Slashdot Mirror
RMS Protest Song On Gitmo
An anonymous reader tipped us to a protest song RMS has written and recorded (while visiting Cuba) and is hosting on stallman.org. It's a sort of parody, although it's too serious really to be called that, in Spanish of the song "Guantanamera," in which a Gitmo prisoner talks about his experiences and mourns his fate. RMS wrote the lyrics in 2006 after learning what "Guantanamera" actually means. The lyrics are moving, and the recording, in Ogg, is competent — RMS sings well and he's got some amateur musicians from Cuba backing him up. Here are the lyrics and an English translation.
but Ogg only?
Yeah I know its RMS, so ideology wins over practicality. But I'd think AAC would be ok, and then it could be played with iTunes or whatever.
I was expecting something like this...
My other account has a 3-digit UID.
The Road to Guantanamo - about three British muslims who end up in Gitmo, get abused and then released.
Real life is overrated.
I wonder what you are talking about. Contrary to popular belief, it is totally legal to visit Cuba (up to X times per year, [IIRC X is one]). There are also controls on how much currency you can bring with you, but to a certain extent, it is perfectly legal to vacation in Cuba (this is, in fact, common for citizens of Cuban descent).
====
Crudely Drawn Games
That's SOOOOOOOOOOOOO '80-ties! You must have misspelled Al-Queda!
"enemies". Your corporations needs you thinking like that so your government can spend a huge percentage of their money on weapons. Sir/madam, the world is not in black and white, although your government wants you to believe that.
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
Yep. Political support of the most unfree regimens (Cuba, Venezuela, Iran ... which go back to the dear USSR) in the name of freedom shows exactly what those people want: to impose THEIR idea of freedom upon everyone; a freedom in which all of us are equal but THEY (our self assumed saviors) are the most equal of all.
RMS = Three-legged PMS
"it is totally legal to visit Cuba (up to X times per year, [IIRC X is one])"
You know, having grown up in an Eastern Block country where a symptom of the dictatorship we had was that we were allowed to go to the "West" only once in every four yours, I find this limit in the "Land of Free" totally hilarious (and, on the other hand, totally sad).
Real life is overrated.
feel slightly better about the guy now... Don't ask me why.
Not that I ever hated the guy, I only know what I read about him.
Maybe if Bush recorded a protest song in a foreign language I would find his zealot-ous rhetoric easier to swallow.
Regards.
P.S. Hey... My first troll-bait post!!! *shakes his own hand*
Tourist travel is not possible under U.S. law. Business-related travel is restricted to persons engaging in or arranging for permitted export sales, such as the sale of medicines or medical equipment, or for food or agricultural goods to non-governmental entities.
http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/fs/2001/fsjulydec/
Eh? If you don't approve of the Guantanamo detentions, it means you like communism?? What kind of bizarre logic is that?
Look, I don't approve of the Guantanamo detentions, or the war in Iraq. I also happen to think that Fidel Castro is a raging deluded asshole, yet I also think that the embargo on Cuba is embarrassingly stupid and should stop.
And I didn't see anything at that website that indicated that RMS had actually visited Cuba, but speaking of that, it's also bizarre that an American citizen cannot go wherever the hell he pleases whenever he pleases.
Let me get this straight. As long as Castro embraces software freedom, actual political freedom is irrelevant in Stallman's world.
This is the same man who links to impeach Bush sites -- presumably not because of Bush's lack of embracing software freedom, though based on the current evidence, Stallman would forgive Bush for everything if he would embrace free software.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
He should stick to what he's good at, writing software.
Next you're going to say country music singers should just shut up and sing.
It's bullshit. Being good at something does not take away your right to hold or express political views.
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
No, because simply put *everyone* is ready to criticize Guantanamo and its abuses, but *no one* bothers to criticize China or Cuba for theirs (because of a fundamentally broken ideology, that means enemies of USA == friends - notice that I'm not an USA citizen, nor that I like their foreign policy that much). Cuba *is not* a democracy, period. It's hypocritical to act like that, to attack such things when you're on a ground that's much worse.
I am a FOSS supporter, but by no means I support such ideology.
But oh, I forgot. They use Free Software. They must be great by default.
A CC-licensed illustrated horror novel
Ahhh yes... Gitmo, the bastion of human rights. Of course, the fact that many people with no connections to terrorism were kept there against their will doesn't outrage you at all...
Today's lucky number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
This is Slashdot! Anyone who has been here for more than 5 minutes should know who RMS is. Even if they didn't, following the 2nd and 3rd links in the summary would immediately educate them.
And the USA is a "democratic and free country"? I for one think not. (And I've written an essay on why the presidents position in particular isn't democratic or particularly free, which can be found at a fine website.)
Also, bitch and moan about how the embargo has done absolutely nothing (except keep the "Miami Cubans" happy and voting for whichever party). Face it, the embargo has done nothing, the USA trades with regimes that are much worse (Saudi Arabia for example, and previously Iraq (where did they get those chemical weapons from again?)) and the UN has voted every year for ages to have it removed (with only ever about 3 or 4 countries (and normally two, can you guess which two?) opposing and a similar number abstaining I think). And you wonder why US foreign policy is hated around the world.
I can't speak on why RMS hasn't been publicised objecting to "nasty" regimes (though I wouldn't be surprised if he has said something...), but I can say that calling him a "lame hypocrite" is stupid. I'm glad the whole of the Free Software Movement is not like you.
I wank in the shower.
One of the things that separate civilization from barbary is that we, generally, try to play fair -EVEN- with those people who would not extend the same courtesy to us.
Yeah, the human-rigths situation is (much) worse in Pakistan than it is USA, and on US-run detention-centres. That make you particularily proud ? Your ambition is to beat Pakistan, so aslong as you're ahead of them, you're a happy camper ?
I wonder how he managed to visit Cuba without violating the federal law that prohibits US citizens from trading with our enemies.
There are several exceptions to the restrictions on travel to Cuba.
I would imagine that RMS went there for a conference on free software. This would fall under an exception which doesn't require special permission from the State Department.
How the hell did this get moderated as "Troll"? It has a perfectly good point behind it - why should a country that constantly plays on how free it is limit its citizens to where they travel?
She's built like a steak house, but she handles like a bistro....
Does anyone else appreciate the extreme irony of going to protest in Cuba, a nation that was rated as having the second least free press (just behind North Korea) in the world, no political freedom of any sort, and thousands of political prisoners. Cuba is a nation where if someone decided to go protest against the political prisoners held in Cuban jails, they would be rounded up and tossed into jail. Going to Cuba to protest some other nations violations of liberty is the sort of thing that should make people laugh until they cry.
"Let me get this straight. As long as Castro embraces software freedom, actual political freedom is irrelevant in Stallman's world."
And who do you think is a good example of embracing freedom, if you were going to consider the USA, then consider the following points.
- Doesn't recognize the democratically elected palistinian government as being legitimate
- Recognize Pakistan's military dictatorship as legitimate.
- Places domestic travel bans on its citizens
- Limits travel to other countries (as mentioned above)
- Spies on its own people without probable cause, (echlon/carnivore/whatever its called now, RFID ? )
- Violates its own constitution (count the ways)
- No longer has a clear separation from the judicial system (sacking bush unfriendly judges)
- Highest imprisonment rate of any country per head of population
- The government of some states kill their own people (capital punishment)
Face it, "land of the free" is nothing more than a propaganda term.
RMS isnt superman... solving all the worlds problems is too much for one person, maybe he just wants to concentrates on software freedom, doesnt mean he shouldnt express his views on other types of freedom.
If you would expect RMS to keep silent about his views on political freedom, then can you honestly say you respect political freedom ?
Oh, wait. They're not entitled to fair trials, so we'll never know.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
"It's bullshit. Being good at something does not take away your right to hold or express political views."
True, but being good at being attractive or a good singer does give you a larger stage than you would normally have to disseminate your ill-informed, embarrassing rantings, which your opinions usually are when you're a rich dilettante whose principle contribution to society was to make millions of people think, "that sounds neat" for thirty seconds.
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
STFU
The song has NOTHING at all to do with Cuba, it's about Gitmo which, for all practical purposes, is 100% American.
He happened to write the song while in Cuba, so what? He could have written it in Argentina or Canada or China.
Now go back to your GI Joes, the grown-ups are talking.
Besides the poor - or soon to be poor - who does an embargo hurt?
The opposing party/leaders. An embargo provides what every politician needs: something to blame everything on.
"It's not my fault your poor. It's the embargo"
"Not my fault we don't have enough fule. It's the embargo"
"The lack of electricity in Havana? The food shortages? All the American's fault"
"It's not that we have rules and policies that discourage actual progress. It's all those damn Americans"
As someone whoes talked to a lot of Cubans and knowing what conditions are like in that country (outside of the tourist areas) I have to wonder if Castro would have been overthrown a long time ago if the American government hadn't been jumping up and down with huge "Blame us for everything" sign on their foreheads.
The fact that the United States is playing international law games in order to facilitate the holding of prisoners indefinitely without trial is something that no US citizen should consider even slightly acceptable. The United States was founded on the ideal of freedom, and the founders thought that the issue of imprisonment without trial was so important that they dedicated an item to it in the Bill of Rights.
If other countries want to torture their prisoners that's bad. But for the United States to hold prisoners indefinitely in the name of defending the country - that makes a mockery of the very values that make the country worth defending at all.
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
Sadly, this is not the only example of the US acting against its own interests in disastrous ways.
Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
Hehe. You're not under the misimpression that the United States is a free country, are you?
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Yes -- the reason they left (according to the GP) is that "they've had family members tortured and killed in some of the most horrif and brutal ways immaginable" (sic). So you're saying that, aside from the brutal torture and murder, Castro's a great guy? That's awesome.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
The "land of the free" (USA) also has over 2 million of it's population in prison, vs a figure of 1 million for China.
t ion_statistics
The US also has the largest *percentage* of it's population in prison of any country in the world.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison#Prison_popula
I wonder if Chinas' lower reported numbers of prisoners might have anything to do with the fact they tend to simply shoot a large percentage of those other countries would otherwise jail, and that they probably don't report those in various political 're-education' camps as 'prisoners' as such? Besides, China would never lie about how many they imprison, in any case.
The U.S. justice system is quite screwed up, no doubt. Still, given a choice, if I had to go to prison, I still think I'd much rather get sent to Gitmo, nevermind a normal U.S. prison, as opposed to a Chinese prison. That is, if my family didn't simply end up with a bill for a bullet as many Chinese families have.
Remember kids, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Cheers!
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
It's still far, far more free than, say, Cuba or China. Vastly more free. But it's trampling its own principles in stunning, alarming ways, reducing democratic rights and principles and rule of law and freedom, all of these essential things taking second stage in the holy war against terrorism, this war against a featureless monster that serves as an excuse for anything.
Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
At least they're honest. And their songs are better than "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran."
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
Why hasn't Stallman said anything about other non democratic countries that treat people even worse
Because China or Cuba are NOT democratic countries. It's silly to write songs saying that they're dictatorships - everybody knows that already.
EEUU however is SUPOSED TO BE a democratic. EEUU is supposed to be the symbol of freedom and democracies in the world. IMO guantanamo it's WORSE than any other dictatorship. Dictatorships are supposed to torture people, EEUU is NOT
A fully reasonable comparison. When my dad once went to the United States, he first thought that he had gotten on the wrong plane and landed in the Soviet Union (this was while the USSR still existed). Where else would you need to fill in a whole range of papers declaring this and that*, as well as tell the immigration officials where you intend to stay and so on.
*= To a foreigner, the US immigration papers look more than silly, they make a laugh of the entire US (first impressions, you know). You have to answer questions on whether you were ever a member of a communist organization, whether you are going to the US to commit terrorist acts, etc, etc. Do they really expect the communists or terrorists to answer Yes in any of these forms? How naive are those immigration officials really?
No offense, but it is insanely ridiculous.
Sorry to say that so frankly but I'm disgusted by the foreign policy of the US. But then I read Slashdot, a site which I consider only educated ppl read and ppl who are able to think for themselves... And then I read so many weird comments relativising Guanatanamo.
... say Germany, a powerful first world country and not usually seen as being part of the "axis of evil" would hijack a US citzien visiting Italy, flying him to say... Afghanistan, let him torture him by locals to gain information, figure out that I was a mistake and after holding him for 2+ years release him without any charges.
The fact is, that the US is hijacking foreigners in foreign countries, flying them to 3d-world countries to torture them and circumvent US laws.
Just one question: What would you say if
What would you then think of Germany as a country?
Thing is, the US is exactly behaving like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_El-Masri
Then imagine reading a german website where a lots of Germans would say: "Well capturing foreigners and holding them without trial is not such a bad thing. At least we're not torturing them... well at least not so brutal... and giving them food. And bibles."
Then figure what your opinion of Germany and the German ppl would be.
RMS does not have to point out the failings of Cuba - they are a constant part of the news we are fed. On the other hand, not enough people are protesting our Gulags - and we should be holding ourselves up to a higher standard than Cuba is.
The problem with EEUU is not so much EEUU, but their foreign policy.
For example, I don't know many people that support EEUU views on the Iran nuclear issue. Because they know that EEUU has been the only country in the story of humanity that has actually dropped nuclear bombs to innocent people. So their thinking goes like "uh, the only country that has dropped nuclear bombs into a city and feels proud of it now tries to look like he is trying to stop other countries from doing the same?"
And we know that EEUU has a long track of supporting dictatorships that supported capitalism and declaring the war to democracies that tried to turn into a socialist economy. South-america hates EEUU, and for very good reasons. So we just don't believe when EEUU says he's trying to fight terrorism and promote freedom - we know quite well EEUU doesn't bothers about democracy or dictatorship, he just cares about capitalism (which allows EEUU companies to enter those countries) and communism, nothing else. IOW, they only care about money, not about freedom and rights.
Then I guess Cuba should be very sparsely populated by now, as most people have tried to escape (and either succeeded, drowned or having been killed by Cuban forces). But according to Wikipedia, Cuba has a population of a little more than eleven million people on 110,000 km^2, which isn't really sparsely populated. Now of course the Wikipedia article could be manipulated by the cuban government to inflate their numbers...
Translation: EEUU is Spanish for The US.
Indeed you're right. The US has sabotaged its own good name and goodwill over and over again. And they just keep at it, over and over, again and again.
The most stunning example of this is how they gained sympathy all over the world after 9/11 and then somehow managed to squander it all in a few months, simply by showing an astonishingly bullying attitude rather than looking for co-operation regarding the Iraq war.
They had such amazing goodwill and sympathy, even in Islamic countries. Sadly, their propaganda machine refused to portray this goodwill, preferring to stir up conflict. But outside the US and its propaganda machine there was so much goodwill, it felt like some kind of world-wide friendship among nations was growing forth. So many past mistakes were being forgiven.
And yet somehow they managed to squander almost all of this in just a few months, by showing an amazingly bullying attitude and disdainfully neglecting all the persistent warnings about the chaos and surging terrorism that would unavoidably ensue if they went forth with their Iraq adventure.
*Sigh!* For a while it looked so promising!
I suppose their war industry didn't like that promising outlook.
Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
"I think people who were wavering about whether what we are doing in Guantanamo is right,"
All six of them? After all, it's been over five years now.
"will come down on the side of Bush when they see unkempt hippie commies like RMS"
Ah yes, victim of the ol' Secret Constitutional Amendment that strips citizenship away from "unkempt hippie commies."
"we are at WAR after all."
With whom, exactly? Iran? North Korea? Cuba? And whether your answer is Afghanistan, Iraq, or Oceania this week, there's still the fact that the United States hasn't been at war with anybody since 1945.
"RMS should be put on trial for treason..."
It's nice to know you share your grasp of the federal constitution with your chosen president.
You only get that for playing chess these days.
Now the current, corrupt US administration is of course another story. They basically, callously and corruptly used the 11/9 incident as a means by which to profit their corporate partners and in turn themselves.
The utterly contemptible way in which they have traded human lives for profit, corrupted justice for greater corporate power and used two religions as nothing but a cynical exercise in political marketing, puts them beyond doubt, as the most corrupt and criminal administration in US history.
The worst possible mistake the Americans can now make, is to fail to prosecute the current administrations for the crimes they have self evidently committed, this failure would inevitably lead to even greater excesses by future administrations.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Doesn't matter. US citizens are not allowed to travel to Cuba under any circumstances other than what is allowed by the State Dept.
Sure, you can travel to Mexico or Canada and then get on another plane to Cuba, but it is still technically illegal, and you will be fined or jailed if you come back with a Cuban stamp without proper authorization. Most Americans get around this by asking the Cuban authorities not to stamp their passports, and they almost always oblige.
Just like it's technically illegal to import Cuban cigars into the country (and the vast majority are poorly constructed fakes from the DOminican Republic), but they're easy to get if you know who to do business with in Europe, Australia, Hong Kong, or the UAE. If you're particularly worried about getting caught, they'll even unband the cigars and ship the boxes and bands separately so that Customs has no reason or right to seize them.
>The most stunning example of this is how they gained sympathy all over the world after 9/11 and then somehow managed to squander it all in a few months, simply by showing an astonishingly bullying attitude rather than looking for co-operation regarding the Iraq war. ...
> And yet somehow they managed to squander almost all of this in just a few months, by showing an amazingly bullying attitude and disdainfully neglecting all the persistent warnings about the chaos and surging terrorism that would unavoidably ensue if they went forth with their Iraq adventure.
Living in the US and being one of the 25% of people interested in news and current events, I can guarantee you that the Iraq War, which began in March of 2003, took quite a bit longer than "a few months".
Your memory, however, is correct, much of the US' "international good-will" evaporated in a few months after 9/11, especially in Muslim and what used to be the "non-aligned" countries. After the US attacked the Taliban in Afghanistan. And to that, I give a giant middle finger to the self-serving hypocrites around the world expressing "sympathy" and withdrawing it after the US took appropriate action in its self-defense.
It's sad so many people lump in the justified war in Afghanistan with the unjustified war in Iraq.
Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
Of course some part of the blame does fall on others. Very close to half the US voters did choose Bush. And what's probably worse, a huge part of the US population buys and sponsors media that publish patriotic propaganda—stuff that isn't really patriotic because it sabotages the true interests of the US.
But can you really blame the American public for being swayed by the propaganda? After all the propagandists are extremely skillful.
Arguably you can't even blame the propagandists. I'm sure many of them do what they sincerely believe is best.
It's a terrible mess!
In any case, the real responsibility lies with the Administration and the propagandists. When people criticize the actions of the US, I don't think you should ever assume that they're criticizing the American people. The distinction is very clear. People can take a very dim view of the actions of your Administration, and still love and respect and admire the US in many ways. I'm one example of a person who feels this way.
In fact one reason why I'm so critical is that I would expect better, and therefore I'm sorely disappointed.
Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
Seemingly ridiculous, indeed, save for one point: If ever they find you gave money to some "terrorist" group or were involved with some "communist" organization, they can deport you. Not because giving your money to some "terrorist" group or having "communist" friends is illegal (it may not be), but because you lied on your immigration forms, and entered the country thus on false pretenses. That's sufficient to deport you, without the hassle of formally accusing you of dubious crimes.
It is also generally agreed that the Afghanistan war and its aftermath could have had very positive consequences, both in the struggle against terrorism and in the democratization of the region, whereas the Iraq war from the very outset promised only exploding terrorism, and would sabotage what could otherwise have been gained in Afghanistan regarding democracy in the region.
Here in Sweden the two wars are seen as very different, and in many ways diametrical opposites.
Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
That's nothing, I almost fell off my chair when soon after 9/11 Bush went on TV and said "either you are with us, or you are against us." That was a well known Ceausescu era saying.
"Consistency is contrary to nature, contrary to life. The only completely consistent people are the dead." A. Huxley
The reason they put those questions on the form is so that should any of those things later turn out to be true (nazi war criminal, blah blah), they can kick you out of the country for lying on your immigration form.
dominionrd.blogspot.com - Restaurants on
Are Guantanamo Prisoners considered POW's now? The last I heard the Bush administration had categorized them as "enemy combatants"; a term intended to hold them beyond the jurisdiction of the Geneva Conventions, the criminal justice system, or any other legal standard that would impose decency upon their captors. I would like to ask Americans this question: Would you find it acceptable if captured Americans were treated exactly the way that Guantanamo Prisoners are treated? Would you not claim that they were being deprived of their rights?
If I were in combat I would want the enemy to know that if he surrenders, he will not be treated as prisoners have been in Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo. I would want the enemy to surrender willingly, not fight to the death to avoid the fate of an American gulag.
Ad hominems aside, if you had a strong belief in something, and an audience willing to listen - wouldn't you speak?
Last post!
Whenever people complain about the state of affairs in the United States, I hear the excuse "we're still better than such and such country". The argument is absolutely degrading to Americans. We're one of the oldest surviving democracies on the planet. We have no standard against which to measure ourselves but our own ideals. We should never say "we're still better than Cuba", but rather ask ourselves "are we as good as we know we should be?"
I absolutely can't stand the "be thankful you live in America" crowd. It's like the "feel good about ourself no matter what you do" crowd. Self-criticism and self-reflection are the only paths to improvement. Being content with what you have is a recipie for stagnation.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
I know many people who, so to speak, have a strong prejudice against US citizens, even though they may know not everyone voted Bush.
One bad choice is excusable, but the US has earned its reputation over many, many years, and the image we have of your country influences the image we have of you. In Argentina, the term 'Yanqui' (Yankee) is used to refer to North Americans in a slightly derogative way. It's not terrible, but you hear the word 'Yanqui' much more often than 'North American'
"To be fair, with regard to killing terrorists instead of jailing them, what terrorists and where were they killed? As far as I'm aware, the only ones that are/have being/been killed are on the battlefield, in the act of killing soldiers and innocent civilians."
Well there was a very famous case of a supposed terrorist being killed by a missile launched from a drone in kuwait or someplace. They guy was getting in a car and boom!. No need for messy trials or jails or nothing.
Then there was the case of the army admitting that many people were killed in afghanistan under US custody. The army coroner ruled the deaths murder.
Then there are the cases of the "disappeared" people. People the US announced that they had captured but nobody has seen since.
"o be fair, as to the 'torture chambers in gitmo', cite please? "
The US has admitted to conducting waterboarding, subjecting to extreme tempratures, sensory deprivation, "stress positions", and force feeding by tubes through the nose. These acts are considered to be torture by all international conventions and the US has admitted to using these methods on a regular basis. The US claims they are not torture but they are alone in that.
Correction to the above. Republicans claim these acts are not torture. Only republicans. Everybody else acknowledges that these are acts of torture.
"The Red Cross and other humanitarian organizations have been over gitmo with a fine-toothed comb, and no 'torture chambers' or anything even close exists at gitmo."
Nope. The red cross is not allowed unannounced visits and they are not allowed to interview detainees alone.
"As to any claims by the detainees, if *I* were a dedicated jihadist captured and sent to gitmo, if some do-gooder organization came asking, I'd wail and cry and gnash my teeth about all sorts of horrible conditions, daily torture, and my innocence, with the goal of creating as much trouble as I could for the hated unbelievers."
How convenient!. That's a really clever way to dismiss all claims of torture by everybody in every US prison everywhere in the world.
Anyway like I said the US itself has admitted comitting these acts, the armies own doctors have ruled the deaths murder. The only people who deny systematic torture by the US military and intelligence are republicans and let's face it how can anybody take anything any republican says at face value? People like you care more about your party then the constitution, morals, human rights, justice, fairness, law and order, or the country.
Keep denying that the US does not torture anybody. You and the rest of the 25% of the american public are a disgrace to humanity but it's important that we amplify your voices so that the rest of decent america knows people like you still exist. We can't get complacent. As long as people like you are around we must keep up our diligence.
evil is as evil does
I think this is a reflection of your ability to distinguish between who is doing the evils and who is being subjected to them. As an American, I find this attitude not only honest but refreshing when considering it is coming from an outsider. Usually, it is Americans reading the messages about how everything is evil and such are the Americans then having to sit back on wonder who the hell they are actually referring to. It is amazing when the government goes power crazed and usurps mosts of the freedom and the rest of the world think there is some consensus of American people supporting it.
It is really the plague of living in a free country, many people support different actions of the government for different reasons but none of us support everything it does for the same reasons. From outside looking in, it must appear that most people support both the extreme and the exact opposite at the same time. I think the fact is that you only get this impression when looking at all the individual causes and grouping them to some common cause which is linked to the governments screw ups. But I guess that is what we deserve when American politics is divided to the point that we will elect one person over another based on their position over just one or two things. Bush was elected twice not because he was the best leader, He was just the lessor of the two evils running and the only person the second time around who had their own ideas that wasn't afraid to say something about them in public.
The situation is really a lot like a candy store that has a few things no one else has and when the kids go in to buy this or that. Someone makes the connection that all kids like that candy store when they are only going there for one or two things that aren't the same thing the other kids are going there for.
hehe... wow... I've been reading your posts...
Your ability to talk down to people is amazingly well developed. I imagine it's your parents that taught you that, mostly by example, and as such, that's why you feel so powerless frightened and alone. Degrading other people isn't the best way to make a point.
You seem to be making the argument that we should cast a judgement over the entire world, then line up everyone by order of the biggest sin. By doing so, you can identify the causes that are worthy of addressing (being worthy, that's not something you are familiar with is it?).
Well let me tell you something... I do have an understanding of human nature. It is because of human weakness that we have laws, laws based on moral codes. The laws of America, it's highest laws in fact, include the right to a trial, the right to be protected against cruel and inhuman punishment, the right to speak freely. The prisoners in gitmo are prisoners of America. As such, we apply our laws and thus our moral code to them, and we exhibit these in the way we as a people handle the situation. So far, it has been to ignore our highest laws, ignore our moral standards, and now, you would advocate that we ignore the problem altogether because there is other suffering in the world.
It's is a weak man who abandons his morals in times of trouble. In fact, by ignoring this and allowing this, it demonstrates that these morals are simply relative to the situation, which implies that they aren't morals at all.
I understand that you feel the way you do, and I can guess why. I suggest that you either stand up for what's right, or please sit back down. Let those folks that do have conviction and courage, those folks who love America and what it stands for, let those people show you the way so that one day maybe you can learn what it is to be worthy.
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech."--Benjamin Franklin
> kind of an inability to have perspective, to understand scale, to perceive context
> why guantanamo garners so much attention
Let me explain. Cuba and Castro don't go shooting their big fucking mouthes off about bringing freedom (tm) and democracy (r) everywhere. Cuba and Castro aren't illegally invading sovereign nations in the name of bringing said freedom (TM) and democracy (R) .
A nation that is always proudly pointing at its Bill of Rights and Constitution, a nation that is always banging on their chest for being the Last Bastion of the Free (TM), a nation that always claims to possess the Moral High Ground (C) should never ever do what is being done on Guantanamo.
I don't suppose the acts committed at Guantanamo are what irks people, it's the massive scale Hypocrisy and Zealotry behind it that kills people. The sheer gall of the US in the face of their own shortcomings.
I am an atheist, but let me take this time to quote some Valued Scripture from the State Religion in the US:
Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
The point here is that, by the principles on which it is founded, the US should be striving to become the one without Sin rather than the one who is throwing the rocks in this world. That would be worthy.
Tee hee.
I'm Dutch. I can travel most parts of the globe, no visa required and no rules against it, and most countries are actually not unhappy to see me coming.
Hanging on to my passport, 's all I'm saying.
I don't think that's what he's saying. Let's take this out of the political realm for a moment. Suppose you were trying to develop a well-balanced perspective on vi vs. emacs. Given their long standing enmity, you'd probably agree that it would be silly to try to get a well-balanced perspective on their relative merits by attending a "vi rules, emacs drools" party, or vice versa. You'd be much better off asking someone who was less emotionally married to the subject and who could comment convincingly on the inevitable pros and cons of both pieces of software.
Moving back into the political, if you were a non-American attempting to develop a well-rounded and nuanced perspective on American foreign policy, would you go and ask Iranians? Iraqis? Probably not. Not because these groups don't have valid complaints -- but rather because their bad experiences hamstring their ability to approach the issue of America's foreign policy in a rational way.
Similarly, the Palestinians would probably not be the right people to ask about Israel's right to exist. This is not because their complaints are unjustified, nor is to say that those should not be addressed -- but their feud with Israel makes them the least likely, in principle, to provide you with a nuanced perspective on the topic.
Armed with this understanding, the thing to realize about the Cuban American population in Florida and elsewhere is that, well, they hate Castro. Asking them what kind of a guy Castro is is about as productive as asking an internal party cadre in Cuba what kind of a guy Castro is -- the response is certain, before you even ask the question. Cuban Americans hate Castro -- that's why they left. They're not going to tell you about the good things he's done, because they want him out of power, and they see American pressure as a means to that end. Similarly, if you asked somebody high up in the Cuban Communist Party what they thought of him, they would certainly not mention anything about the bad things he's done -- they owe their livelihood to him, it is in their best interest that you see him as a good leader worthy of support.
This is the essence of propaganda, whatever end it pushes. You needn't lie; no one is perfect. Choose a side, and then selectively report only the good or only the bad, depending on which view you'd like your readership to take. If you listen to liberals, for example, Bush's tax-cuts were a "gift to the rich, at the expense of the poor" -- but in actuality, thanks to a (proven) economic phenomenon known as the Laffer curve, federal income has increased since the tax cuts, which should surprise no one who has studied economics. This is quietly ignored in the left-leaning press, who instead opt to play the percentages game and say that the middle class pays proportionally more of the tax burden than it used to, ignoring that everyone is paying less than they used to. In a similar vein, when you listen to Fox news, the completely unjustifiable Iraq war was justifiable because they had WMD, or Saddam was a bad guy, or whatever -- now, the right is careful not to invoke images of WMD because they know that it will hurt their image, which is already so tarnished that one wonders how much more damage can be done.
Selective reporting -- you should always be wary of it. My view, and I believe it nuanced, is that Castro has been a pretty brutal guy at times, and can in no way be considered a great leader by any honest definition of the term. But having said that, it is telling that the infant mortality rate in Cuba is the lowest in the Americas -- which, lest you gloss over it, includes the US and Canada. The literacy rate in Cuba is nearly 100%. People are poor, but they are not walking around on the street fearing for their lives, either, as in many places in Latin America, where kidnapping and drug cartel related deaths are a fact of life. It's not such an easy question to answer: well meaning but weak governments hav