advanced society cannot be acheived by killing

Oh that tops the lot that does, that is the crowning turd in your waterpipe.

Coming from an American imperialist that is fucking hysterical.

Korea
Vietnam
Nicaragua
Iraq
Afganistan
Iraq again

Well, South Korea is undeniably more advanced than it would have been under the communists from the North. South Vietnam is less advanced than it otherwise would have been but the domino effect of socialist poverty was halted. Regan tried to help the Nicaraguan people acheive freedom from the Sandanistas and halted the supply of weapons to Cuba. We saved Kuwait from the Iraqis. We saved Afghanistan from praying five times every day under a shocking socialist government and now they can fly kites and eat ice cream. We saved Iraq from Saddam.

Quite an abysmal record of imperialist aggression eh?

Whilst your perusing over that little collection of American Gems, you might like to tell that to the millions of native Americans who you butchered to achieve your advanced society.
I dont defend the butchering of the native Americans. It was evil and unnecessary. Notice how they actually won a court case in an American court however which should have prevented them being displaced to New Mexico? To bad mr Andrew Jackson didnt care about that. Oh well. Now that WAS evil. No-one ever said US was faultless. It is however more faultless today than in yesteryear.

Ever heard of the expression two-faced.
What about the Indigenous Americans attacking and butchering the whites? Are they less humans than the native Americans? Can we accept there was a war going on since settlement and there were atrocites on both sides, as is common in war?

Talk about two-faced!

Led Zeppelin

8th July 2006, 15:49

Originally posted by spanishinquisition
Capitalism enriches countries. Capitalist countries will always be richer than socialist ones. Look at Havanna, full of beautiful buildings frmo the horrible Batista era and nothing much built by Casto. Full of cars from the evil Batista era and nothing imported or built from elsewhere and don\'t cry embargo because there are plenty of countries other than the US to do business with.

To which nation are you comparing Cuba? The US? Japan?

Why don't you compare Cuba with, let's say, Rwanda? Rwanda has a capitalist economic system just like the US, yet it is poor. Care to explain why? You can't of course because you are clueless. Let me explain it for you; one of the key features of capitalism is the law of uneven development. This law states that capitalist nation-states develop at uneven rates, due to several factors that you won't understand anyway, so there's no point in trying to explain them. Still, as I was saying, the law of uneven development creates the situation you just referred too. Rich and poor nation-states.

The rich nation-states have the same economic system as the poor, and guess what, the poor outnumber the rich by about 90%. So here we have 90% of the worlds capitalist nations being poor, and you compare Cuba with a rich capitalist/imperialist nation, of which there are only 10% of in the world!

Are you kidding me?

Commies could do the same as you are doing, of course. For example I could compare the former USSR's economic wealth to India's, but that doesn't prove anything, now does it? What does prove something is comparing Russia today with the USSR, and guess what, they were better off without capitalism.

razboz

8th July 2006, 16:19

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2006, 12:36 PM
We saved Afghanistan from praying five times every day under a shocking socialist government and now they can fly kites and eat ice cream.
This is a very confusing statement! How where the Taliban who had gained control of the country socailists? Of all things! Religious nutcases (as opposed to non-religious nutcases which im told do in fact exist) yes. Fanatical war mongerers maybe. Protectors of the US trained and organised Al-Qaeda probably. But socialists? What next: the fight against Hetler was in fact a battle against anarchism? Or the Russo-Japanese war was a war in between two Communist countries?

And that's just socialist bit. Whoever appointed the the Christian USA moral arbitratiors of the world. Who elected them to decide what the rest of the world should beleive in and do? Did the Afghani people say "please we dont want to be Muslim anymore Uncle Sam save us"? Ill agree the Taliban where insane (as all religious people are) and a real threat to their people but are you suggesting that the half arsed crappy attempt the US made to oust them (which failed incidentally, the Taliban im told are still very much present in the country) was a religious war? If it was then i would suggest you be extremely carefull. Who will be targeted next? the Catholics? The Atheists? The Jews? Though i doubt anyone would dare touch the jews anymore - they've got nukes.

What about the Indigenous Americans attacking and butchering the whites? Are they less humans than the native Americans? Can we accept there was a war going on since settlement and there were atrocites on both sides, as is common in war?

Im surprised you dare even suggest an injustice has been made to the white americans! Who invaded which country? Is it not one of the founding stones of America that everyone has the unalienable right ot protect their land, homes and families? So who is defending their land and who is attacking it? Is it not justifiable to attempt to defend's one's land against people who are trying to run you off it and are willing to kill you if they must? What would you do if a bunch of men with guns cam to your door and shot your kids, then raped your wife? Would you just walk away and try to find another home and wait for them to come agin? Or would you deffend your family at all costs?

It is however more faultless today than in yesteryear.

No they just got better at dressing it up in fancy clothes.

spanishinquisition

8th July 2006, 16:23

To which nation are you comparing Cuba? The US? Japan?

I am merely seeking to compare Batistass Cuba to Castros. It is not hard to see which one was richer. Havanna is filled with Batistan architecture whereas the rest of the worlds cities have moved on. Not that being a museum peice is a bad thing of course, I will visit the Havannan relic one day to take a trip into the 1940s. Its going to be a surreal experience. I will try not to spend anything so my capitalist decadence does not rub off.

Why don\'t you compare Cuba with, let\'s say, Rwanda? Rwanda has a capitalist economic system just like the US, yet it is poor. Care to explain why? You can\'t of course because you are clueless. Let me explain it for you; one of the key features of capitalism is the law of uneven development.
I find it funny that you call me clueless. Ok, Cuba is right next to the richest country on earth and Rwanda is in the middle of nowhere. Which should be richer? Of course Cuba. But it would be even richer under capitalism.

This law states that capitalist nation-states develop at uneven rates due to several factors that you won\'t understand anyway, so there\'s no point in trying to explain them. Still, as I was saying, the law of uneven development creates the situation you just referred too. Rich and poor nation-states.

Wow! This so called law of the universe I have never even heard of is really over my head! So many equations and formulae! Im so overwealmed by the omnipotence and all explaining insight it delivers!

I mean, Lets not blame the fact Africans cant get their act together politically. Lets blame capitalism in general. This always does the trick.

The rich nation-states have the same economic system as the poor, and guess what, the poor outnumber the rich by about 90%. So here we have 90% of the worlds capitalist nations being poor, and you compare Cuba with a rich capitalist/imperialist nation, of which there are only 10% of in the world!
Im not sure thats fair. The US was also a third world country when it was just starting out. Some of these new capitalist economies are only a few years old but the US has had a 500 year head start.

Commies could do the same as you are doing, of course. For example I could compare the former USSR\'s economic wealth to India\'s, but that doesn\'t prove anything, now does it? What does prove something is comparing Russia today with the USSR, and guess what, they were better off without capitalism.
If you really want to compare 16 years after a new system is implemented, compare Russia today to 1934. Collectivisation is in full swing! Ah, the wonders of the socialist state! I mean were still in reconstruction mode here. And really what is going to be richer, a society which embraces or rejects wealth?

Si Pinto

8th July 2006, 17:48

This is hardly hunger, or even starvation. Going without food for even a few days, (if it happens..... i doubt it) is not exactly a starvation situation. There will never be starvation in the US so long as you can raid your neighbour\'s trash for unopened food.

Of course you don't believe it, that's why I can't be arsed quoting 100's of sites, no-one likes the truth when it goes against what you think.

What type of human are you??

You think that people should be reduced to rummaging through rubbish bins for food!!! as long as you continue to make money!!!

What kind of philosophy is that??

You live in the richest country on the planet and you still have people requesting food handouts for gods sake!!!

and you support it......

If their is any justice in the world then whatever career you embark upon will fail so that you can taste your own medicine.

You poor poor individual, I really pity you, what a sad, diluded figure you cut.

Capitalism enriches countries.

What are you a government official???

Wealth and enriches are two different words with very different meanings try a dictionary for size.

Well, South Korea is undeniably more advanced than it would have been under the communists from the North.

Hold on a minute

South Vietnam is less advanced than it otherwise would have been but the domino effect of socialist poverty was halted.

whoooaa :lol:

Regan tried to help the Nicaraguan people acheive freedom from the Sandanistas and halted the supply of weapons to Cuba.

Stop it your killing me :lol: :lol:

We saved Kuwait from the Iraqis. We saved Afghanistan from praying five times every day under a shocking socialist government and now they can fly kites and eat ice cream. We saved Iraq from Saddam.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

BUT YOU SAID............

A more advanced society cannot be acheived by killing

I guess if it's Americans doing the killing then that's ok by you.

I mean that wouldn't make you biased at all.

I love seeing someone commit verbal suicide.

Now I really REALLY pity you.

So I'll leave you to your 'American Dreams'

spanishinquisition

8th July 2006, 18:15

Of course you dont believe it, thats why I cant be arsed quoting 100s of sites, no-one likes the truth when it goes against what you think.
What truth? There is ZERO starvation in the United States of America!!! Funny how there are so many websites and there is no starvation to be found listed among any of them?

What type of human are you??
Homo Sapiens

You think that people should be reduced to rummaging through rubbish bins for food!!! as long as you continue to make money!!!

What kind of philosophy is that??
You really object to a so called starving person getting perfectly good food out of the bin? You are rapidly sickening me. Well, I guess lets send up a waiter to Mr Pinto with a menu like he would get in Cuba.... Wait a second! My God there isnt any unopened food in the bins of Cuba! Gee, USA sure is a bad place to be! Im sure North Koreans wouldnt object.
Perhaps the homelsss should go to the fucking cociege and have them send up some lobster and a nice Bordeaux 98? Gosh starving homeless peopel sure are proud! Theyre starving (yeah right) but no they wont get food out of the bin! Too shy!

You live in the richest country on the planet and you still have people requesting food handouts for gods sake!!!
Well, its that or they can starve. I wont bat an eyelid. I KNOW lets put them on a fucking DRIPFEED!

If their is any justice in the world then whatever career you embark upon will fail so that you can taste your own medicine.
My career is going to be in the public service as a councillor. I have real estate in many different suburbs so i have council voting rights and im going to keep running for elections on a libertarian platform until i get elected, also so I can get elected no-one likes hefty taxes right? Then hopefully ill get lots of bribes from developers for my council votes.

What are you a government official???

Wealth and enriches are two different words with very different meanings try a dictionary for size.

My dear Si Pinto. Look at the socialist countries. Now look at the capitlaist countries. Which are richer??

BUT YOU SAID............

QUOTE
A more advanced society cannot be acheived by killing

I guess if its Americans doing the killing then thats ok by you.

I mean that wouldnt make you biased at all.

I love seeing someone commit verbal suicide.
No I am right. The Americans kill enemy military personell as a bi-product of assisting self-determination against dictators. Ches war was pure genocide against an entire class.

Led Zeppelin

8th July 2006, 18:36

Originally posted by spanishinquisition
I am merely seeking to compare Batistass Cuba to Castros. It is not hard to see which one was richer. Havanna is filled with Batistan architecture whereas the rest of the worlds cities have moved on. Not that being a museum peice is a bad thing of course, I will visit the Havannan relic one day to take a trip into the 1940s. Its going to be a surreal experience. I will try not to spend anything so my capitalist decadence does not rub off.

Obviously you don't know anything about Cuba then:

Literacy Before & After The Revolution

1952 59%
2005 97%

Life Expectancy Before & After The Revolution

1955 59.4 years
2006 77 years

Infant Mortality* Before & After The Revolution

1958 60
2005 5.8
____________________________________________

What world are you living in?

Ok, Cuba is right next to the richest country on earth and Rwanda is in the middle of nowhere. Which should be richer? Of course Cuba. But it would be even richer under capitalism.

Well, you just said in your previous post that Cuba can't trade with the US, so no, Cuba is not supposed to be "richer" just because it is close to one of the "richest" nations. Even if it could trade with the US it doesn't make a difference, look at Mexico or other nations close to the US. Being situated close to a rich imperialist nation doesn't make a nation rich, do you know anything about political economy or what?

My point was that Rwanda is capitalist, why don't you compare Cuba to that nation or another poor capitalist nation instead of wealthy nations like the US or Japan, which are the minority of capitalist states?

I mean, Lets not blame the fact Africans cant get their act together politically. Lets blame capitalism in general. This always does the trick.

It's kinda hard to "get your act together politically" after only having gained independence from colonial suppressors a decade or so ago. That's not even the point. The point is that liberal bourgeois democracies can't function without the material development which is only present in imperialist nations. In other words, you can have a government which functions almost exactly like the US in a poor African nation (most of them are described as "democracies" by the CIA, so that makes your argument invalid anyway) but the nation is still screwed economically exactly for that reason.

You actually, without knowing it yourself, explained why the US can have such a political system and be relatively wealthy compared to other nations, while a nation in Africa can't. They had a head-start of about two hundred years. Two hundred years of capitalism develops a nation to such an extent as we see today in the US, western-Europe and other imperialist strongholds.

The contradiction in the imperialist system is that other nations can't achieve that. Do you understand now? The nations that are developed, that is, imperialist nations, are constantly in struggle to keep the other nations under their control. The US won't allow China to take it's place as number one superpower without a fight, they are fighting it out on a daily basis through means you have no clue of.

All capitalist nations, from Rwanda to the US, are connected by this global market. You have a job in the US, a family is starving in Rwanda, that's how the capitalist market works. Cuba has severed its ties with this market, albeit not completely, but still something to be admired of.

And that is why Cuba is not the "richest" country in the world, and that is why the US is, and that is why the capitalist market will be destroyed by the poor and oppressed, who are the majority. Instead of whining about it you should learn to live with it, or perhaps start building your bunker, because the proletarians revenge will come down on you with a force you can't even begin to imagine.

Good-day, sir!

theraven

9th July 2006, 05:07

If this weree a nazi or mongol or maoist board I would.

Don't you hate ALL mass murderers ALL of the time? Don't you think that Hitlers record deserves lampooning before Che's?

it depends onth situation. if i was in normal company then i probably would make fun of hitler over che.

What about Pol Pot, surely he would rank a lot higher than Che on your murderer list?

he does-but again no one here whorships pol pot (i hope)

Nope, your just picking Che (even though he's not a mass-murderer), thereby demonstrating your wish to appear like 'the big anti-commie tough guy".

No i picked him becuase hes the guy you make the back ground of these replies.

If I was a moderator on this forum I'd suspend you until you change your signature, because you can't prove it, and you seem to have no interest in trying to. It's purely there to offend people who think Che was a good guy, and provoke the response that it has.

actually i did prove it-with your own souce i might add. look back on page 1

If I made a signature up about your relationship with your mother would you like that? or perhaps make a signature questioning your sexuality?

I wouldn't care-go ahead. say my mother (who btw is dead) is the biggest whore in vegas. or say "theraven is a flaming homosexual" whocares whats in your sig

Of course not, and you'd have every right to be offended. However, I'm not a scumbag like you so I wouldn't. I DO have a conscience.

haha actually I'd be amused.

and for the record I'm not a Che 'worshipper', I don't 'worship' anything. If you knew the first thing about Che you'd know what he thought about 'worship' of any kind.

fine your actiosn border on whorship. the fact that my sig so offends you is proof enough

a) It wouldn't surprise me if you did.

just because YOU do it doesn't make it normal...

b) If you are there just typing this crap for your own satisfaction then YOUR the one with the ego problem not me. Like I said before 'self-important, vindictive little....' you know the rest by now.

No someone with an ego thinks they are all important. while I do think I am important (to myself anyway) i am under no illusiosn as to my importance to others. I am posting for mysefl, however isn't that why your posting?

Don't you see how stupid you look when you type crap like this?

Che WAS doing his duty, that's how he saw it and how I see it.

Fulfilling an oath???? What like the SS?? Your turning your American GI's into a lot of automatons with no self-control mechanism in them.

1) Che was fufiling his ego. the guy had a messiah complex the size of the sears tower.
2) I am not going to try to explain patritoism and loyalty to you-your clearly beyond it.

As for

IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT WHY TALK ABOUT IT!!!

There are thousands of sites out there that WILL give you the correct figures about draftees and volunteers and how the average GI felt about it all, then maybe you wouldn't try and argue points that you don't know about.

I am sure the stats would vary widely from anti-war vet grosup to the pro war ones. also remember it is imposisbel to survey everyone.

What type of sick fuck are you???

Without an immediate retraction in your next post. I would recommend the board ban you for that comment.

haha well based on my persoanl expeince the poorer you are the fatter you are (in america anyway) dont'a sk me why..

Suspended and Banned in the same post!!! Your doing well Raven.

thanks..

Bullshit!!! They suffer from lack of medical care because they can't afford medical care. Your precious USA doesn't see fit to allow it's citizens 'free' health care. What do you want more hospitals for?? So you can rake in more money?

i am aware why they can't afford medical care. do you know why medical care costs so much? because of high demand and low supply. if we raise supply (doctors/hopsitals) then pricse go down.

Personal wealth before personal welfare? Spoken like a true blue American.

Indeed-ever wonder why poor people flock to america not the welfare states?

QUOTE
and what country are you from that so outshines the US?

I'm not from any country that 'outshines' the US. All imperialist countries that promote a 'I'm allright jack' attitude in their society, whilst citizens of that country and many millions more around the world are dying because of lack of basic human requirements, are sick!!!

Do you disagree with this??

not at all,but Considering the amount of aid western coutnires give they aren't exactly ignoring problems. plus those foriegn countires dont' hlep matters by having shitty governmetns.
QUOTE
people with a conscience

I'll finish that quote for you.....people with a conscience would not sit at their computer advocating a society that allows millions to die and suffer.

I know, but we aren't takling about you commies now are we?

red team

9th July 2006, 06:00

Ok, Cuba is right next to the richest country on earth and Rwanda is in the middle of nowhere. Which should be richer? Of course Cuba. But it would be even richer under capitalism.

Great, please book your next trip to Haiti (factory owners are exempted as you are rich already).

theraven

9th July 2006, 07:04

Obviously you don't know anything about Cuba then:

Literacy Before & After The Revolution

1952 59%
2005 97%

Life Expectancy Before & After The Revolution

1955 59.4 years
2006 77 years

Infant Mortality* Before & After The Revolution

1958 60
2005 5.8

the only one here of real note is the litteracy, infant mroatiatly dropped and life excepatncy rose everywher. Litteracy however is nto much good when the govenremtn stops you from reading certian books, or you can't afford certrian books.

Well, you just said in your previous post that Cuba can't trade with the US, so no, Cuba is not supposed to be "richer" just because it is close to one of the "richest" nations. Even if it could trade with the US it doesn't make a difference, look at Mexico or other nations close to the US. Being situated close to a rich imperialist nation doesn't make a nation rich, do you know anything about political economy or what?

your right, far more importnat is to have a stable government and pro buissnes economci polices.

My point was that Rwanda is capitalist, why don't you compare Cuba to that nation or another poor capitalist nation instead of wealthy nations like the US or Japan, which are the minority of capitalist states?

on what do you call rwanda capitilist?

It's kinda hard to "get your act together politically" after only having gained independence from colonial suppressors a decade or so ago. That's not even the point. The point is that liberal bourgeois democracies can't function without the material development which is only present in imperialist nations. In other words, you can have a government which functions almost exactly like the US in a poor African nation (most of them are described as "democracies" by the CIA, so that makes your argument invalid anyway) but the nation is still screwed economically exactly for that reason.

being called a deomcrayc and having a stable government thats good for buisness is two different things. also you can't blame it all on the west. rhodisia (aka zimbabwe)

You actually, without knowing it yourself, explained why the US can have such a political system and be relatively wealthy compared to other nations, while a nation in Africa can't. They had a head-start of about two hundred years. Two hundred years of capitalism develops a nation to such an extent as we see today in the US, western-Europe and other imperialist strongholds.

yes indeed the fact that we have a history of stable govenrmnets and good fiscal policy is what makes us much beter off then the african countires-many who attempdt ot try marism or socialms.

The contradiction in the imperialist system is that other nations can't achieve that. Do you understand now? The nations that are developed, that is, imperialist nations, are constantly in struggle to keep the other nations under their control. The US won't allow China to take it's place as number one superpower without a fight, they are fighting it out on a daily basis through means you have no clue of.

The US and china are indeed economc compettiers, but its not like the US doesn't awnt china to devolp, we just don't want to cede world hegemony to them.

All capitalist nations, from Rwanda to the US, are connected by this global market. You have a job in the US, a family is starving in Rwanda, that's how the capitalist market works. Cuba has severed its ties with this market, albeit not completely, but still something to be admired of.

hence it suffers/

And that is why Cuba is not the "richest" country in the world, and that is why the US is, and that is why the capitalist market will be destroyed by the poor and oppressed, who are the majority. Instead of whining about it you should learn to live with it, or perhaps start building your bunker, because the proletarians revenge will come down on you with a force you can't even begin to imagine.

no-the "poor and opporsed" may revolt and steal the wealth of the wealthy, but they will do it only to keep it fro thtemselves, and thus a new wealthy class will emerge.

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 00:54

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 04:05 AM

Obviously you don't know anything about Cuba then:

Literacy Before & After The Revolution

1952 59%
2005 97%

Life Expectancy Before & After The Revolution

1955 59.4 years
2006 77 years

Infant Mortality* Before & After The Revolution

1958 60
2005 5.8

the only one here of real note is the litteracy, infant mroatiatly dropped and life excepatncy rose everywher. Litteracy however is nto much good when the govenremtn stops you from reading certian books, or you can't afford certrian books.
Infant mortality fell everywhere did it? Fell by just over 10 times, everywhere. Either you're making this up or you live in some fucking fairyland. Could you tell me exactly on what evidence you base this claim that the cuban government has banned books? Are you saying that a person is better not reading at all if they can't get hold of a copy of 'Atlas Shrugged'? Because if you are making that claim you're being bloody stupid, of course it's advantageous to be able to read or write. What books can't cubans afford? Books costing pretty much the same amount as each other kind of blows that argument out of the water.

theraven

10th July 2006, 01:11

Originally posted by Jazzratt+Jul 9 2006, 09:55 PM--> (Jazzratt @ Jul 9 2006, 09:55 PM)
[email protected] 9 2006, 04:05 AM

Obviously you don't know anything about Cuba then:

Literacy Before & After The Revolution

1952 59%
2005 97%

Life Expectancy Before & After The Revolution

1955 59.4 years
2006 77 years

Infant Mortality* Before & After The Revolution

1958 60
2005 5.8

the only one here of real note is the litteracy, infant mroatiatly dropped and life excepatncy rose everywher. Litteracy however is nto much good when the govenremtn stops you from reading certian books, or you can't afford certrian books.
Infant mortality fell everywhere did it? Fell by just over 10 times, everywhere. Either you're making this up or you live in some fucking fairyland. Could you tell me exactly on what evidence you base this claim that the cuban government has banned books? Are you saying that a person is better not reading at all if they can't get hold of a copy of 'Atlas Shrugged'? Because if you are making that claim you're being bloody stupid, of course it's advantageous to be able to read or write. What books can't cubans afford? Books costing pretty much the same amount as each other kind of blows that argument out of the water. [/b]
1) I am sure the amount of drop vaired form place to place

2) if the governmetn restircts your abitly to read things tha might challenege the ideas of te governmetn and limits your education then yes it does becoem less useful.

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 01:15

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 10:12 PM
1) I am sure the amount of drop vaired form place to place

What and it was like the national lottery how much it dropped by? Fuckwit.

2) if the governmetn restircts your abitly to read things tha might challenege the ideas of te governmetn and limits your education then yes it does becoem less useful. And you have irrefutable proof this is done? From a neutral source? Or are you just speaking in cappitalist hyperbole?

theraven

10th July 2006, 01:19

What and it was like the national lottery how much it dropped by? Fuckwit.

I am sure the reasons it drops are many, and perhaps who knows the commies had a decent policy.

And you have irrefutable proof this is done? From a neutral source? Or are you just speaking in cappitalist hyperbole?

are you denying books are banned in cuba?

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 01:24

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 10:20 PM

And you have irrefutable proof this is done? From a neutral source? Or are you just speaking in cappitalist hyperbole?

are you denying books are banned in cuba?
Until you have evidence that is pulled from anywehre other than your arse, then yes.

theraven

10th July 2006, 01:30

Originally posted by Jazzratt+Jul 9 2006, 10:25 PM--> (Jazzratt @ Jul 9 2006, 10:25 PM)
[email protected] 9 2006, 10:20 PM

And you have irrefutable proof this is done? From a neutral source? Or are you just speaking in cappitalist hyperbole?

are you denying books are banned in cuba?
Until you have evidence that is pulled from anywehre other than your arse, then yes. [/b]
heres the first site that came up from google. i kinda doubt thats the whole list but here ya go. http://www.cubacenter.org/books/books3.html

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 01:37

That's it? One rather biased and sloppy website. You fail, try again.

spanishinquisition

10th July 2006, 01:42

Originally posted by theraven+Jul 9 2006, 10:31 PM--> (theraven @ Jul 9 2006, 10:31 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 10:25 PM

[email protected] 9 2006, 10:20 PM

And you have irrefutable proof this is done? From a neutral source? Or are you just speaking in cappitalist hyperbole?

are you denying books are banned in cuba?
Until you have evidence that is pulled from anywehre other than your arse, then yes.
heres the first site that came up from google. i kinda doubt thats the whole list but here ya go. http://www.cubacenter.org/books/books3.html [/b]
I think mr Jazzratt just got owned badly. Poor little man, thinking Cuba truly was a free society. Oh well.....

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 01:47

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 10:43 PM
I think mr Jazzratt just got owned badly. Poor little man, thinking Cuba truly was a free society. Oh well.....
Sorry? A link to a crappy capitalist anti-cuban establishment site constitutes owned?

spanishinquisition

10th July 2006, 01:54

Originally posted by Jazzratt+Jul 9 2006, 10:48 PM--> (Jazzratt @ Jul 9 2006, 10:48 PM)
[email protected] 9 2006, 10:43 PM
I think mr Jazzratt just got owned badly. Poor little man, thinking Cuba truly was a free society. Oh well.....
Sorry? A link to a crappy capitalist anti-cuban establishment site constitutes owned? [/b]
Fraid so. Im sure there are plenty more sites just like it. I wont say whether the site is crap or not but anti-cuba? Not on my watch. The site is pro the Cuban people. The fact it would be written in the first place is demonstrative enough of the repression inherent within the Cuban regime.

theraven

10th July 2006, 01:56

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 10:38 PM
That's it? One rather biased and sloppy website. You fail, try again.
I'm sorry my source didnt live up to your expceation..however its true. do you really think cubas some heave on earth you in some major delusions..

Fuzzy_Louster

10th July 2006, 01:59

Well, I would think that wikipedia is almost a better source than the center for a free Cuba...

I'm sorry my source didnt live up to your expceation..however its true. do you really think cubas some heave on earth you in some major delusions..

The good news is, since the literacy rate after the revolution has risen so much, the Cuban people won't have some of the spelling problems that you are having.

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 02:04

Originally posted by theraven+Jul 9 2006, 10:57 PM--> (theraven @ Jul 9 2006, 10:57 PM)
[email protected] 9 2006, 10:38 PM
That's it? One rather biased and sloppy website. You fail, try again.
I'm sorry my source didnt live up to your expceation..however its true. do you really think cubas some heave on earth you in some major delusions.. [/b]
Not at all. I think it has some horrendous conditions, I also think that many (not all of these) have the U$ and the anti commie hysteria therin as a major reason.

theraven

10th July 2006, 02:32

Originally posted by Jazzratt+Jul 9 2006, 11:05 PM--> (Jazzratt @ Jul 9 2006, 11:05 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 10:57 PM

[email protected] 9 2006, 10:38 PM
That's it? One rather biased and sloppy website. You fail, try again.
I'm sorry my source didnt live up to your expceation..however its true. do you really think cubas some heave on earth you in some major delusions..
Not at all. I think it has some horrendous conditions, I also think that many (not all of these) have the U$ and the anti commie hysteria therin as a major reason. [/b]
so the only reason cuba has problems is us evil cappies? not their government ?

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 02:37

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2006, 11:33 PM
so the only reason cuba has problems is us evil cappies? not their government ?
Not the only reason. But a major one.

spanishinquisition

10th July 2006, 07:58

Originally posted by Jazzratt+Jul 9 2006, 11:38 PM--> (Jazzratt @ Jul 9 2006, 11:38 PM)
[email protected] 9 2006, 11:33 PM
so the only reason cuba has problems is us evil cappies? not their government ?
Not the only reason. But a major one. [/b]
Why dont you just fess up that socialism is making Cuba poor? Be brave and admit your mistake.

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 13:32

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 04:59 AM
Why dont you just fess up that socialism is making Cuba poor? Be brave and admit your mistake.
Because then I would bne talking shit. Like you often do.

spanishinquisition

10th July 2006, 13:47

Originally posted by Jazzratt+Jul 10 2006, 10:33 AM--> (Jazzratt @ Jul 10 2006, 10:33 AM)
[email protected] 10 2006, 04:59 AM
Why dont you just fess up that socialism is making Cuba poor? Be brave and admit your mistake.
Because then I would bne talking shit. Like you often do. [/b]
In response to theraven you stated:

QUOTE (theraven @ Jul 9 2006, 11:33 PM)
so the only reason cuba has problems is us evil cappies? not their government ?

Not the only reason. But a major one.

I would like to know whether you Jazzratt consider international capitalism or Cubas socialist government a greater problem to the Cuban population.

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 13:50

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 10:48 AM
I would like to know whether you Jazzratt consider international capitalism or Cubas socialist government a greater problem to the Cuban population.
International capitalism, obviously. Mainly because it *IS* fucking obvious and anyone that doesn't see that the existence of a global market is the primary reason for a nation failing on an international market needs to have thier fucking head examined. Either that or kicked in.

spanishinquisition

10th July 2006, 13:56

Originally posted by Jazzratt+Jul 10 2006, 10:51 AM--> (Jazzratt @ Jul 10 2006, 10:51 AM)
[email protected] 10 2006, 10:48 AM
I would like to know whether you Jazzratt consider international capitalism or Cubas socialist government a greater problem to the Cuban population.
International capitalism, obviously. Mainly because it *IS* fucking obvious and anyone that doesn\'t see that the existence of a global market is the primary reason for a nation failing on an international market needs to have thier fucking head examined. Either that or kicked in. [/b]
But international capitalism is not the one ruling the Cuban people, surely. Surely everyone knows this. Castro rejects international capitalism. How are capitalists reponsible?

And are you really threatening me over the internet? It sounds funny. Id love to meet you in real life for you to really kick my head in. Im sure that would work out.

Si Pinto

10th July 2006, 14:07

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 10:57 AM
But international capitalism is not the one ruling the Cuban people, surely. Surely everyone knows this. .
Oh for christs sake.

International Capitalism rules everything.

There isn't a country on this planet that is not affected by it.

and you wouldn't want it anyother way.

There is no need for you to try and play dumb.

Trust me :rolleyes:

spanishinquisition

10th July 2006, 14:15

Originally posted by Si Pinto+Jul 10 2006, 11:08 AM--> (Si Pinto @ Jul 10 2006, 11:08 AM)
[email protected] 10 2006, 10:57 AM
But international capitalism is not the one ruling the Cuban people, surely. Surely everyone knows this. .
Oh for christs sake.

International Capitalism rules everything.

There isn\'t a country on this planet that is not affected by it.

and you wouldn\'t want it anyother way.

There is no need for you to try and play dumb.

Trust me :rolleyes: [/b]
Well maybe I meant national capitalism, even though it is an internationalist ideology like you guys have. See Jazzratt seems to think its all the capitalists fault that Cuba is backfiring, and not the government, but isnt their government in immediate control of that country I would have thought - a government that rejects capitalism?

Si Pinto

10th July 2006, 14:23

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 11:16 AM
a government that rejects capitalism?
It doesn't matter whether it rejects capitalism or not.

International capitalism affects EVERYTHING, for the second time.

spanishinquisition

10th July 2006, 14:30

Originally posted by Si Pinto+Jul 10 2006, 11:24 AM--> (Si Pinto @ Jul 10 2006, 11:24 AM)
[email protected] 10 2006, 11:16 AM
a government that rejects capitalism?
It doesn\'t matter whether it rejects capitalism or not.

International capitalism affects EVERYTHING, for the second time. [/b]
Evidence? Where is the capitalism in Cuba? I see old cars and old buildings from the Batista era. If I put a barrier around my island how am I affected by international capitalism?

Are you suggesting capitalists conspire not to trade with Cuba? This would defeat the perogative of capitalistic nature which is to offer competitive pricing.

If you suggest capitalism to be at fault, if anything you must admit that socialism has impoverished the Cuban people to the extent they can no longer afford deal in the global marketplace, making their poverty the fault of the Cuban socialist junta, right?

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 14:39

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 10:57 AM
But international capitalism is not the one ruling the Cuban people, surely. Surely everyone knows this. Castro rejects international capitalism. How are capitalists reponsible?
Because capitalism affects everthing, it would require to be not just Castro, but every leader in the world to reject capitalism for the rejection to have an affect. It's pretty much all or nothing. International Capitalism is ruling everyone and everything and it's shitting on the majority of the people whom it rules.

And are you really threatening me over the internet? It sounds funny. Id love to meet you in real life for you to really kick my head in. Im sure that would work out. I didn't threaten to do anything to you, fucknut. I said you needed your head examined or kicked in and I no more threatened to kick your head in than I did offer to examine it. You stupid, stupid tit.

spanishinquisition

10th July 2006, 14:46

Because capitalism affects everthing, it would require to be not just Castro, but every leader in the world to reject capitalism for the rejection to have an affect. It\'s pretty much all or nothing. International Capitalism is ruling everyone and everything and it\'s shitting on the majority of the people whom it rules.

My response to Si Pinto will suffice:
Evidence? Where is the capitalism in Cuba? I see old cars and old buildings from the Batista era. If I put a barrier around my island how am I affected by international capitalism?

Are you suggesting capitalists conspire not to trade with Cuba? This would defeat the perogative of capitalistic nature which is to offer competitive pricing.

If you suggest capitalism to be at fault, if anything you must admit that socialism has impoverished the Cuban people to the extent they can no longer afford deal in the global marketplace, making their poverty the fault of the Cuban socialist junta, right?

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 14:52

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 11:47 AM
If you suggest capitalism to be at fault, if anything you must admit that socialism has impoverished the Cuban people to the extent they can no longer afford deal in the global marketplace, making their poverty the fault of the Cuban socialist junta, right?
That's a very odd piece of convuluted logic juggling. As I said, I have no aspiration to spout shit like you do. You cannot deny that without capitalism there would be no international market, because such an abomination would not be required and as such societies would be able to flourish. Unfourtunatley we have this fucking stupid capitialist system that allows arse candles like you to be considered sane.

spanishinquisition

10th July 2006, 15:01

Originally posted by Jazzratt+Jul 10 2006, 11:53 AM--> (Jazzratt @ Jul 10 2006, 11:53 AM)
[email protected] 10 2006, 11:47 AM
If you suggest capitalism to be at fault, if anything you must admit that socialism has impoverished the Cuban people to the extent they can no longer afford deal in the global marketplace, making their poverty the fault of the Cuban socialist junta, right?
That\'s a very odd piece of convuluted logic juggling. As I said, I have no aspiration to spout shit like you do. You cannot deny that without capitalism there would be no international market, because such an abomination would not be required and as such societies would be able to flourish. Unfourtunatley we have this fucking stupid capitialist system that allows arse candles like you to be considered sane. [/b]
Why are you so unwilling to admit that socialist inefficiency prevents the Cuban people from taking part in the global marketplace? On the one hand the marketplace is extremely efficeint and competitive and on the other Cuba is somehow immune from taking part due to a repressive regime. Is this so hard to understand?

Unfourtunatley we have this fucking stupid capitialist system that allows arse candles like you to be considered sane.
So you admit society would consider yourslef insane. I woudn\'t go that far personally as society can often be wrong, hence the magic of capitalist individuality which allows everyone to go their own way.

Jazzratt

10th July 2006, 15:08

Originally posted by spanishinquisition+Jul 10 2006, 12:02 PM--> (spanishinquisition @ Jul 10 2006, 12:02 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 11:53 AM

[email protected] 10 2006, 11:47 AM
If you suggest capitalism to be at fault, if anything you must admit that socialism has impoverished the Cuban people to the extent they can no longer afford deal in the global marketplace, making their poverty the fault of the Cuban socialist junta, right?
That\'s a very odd piece of convuluted logic juggling. As I said, I have no aspiration to spout shit like you do. You cannot deny that without capitalism there would be no international market, because such an abomination would not be required and as such societies would be able to flourish. Unfourtunatley we have this fucking stupid capitialist system that allows arse candles like you to be considered sane.
Why are you so unwilling to admit that socialist inefficiency prevents the Cuban people from taking part in the global marketplace? On the one hand the marketplace is extremely efficeint and competitive and on the other Cuba is somehow immune from taking part due to a repressive regime. Is this so hard to understand? [/b]
You ignore the fact that Cuba is not 'immune' from taking part and as such arguing with you is pointless because you do not accept basic truths. Maybe socialism is inefficiant because it puts humanity above profits.

Unfourtunatley we have this fucking stupid capitialist system that allows arse candles like you to be considered sane.
So you admit society would consider yourslef insane. I woudn\'t go that far personally as society can often be wrong I didn't say I was considered insane I said that you were considered sane (at least I assume so) despite your chronic lack of compassion, morality and any real redeeming qualities.

hence the magic of capitalist individuality which allows everyone to go their own way. I think you made a mistake there your quote should say something like this:

hence the magic of capitalist exploitation, which allows rich people to go their own way at the expense of the poor.