250px-fidel_castro_-_mats_terminal_washington_1959-1Longtime Cuban leader Fidel Castro is dead at age 90. While many around the world spoke highly of Castro’s success in greatly reducing illiteracy and proving basic services like health care, I have long been critical of his reign and his enablers in the West. Whatever success he achieved, he did so through a brutal dictatorship that denied freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and other basic civil liberties. For those of us who grew up in the 60s and 70s, he was a defining character of our generation. The menace across the border. When we were being taught to shelter under our desks in any nuclear attack, it was his image with that of the Soviet premier that would be flashed across the screen. It was a time of utter madness and mania — on both sides of the Iron Curtain.

Castro clearly had the leadership skills and courage to be much more after overthrowing a corrupt puppet like President Fulgencio Batista. Instead, he elected to follow the Soviet communist model and reduced his economy to little more than an agrarian state that was frozen in time — as vividly shown by the cars from the 1950s that still drive around the island. He ordered the torture of thousands and the killing of opponents. It is certainly true that the United States has an equally horrific record in supporting Battista and his cronies and repeatedly trying to overthrow Castro or destroy the Cuban economy. However, Castro is quoted as saying that “history will absolve me.” Certainly there are some professors on the left who have always idealized dictators like Castro or Hugo Chavez. From Bernie Sanders to Dr. Jill Stein to  49ers Quarterback Colin Kaepernick there have been expressions of support for Castro’s record on educational and health benefits.  However, history can not wipe clean, let alone absolve, a man whose legacy is soaked in the blood and suffering of tens of thousands of political prisoners.

170px-cheyfidelHe was an interesting historical figure to be sure. Many do not know that Castro was a lawyer and came from a wealthy family. He was born in 1926 to a servant of a Cuban sugar plantation owner. He father eventually recognized him as his son but only when he was 17 and Castro then took his name. He attended Jesuit schools before joining the University of Havana law school. By then, he was a committed socialist. It was after the failed 1953 attack on a military barracks and the trial that he said in his own defense “history will absolve me.”

bundesarchiv_bild_183-l0614-040_berlin_fidel_castro_an_der_grenzeI do not question the remarkable life of someone who overthrow a dictator and stood off the world’s most powerful country. That took guts and leadership. However, he then replaced one dictatorship with his own dictatorship. People were tortured in the many of Communism rather than capitalism. Reporters and political dissidents were jailed in the name of the people. At a time when Communism was denying freedom in Eastern Europe and rolling tanks through the streets to prevent democratic elections, Castro embraced the Soviet empire. His government ultimately representing little beyond authoritarian power masked by collective rhetoric — a point driven home by the fact that he was replaced by his own brother like some Communist Aristocracy. Likewise, the claim of a government of the people would be a tad more convincing if the Castro brothers ever let the people choose their government. Instead, they jailed opponents, barred the free press, and stomped out any protests over their rule. Those apologists internationally (who often cite how teams of Cuban doctors would travel the world or literacy advances) did not live under their autocratic rule without democratic freedoms and basic rights.  Castro offered doctors and education in a trade for basic civil liberties. Only the greatest moral relativists viewed that as a fair trade.

Nevertheless, world leaders like Justin Trudeau expressed “great sorrow” at the passing of Castro.  Journalists like MSNBC Andrea Mitchell insisted Castro “will be revered” for “education and social services and medical care to all of his people.”  Really? He will be “revered” because he gave his people services while torturing and jailing those who wanted democracy? Mitchell may want to check out the free medical care that Castro gave people like Armando Valladares, who was initially a supporter of Castro but was arrested when (as a worker at the Office of the Ministry of Communications for the Revolutionary Government) he refused to put a plaque on his desk that read, “I’m with Fidel.” He was arrested and spent 22 years in Castro’s prisons being tortured, starved and left in solitary confinement. He might not be as reverential about those services, but then again Mitchell did not have to live under the dictatorship of the Castros.

One can certainly argue that he had little choice when the CIA was mounting aggressive attacks. However, Castro had long before adopted the ideology of the “people’s revolution.” It was simplistic and violent. It ultimately denied the fundamental human rights that belong to all people. He did so in the name of equality. He succeeded in achieving equality by reducing a society of a level only slightly above agrarian status and became a willing pawn for the Soviet Union. Without the shipments from Soviets to keep his population alive, his government would have collapsed. To this day, the island operates on the lowest level of economic exchanges and production. His unquestioned success on literacy and health care is no substitute for human rights. He placed his name on a long list of dictators who emerged from political and economic chaos. He did not end the brutality but merely justified it as a means for a new cause.

That is what history will remember about Fidel Castro.


  1. Don’t worry whoever that was. be happy! Your off the hook with the biker gangs.

  2. You folks are so focused on gamesmanship because you have a hand in that game that you forget there is some genuine humanity out there. She’s been screaming from Day One that the elections are rigged against third parties.

    Well siad.
    There is no doubt in my mind we would all have been better off had she been covered fairly. If Bernie was able to push Hillary that slightly to the left, imagine what Jill Stein would have done if allowed a voice. There is no doubt tin my mind Trump would not have won, nor would have Hillary unless she did a 180, and the political game would have changed certainly.
    The mere covering the Greens fairly, and allowing them into the debate would have turned this duopoly onto its head, perhaps for good.
    Whatever bad one may find to say about Jill Stein, being consistent and putting skin in the game in support ain’t it. How many candidates have been arrested that many times fighting for democracy and or people’s rights?

        1. Steve,
          I haven’t seen her
          articulate either a solid basis for the recount– it looks like a fishing expedition–nor have I heard her propose specific changes to the election laws.

          1. tnash: election officials in Wisconsin deemed her petitioning rationale reasonable. The petition is available in PDF. Just google it.

            As for what she wants changed vis-a-vis election law, even having to petition for a recount for a verified vote which should be automatic on request is one. Secondly, how do we get rid of optical scanning and other machine technology vulnerability without a recount showing that the count was flawed?

            She lays out others here:

            She used no teleprompter here.

            1. Thanks, Steve. I’ll be able to download the pdf and view the video when I get access to a device with the required bandwith.
              If these recounts reaffirm the orriginal results, it seems to me that they will be counterproductive.
              That is, if her objective is to show the unreliability/ vulnerability of optical scanners, etc., and no discrepancies are uncovered during these recounts, then she will have unintentionally bolstered confidence in the current voting systems/technology.

        2. Now I know the meaning of One Percenters. Suddenly it all makes sense….sort of….or something.

    1. The donations are small, too, not Soros-sized, and can be used only for the recount(s).

      While Vichy Democrats maintain their comfortable and hard-earned bliss, it’s Jill Stein who is doing the work to initiate a long look at election law.

      1. As I posted under another heading I see this as a move to gain or peel away members from a Party in serious trouble of suriving. Berne Sanders is doing the same from within. It strikes me that one or both of them are making good use of a non-issue to begin the 2020 campaign. Certainly in todays news we see evidence of that.

        a. Pelosi being re-elected by the old guard is a very stupid move as it guarantees votes to the other side since we now seemingly have a ….quasi….two party system …perhaps. At the least and for the moment the left can not longer count on the puppy chow vote of the RINO’s who are also facing, still a major revolt i the ranks. However they are not playing stupid as are the Democrats.

        b. Ground work for serious issues such as full citizenship for women with all rights and privileges of men again hit the news. No draft for women keeps them in a baby factory mode. What it should be doing is lining up the active but not used for the moment draft law for repeal. Yet they get full benefits without earning them as do the men.

        c. With the release of the popular vote ( figures Klein has no real other than making a non announcement for her bid as the first woman president or even vice president. Withor without Bernie Sanders. But it does enhance the take over a larger portion of the demo’s and the figures acted as a second political death sentence for the losing candidate. You’ll see but Clinton did not get a majority of the popular vote. 48.2 to be exact. 51.8 voted against her. Add her tantrums and other mental/physical/age/and moral problems that one is gone.

        d.Jill Klein is certainly bright enough to raise a large amount of money very fast. even for a lost cause which makes her a worthy potential standard bearer for 2020.

        I cannot discount the reasoning behind all of this is the 2020 race. Hillary’s announcements of another run and Chelsea running for office both fell flat on their face.

        What I, in agreement with Squeakie Fromm have in common is an interest in Tulsi Gabbard. Interesting background including vice chair of DNC and mght end up working their again. Once the over the cliff bus wreck crew are removed. Klein or Gabbard are two very different but very elibible possibilties. The inside and outside moves by Bernie Sanders and Klein can only help rebuild the train wreck.

        Whats her name. Ahh is now branded as a Klintonite She has no chance except helping opponents get more votes. Excess useless baggage.

        1. Michael: election integrity is a non-issue? I think this is a sincere effort to prove we need change in election laws from prohibiting optical scanning all together to universal ballot forms including all of the parties’ primary candidates on one open ballot and all parties’ nominees on one open ballot to prohibiting superdelegates, and so forth.

          As for the Vichy Democrats, they haven’t changed one bit. The party itself is excess baggage. Schumer and Pelosi?? Bernie gets to be leader of party outreach? Way to go, Bernie! Glad you stuck it out with your colleagues rather than team up with Jill.

          1. Now! Your are getting the picture. Before the DNC can build new track and put the engine on new wheels it has to get rid of the wreckage. In their own way both Sanders and Klein are helping to do exactly that. Insert here all you suggested. I reckon with miracles an eight year project otherwide 12 to 20. At best.

      2. Steve Groen – Jill Stein has said in her mailers that the money could be used for the recount, but may not be. She has 3m more than she needs if she hit all targets.

        1. Paul: I know you’re required to be Guy Noir, but that she has three million more than she needs is false. She doesn’t have enough for all three states and will be requesting more donations as of two days ago.

          1. Perception Management verson. Is Jill adding to her campaign account for 2020? I like subjectivism As a system it’s very very useful and there is no moral issue involved. Tit for Tat.

            1. Michael: It would violate federal election law were she to use the money for her campaign or the Green Party. She’s acknowledged that.

              You’ve been in Sonora too long. 🙂

              1. Having a fund on hand that can be used at a later time may be characterized as perception management and remain legal. Or she could refund it but currently it’s mere presence is enough. She’s running for office and this is her ticket to media involvement. You haven’t been in Sonora long enough. What is done and what is thought to have been done are two entirely different things. Then to how was the request fo rfunding worded. The one that came to my email box stated, “May not be used for stated purpose.” Didn’t exaamine the receipt didn’t donate.

              2. She says part of the $6 million is going for “voter integrity” programs and the advisory opinions from the FEC on the topic are nonexistent on that point. It’s unclear what she’ll do with the excess money and about the only thing she can’t do is spend it on her campaign.

                1. Jill Stein’s original goal was to raise $2.5 million for the recoints.
                  As the contributions blew past that goal, the “cost” of the recpunts seemed to go up dramatically.
                  I think she’s at $6.8 million now, but she now “needs” c.$10 million for the recoints.
                  I guess inflation is skyrocketing much higher for her cause.

                  1. One reason was the States are fed uip with the antics. Wisconsin found only 300 miscounted with no evidence of meddling. Both Michigan and Pennsylvania had similar results and Michigan just finished a hand count while Pennsylvania recount time limits are already expiring. So far the only significant outcomes were Trump getting 303 electoral votes and Hillary’s popular vote ‘win’ fell below to 42.8 percent with 57.2 voting against her.

                    The reaction of the three states is what led me to conclude the reason is more publicity for a future effort EXcluding Hillary but featuring Klein and her growing Green party. The comment the money can’t be used for campaigning is true but there are ways and one is name in lights doesn’t hurt while oblivion is the kiss of death Klein vs Klinton.

                    1. A joke to you would have been a steamroller had she had the money Clinton or Trump had. And now we’ll all have front row seats to a maturing fascism.

                2. But at the same time ‘name in lights and media’ which in effect is a part of campaigning and in a very positive manner. She is making herself valuable to not on the Green Movement but eventually those who inherit the DNC once the current deadwood is taken to the trash. Nothing wrong with that and the other upside is it reminds the Constitutionalists about the whole sordid mess AND reminds the RINOS they can still be trashed the same way. One thing I didn’t mind was McCollum’s wife getting a cabinet position she has experience and competence to spare. It also shows he understands which side of the bread to find the butter. All in all so far depending on the key positions left at State and Defense not bad .I see a second red herring distractor was dragged across the media screens for VA. That Hawaii Rep would make a better choice with her still serving military background AND get one of their superior members out of that Congressional chair.

                  1. Name in lights? She was the the fourth-leading vote-getter in the general election! Why were you not calling her out for trying to get her name in lights when she was protesting at Standing Rock, or being arrested for demonstrating, or calling out the Establishment parties for the self-centered conservatives they are??

                    You folks are so focused on gamesmanship because you have a hand in that game that you forget there is some genuine humanity out there. She’s been screaming from Day One that the elections are rigged against third parties.


          2. Steve Groen – the required deposits for the 3 states combined is 2 mill. When she got the 2 mill so fast she suddenly upped it to 5 mill. However, you have to be a lawyer to read her ‘contract’ with her donors. 🙂

    1. My brother looks nothing like my father. He is still my father’s son. This is silly.

        1. Chelsea looks like their Whitewater Banker friend from Arkansas but she’s got to be at least half Clinton look how she’s turning out. Let’s see Hillary and the banker. Would explain the preoccupation with money. That was pure unsupported gratuitous spite of the subjectivist kind but so was gloating over watching the reporters, pundits, apologists and DNC crowd crawl like slugs trying to point fingers – not realizing slugs have no fingers.

          OK back to reality and one sample of a coincidental clue from history. It’s called the royal wave and is given palm in in a sort of up and down motion as if the King, Queen whatever was doing everyone a favor to take notice they exist. Think back to the first nominationg Convention for Clinton in the what 92? The entire family was brought on stage including the house princess. The crowd erupted on cue with cheers and applause. Remember how Chelsea waved? You got it.

          My sibling says she’s being groomed to be President and whoops Chelsea is already been announced as a probable Candidate for Congress. Question is when old enough to be a Senator or ….Representative…. or Governor? Move over Hillary you had your turn Chelseas taking over.

              1. I met Webb Hubbell once. He was a heck of a nice guy (a good ol’ boy), a huge guy (maybe 6’4″ and 280lbs.), a fellow alum of UofA SOL, former Mayor of Little Rock, and a heck of a trial lawyer. I remember once seeing him in a Little Rock chancery (probate) court cross-examining a Catholic priest who was trying to take from estate proceeds an alleged oral gift to his church. The first words out of Webb’s mouth were, “Do you know you’re trying to take the food out of the mouths of two children?!”

                1. That’s terrible cross-examination. Objectionable in every court with the possible exception of those in Arkansas.

                  1. Mespo: True, but the question was rhetorical. Of course it was objectionable, but so was a priest contesting a valid will on the basis of an alleged oral gift in a state which does not permit bequests other than in writing.

                    1. It’s unethical to ask a question you know beforehand is irrelevant or designed merely to embarrass or impugn. Do you really practice law?

                    2. Mespo: I’ll premise my response by stating we’re all students of the law until we retire or die, whichever occurs first, and especially of evidence in the courtroom.

                      As was your question to me were it on cross-examination in the courtroom, Hubbell’s question was argumentative. It was designed to persuade the trier of fact rather than to elicit information and therefore it was objectionable. On the other hand, in the judicial officer’s discretion, argument may be allowed on cross-examination of a hostile witness.

                      You characterize “embarras[sing] or impugn[ing]” a hostile witness as unethical. Half the attorneys in the US are pugnacious. Imagine a defense lawyer in a civil sexual assault action being prevented from asking intimate questions or those which might assail the victim.

                      Perhaps the ABA rules allude to something along the lines of not making reference to irrelevant evidence or evidence not supported by admissible evidence, but you should clarify which rule that is and how the question would not be supported by admissible evidence of a decedent’s two daughters’ portion of their father’s estate being distributed to a church on an alleged oral bequest. I’d sure be interested in knowing what it is.

                      The state in which I am licensed does not follow the ABA rules and, here, I have never seen a disciplinary opinion for argument during questioning unless the judicial officer has warned counsel and the inappropriate behavior continues and is so over the top that it violates another rule of professional responsibility.

                      At any rate, if you would, please let me know the rule in your jurisdiction that reflects the question “Do you know you’re trying to take the food out of the mouths of two children?!” during cross examination was unethical.

                    3. There is no showing the priest was “hostile” since you said the question “was the first thing out of his mouth” on cross-exam. In fact, your narrative proves he wasn’t even belligerent. Now, he may have been an adverse witness to our bombastic Mr. Hubbel but he surely wasn’t hostile and even if he was hostile attempting to get impermissible character evidence before a jury when you know it’s wrong to do so is unethical in every state — even yours. As for us all being students of the law, that’s true but your degree, experience and licensure are supposed to insure that you’re closer to a doctoral student than a kindergartener. All you prove to me is that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

                    4. Perhaps I didn’t make clear that the priest was contesting the will and being cross-examined by Mr. Hubbell who was the beneficiaries’ attorney. In other words, they were opposing parties with a competing interest in the litigation.

                      Do you have an ethics rule from your jurisdiction which reflects that argument is unethical or are personal attacks your way of passing the day?

                      Put up or pipe down.

                    5. You obviously don’t know the difference between and adverse witness and a hostile one despite me explaining it to you. They aren’t the same. I’d suggest you read an evidence book before you embarrass yourself even more.

                    6. mespo: I’ll assume you have zero authority for your assertion that Hubbell’s argumentative question on cross-exam was unethical. You’ve lost my trust in your ability to be candid.

                    7. I’m not your researcher and I’m damn sure you’re never be mine, but you seem to need the ethics primer. In the interests of your clients, you can start with ABA Model Rules 3:4 and 3:5 and then work your way to your own local rules.

                    8. There is nothing in ABA Rule 3.4 or 3.5 which applies to argumentative cross-examination that I have not already explained several posts ago, namely, 3.4(e) [in trial, allud[ing] to any matter that the lawyer does not reasonably believe is relevant or that will not be supported by admissible evidence, relevant evidence or evidence leading to admissible evidence].

                      Hubbell’s question was rhetorical, but it certainly was relevant to the effect of a distribution to someone other than to the decedent’s heirs were the witness trying to change Arkansas probate law on oral gifts.

                      It’d be interesting to see whether argumentative cross-examination was ever referred to a state disciplinary board unless it was so over the top it constituted something akin to civil harassment. I’d think the judicial officer would be subject to discipline before it got to that point, however.

                      Keep trying. I’m all ears, and we can both learn from this.

                    9. Asking a lawyer about ethics? That truly strains the limits of credulity and gives oxymoron a new lease on life. Ethics for a lawyer is defined by those who can pay their fee and so are it’s limits. One reason they should not be allowed to hold public office especially at the federal level where the oversight is non-existent. Apologies for any spelling error. My fingers were at odds with LMAO.

                    10. Fees are on thing; ethics are another. I know many extremely ethical attorneys who charge a boot full, and then there are the others. It’s the same in any profession. For instance, insurance executives (per se), some physicians who keep people addicted for that monthly consultation fee and prescription (remember the end of Michael Jackson and Prince?), CEOs of federal governments who kill to strengthen an otherwise mediocre to poor economy, and the like.

                    11. Excuse my sense of humor I had a picture in mind of a lawyer defending and/or prosecuting a lawyer and thought of the fox guarding the fox guarding the hen house. However it did enhance my day! something tells me the Founders left that requirement off Supreme Court qualifications using their demonstated superior foresight. Now I shall go laugh some more.


                    12. Michael: Point well-taken re SCOTUS. “We’re not last because we’re right; we’re right because we’re last,” a paraphrasing of OW Holmes, Jr.’s famous quote, comes to mind.

                    13. Even that quote while accurate is untrue. The court is not the last stop. It is Supreme until the ultimate source of power the American Citizens exert their will and through a variety of mechanisms. Through direct and representative democracy at the local level or first level of government and if they are responsible it creates a solid foundation That vote extends up to selecting all State Elected Officers and delegates to the federal congress. The only place it stops but shouldn’t stop is recall for those delegates to Washington D.C. and of course the Federal Income tax which allowed direct control of their money . Two mistakes.

                      It extends into the second their using the principles of a Constitutional Republic and the major fault their is accepting a dismantling of checks and balances and accepting by continuing to vote for anti-constitutional Congressionals who created the Fourth Branch with each agency containing it’s own lawmakers, law enforcers and courts and none with oversight. That’s two more mistakes. Responsible Citizens would not countenance such activities withoug swift action at the ballot box.

                      it extends every fourth year into selecting electors and indicating a preference in candidates then, as this year, rejecting all of those selected by a party system that had become simply The Government Party

                      That was no mistake. That was independent thinking responsible citizens exercising their ultimate power and firing a clear final warning shot. The main target? Well suffice to say the Republican Hierarchy was part and parcel. They seem to have received the message.. Maybe. But the end was the majorit of precincts, districts, state governments, and in the end choosing a flawed outsider as the preferred choice over the offeirng of the current party system prevailed. And they did it by paying attention as did that campaign to what was important. Fifty percent plus one in each State that uses winner take all.

                      In the end the loser did not have a majority of the popular vote but lost to a coalition of strange bedfellows which included the Greens and Libertarians. 48.2 percent to 51.8%.

                      And true to their Oath of Office the military in the ranks of it’s combat soldiers including those who had been part of a 50% reduction in time of war voted two to one with ballots not bullets.

                      Only because the Constitution still lived. Absent that. their next step might well have been honoring their oath of office.

                      The self governing free thinking, independent and responsible citizens are the Ultimate Source of power and outrank the Court and the combined forces of the government and those who would replace it.

                      Just as the founders designed the system. Three tiers. Direct Democracy, Representative Democracy, Constitutional Republic a lesson forgotten by too many.

                      My dream changes? Automatic ejection of those engaged judicial mattes and those engaged in writing tlaw from the Executive Branch. Sent back to their proper homes in the Judicial and Legislative Branch who having said they needed expert advise can accept them or reject them.

                      Followed by replacing the fascist income tax with an end user consumtion tax

                      Followed by repealing the draft laws.

                      and allowing the States to individually decide how to select their employee delegates to the federal Congress direct, by their legislature or a mix. WITH the power of recall.

                      Followed by changing the Act of Succession to exclude any who had no votes at all the Cabinet Secretaries and elevating those who had the most votes the Senators.

                      Followed by No funding no mandate

                      and one more

                      If you may not vote you may not contribute. Simply defined by each precincts voters pamphlet and ballot.

                      That should be enough should follow automatically.

                      Ultimate Supreme Authority? The Citizens. over Government.

                    14. “Via the Free Beacon, I’m not exaggerating in the headline. It’s a verbatim quote. And he’s saying this in defense of re-electing Nancy Pelosi as minority leader. “At least we have some proven leadership that can, you know, take us into what’s going to be a new era,” or something. “says Emanuel Cleaver.”

                      Apparently the search for a new leadership and stategy is going to include really bad bus drivers. with proven records of major train wrecks. I added the ‘or something’ so it wasn’t in quotes.l
                      Cleaver is apparently some sort of something in what’s left of the Democratic circles. That part wasn’t explained

                      Any relation to Eldridge?


                    15. Soooo having beat this one to death what’s going on in the world today?

                      Turlow is still on vacation or off speechifying
                      Hillary received one vote (1) count it. From Wisconsin recount*

                      “Amherst MA decided to join the UN” and is requesting federal funding to meet he rather large membership fees.

                      “Unknown clothing designers are jumping ont he ‘what’s her name’ bandwagon seeking to become unkown. My advice. Start designing clothes worth the price. Frump Look didn’t cut for the first protester. Now really does anyone really believe that a former model of Mrs. Trumps current stature doesn’t already have her own designers. She didn’t get that perfectly turned out look from Fabrique Frump. I’m betting her designers are not unknowns and for good reason. They are successful at their profession. She pays on time.

                      I like the idea of staying at home with the children..good move and the First Lady put down by politicians is nothing but a way to promote an Imperial Presidency Fortunately the last one found out royalty sometimes get to meet another well known designer Madame Guillotine. In her present reincarnation the one who counts the votes that count.

                      I wanted to say something nice about the left. According to statistics on all levels of government = they left. Bon Voyage.

                      I wanted to say something nice about Benita Pelosillyni. She’s a top vote getter for Constitutionalists.

                      The value of he rest of the news is borne out by the lack of topics being posted.

                      Speaks for itself.

                      And that’s all the news that ‘s fit to print.

                    16. That “famous OWH quote” you paraphrased was actually said by Justice Robert H. Jackson: “We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final.”

            1. With perception management an old story that had legs in the 80’s and 90’s will be remembered and a subjective style comment here and there will it give fresh legs. Never underestimate the stupidity of the other side. In both directions. the story about Trumps big tax deduction will be remembered as Chelsea’s Dad signed a law that directly benefited his quote family charitable foundation unquote and Chelsea’s 800 million dollar salary. That one has five verifiable truths. Plenty of non prosecutable ammuntion for any tabloid. As I said she will have to distance her self from the family pecadillos and survive the ongoing investigations. A lot of baggage. It’s like making your house LOOK like it’s heavily burglar proofed while your neighbors made theirs look inviting. a DNC selection committee would have to take all that into account before agreeing to face another train wreck. And the perception of the voter, as was just proved, is all that matters. Hey …it’s politics. A nasty business at best.

          1. Chelsea lacks her mother’s drive and focus and shows no evidence of her father’s narcissism either. Her local congressman has been in office for 23 years and is 70 years old, so she might have the opportunity soon. OTOH, the local congressman paid her dues holding lesser offices. There might be people in line who’d say if Chelsea wants the seat, she’s going to have to hustle for it. The Clintons don’t own Manhattan the way the Kennedy’s own Boston.

            1. Who mentioned any limits? Senator, Governor, Representative. There was certainly no problem finding a safe seat for her Mom. As for drive. Sh’es got a freaking PhD. What she doesn’t have is credibility that passing the IRS exam and distance in time from Mom and Dad won’t cure. Perception Management was after all an invention of the left and a very useful tool.

              1. No. She’s wandered through several different careers over the last 15 years: McKinsey-type consulting, academic administration, broadcasting, &c. Now she works in her parents’ cruddy enterprise. She has several graduate degrees in disparate subjects, but never tried her hand at teaching. She’s a dilettante by nature. She isn’t dangerous like her mother. Her adversaries at the foundation dumped little turds in the press about her (“she is very difficult”), but we now have a good idea that she called attention in internal memoranda to corrupt practices by certain characters.

                No one ‘found’ a safe seat for her mother. The New York Democratic Party sachems just rolled over and played dead when she said she wanted the seat. No one challenged her. (Recall that Caroline Kennedy indicated to Gov. Patterson that she’d like the seat when Hilligula resigned from it and was told no; not everyone gets the starf**** treatment). Partisan Democrats had a reactive devotion to the Clintons as a consequence of the hatred that is essential within them. That made her salable in a constituency she’d never lived in before. (Robert Kennedy was living in NoVa when he was elected to the Senate, but he’d at least spent a double-digit span of years living on-and-off in Westchester between 1926 and 1952; Daniel Patrick Moynihan had spent 13 years living in New York and had returned there to take a diplomatic post, not run for office; James Buckley lived just 3 miles over the border).

          1. True, but it’s historically based on what is probably another untrue story about the Whitewater Banker being Chelsea’s bioogical daddy. When a family acts as that one has and does they are wide open to much further leaps of the imagination and scrutiny than those who are just plain folks. The announcement about Chelsea running for office and eventually President (implied) will mean distancing that connection and defeating that image IF she gets pas the financial investigations of the IRS A connection, no matter how tenuous, and subjetively unverified between a banker and someone so involved with money (she’s reported now the richest Clinton ) here company even advertising in the conservative blogs will not go un-noticed. Objectively speaking I would have to see some proof but then half the nation is tabloid oriented and anything but objective.

            1. My mother never met James McDougal. This whole discussion is utter nonsense.

              1. Keep beleiving that. It’s how we got votes. Borrowed that system from the media. Works great. Thanksfor the win.

  3. Some interesting comparison photos on Twitter alleging Justin Trudeau is the love child of Fidel.

  4. Michael, there is no objectivism as objectivism is subjective.
    Everything that makes you up came before you knew yourself. Your lineage, your name, your ethnicity, your locale, your upbringing and the morality that derived from it, are not yours. You are just acting them. Even the fact you think you are free from those influences reflect how embedded they are in you.
    Additionally there is a privilege that comes with being from an affluent society that you would not have otherwise, and while the less privileged does not have a choice upon which morality to choose, you can decide the exact morality to choose, unaware you are that in that, you are not displaying objectivism, you are displaying subjectism.
    Even so, there is a morality that is wired in you, and wired in almost every human being (hence the universality of it). You cannot choose whether or not to cringe before murder, you just do, unless you never did, casued by an emotional imbalance or you managed to override your emotional response to such immorality, which makes you a psychopath.

    1. You are a very sad person. We have a rule for people like you. Turn your back and walk away. You are not worth the effort.

      1. WE?
        What rule?
        Sad? Me???
        I knew you had me confused with someone else, Mike.
        It is universally acknowledged I am always worth the effort… 🙂

      1. I don’t refuse its claim to a name, or a definition, Mespo, I respond to it that it is fallacious. There is no objectivism when the starting point is subjective. It is akin to stating you will from now on process everything as a man. Well, you have no say in being a man, you were born one, raised as one, processed everything as one, the fact you are now consciously processing everything as the man you think you are does not change the fact that seminal moment of choosing who you are was brought along/about by your whole lifetime of indoctrination.
        In other words, who you are now, makes you who you are from now on. And who you are now is made up of who you were then.

  5. While I agree with Turley’s critique of Castro on the civil liberties front, I do have to note that Castro was under invasion, constant attack, sabotage, mass murder, and bombing jet airliners out of the sky by the USA. The US was the SAME AS CUBA back when I was growing up in that regards during the Cold War and McCarthyism. So I think that if we are to judge our Presidents the same way as Castro, then we should not give any credit to Truman, Eisenhower, JFK, and LBJ for their terms of office in what they did. It is only recently as an adult that I have experienced free elections in the US, and that is being eroded today. I also have to ask what would be the reaction in the US if we faced a similar situation as the Cubans did? Given the FACT that the US had no real fear of being invaded by the Soviets, we still had similar crimes against us by the US government. So I think that the US would have behaved in a similar manner as Castro.

    I thought Castro was pretty good until he supported the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia in an outlandish manner. While I would not expect him to denounce the Soviet Union since he was very dependent on them, he could have kept his mouth shut or done a pro forma statement. As Gorbachev said in his book, that invasion appalled him and many in the Soviet Union as well as throughout Eastern Europe. That was the final nail in the coffin for Stalinism. I just did not think it would take so long to fall.

    While it is true that there are political prisoners in Cuba, and that there are injustices in that regards, they pale in comparison to the regimes the US IMPOSED on most of the countries in Latin America. The number of people killed by Castro as insignificant compared to the 200,000 dead in Guatemala, 20,000 dead in Chile, 30,000 dead in Argentina, 10,000 in Brazil, 80,000 in El Salvador, and the list is almost endless in the blood soaked US regimes. The last figures I saw was about 200+ in Cuba who were executed. That applies mainly to actual terrorists, not political prisoners. There are no death squads runing around as they are in Honduras now and in El Salvador in the past. They even murdered a Catholic Archbishop while he was saying mass! Yet the US SUPPORTED that regime even after murdering four American nuns! When you can show such mass bloodletting, then I will join in denouncing Castro for his regime and his legacy. I always say about historical figures and policies to look at the times and the context. THEN make your judgement.

    1. I do have to note that Castro was under invasion, constant attack, sabotage, mass murder, and bombing jet airliners out of the sky by the USA.

      This has no reality outside your imagination.

      The US was the SAME AS CUBA back when I was growing up in that regards during the Cold War and McCarthyism. S

      You’re either a moron or you’re lying about your biography. Sen. McCarthy and and the House Un-American activities committee were a threat and an irritant to a modest corps of government officials and entertainment industry figures (who were generally not themselves defensibly motivated people). They faced, at worst, dismissal from the job they held.

      1. I know I didn’t sleep through any of that. Tell me. Were you even alive back then? Were your sources for al lthat alive back then. OK Po II time to get on google and find some facts to back up that astounding historical rewrite.

        1. Alive back when?

          The United States did not ‘impose’ any government on any country with the qualified exception of that of Carlos Castillo Armas, who died in 1957, Guillermo Endara (elected but not permitted to take office by the Panamanian military), and Jean-Bertraind Aristide (re-installed in 1994). Several countries were suffering from bloody insurgency and counter-insurgency, but the political violence was derived from their own internal dynamics.

          What’s amusing about Latin America is that nearly every leftoid who comments on it utters historical howlers. They’re not referencing history, but their own disordered and static infested minds.

          1. That makes more sense because I don’t remember any non stop air attacks on Cuba by anyone etc.etc. etc. Back when refers to when all those non stop air attacks were taking place.

      2. First off you forget the FACT that the Congress passed the Communist Control Act of 1954, and the DoJ sent over 100 people to prison for membership in an outlawed party. In Texas as I recall, they tried to make membership a death penalty offense. Then we had the fact that many states in the South outlawed the NAACP among other organizations. The terrorist KKK was OK as were lynchings, and the Congress tried to outlaw lynchings and failed to do so. Then there were the parents of a friend of mine who had to flee to France to avoid prison. The figures of those in prison were not as large as they would have been because so many people had to flee from the “land of the free”. It is the land of the free as long as you agree with the authorities, but that is true of every dictatorship too. Also another person I knew lost his job as a chemist at an oil company when the FBI went to his workplace and told his company to fire him. He was a much decorated WWII veteran who was in the 10th Mountain division and had some of the worst combat in the ETO having to fight in the Italian Alps.

        The fact is that the US promoted attacks by Cuban exiles along with actual CIA attacks, in addition to the Bay of Pigs invasion. The US refused to extradite the Cuban who blew up a Cuban jetliner that was climbing out of Barbados, killing all on board. The US also gave refuge to a Russian who shot and killed the captain and a flight attendant of an Aeroflot plane which he forced to Turkey. It seems that our terrorists are GOOD while theirs are bad.

        Then we have the fact that when I was growing up in that era, black and Mexican Americans could not vote for the most part in all of the South and other states to one degree or another. One has to wonder how many citizens can have their political rights abrogated and still be called a “free” country or have “free elections”. In many counties in the South black Americans were a majority, yet they could not even vote! Needless to say, many books were banned in the US at that time as well. One of the more memorable experiences I had in college was the chance to read a book that was not officially banned, but all the press run had been confiscated and burned, The Hidden History of the Korean War. The book was out of print, and the copy I read was smuggled in from Canada and had been zeroxed so that I had to read it by lifting the pages up as I went along. Then there are the numerous books that have been banned by many states in addition to the Federal bans.

        Cuba does have a limited democratic system in which independents can run for office and many have won their elections. I certainly do NOT regard those elections as free or fair. Then as far as the US imposing dictatorships, I knew a fellow USAF troop who worked with me who was part of the US invasion of the Dominican Republic to prevent the return of Juan Bosch who had been overthrown. The US paid Pinochet $5 million dollars to overthrow the freely elected government of Chile. Then Bush tried to overthrow Chavez in Venezuela, but failed on that one. Almost ALL of those dictators in Latin America were trained and supported by the US. There was ZERO objections from the US government while they were one thousand times more bloody and repressive than anything Castro ever did. By comparison to the US supported dictators, Castro was a Saint! Just run up the totals of dead bodies from our good dictators and Castros. it is no contest.

        1. Ours? I thought you were Canadian however you have one thing right the totals of those killed by our principal war monger party is worth mentioning. Invasion of Mexico, WWI, Banana Republic incursions, WWII, Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Operations in Central America, countries of the former Yugoslavia, and currently Syria and Afghanistan All Democrats. The War Powers Acts which applied after Grenada was never complied with.

          The other party Republicans before they became RINOs?

          Kuwait *

          *War Powers Act complied with.

          This lasted until the other party became the right wing of the left in what for practical purposes was a single party system.

          Ratio of US Service personnel killed (never mind allies and the opponents and collaterals) since WWII 18 to 1. A soldier is 18 times more likely to die if the war mongers start the conflict. This has dropped drastically with Kuwait 105 or so and Iraq several hundred while the others are in the thousands.

          Check any Times Almanac pubished annually for the breakdown and exact figures.

          While I don’t go along with a lot of what you wrote this particular subject is open knowledge and published annually.

          Having been in the Infantry and a few other odds and ends combat units that ratio is burned indelibly in my mind.

              1. The numbers used for Cuba run from 10,000 to 100,000 all significantly less than the body count of the XXth Century under leadership fo the Progressives. WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Easily found statistics in any annual Almanac. That would be Wilson, FDR, Truman and LBJ. Those numbers are broken down into several related categories but do not include opponents and deaths caused by the opponents which for Socialist Leaders like Hitler and Stalin ran into the multi millions and of course the top scorer of all Mao Tze Dung. Methods run from execution, imprisonment, genocide, starvation, and of course just sending troops mostly conscripts off to wars. WWII was justifiable IF the returning soldiers hadn’t began voting for that which they had just fought and defeated. The end of that tunnel is nowhere in sight.

                Vote for War Mongers you get Wars.

                1. I’ll take the over bet and say at least 150,000 including civilian persecution and soldier deaths from dalliances abroad, not to mention untold citizens shot while trying to escape with no records of it.

                  1. I forgot that major effort in Angola for one. That was a big time troop deployment. Starting with five to six thousand ground troops, and both attack and cargo aircraft the total amount is listed from 20,000 to 36,000 with half being withdrawn which may account for the two figures. I have found no record of Cuban casualties so far.

              2. Toads: Once you pull aside the curtain, maybe we’ll have a view of the real Wiz. Until you do though, you’re just a black and whit facade on a screen.

            1. Steve Groen – Castro has a much smaller country, fewer people to kill. Stalin killed more of his people than the Germans did and they still have him in a mausoleum. Mao killed millions of his own people. Pol Pot the same. Aside from wars, these are probably the big three. As for killing in war, reasons for body counts get dicey. During the Civil War and WWI, sanitation was poor so more soldiers died of other causes then directly of their wounds. WWII sanitation is much better. Korea frostbite was a huge problem. Vietnam we had fewer deaths because we could helicopter them to a medic station almost immediately. And medics are attached to most units.


            easyi to find unverified estimates range from 10,000 to 100,000. Human Rights organizations also compiled figures. Most were executions and most in the 70’s and 80s from the former Batista Government and the former ‘establishment.’ The phrase “Paredon!” after a one minute or so trial conducted by Raul Castro and Ernesto Guevara was made famous in these ‘no defense allowed’ proceedings.

            The standing rule after any fascist socialist revolution is is don’t leave any opposition and especially not your own trained agents It varies according to the situation.

            The alternative to ‘Paredon’ which translates as To The Wall was imprisonment on the Isle of Pines.

            Accorfidng to Human Rights which either a shill for the left or a shill for the right what ever that rmeans indicates there was plenty of blood on the hands of the Castro Brothers Inc. Ernesto after a series of failures playing the revolutionary without Fidel was turned over the Bolivian Military by local farmers tired at his little group of five or six Cubans constants theft of foods and reportedly a few daughters – Against the express advice and request of the USA Government who did not wish to create a martyr – they thought it more useful to let him keep playing the discredited fool – he was executed. and oc ourse became a sainted martyr in much of places like USA college campus’s but not in much of South and Central America.

            Compared to the Soviets whose government murder rate ran into the millions using starvation as a tool (Ukraine 1930s) They easily surpassed fellow socialist Adolf Hitlers score by double – of their own citizens. Castro was a small potato piker.and Mao Tze Dung is still the undisputed leader. of mass murderers. Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein also made the list with massive numbers.

            The refereces are as readily available as a weather report from Intellicast.

            Looking back some hundreds of years Ghenghis Khan and some of the other similar mid Asian effort scores were recorded and nothing to sneeze at. Temujin however gave cities and city states a chance to capitulate and if refused ‘stacked skulls.’

            Being more enlightened the USA just used the draft laws and sends it’s ‘best and brightest’ off to war althought the Civil War and WWII vie for most killed in direct conflicts and resulting diseases and other medical conditions.

            To date the ‘forces of progressivism hold top honors in numbers killed being the far and away major proponents of war in the nation’s history. and is still continuing.

            1. We’ve killed more innocent people since 2003 than Castro ever did.

              So what if we haven’t killed as many citizens of the US as Castro did Cubans. The attempt to distinguish domestic homicide from regime change and the high foreign civilian homicide rate is disingenuous.

              1. It was also my point if you read both posts carefully. While far from innocent Castro Inc. are no where near the top scoring USA. All part of the Great Twentieth Century Socialist Wars. In which the USA definitely participated under Wilson, FDR, LBJ and in it’s second hundred years.

                1. Michael: Because W Bush and his cronies initiated regime change in Iraq, you’re implying they’re socialists.

                  Regime change is about economic expansionism, a textbook fascist motivation.

                  1. Pay attention I DO NOT USE progressivce leftist PC definitions. But since Left Right is so ingrained I will give some corrected definitions

                    Left = Government over citizens
                    Center = Supporters of the Constitution and the Constitutional Republic with it’s respresentative democracy foundation
                    Right = Citizens Over Government it’s the home of the old Divine Right of Kings replaced by the ultimate Source of Power the individual citizens

                    Since the leftist definition is completely worthless I reject it out of hand.

                    Question: How do you catagorize the Republican In Name Only controlled Republican Party and their constant caving to the left? They are Government over Citizens. You may consider them to be the right wing of the left and not much else.

                    Those are useful definitions of realpolitik. Bush I who over saw the massive build up of the federal police state (from 3 to around 30 agencies followed by Clinton ‘Bush II and Obama can hardly be called anything but left wing using a useful defijnition.

                    You can create your own or you can use that propagandized into existence by the Progressives left.

                    I choose not to do so. It isn’t useful.

                    Unlike some I can articulate my reasons beginning with …The center of a Constitutional Republic IS the Constitution it is ‘NOT “the center of the left. If you think otherwise re-read the Military’s Oath of Office.

                    1. My apologies I didn’t provide a complete answer. Since the left is almost if not completely left wing and definitely supports forms of fascism (small f) such as the income tax and dismantling checks and balances etc etc etc and the RINOs support the left ergo sum they support a form of socialism. Their support of the Welfare State another example. As Carlin said, The fascist left is alive and well. Government and it’s fascist Fourth Branch of Government is irrefutable proof of that. For me. And my version of the political spectrum stands the test of being useful. Apparently a lot of unexpected voters agreed preferring the ‘ how did that one description go. Ah yes. Voting this year is like gambling. If you want a socialist dictatorship Hillary is a 100% sure thing. With Trump it’s like buying as lottery ticket. That vote came from people who prefer a lottery ticket to a socialist autocracy.

                  2. “Regime change is about economic expansionism, a textbook fascist motivation.”
                    Ok, where’s our fascist dividend from the economic expansionism? We surely don’t need the oil in the midst of a glut. (OPEC just cut production). Plus we let them keep the oil anyway. Pretty bad expansionists, if you ask me. Looks like the excursion cost we “fascists” about $3 trillion so far and freed a lot of Iraqis in the “regime change.”

                    Are you ever right about anything?

                  3. Regime change is about economic expansionism, a textbook fascist motivation.

                    Your liberal education is worthless. You would be hard put to find any fascist movement which is commercially-minded. There are some common features of economic policy – protection, exchange controls, corporatist bargaining, and a tendency to favor goods production over finance – but the economic sphere is an afterthought. The signatures of fascist regimes are revanchism, collective vainglory, and (more intermittently) colonization and ethnic cleansing.

                    As for contemporary policy, you could never make a business case for the Bush administration’s initiatives. Their motives were commercial in the imagination of Michael Moore and no where else.

                    1. Toads: “As for contemporary policy, you could never make a business case for the Bush administration’s initiatives. Their motives were commercial in the imagination of Michael Moore and no where else.”

                      Darling! Then you get the opportunity to explain two issues after viewing this clip:


                      1) Why did Dubya preconceive the invasion of seven ME states?; and, 2) How is the first issue inconsistent with US imperialsim.

                      Perhaps your conservative education left you with too narrow a set of blinders. Smedley Butler’s obviously was too liberal.

                    2. Nice job of reframing and useful too. The answer Bush was a RINO and like all RINOS part of the right wing of the left. The left wanted wars against genocide. Bush wasn’t smart enough to see it was a political trap but like any schtupnagel took the bait and then years later decided to vote for Hillary. Ha ha ha. All of it a stage play or street theater of the ‘government over citizens’ left.

                      Doesn’t Let you off the hook though. Now this thread gets turned back to the one who pinned you to the wall in the first place.

                    3. Michael: You’ve been listening to your own BS too much. 🙂 Happy holidays, and enjoy your next book from the fiction section in the San Carlos book exchange. 🙂

                    4. OK Zounds I’ve been found out ….but then I only have to point at the election returns to validate my BS. What have you got to offer?

                      It is a very small world ….and we both chose wisely in where to plant not roots but anchors.

                      Yes I do I helped them move in the first time from the old storage shed facility.

              2. Steve Groen – if you consider that Fidel had his fingers in the drug trade coming into the US. I would say we could tag some more bodies on his body count.

        2. First off you forget the FACT that the Congress passed the Communist Control Act of 1954, and the DoJ sent over 100 people to prison for membership in an outlawed party.

          In your imagination only. They had trouble getting a conviction of Eugene Dennis and a dozen or so people drawn from the party politburo, and none of them were ever charged under the Communist Control Act.

          Cuba does have a limited democratic system in which independents can run for office and many have won their elections. I

          It has the same sham conciliar institutions the Soviet Union had. No one not mentally disabled or on the payroll would take that seriously.

          I knew a fellow USAF troop who worked with me who was part of the US invasion of the Dominican Republic to prevent the return of Juan Bosch who had been overthrown.

          Bosch was overthrown in 1963. The incident in question occurred in 1965. American troops never left the capital. They were there for five months to mediate and enforce a settlement to a brief civil war and arrange for a provisional government and new elections. One of Bosch’s associates was installed in the presidency in September 1965 and new elections were held the following spring, which Bosch lost. Bosch ran for president 5x over a thirty year period, losing each time. The Dominican presidency has changed hands between political parties 5x in the last 50 years, so it’s not as if he never had a fair shot.

          The US paid Pinochet $5 million dollars to overthrow the freely elected government of Chile.

          Again, this is fiction. The Chilean military needed no bribes to be motivated to put an end to the chaos Salvador Allende had generated and repeated attempts (including a civil trial wherein Edmund Muskie was compelled to testify) to stick the CIA and Henry Kissinger with responsibility for the coup have failed.

          Then we have the fact that when I was growing up in that era, black and Mexican Americans could not vote for the most part in all of the South and other states to one degree or another.

          Mexicans who were U.S. citizens were not denied suffrage and scads of them were holding public office in New Mexico. Blacks were generally denied suffrage through various sorts of subterfuge in 10 states. That reduced the dimensions of the electorate by about 8%. The color bar in suffrage began to break down in the late 1940s.

          was not officially banned, but all the press run had been confiscated and burned, The Hidden History of the Korean War. The book was out of print,

          More fiction from you. The book was part of the oeuvre of I.F. Stone, Soviet asset and lionized free-lance journalist. IF Stone published without interruption through that whole era.

          The fact is that the US promoted attacks by Cuban exiles along with actual CIA attacks, in addition to the Bay of Pigs invasion.

          You cooked up in your mind a bombing campaign against Cuba which never occurred.

          Then we had the fact that many states in the South outlawed the NAACP among other organizations.

          Alabama attempted to.

          The terrorist KKK was OK as were lynchings, and the Congress tried to outlaw lynchings and failed to do so.

          The controversies over lynch law were a generation earlier. The question wasn’t topical in 1955. There were a scatter of lynchings between 1946 and 1960, the last occurring in Mississippi in 1959. The University of Missouri – Kansas City database records 19 between 1946 and 1965, but they’ve thrown in political murders and some other cases which do not qualify (e.g. Emmett Till). There was no unified Klan after 1949. There were enumerated in 1983 three small organization which claimed a ‘national’ membership, several others which claimed a statewide membership, and about three dozen stand-alone local klaverns. Klavern members committed about 16 homicides between 1954 and 1982, political murders and sundry homicides for the most part. The actual lynchings committed in the earlier part of that era were generally the work of ad hoc groups, not Klaverns.

          You have an exceedingly high ratio of opinion to actual knowledge. I’m sorry for the people in meatworld who have to listen to you pontificate.

        3. Almost ALL of those dictators in Latin America were trained and supported by the US.

          You haven’t a clue what you’re talking about. The soldier-caudillo was a common figure in Latin American politics from 1822 down to about 1970. That sort of figure wasn’t an artifact of American security assistance programs, which were nearly non-existent prior to 1947. Beginning in 1930, you began to see institutional military regimes in which the military manifested a corporate personality (or, at least, a faction of it did). The chieftains of these sorts of regimes were generally primus inter parus and subject to the supervision of the other chiefs of staff. You haven’t seen any regimes of that type erected de novo since about 1980. Campus gasbags have made quite an issue of the School of the Americas, as if the training provided there was the generator of problematic institutional cultures among Latin American militaries. I’m sure Roberto d’Aubuisson was a sweet guy before he had his six week course in radio repair there.

          1. Not as compared to a certain university on the outskirts of Moscow but traning was provided in a number of discipines including Counter-Insurgency Operations under Carter for example. the training took place both in Panama and in host countries using MTT’s or Mobile TrainingTeams. Many were technical such as using Bailey Bridges . Also a large amount of civic action missions for the aftermath of Hurricanes and earth quakes. Probably still is if there’s anyone left to conduct such efforts. Castro’s efforts ranged from the Americas to Africa.Nesr the old Canal Zone his MTT’s trained the Gatos Negros Tocumen garrison the personal Waffen SS of the Torrijos regime. Torrijos – later executed by Noriega – was a favorite of Carter’s .

            1. Torrijos died in a plane crash, which is ‘suspicious’ to knuckleheads who think the issue of the imagination of Hollywood screenwriters is realistic.

              1. Helicopter on the way to Culebra Island;.he accidentally fell out. You are of course familiar with the area and time frame?

                1. No. A plane. Which crashed, killing Torrijos and several others on board. Your reign of error re all things Panamanian is getting amusing.

                  1. Too late I already corrected that error. See the thing about being objectivists when you discover you made and error you own up to it, give a complete set of facts such as adding the reason Torrijos was in the plane, and add a little extra as payment. Now had I taken the subjectivist route I would have pretend it didn’t exist. The error that is. But I’m not a follower of Comrade Clinton’s Shining Path to ignominy.

                  2. Where were you exactly the night the treaty passed in the US Senate? Where were you when a mob marched on the Atlantic side Canal Zone Government Administration Building. Can you describe it’s shape and three functions? Whee were you when the Guardia Nacional contingent already on site WITH the Canal Zone Police stopped the march and can you describe the actions the officer in charge took? Can you quote his exact words? Toad no. Poseur probably.

                    Go on….describe that day and where US Military troops were posted WITH troops from the Guardia Nacional?:

                    Show your briliance those questions should be duck soup easy. For someone who knows what they are talking about.

                    OR just ignore it and following Shining Path Hillary by pretending to have been there.

                    Don’t forget how many were shot that night and by which side(s).

                    Here’s the kicker. When Carter visted the Canal Zone how much time did he spend on the northern end?

                    1. Keep waving your hands all you like. In this discussion you’ve made five factual statements which are absurdly false (one about the political history of Panama, three about the circumstances of Omar Torrijos’ death, and one about the career of Manuel Noriega). None of these questions are difficult to research.

              2. It was a Twin Otter taking Torrijos to exile on the island of Contadora by orders of Noreiga. Culebra Island along with Flaming Island is an old Southern Command base on the Panama City side of the canal’s east side. The main prison island for the country similar to Papillion story is Coiba. Bpth Flamingo and Culebra AND reportedly Coiba are now resorts.

                1. He didn’t take orders from Manuel Noriega, who was at that time a Lt. Colonel specializing in intelligence. Noriega was not commander of the National Guard until August 1983, nearly two years after Torrijos death.

                  1. No shit sherlock. Noriega didn’t come from the Guardia Nacional. Noriega came from DENI their version of a combination FBI/CIA. DENI never took orders from the La Guardia. Where did you get that idea?

                    1. No, he was a National Guard officer and a graduate of the country’s military academy. You keep making crap up. You haven’t gotten one thing right in your discussion of Panama.

                    2. Proof positive you were never there. Or just passed through on a cruise ship.

                  2. So? Who dio you think ran DENI the Secret Police. G2 Intelligence.


                    Excerpt from an article detailing ‘Noriegas chain of command when he did take over.

                    “Below him are Lt. Cols. Moises Correa, Aristides Hassan and Nivaldo Madrinan. Correa also serves as chief of operations on the General Staff, and Madrinan heads the National Department of Investigations, known as DENI, the country’s notorious secret police. Both were promoted from major a week after the coup attempt as part of a major military reshuffle.”

                    No big secet to a Zonie. The Militry also ran the country’s police force.

                    So what did happen that night in front of the Cristobal Police Station. The shots fired by .38 occured the following January 7th. The night of the vote of the US Senate took place the previous year.

                    Don’t be reframing dates and did you enjoy your cruise ship tour?

                    1. [Rating temporarily unavailable. We are working to restore service. No user action is necessary]
                      Panama Canal Act of 1979 (1979; 96th Congress HR 111) –

                      Sep 27, 1979 – Sep 27, 1979. H.R. 111 (96th). An act to provide for the operation and maintenance of the Panama Canal under the Panama Canal Treaty of …

                      There were no shots fired.

                      The Pamanian Police had a contingent of their police officers in riot gear ready to go inside the building. The Administration buildins was U shaped with parking in the center for employees. Administration offices faced the docks. The center was the Post Office the other wing was the CZ Police And jail. Court was also in that building.

                      After the treaty was passed a large crowd of what were identified as ‘Dignity Battalions’ one of the inventions of G2/DENI marched on the building.

                      The Panama Police lined up out front armed with different weapons including some .45 caliber Thompsons.

                      Their leader, a rather young officer stepped to the front and held up his hand signaling the crowd to stop, This wasn’t the first time these two grouips had met during the preceding year but before only deeper in Colon.

                      He said to the crowd in Spanish of course, “This Is My Police Station Leave.” The police switched from safe to firing mode on the various weapons.

                      The crowd left. There were no shots fired .The same day the police function by prior arrangement switched to a CZP officer and a Panama Police officer walking each beat of which there was one in the Railroad Stration, Docks, area behind the YMCA and Masonic Building over to the bus stop. The rest were vehicle patrol sectors. Colon, Margarita Coco Solo, and Gatun and one roving traffic enforcement/accident investigation car.

                      There were no US Military in the immediate area

                      You may treat that as first hand information. Oh yes. ALL CZP were on duty for that episode. My shift drew overtime. Thank you very much.

                      And the Police Academy was on the southern Pacific side with the fring range out on the road towards the Isthmian highway just behind the Police Lodge. The prison was at Gamboa.

                      A good many of us all under five years service were dismissed from the job. The rest were gradually replaced and went to jobs elsewhere . As I recall Wisconsin, California in San Bernadino County and the Border Patrol were favored places.

                      If you want to speak to any of the former Zonies in person a huge amount settled in Dothan, Alabama.

                      Any questions? Class dismissed.

                      Noriega was a principal officer in DENI a the time and a main conduit to a lot of activities one of which was the Tocumen Garrison – trained by Cubans and not at the School of The Americas.

                      No big thing. That was public knowledge.

                      The worst sections of Colon and Panama City? Pontoon Beach for Colon and Hollywood Barrio for Panama. Like Mexico the capitol is referred to by the countries name.

                      That was the job I took to feed my family when Carter insisted on using the military to set the example while giving civilian government workers pay raises. He was and to this day is a thoroughly despised individual
                      No different than Fidel, Raul, Chaveta or Ernesto.

                      Except to the left wing fascists of the Democrat now by their own request Socialist Party of the United States of America.

                      Seig me no Heils Comrade. We didn’t serve The Party then and we don’t serve The Party now.

              3. It was a Twin Otter taking Torrijos to exile on the island of Contadora by orders of Noreiga. Culebra Island along with Flaming Island is an old Southern Command base on the Panama City side of the canal’s east side. The main prison island for the country similar to Papillion story is Coiba. Both Flamingo and Culebra AND reportedly Coiba are now resorts.

                Fort Gulick and the school fo the Americas is a resort area and Fort Sherman on the north entrance to the west bank as well .A popular fenced beach (in the water ) area is now the new Yacht club Nearby the Sherman area is the old Spanish fort razed by Morgan the Pirate above the mouth of the Chagres River.

                Of interest to me the old demolitions range going west from the Gatun locks was not mentioned in the stories about de-militarizing duds on the other ranges etc.

                To the east of the northern entrance to the canal is the site of the Black Christ festival. the statue of ebony was recovered from a ship that sunk off shore. It come out Easter Week and during the Christo Negro festival for a traditionasl two steps foward one step back -or three and two ) Portobello was once the largest city in the Western Hemisphere containing four distinct quarters it is close to the San Blas Islands. There are many sites in Panama for the inquisitive visitor including perhaps remnants of the old WWII protective fortifications.

                1. Torrijos was not headed into exile. You’re a great fountainhead of fictions.

    2. randyjet – did you forget that Fidel and Che were exporting Marxism to Latin America? And you don’t think those Soviet nuclear tipped missiles would have killed large numbers of people in this country?

      1. He doesn’t care as long as the wind direction doesn’t include Canada. Which saves Alaska. However a badly planned strike would affect places in the Caribbean – such as Cuba – depends on the down wind message for that day and the next three to seven days plus. and some of course would trek arouond the planet and whoops; But then Castro didn’t care either. But what he might care about like many Canadians is losing their cheap winter play ground with the the little dollies available for $5.00 CDN should Obama or anyone else lift the embargo. the odds on Raul surviving then would depend on how fast he could escape to a ‘safe spot with his share of Fidel’s loot. Let’s be both pragmatic and practical. Raul’s chances of surviving grow less each day. Until whoever has the keys to the bank accounts realizes they are the new Emperor Incarnate …unless of course that someone IS Raul.

        1. Michael Aarethun – I was on some site that had all-Canadian news 24/7. As I curiously rolled through the stories I saw they are having a spate a officer involved shootings. They are not as polite as I thought.

          1. I just received a NAFTA harangue from one of them. The guy was livid over the NAFTA re-negotiations Basically he said Trump forgot about Canada and the USA forgot about Canada a long time ago. Every time we want to improve something they bring a a couple huen ndred more lawyers and stall for two or three more years The USA has 95% of the worlds lawyers and no one else stands a chance.

            Well I didn’t dispute that .

            Then we got on the pipeline This is a real quote. The deal told to Canadians was We would pump our oii to the refineries in Houston – for a fee. Our oil would be turned into our products which we could export out of the Port of Houstoh on ship’s we contract or our buyers contract. Now we find out their are limits and restrictions. OK I can understand Cuba but prior approval on any ships from any country.?”

            So I explained the new double hull rule for all tankers in US Waters.- which by the way would not have stopped the Exxon Valdez spill or stopped BPs Gulf oil rig spill. So I asked what were the outcomes?”

            We’re thinking of a pipeline to Vancouver and another to Thunder Bay. Especially Thunder Bay (for the geographically challenged it’s a boat on Lalke Superior one of the inland seas of North America. Shipping routes se the St. Lawrence to the Atlantic.

            Unlike your discover he was pretty polite until then end. Then. I reminded him of the new President and new ball game and Trump is for the pipelline.

            “Maybe but when you paid Hillary they stayed bought until the next payment. ” Then he started laughing.

            A better experience it went like this Ha Ha HA’ey?’

            For the language challenged here’s a course in the Canadian language. Spell Canada out loud slowly.

            So C A N A D A and that’s the end of the lesson. No wonder they can’t compete with our lawyers. Got it A?

  6. Michael, please stick with one or the other…either it is poop or it is po, you are confusing everyone using both.
    Also, what are we debating again? You are hopping around so much I am not sure what your argument is.
    But…regarding toddlers…and here you too are invited Paul, these were my words: “you are at a higher risk of being killed by a toddler than by an islamic terrorist.” Now, I assume you both can refute that statement…I am waiting.

    1. Still waiting for your proof about the doctor story. Not to worry Now you add a fairy tale about child killings without fact checking that one. As for The last twist and turn I will take you off the hook and let you get back to the others where you are still lacking… for this last statement you confined yourself to Islamic Terrorist. But you did not address other forms of terrorism so that is an open subject for others.

      1. Proof? I gave you two links, Michael, TWO. Short of being able to attack my argument you shall pretend you never saw my sources?!
        As I said, either attack the meaning of MANY or just let it go. And based on your lengthy definition of Many, I used it properly.

        As for toddlers, again, show me where my statement was wrong and I will take it back. And by the way, that last statement was my original statement, I just copied and pasted.
        AS I said, you are moving too fast, take the time to read the comments before replying to them 🙂

        1. You gave a ten year old version and Paul caught you at it. I provided one from 2015 which completely refutes yor ten year propaganda. Others provided support. To be polite we didn’t rain on your parade mmmmmm rained on yourself. And continue to do so.

          I even gave you a way out and continued to tinkle on yourself. So? A perfect demonstration of ‘anything said or done that advancess the party is the truth. but you forgot ‘ until we change it and that too will be the truth.’ The demonstration was to show how the turth as defined by people with morals, values, ethics and standards is not the same truth as that used by people with out those defining characteristics.

          I am sure all that went over your head but it matters not. The target audience was those who needed to witness a demonstration. Thank you for providing it.

          The real reason was it also demonstrated our ‘almost’ President’s ability to act out in the same manner.

          So? Continue in your usual fashion. Please. It’s how we get converts.

    2. Po – I can refute you statement, but I want you to do the homework and actually look up the real statistics.

      1. Paul: “Po – I can refute you statement, but I want you to do the homework and actually look up the real statistics.”

        Avoiding home work in favor of conclusory statements again?

        1. Steve Groen – I already looked it up. I just want him to do some homework. He has been avoiding it lately.

Comments are closed.