US Features
Feb 20, 2008, 0:22 GMT
Analysis: Castro's departure won't bring quick change in US policy
And Also
Similar articles
- Fidel Castro thinks Obama 'sincere,' but ...
- Raul Castro meets US Congress members
- Ailing Fidel Castro changes tack, attacks Obama
- ANALYSIS: Defiant Cuba reinforces Latin ties with Obama on horizon
- Raul Castro offers direct talks with Obama administration
Latest Headlines in US
- 1. Four US police officers shot dead near air force base (1st Lead)
- 2. Four US police officers shot dead near air force base
- 3. Tiger Woods' slightly injured in car mishap (Roundup)
- 4. It's official: Tiger Woods' injuries were slight (3rd Lead)
- 5. Tiger Woods treated after car accident (2nd Lead)
Older Talkback
Re: your comment ... 'you advocate capitulation as a sign of courage'
You're outright making that up.
NEVER have I said capitulate to ANYONE.
I'm saying strong men don't give into fear ... whether that 'fear' comes from terrorists, or our own government.
YOU on the other hand can't wait to capitulate to those who seek to change your way of life solely through making you feel afraid. (read about rights again).
Strength is 'keeping our way of life in the face of threats.' (my position)
Weakness is 'begging them to change your way of life in the face of threats.' (your position)
Stay the same .. or change ... one is from a place of strength ... the other from a place of fear. You scared little wuss.
' then beg to have our government abandon what America stands for.'
Since when has 'our' government stood for giving Constitutional rights to to enemy combatants in foreign countries? You know what we did with them in previous wars including the revolutionary war? We shot or hung them.
Idiot. America doesn't 'stand for' cutting our own throats.
'You're beyond frustrating,'
Good. Your argument is beyond stupid. Go over to North Waziristan and offer to prepare their legal defense for them. When I see the video of your head being sawn off on the internet I will just remind myself that it was empty anyway.
'I'm saying strong men don't give into fear ... whether that 'fear' comes from terrorists, or our own government.'
Do strong men allow homicidal maniacs to run free? In a time of war do strong men just release those who have pledged to dedicate their lives to our destruction? No. It is just a stupid inversion of reality.
'YOU on the other hand can't wait to capitulate to those who seek to change your way of life solely through making you feel afraid. '
For the 3rd time now, you are wrong. Indeed, by your appeasing of these monsters you are the coward who seeks to capitulate. You are just rationalizing your cowardice as some kind of flimsy moral objection. I am not buying it.
'Strength is 'keeping our way of life in the face of threats.'
Once again, for the sloooooow to understand, we have not had to give up our way of life above and beyond having to go through airport security. All my constitutional rights are intact. I know this because I use them regularly...
'Weakness is 'begging them to change your way of life in the face of threats.''
That doesn't even make any sense, idiot.
You write 'All my constitutional rights are intact.'
Do you know that little about your rights? or the laws Bush has passed?
Umm Clueless ... yeah you ... read up on the 'Patriot Act' ... and the 'Surveillance Laws' passed by Bush ...
Before them the gov'mnt could listen to your phone conversations without a warrant ... or track what you read at the library without warrant ...
Not anymore ... now they can do it at will.
And you have the stupdity to say your rights haven't changed.
No wonder you can't understand ... you are totally clueless about the founding principles of American freedom, justice and rights.
And as such, when they're taken away, you say you never had them.
line five should read ... the gov'mnt couldn't (not could)
'Do you know that little about your rights?'
No, I know hat much about them. Where in the constitution does it say that terrorists picked up in Pakistan should enjoy the same constitutional rights as a j-waker in Los Angeles?
'Umm Clueless ... yeah you ... read up on the 'Patriot Act' ... and the 'Surveillance Laws' passed by Bush'
Where in the constitution does it say that the US government can not listen in on the conversations of jihadies in Afghanistan? Passed by congress by the way you mouth breathing moron. Bush can not pass laws, only congress can.
'Before them the gov'mnt could listen to your phone conversations without a warrant'
The constitution protects you from evidence that has been obtained illegally. You asked me to name a terrorist who resumed killing after they were released from Guantanamo. I showed you that there were about 30. It is YOUR turn to name me a single American convicted of a crime because of evidence that was illegally obtained without a warrant under he Patriot act.
'And you have the stupdity to say your rights haven't changed.'
They haven't and they wouldn't by giving constitutional rights to terrorists in foreign countries. Idiot.
' you are totally clueless about the founding principles of American freedom, justice and rights.'
Show me where the constitution offers it's protection to foreign fighters who have been taken prisoner outside the USA in a time of war? Go through the preamble to the end of the 27th amendment and point out the clause...
Good luck you idiot.
'And as such, when they're taken away, you say you never had them.'
I have been on every continent on the planet, including Antarctica. I have passports full of stamps to attest to that fact. There is no where on Earth that I have found where I am freer or have more rights. I take them very seriously and have dedicated years to defend and uphold them. Those rights should not, can not and will not be extended to the terrorists in Gitmo. If you feel that somehow tramples on your rights you are an idiot. (As if further evidence were needed.)
'... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;...'
and
'In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial ... and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.'
These are principles of Justice that our government is bound to.
To avoid imprisoning innocents without trial.
Our government is now violating these principles of justice.
NOTHING says it can 'choose when it wants to, or when it doesn't want to,' be held to the standard of justice outlined in this part of our Consitution.
You Sir, have absolutely no understanding.
'From the Bill of Rights ... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;...''
So the bill of rights applies to everyone all over the world? I don't think so. No, that is the law of the USA, not Afghanistan.
''In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial ... and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.'
So does that apply everyone all over the world? Does that go in, say China?
No. The obvious point you are missing, because you are a moron, is that the Constitution of the United States of America does not extend to terrorists who have been captured in Afghanistan or Pakastan who are not Americans. Indeed, we do not have the right to impose OUR values on the rest of the world. They want to live in the dark ages there and do not want things like womens rights that the US Constitution insures.
'These are principles of Justice that our government is bound to.'
Sure, in the USA regarding Americans. Not regarding foreign terrorists.
Jose Padilla, an 'American' convicted of islamist terrorism in the USA was entitled to the protection of the Bill of Rights and had his trial. His conviction is now being appealed.
'To avoid imprisoning innocents without trial.'
So did we 'try' the German POW's in world war 2? No, the ones that were caught in uniform were put in prison camps until the end of the war. The ones who were not were put before a military tribunal and usually hanged.
'Our government is now violating these principles of justice'
Not in the slightest.
'NOTHING says it can 'choose when it wants to, or when it doesn't want to,' be held to the standard of justice outlined in this part of our Consitution.'
So last week there were people stoned to death in Iran for 'activities incompatible with Islam', does the constitution apply to them? Do we need to invade, set up a court system and try the monsters who did this? Or do we realize that other countries have different laws?
It would be perfectly legal to try them in a military tribunal as 'unlawful combatants' or even spies since they were not wearing uniforms and shoot them. The Supreme Court upheld the jurisdiction of U.S. military tribunals over unlawful combatants and allowed for their execution, even if their crimes were committed in the territory of the USA as were 6 German spies who were caught and sent to the electric chair. These animals committed their crimes for the most part out side the USA.
'You Sir, have absolutely no understanding.'
You are an idiot. The US Constitution is not the law for the entire planet.
... that our government is bound to follow in IT's actions.
You bring up examples where our government is not the ruling government.
Their government's laws apply there, not ours (duh)
But in OUR governments actions, in regards to justice, it's quite clear.
And again, nothing gives our government the choice of of when it applies to them or not.
Ya see, YOU think our government has the right to imprison ALL (innocent and guilty) without justice. Innocent and guilty alike!!!
I think we should imprison the guilty
That would be justice!!
But imprisoning innocents is a crime, and violation of US standards of justice.
You have no understanding of the principles of justice.
No matter how much you blather and froth at the mouth.
Unless you think having different standards of justice for different people is not hypocrisy ... and is in harmony with 'and justice for all.'
'Their government's laws apply there, not ours (duh)'
So take them to the soccer stadium and shoot them in the head then, that was the 'law' under the Taliban. That way everyone is happy.
'But in OUR governments actions, in regards to justice, it's quite clear.'
Indeed, they should be set up with a military review board which can decide to hold them, release them, try them.
'And again, nothing gives our government the choice of of when it applies to them or not.'
I agree! The US constitution does not apply to foreign enemy combatants! The Supreme Court has affirmed this. All nice and legal. :-D The argument can be made that it would be ILLEGAL for our government to do so.
'Ya see, YOU think our government has the right to imprison ALL (innocent and guilty) without justice. '
Ya see, when you are fighting an enemy who does not respect any boundaries, any code of decency, any international law or really any of the trappings of humanity... one who fills schools gyms full of children and sets off bombs or slowly saws peoples heads off and puts their last horrible screaming moments on the internet or who simply flies aircraft full of human beings in to buildings full of human beings they forfeit their rights to things like the Geneva convention. The Geneva convention is INTERNATIONAL LAW which would usually cover an enemy if they had the guts to wear a uniform and attack our military instead of shielding themselves among civilians to murder civilians. You want them given access to our DOMESTIC law which doesn't apply to them because most have never set foot in the USA.
So, since they forfeited their rights under international law and they are not entitled to the protections of our domestic law they find themselves stuffing their faces with cheerios and grinding their stupid heads in to their prayer mats 5 times a day until the legality of the military tribunals makes it's way through our domestic courts. Want it done faster? Get the idiots out there to stop holding up the process with lawsuits so they can have their day in court and get their lethal injection.
'You have no understanding of the principles of justice.'
'Justice' would be putting them in a building and flying a jet loaded with fuel in to it. We are talking about 'law' not 'justice'. The law says that they are not entitled to protection under the constitution. The law says that they gave up their right to protection under the Geneva convention by attacking civilians and not wearing a uniform. The best they are going to get is a military tribunal, just like in the Korean conflict, WW2, WW1, The US Civil War, the war of 1812 and the Revolutionary war. Look up the treatment our founding fathers gave to 'Major John Andre' who was caught without a uniform and tell me that they would have let these bastards go.
'Unless you think having different standards of justice for different people is not hypocrisy ... and is in harmony with 'and justice for all.'
Yeah, the whole world should be covered by the US Constitution. I agree. It should also not fight and all children should have braces if they need them and maybe a puppy if they are not allergic. That would be lovely but it isn't going to happen any time soon. The fact is we are talking about things whose ideas of 'justice' is to beat a woman with a car antenna if she is not completely covered in her burqua or to bury someone up to their waste in dirt and throw rocks at their skulls until the brains run out for 'infidelity'.
They will get their date with a military tribunal which is more then they deserve. Until then they are lucky that they are not being subjected to the same 'justice' that they would get in their own country.
... you do the right thing, because it's right.
Not because your enemies do it, or don't.
True justice is not something to be done only when it's easy or convenient.
It's what a man should advocate and support, because it's right.
You've written endless rants about how doing the right thing (true justice) is something you eagerly abandon when you feel threatened..
You've shown us you have no principles on the matter of true justice.
Any further discussion with you on this will only continue to fall upon your deaf ears.
You will not see the point made so very clear here, because you choose your blind rage of injustice instead.
Never understanding the real reasons the world has turned against men like yourself, you'll continue to go around kicking dogs and then blame the dog when it bites you.
'Having principles means ... you do the right thing, because it's right.'
Having a brain means you keep islamist terrorists in prison. Give them their tribunal and their injection.
'Not because your enemies do it, or don't.'
Our enemies do not keep their captives in prison, they saw their heads off and put the video on the net. Do a web search on 'Nick Berg' or 'Taliban Child Beheading' or 'Paul M. Johnson'..on and on... Nope, they 'don't'.
'True justice is not something to be done only when it's easy or convenient. '
Again, idiot, true justice would be making that fat pig Khalid Sheikh Mohammed have to chose whether or not he was going to burn to death or have to jump a hundred and ten stories to his death. That is the choice he gave others.
'You've written endless rants about how doing the right thing (true justice) is something you eagerly abandon when you feel threatened..'
I wouldn't eagerly abandon the above scenario at all. Men can only seek justice through enacting just laws to punish the guilty. They are getting the justice that their actions warrant by being held accountable to the laws that they have willfully broken. End of story. Creating new, inherently illeagal ways of giving criminals benefits is not justice.
'You've shown us you have no principles on the matter of true justice.'
You have shown that you do not have a clue as to what justice is.
'Any further discussion with you on this will only continue to fall upon your deaf ears.'
Go preach a sermon then you sanctimonious half wit. You are a boring idiot by the way. This whole thing is getting repetitive.
'You will not see the point made so very clear here,'
Oh yeah, I see it, your heart bleeds for the world and you want to float above it and dispense 'true justice'...
'because you choose your blind rage of injustice instead.'
There is nothing 'blind' or 'unjust' about it. It is very lucid and focused.
'Never understanding the real reasons the world has turned against men like yourself,'
:-D The world sounds like it is treating you mighty fine there Einstein. Why do morons like you invariably think that they can speak on behalf of the 'world'?
'you'll continue to go around kicking dogs and then blame the dog when it bites you.'
I would never, ever kick a dog. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and these twisted islamist monsters are something far, far lower then dogs.
The dog metaphor was to give an illustration of your belligerant mindset.
When you go around the world imposing your will on people, at the ends of your guns and bombs, imprisonig and killing their innocent family members, they will grow ti hate you and they will strike back.
And in your beligerant arrogance, you will blame only them instead of seeing your contribution for the reasons they hate you.
You have made it quite clear that you hate ALL people in Arab societies ... you've judged them all guilty.
You desire to punish good and bad alike.
Making no distinction between innocents and guilty, your mindset would turn even those that don't hate you today, into those that will come to hate you because you impose injustice and terror upon them.
Then you'll blame only them for it. Never admiting that it was you who've given them reason to hate you.
Read history of US invlovement in the middle east ( i.e.: Shah of Iran is only one example) ... if your eyes are open you'll see why they hate us.
If not, you'll continue to blame only them.
I suspect you're only capable of doing the latter.
'The dog metaphor was to give an illustration of your belligerant[sic] mindset.'
So acording to your 'metaphor' I would be kicking and biting myself.
Smart metaphor.
'When you go around the world imposing your will on people, at the ends of your guns and bombs, '
So Bin Laden was justified in attacking us, eh? Typical. Scratch your BS rhetoric about 'justice' and we get down to the core of your stupid belief. Couldn't see that coming a mile away.
' imprisonig and killing their innocent family members, they will grow ti hate you and they will strike back.'
I guess you are too stupid to use a calender as well. Al Qaeda attacked us DOZENS of times before 9/11 killing thousands from Somalia to Yemen to Saudi Arabia to the first World Trade Center bombing. Islamist terrorist scum have committed atrocities in almost every country on the planet. Yet it is someone else's fault? You idiot.
'And in your beligerant arrogance, you will blame only them instead of seeing your contribution for the reasons they hate you.'
I didn't hate anyone before 9/11 and the wars that I fought in were to protect Muslims. The fact that you would seek to excuse the monsters who fly aircraft full of people in to buildings full of people pretty much confirms that you are scum as well.
'You have made it quite clear that you hate ALL people in Arab societies ...'
That is a lie. Where have I said that? I haven't, idiot. I just hate people who make excuses for islamist atrocities like 9/11.
'You desire to punish good and bad alike.'
You are wrong. You have probably had the same 'we are poor victims' ground in to your head at your own mosque that the terrorists had ground in to their pea brains. If Islamists have been 'victimized' perhaps it is because there have been deadly islamist attacks in:
India and the Sudan and Algeria and Afghanistan and New York and Pakistan and Israel and Russia and Chechnya and the Philippines and Indonesia and Nigeria and England and Thailand and Spain and Egypt and Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia and Ingushetia and Dagestan and Turkey and Kabardino-Balkaria and Morocco and Yemen and Lebanon and France and Uzbekistan and Gaza and Tunisia and Kosovo and Bosnia and Mauritania and Kenya and Eritrea and Syria and Somalia and California and Argentina and Kuwait and Virginia and Ethiopia and Iran and Jordan and United Arab Emirates and Louisiana and Texas and Tanzania and Germany and Australia and Pennsylvania and Belgium and Denmark and East Timor and Qatar and Maryland and Tajikistan and the Netherlands and Scotland and Chad and Canada and China and Nepal
and the Maldives and...
But that is all because they are victims seeking 'justice', right? At what level do you hold these monsters responsible for their own actions? Evidentially none. All you can see is that they probably look like you and they hate the same people that you do so therefore they are just poor dogs who have been kicked. Well rabid dogs need to be put to sleep.
'Making no distinction between innocents and guilty, '
It is YOU who are trying to make no distinction between the innocent and the guilty by making excuses for the actions of the terrorists. In that sense, that makes YOU guilty as well.
'Then you'll blame only them for it. Never admiting[sic] that it was you who've given them reason to hate you.'
Again, you piece of s**t, I never gave anyone a reason to fly aircraft full of people in to buildings full of people. If you think America has done that you need to find some place else to live. Go to Iran where you might get strung up in the public square for doing some trivila thing that is 'incompatible with Islam'.
'Read history of US invlovement[sic] in the middle east ( i.e.: Shah of Iran is only one example)'
Firstly, moron, the terrorists who attacked us were Sunni and Iran is Shiite, they do not like each other almost as much as they hate the infidels. One has nothing to do with the other. Secondly that was over a half century ago. At what point does your LAME, TIRED, WARN OUT EXCUSE for violence and barbarity wear thin? How many embassy's have to be invaded and hostages taken before they get over it? How many people have to be murdered in state sponsored terrorism all over the world before they get past it? It is an excuse. Just an excuse for behaving in a way that is beyond savagery.
' if your eyes are open you'll see why they hate us.'
They hate ME because I am a kafir, an 'unbeliever' who is not going to submit to sharia and who enjoys a lifestyle that demonstrates the counter productivity of their belief system. They hate ME because they are jealous that my society goes to the moon and theirs publicly lynches 16 year old girls for being 'disobedient.' They have ME because my society represents the future and theres represents a primitive past. They hate ME because my success underlines their failure. It is not MY fault that they are backward any more then it is my fault that you are stupid. They should either adapt, get used to it or attack the REAL reasons that they are in the mess that they are in instead of knocking down skyscrapers because they can't build any.
'If not, you'll continue to blame only them.'
They ARE the only ones to blame. They will continue to be murdering monsters until the whole world stops making excuses for their savagery.
'I suspect you're only capable of doing the latter.'
I suspect that you have your cranium shoved up your backside, idiot.
Calling me an 'apologist for terrorists' is pure comedy.
Apparently you were unable to comprehend the part where I said punishing 'the guilty' would be true justice?
But I do say that not everyone is guilty, simply because 'you say they are.'
(Why does applying fair justice scare you so? ... If someone is truly guilty, they will be subject to punishment, as they should)
(If you were confident in their guilt, then fair justice should be no threat to you)
Hey Clueless ... ALL of my posts are about defending TRUE American principles, and not abandoning them from fear (as you advocate).
You've made yourself a joke.
Again, you've shown yourself incapable of higher thought.
You simply refuse to grasp higher principles, and enjoy wallowing in your base ignorance and hatred.
Go ahead, make up more incorrect ass-umptions about me.
Show us more of your laughable genius.
... the contradiction in our nations foreign policy.
Our government says 'We're spreading American democracy and freedom' ...
Yet, in it's actions around the world, it denies TRUE American justice.
You're just too stupid to see, and understand that contradiction.
You make yourself a fool ... an ignorant, hypocrite, fool.
“Calling me an 'apologist for terrorists' is pure comedy.”
Really? Perhaps you don’t know how to speak English well enough to express yourself. When you write drivel like:
“When you go around the world imposing your will on people, at the ends of your guns and bombs, imprisonig[sic] and killing their innocent family members, they will grow ti[sic] hate you and they will strike back.”
What you are saying is that we brought 9/11 on ourselves with our bombing, imprisoning, killing the terrorists innocent families, etc. (Never mind that they had been attacking us for years… )
When you write sanctimonious nonsense like:
“you will blame only them instead of seeing your contribution for the reasons they hate you.”
You are saying that there was something, ANYTHING I could have done that would have justified or brought on something like 9/11.
When you write:
“Then you'll blame only them for it. Never admiting[sic] that it was you who've given them reason to hate you.”
You are saying, obviously, that we have done something which would justify flying aircraft full of human beings in to buildings full of human beings.
And you further show your ignorance and stupidity by writing:
“Read history of US invlovement[sic] in the middle east ( i.e.: Shah of Iran is only one example) ... if your eyes are open you'll see why they hate us.”
Which not only shows that you are grasping at straws to find an excuse for these monsters but you are too ignorant to understand the difference between Sunni/Shiite and Arab/Persian.
So yes, a terrorist apologist. Nothing on this earth could justify their atrocities. Nothing. They commit them all over the world against every other society that they come in to contact with. Look at the list of countries.
“Apparently you were unable to comprehend the part where I said punishing 'the guilty' would be true justice?”
You have blathered on about a lot of things, terrorist apologist. You have first said that the terrorists in Guantanamo Bay were “innocents” and implied that none of those who have been released from Guantanamo Bay ever rejoined their terrorism. When I pointed out that at least 30 have you started in moaning about “justice”. When I pointed out that they are not entitled to the same protections under the Constitution by US and International law you started in with how they are just poor kicked dogs who are attacking their abuser. When I called you on that and pointed out that they have been attacking us for YEARS before Afghanistan/Iraq and even 9/11 and nothing can legitimize their crimes you retreat back to “punishing 'the guilty' would be true justice…” You are a boring, repetitive, terrorist apologist idiot …
Obviously. That is what the military tribunals will do.
“Why does applying fair justice scare you so?”
It doesn’t. I would pull the lever myself.
“then fair justice should be no threat to you)
“
In order to achieve “Justice” men write laws. They do not qualify for or deserve protection under the Constitution and they are being treated as they are according to the international law which they violated. That is more then justice because they could, according to international law, have been summarily executed on the battlefield for being stateless and fighting out of uniform. If it makes you feel any better, a whole lot more have been given that true justice.
“ALL of my posts are about defending TRUE American principles,”
What the hell would you know about true American principals? As you have stated we brought all of this on ourselves for our “invlovement[sic] in the middle east”. Idiot.
“You simply refuse to grasp higher principles,”
There are no “higher principals” in play. It has been found that they warrant detention by a military review board and as soon as the tribunals have been sorted out they will render a just sentence. That is the law and that is justice.
“Our government says 'We're spreading American democracy and freedom' .”
Nope, idiot and liar, they just say “democracy and freedom'”. Neither the Iraqi nor Afghani parliaments are modeled after the republic in the USA. They are however a whole lot more democratic then what they replaced. “Freedom”, you unbelievable moron comes with responsibility. Those responsible for attacking us should not be allowed to run free nor should those who worked to enable them.
Pure comedy.
'Pure comedy.'
Laugh it up then, terrorist apologist. But your little pets are getting their justice, and there is more to come.
... arrogantly slapping the whole world in the face.
Then you can act surprised, offended and justified for slapping them again, when in response they refuse to help you.
You couldn't connect the dots if there were only two of them.
Your Talkback on this Story