Monday, October 08, 2007

The Misguided G and more Commie Lies about Posada Carriles

I seldom talk about the nuts and bolts of immigration law. One of the very principles of Asylum is the question of is this person likely to be tortured if returned to the country of origin. In the case of Posada Carriles the answer is yes.

Thus we have unhinged commies who rail about Abu Gharib knowingly clamoring to send a person back to where he will be tortured. This proves that feigned commies self righteousness
is a second rate act. No doubt even if the charges were true to send a person back to face real torture, not to be confused with panties on the head of Muslims, is inhuman.

The US judge affirmed the basic principle's of asylum law. Commie wail and hold up very suspect cases of commie colaborators in El Salvador on far less certain stories than this. Perhaps Jams will explain the UK variation of asylum law. The fundamental basics are likely similar.

I might consider a swap for Joanne Chesimard provided Chesimard talks about those who aided
her flight to Cuba. The guilty parties should be given the maximum sentence under US law. I would prefer to see the guilty parties denaturalized and deported to Cuba even if born in tghe USA.

Ren adds a bit where he bets that I have commited murder. What the basis of this insane charge is remains unknown? This sounds like more insane commentary from a deranged dolt who venerates a war criminal Trotsky and celebrates Communist lawlessness in the USA even as he claims to be against such behavior.

I want to draw a comparison between Posada Carriles and Bill Ayers. Ayers was tried before an independent jury and not subjected to torture. Ren feigns ignorance of the thirty bombings Ayers was involved with. Moreover he presents him as an incompetant terrorist. The law does not provide mercy for such unprofessional types. Ayers also was in a country that allowed him the ability to participate in the political process and his crimes had zero to do with Vietnam. Oddly, previously Ren claimed to be opposed to Ayers. When and where this opposition is remains a mystery.

Unlike Ayers, a spoiled middle class couch potato Commie, Posada Carriles did not have the ability to participate in the political process. I do have a problem if his targets were civilian. However, I do not accept any evidence presented by Cuba or Hugo the Cocacommie. The evidence is not a slam dunk either. According to the Fontova article he has served time allready
and other sources say he has not.

This definition of what is terrorism according to Ren would have Tito's partisans and the French Resistance fighting Nazis as terrorists. Commies also called Nicaraguan Indians defending themselves from genocide at the hands of Eastern European and Pseudostinian mercenaries terrorists. The term as used by commies like Ren means anyone who opposes Marxist tyranny
is a terrorist.

My sole disagreement with Posada Carriles is choice of targets. Miliary and infrastructure targets are fair game. This is not to be confused with shooting school kids in the back and blowing up Jewish houses of worship in Argentina and Turkey and elswhere.

Beamish in 08

1 comment:

sonia said...

Ren and company are trying to change the subject. The issue isn't whether people like Posada should be applauded or denounced, or whether his targets are legitimate or not.

The issue is whether the system that people like Posada is fighting against is evil or not. If it's evil, then all targets are fair game. Dresden and Hiroshima were civilian targets too...