Top 10 Worst Living Dictators
- Published July 3, 2007 - 268 Comments
This is a list of the most evil currently reigning dictators in the world. It is amazing that these people continue to rule while we busy ourselves fighting in places that are ruled by far less dangerous men.
1. Kim Jong Il, North Korea (in power since 1994)
The amount of debate over the recent nuclear weapons development in North Korea has managed to deflect people from the fact that Kim’s government represses its people more completely than any other living dictator. North Korea has, for the last 31 years, been at the bottom of the Freedom House ranking for political rights and civil liberties. It is also ranks last in the Reporters without Borders ranking of press freedom. The US committee for Human Rights estimates that there are approximately 150,000 Koreans performing forced labour in prison camps for political dissenters and their families.
Contrary to popular belief, Kim Jong Il is actually a very clever and efficient manipulator of his people. He is also the author of the books On the Art of the Cinema, and On the Art of Opera.
2. Than Shwe, Burma (in power since 1992)
General Than Shwe has survived a power struggle to emerge as the sole leader of Burma’s military dictatorship. Because of his hard-line views, he has taken an already bad human rights situation to an even worse level. Burma has more child soldiers than any country in the world and the Burmese regime continues to kidnap citizens to force them to serve as porters for the military in conflicts against non-Burmese ethnic groups.
In 1990 the party of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi won 80% of the vote in an open election. The military cancelled the results. Suu Kyi has spent most of the years since then under house arrest. On May 31, 2003 hired thugs attacked Suu Kyi’s motorcade, killing several of her supporters and arresting dozens of others including Suu Kyi herself.
Shwe is a very private figure, preferring to work behind the scenes. Consequently, even the Burmese people know very little about him.
3. Hu Jintao, China (in power since 2002)

Trained as a hydrolic engineer, Hu Jintao joined the Communist Party in 1964 and spent the next 38 years working his way up the hierarchy. While serving as Party Secretary of Tibet, he did not hesitate to administer martial law and to oversee the killing of unarmed demonstrators. Now that he is General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, Hu, although not all-powerful, is the leader of an unusually repressive regime. The communist party still controls all media, and uses 40,000 internet security agents to monitor online use. More than 200,000 Chinese are serving re-education sentences in labour camps and China performs more than 4,000 executions every year, more than all of the other nations of the world combined, and many of them are for non-violent crimes.
4. Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe (in power since 1980)

Mugabe began his reign with widespread international and national support. After leading a successful anti-colonial war of liberation, he was elected independent Zimbabwe’s first president. But over the years he has displayed increasingly dictatorial tendencies. According to Amnesty International, in 2002 alone, Mugabe’s government killed or tortured 70,000 people. Unemployment is above 70% and inflation 500%.
Mugabe has been accused of blocking the delivery of food aid to groups and areas that support the main opposition party. He has continued to hold elections, but has restricted the opposition’s ability to campaign and has shut down media that do not support him. When opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai won 42% of the vote, Mugabe had him arrested and charged with treason. Mugabe has also confiscated farms owned by white people and turned them over to his supporters.
5. Crown Prince Abdullah, Saudi Arabia (in power since 1995)

Crown Prince Abdullah has been the acting leader of Saudi Arabia since his half-brother, King Fahd, suffered a stroke in 1995. Saudi Arabia is one of the only nations that holds no elections whatsoever. The royal family has promised municipal elections soon but has not announced whether women will be allowed to vote. In fact, it is forbidden for unrelated Saudis of the opposite sex to appear in public together, even inside a taxi. Women are not allowed to testify on their own behalf in divorce proceedings and, in all court cases, the testimony of a man is equal to that of two women.
According to the US State Department, Saudi Arabia continues to engage in arbitrary arrest and torture. During a human rights conference in 1995, Saudi authorities arrested non-violent protesters who were calling for freedom of expression. Some were later flogged, the usual punishment for alleged political and religious offenses.
In a very unusual show of power, the religious forbade children from playing with Barbie dolls, which they dubbed ‘Jewish dolls’ that are ’symbols of decadence of the perverted West’.
6. Teodoro Obiang Nguema, Equatorial Guinea (in power since 1979)

This small West African nation (population 500,000) was a forgotten dictatorship until major reserves of oil were found in 1995. Since then, US oil companies have poured billions of dollars into the country. Although the per capital annual income is $4,472, 60% of Equatoguineans live on less than $1 a day. The bulk of the oil income goes directly to President Obiang, who has declared that there is no poverty in Guinea, rather that the people are used to living in a different way. In July, state radio announced that Obiang is “in permanent contact with the Almighty,” and that “He can decide to kill without anyone calling him to account and without going to Hell.”
There is no public transport, no newspapers, and only 1% of government spending goes to health care. When asked why so much of his nation’s oil money is deposited into his personal account at the Riggs Bank in Washington, DC, Obiang explained that he keeps total control of the money in order to ‘avoid corruption’.
7. Omar Al-Bashir, Sudan (in power since 1989)

Sudan, the largest country in Africa, is in the midst of a complex 20 year civil war that has claimed the lives of 2 million and uprooted another 4 million. Al-Bashir seized power in a military coup and immediately suspended the constitution, abolished the legislature, and banned political parties and unions. He has tried to negotiate a peace agreement with the main rebel group, but he insists that the nation be ruled according to Islamic Shari’a law, even in southern Sudan, where the people are Christian and animist.
His army has routinely bombed civilians and tortured and massacred non-Arabs, particularly in the oil-producing areas in the south. He has a long history of providing sanctuary for a wide range of terrorists, only to turn against them. He turned over the notorious Carlos the Jackal to France in exchange for financial and military aid and, in 1996, he tried unsuccessfully to sell Osama bin Laden to the US government.
8. Saparmurat Niyazov, Turkmenistan (in power since 1990)
Since taking charge of this former Soviet republic in central Asia, Niyazov has developed the world’s most extreme personality cult, challenged only by that of Kim Jong Il. Niyazov’s picture appears on all Turkmen money, there are statues of him everywhere, and he renamed the month of January after himself. His book, Book of the Soul, is required reading in all schools at all levels, and all government employees must memorize sections of it in order to keep their jobs.
Niyazov rules without opposition. As he put it, ‘There are no opposition parties, so how can we grant them freedom?’. In recent years Niyazov has cracked down on religious and ethnic minorities, including Russians, and has refused to grant exit visas for families for women under the age of 35. He has imprisoned political dissidents and subjected them to Stalinist-style show trials and public confessions.
The Turkmen constitution requires retirement at the age of 70, but Niyazov has ensured his own rule by creating a 2,507-member People’s Council which unanimously elected him Lifetime Chairman.
9. Fidel Castro, Cuba (in power since 1959)

The longest reigning dictator, Castro took advantage of the world’s preoccupation with the Iraq war in March and April of 2003 to carry out his biggest round-up of non-violent dissidents in more than a decade. He arrested 75 human rights activists, journalists, and academics, and sent them to jail for an average of 19 years.
Cuba remains a one party state with all of the power in the hands of Castro. The courts are controlled by the executive branch (in other words, Castro). He traditionally blames all of his country’s problems on the USA.
10. King Mswati III, Swaziland (in power since 1986)
Swaziland (population 1.2 million) is the last remaining absolute monarchy in Africa. Mswati III ascended to the throne when he turned 18, four years after the death of his father. Because he had been educated in England it was thought that he would modernize his kingdom. However, he has shown a liking for certain Swazi traditions. On September 15, 2002, he watched thousands of girls and young women dance bare-breasted in the annual Reed Dance and then chose one of be his tenth wife (his father had 100 wives). The girl’s mother filed a lawsuit against the king, charging him with abducting her daughter. Mswati, who rules by decree, then announced that the Swazi courts were forbidden from issuing rulings that limited the king’s power.
In an attempt to appease international opinion, Mswati approved the drafting of a new constitution to replace the one that his father had suspended 30 years earlier. However the new constitution bans political parties, allows the death penalty for any criminal offense, and provides for the reintroduction of debtors’ prisons.
Technorati Tags: Dictators, Politics, Top 10 list


















July 9th, 2007 at 2:57 am
Where is George w Bush on this, he has centralized power in the most dominant country in the world to a level never seen before, taken away basic rights of freedom and privacy, militarized the police force, has tampered with elections twice, Invaded 2 countries. He has also arrested an unknown number of people without trail and had them systematically tortured, and killed more people worldwide through his imperialistic agenda more then anyone listed here. Dictators are not just limited to lesser developed countries, He is the worst dictator ever known
July 9th, 2007 at 3:12 am
Don’t be ridiculous Chris. Whatever wrongs Bush has done doesn’t make him a dictator. And such hyperbole only weakens the fight against the neocons.
July 9th, 2007 at 6:28 am
Is it really hyperbole, Michael? Whereas many or most of the above listed do not have international support, the United States has enough economic and military power to easily be considered a dictatorial oligarchy that has free, oppressive reign over the rest of the Earth. Bush’s country (through none of his own doing, assuredly) may have many more basic human rights than the other countries listed above. However, U.S. policy allows for American military and international business to subjugate entire countries, sending them into civil war, eternal debt, lawlessness and general despair. Would that more people see this for what it is.
July 9th, 2007 at 9:09 am
I don’t agree that Bush is a dictator – he is going to be out of power at the next elections and it would take a Communist style election rigging to prevent that.
July 9th, 2007 at 9:11 am
I would like to thank Erik Marcus who emailed me to point out that dictator number 8, Saparmurat Niyazov, died last year. He has been replaced by Gurbanguly Berdimuhammedow, elected (apparently falsely) by an 89% majority. He was previously the Minister of Health and it was during his time as Minister of Health that the country’s hospitals outside of the capital City were all closed.
July 9th, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Chris – Lets define dictator. Dictator – refers to an absolutist or autocratic ruler who assumes sole power over the state. Bush was elected BY OUR ELCTORIAL PROCESS twice (if you don’t like it then vote to change it) and please spare me your fixed voting conspiracy theory. Your elected CONGRESS gave him the authority to take us to war against two countries. As far as the imprisonment and torture goes why not defend the right of our American workers and countrymen who are captured an beheaded? After the first WTC bombing and attack on USS Cole we did nothing. So 9/11 happened and did you expect us to do nothing again? Hardly! Still more terrorist plot to bomb major metropolitan cities like the bombing attempts in London but what we should sit back and do nothing? Take no action? Instead of placing blame or pointing out what you think is the obvious be part of the SOLUTION!
July 10th, 2007 at 3:44 am
Bush aside, great list jfrater.
July 10th, 2007 at 4:54 am
I guest invading a country, which had nothing to do with 9/11, and causing the death of over 100,000 of its citizen seems like the logical thing to do.
July 10th, 2007 at 11:28 pm
dj41326. You sir are an idiot! IF there was any logic to your argument it would be incorrect. As it is you seem to be saying that the US was attacked so lets go out and fuck up some other countries. George Bush didn’t like Iraq so he invaded. Did Iraq have anything to do with 9/11? No. Did that matter? No. Why not? Because there are enough dumbshit morons in this country who will believe any lie told to them by the fascist right wing shitstains that are currently in charge in this country. Why is Bush’s approval rating in the toilet? Because the people finally realized how stuped they were to listen to him and his sycophants. He may not be a dictator, but he sure is a dick. By the way nutjob, who said anything about “take no action”? You seem to be the only one saying that. I say we take action against the Taliban and al qaida but currently our military heros are diverted and dying in Iraq so osama goes free. Smart plan. Way to think it through. If you supported this bullshit and voted for Bush (especially the second time) then I blame you personally for every unneccessary death that has occurred (that includes the Iraqi’s that have died).
July 13th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
George Bush wasn’t really elected the 2nd time. He called to his father for help and the Supreme Court was pressured by the “powers that really be” to stop the re-count. Typical dictator behavior. Bush has also broken multitudinous US laws, lied in a pathological manner, has enriched his friends (and their friends) through a devastating, illegal war, …. sheesh, the list goes on and on. Yes, Bush is the worst living dictator since Hitler. If we aren’t careful, he’ll declare martial law in the US and take power for good.
He and Cheney need to be impeached, tried, and then executed for their crimes. Lesser members of the Bush regime should be incarcerated.
July 18th, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Here is a free clue:
Dictators murder and imprison dissidents. I do not see any BDS sufferers being shipped off to the camps. If Bush really was a dictator, you would not be able to whine about him on the internet without getting hauled off to the gulag.
If Bush and Cheney were as evil as Steve seems to think, Steve would have vanished mysteriously after his last post.
Dictators are not removed from power by being “careful”. They generally require violent revolutions to be deposed. If Bush really is a dictator, then I am afraid it is too late for Steve … he had best flee to Canada now while he still can.
July 19th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
I am an european..I like a lot american people… but sometime is so light mind.
Bush made too many trouble to the world, I hope war stopping and America became more friendly and no so close.
Otherwise America will lose, step by step, all the power she produced in 60 years..
I mean: so short time of empire relatives Rome, London, Babilonia.. (now IRAQ!!!!) So learn History, know other people and don’t worry..
In 30Years you will became the past.
INDIA, CINA and EUROPE need to became the leader for hundred of years.
Goo bless, America.
July 20th, 2007 at 7:11 am
Will, let me personally thank you for your kind words. In reference to those who posted before me about Bush, you guys need to stop going off-topic. First and foremost, Bush is not, and will not, be a Dictator. This country runs on a system of checks and balances that ensures that no branch overpowers another, that includes the executive branch, which is the “Presidential” branch. Yes I agree that electing Bush twice wasn’t the best of decisions, but we DID pick him indirectly so if you want to complain, send a letter to your congressman or senator. In order for Bush to pull of a fixed election, he would have to manipulate the entire system, which hasn’t been done, and certainly won’t be done with today’s technology. I don’t want to provide excuses for invading Iraq and sending our men there, but it’s better than nothing, and it has worked so far since we haven’t had any terrorist attacks after 9/11 have we? Anyways, I’m already veering off-topic so let me tell you guys that you need to stop bringing up Bush in this list, because he is not a dictator, no matter what he has done. Also if you hate your country so much or its system, you are free to move to whichever country you’d like, a freedom not enjoyed by many people of the world. Maybe you guys should start stepping back a little bit and take a look at the world around you.
July 22nd, 2007 at 2:11 pm
Top 10 worst living dictators
Hello. This is a great website, I have been reading it all day.
3. Hu Jintao, China, you said he was an engineer, should that be a hydraulic engineer? Perhaps I am wrong.
If not it is the only fault I have found, good work!
Matt
July 22nd, 2007 at 6:35 pm
The vast difference in opinions is eye opening. MARK
July 23rd, 2007 at 10:08 am
Its amazing how quickly some people go off the deep end when things don’t go their way and they watch a little too much you tube. Steve sounds like the type who watches the conspiracy network for his ‘news’.
Anyway, nice list.
July 23rd, 2007 at 10:18 am
I agree with Chris and Steve =D! Oh and don’t they know that Cuba wants Castro? Like duh, old news! Cubans… in a whole believe that Castro brought their country out of a very bad era and into something much better. Jeez, when will Americans just leave the old man alone?
Best to begin the video at 30:00 mins into it
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331
July 25th, 2007 at 6:35 am
My university Spanish prof was born into a position of abject poverty in Cuba’s definite lower class. He had no hopes for anything, but after the revolution, he was able to receive an education to such a degree that he now teaches in Canada.
Why do you think it’s so ridiculous to suggest that the proprietary Diebold machines, the ones that insiders have said were specifically designed to include backdoors, could have been a part of a neocon voting fraud scheme?
Neocons do not have any respect for the principles of democracy and its processes, they simply analyze the system, identify loopholes and exploit them to take full control. And, yes, they are perfectly capable of doing it while simultaneously “allowing” free speech to be maintained.
In other news, there’s this brand new shade everyone’s talking about, it’s called gray.
July 25th, 2007 at 7:02 am
I see no point in even wasting youre valuable time calling bush a dictator..if you look at our country’s history no one who EVER entered office has ever even shown signs of dictatorship so why think that should change now??? get of your high horse and spare us your pity arguments..you probably just regret your OWN vote..
July 25th, 2007 at 8:14 am
I wonder if all this anti-Bush stuff on the net will go away after the next elections. It could change the face of the internet!
July 25th, 2007 at 8:38 pm
George bush did not invade any country.
The army of the United States of America by request of President George W. Bush, (their commander in cheif) and with permission from the U.S. Congress invaded two countries.
I do not totally like Bush and I do not totally dislike him.
For enough americans to vote him in something had to be right. We don’t just give the job of President to the village idiot (or in this case the country idiot).
A person has to be well educated and somewhat intelligent.
Were he a dictator we would lead much different lives than we do now.
Try having all your assetts seized for the betterment of the coutry, try having your family killed or imprisoned for voicing disagreement with the political government.
In fact if we are able to make comments against our government in a public forum such as this without repisal means our president is not a dictator.
Thanks.
July 26th, 2007 at 6:42 am
This is just typical internet neo-leftist anti-Bush hysteria.
Bush as bad as Kim Jong, Mugabe, or Saparmurat Niyazov? Last I checked, there aren’t thousands of Americans in re-education camps around America, Bush hasn’t had but one wife, January is still called January and his face doesn’t appear on any of our bills.
Allow me to rephrase it:
There are more then 200,000 Chinese serving prison terms for political reasons. There are currently 0 Americans serving prison terms for political reasons.
Niyazov’s book, BOOK OF THE SOUL, is REQUIRED reading for government workers. Bush’s book is not required reading for anyone.
Mugabe’s government has killed or tortured over 70,000 of it’s own citizens. Bush has never killed or tortured any American citizens.
Than Shwe arrested his opponet in a general election. Both Gore and Kerry seem to be doing pretty well on the tour circuit and in Congress, respectively.
Last but not least, Bush’s election: Even the most liberal leftist newspaper in the US, the New York Times, on Nov. 12, 2001, ran a front page article that began: “A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year’s presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.”
Folks, if you are this bat-shiat crazy against Bush that you would make him the worst dictator in the world, compared to these top 10 nuts, seek professional help. You are mentally disturbed.
July 28th, 2007 at 5:22 pm
I totally don’t agree with Hu Jintao & Fidel Castro on this list of the WORST,first Hu isnt even a dictator so thats off and Castro is better than many US presidents and has made cuba a politically stable and strong country and its medical facilities is better than US so he is a dictator BUT not the WORST,sorry ur just wrong there.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:38 pm
The fact that you put Castro on this list shows your utter lack of knowledge re the latin world and US imperialism in that region.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:50 pm
Wideload (and partly Doomkultus): I don’t consider that any nation’s imperialism gives someone an excuse to become a dictator. No matter how bad the US may have been, Castro murders people who oppose him and prevents free elections. That makes him a dictator. When he gives Cuba free elections and stops murdering people for political reasons, I will remove him from the list. Thanks for the comments.
July 29th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Bush is a traitor. He belongs in the number 1 spot.
July 29th, 2007 at 4:58 pm
So I was hanging out in the Imperial, I mean the Oval Office this morning surfing the net I saw Chris and Greg’s e-mails. That’s it for them, I’ve already had them picked up by the NSA along with their families. They’ll be shot, of course, and the families put into the Correction Facilities in Area 54. My NSA agents are out looking for Steve, and that will guy is in for it too, just as soon as they figure out which Euroweenie country he is from and who to bribe. Black helicopter time for him. And I’ll show that six million jews guy the ropes, too. (Get it? The ropes? Little dictator humor there.)
That’s why I had Harry Reid killed, too. Looked like a car accident, but that was Daddy’s friends in the CIA. And Nancy Pelosi “just dissapeared?” Come on. I fed her feet first into the woodchipper and made a coffee cup out of her skull. And I made Olympia Snowe drink out of it last time she opened her mouth about where all the stolen oil went.
But you know what was really satisfying? When I closed down the New York Times and fed Pinch Sulzberger the publisher to the hyenas at the Bronx zoo. Man, the screams and the laughter juxtaposed together were really sonic art. I recorded and listen when I play with “Little George” while watching “Peace Mom” Cindy Sheehan and those other “Code Pink” bitches raped by the Washington D.C. Police Cavalry Unit. “Absolute Moral Authority” my ass. Her ass, actually. More Dictator Humor. We don’t use any vaseline, so you *better* laugh. And after that fake “toilet story” in the U.S. World Report I closed the magazine down and threw the entire editorial staff into the Gitmo Latrine on CNN and had all the terrorists do their business on them for a few hours, and then I invited the CNN people to join them. They “reluctantly” agreed, so I just left them there.
Now *that’s* what happens in a dictatorship. Who can see the difference? This is a test. If you fail, you get to live in a dictatorship. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your life.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:27 am
Ummm..Mr Bush, I’m not sure. Can you go back to the part about Cindy Sheehan, though, that was fun.
Can you tell us more stories about Pelosi’s Coffee-Mug-Skull, too? Who else drinks out of it?
August 10th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
Where is Maumoon Abdul Gayoom of Maldives in your list. He’s been in power for nearly 30 years, with absolute control on everything. He is probably the worst dictator of them all.
August 10th, 2007 at 6:45 pm
I would vote the american presidency starting sometime more or less with kennedy as an imperial presidency. whereas in the past the office of president was just a public official like any senator or judge, nowadays they have unprecedented power.
August 10th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Phil: I would vote the american presidency starting sometime more or less with kennedy
As the top 10 worst dictator in the world? Are you farking nuts?
Again, real slow so you can understand me; Show me where any one of the previous Presidents rose to the level of pure madness these current 10 listed here have.
Seriously, put the pipe down, folks and step away from the bong. You’re two last brain cells are fried.
August 10th, 2007 at 8:33 pm
Phil: erm, I don’t know that Kennedy had long enough to be classified as imperial. Regardless though, he was elected. May I ask what your political affiliations are? You don’t seem too keen on the Demos or Republican’s.
Loose Cannon: I should try to be unbiased, but… you go!
August 10th, 2007 at 9:21 pm
Loose Cannon: I was referring to the first few comments above. by imperial presidency I mean that the presidents have been given more and more authority. see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperial_presidency
jfrater: i’m liberal but don’t really belong to any of the two parties.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
What about the Pope? he has absolute authority within the vatican and catholicism, and is considered infallible.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
Phil: Thanks for replying. Your answer makes it clear why you don’t seem to support republicans or demos. What was it about Kennedy that makes you feel he was imperialistic? Do you think (Iraq war aside) that recent Presidents have really acted in an imperial manner (keeping in mind that true imperialism is what we saw from the English monarchy in the 1800’s – it has since been abolished).
August 10th, 2007 at 9:37 pm
“Bush” said: But you know what was really satisfying? When I closed down the New York Times and fed Pinch Sulzberger the publisher to the hyenas at the Bronx zoo. Man, the screams and the laughter juxtaposed together were really sonic art. I recorded and listen when I play with “Little George” while watching “Peace Mom” Cindy Sheehan and those other “Code Pink” bitches raped by the Washington D.C. Police Cavalry Unit.
Loose Cannon responded: Ummm..Mr Bush, I’m not sure. Can you go back to the part about Cindy Sheehan, though, that was fun.
you’re a sick fuck loose cannon and i discredit your arguments
August 10th, 2007 at 9:39 pm
Jfrater: I don’t specifically think the “imperial presidency” started with kennedy. it’s just around that time (the mid 60’s maybe) that the office went from being something smalltime like a senator to big like the president was the supreme executive authority.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:40 pm
Slim Jim: The infallibility of the Pope is very limited (ie, it relates only to morals and doctrine); but that aside, Catholics have never considered imperialism to be a bad thing – that is why the Catholic Church used to crown the royals of Europe’s thrones. You could say that in an ideal world (from a Catholic perspective) each country would be governed by an absolute monarch who acts for the best of all his subjects. Frankly this worked for a long time, but you do suffer the occasional despot who screws it up for all by being totally evil. I am not sure we will ever find a perfect balance.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:45 pm
Slim: you go!
Phil: I see – to be honest I don’t follow politics a great deal so I am not one to debate on a deep level as I lack the knowledge. I am happy to just chew the fat though (as we have here).
August 10th, 2007 at 10:05 pm
Slim Jim: you’re a sick fuck loose cannon and i discredit your arguments
It was satirical. If you’re that oblivious to sarcasm then I suggest you stick to the Disney Channel forums.
My argument is simple: Rating any political leader in this nation as one of, or the, worst dictator in the world, especially when we have so many others that are clearly worse, is hysteria.
Anyone who disagrees with this argument is either an imbecile or suffering from BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome).
August 10th, 2007 at 11:33 pm
Loose Cannon: passion is good – but we should probably try not to resort to name calling. I think we could probably have a reasonable debate here if everyone is willing to listen to the others and ALSO to be heard by the others. Hysteria is always lame – we should try to be moderate. Thanks for the comment though – I guess if some are passionate about their views we need to have others as passionate for the opposition too!
August 17th, 2007 at 6:33 am
I wouldn’t go as far as to say Bush is a dictator. Besides, the problem really seems to be with the whole system as opposed to just one centralized figure. Too many representatives and congressman are more interested in filling their own pockets and egos than helping the state of the nation or the world.
Also, for those comments about Bush being elected, you seem to forget that in order to have any realistic chance of being elected you need to have $250 million and to have all the right corporate powers in your pocket. That narrows it down to a very small pool of people who generally don’t care about the average American any farther than where their votes and money go.
I’m sorry if that wasn’t very on-topic or if it was a little extreme. I always get fired up when discussing what I see as a great disservice to the American people(i.e. politics).
August 17th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
“It is amazing that these people continue to rule while we busy ourselves fighting in places that are ruled by far less dangerous men.”
That is a quote from the top of the page. Funny — We are talking about dictators and at the same time we are talking about how Bush ‘invaded Iraq for no reason’, yet where the hell do you think Saddam Hussein would be on this list? In my opinion, top 3.
So, how do you make a list about evil dictators, then in the introduction you say we are wasting our time in Iraq while these people are still ruling.
I guess the millions tortured, raped and murdered by Saddam Hussein don’t matter and should be overlooked because a Republican actually did something about it. God, I hate those damn Republicans so ill bitch that we arent doing anything in the world to help genocide and at the same time ill overlook what Saddam did in Iraq throughout the years.
August 17th, 2007 at 7:51 pm
Louis: thanks for the comment – it is nice to hear a fairly moderate view of the state of things.
Billy – when I compiled this list Saddam was dead – therefore he can’t be on the list of living dictators. My introduction to the article was not actually related to Iraq. I watched the execution of Saddam (and I must confess, I watched it was with glee) but I think we tend to focus on countries that have the most to offer us, rather than those which actually are suffering dreadfully while the world is oblivious. Where were we in Rwanda? Please don’t take this is as a condemnation of our actions in Iraq – I think they had to happen, and now it is time for us to let the Iraqi people govern themselves finally. Surely we are all for the freedom of people to decide their own governments?
Just to confirm: I think Saddam had to be taken out of Iraq and am glad we did that. I will never forget the images of his political opponents hanging by the neck from streetlights.
August 17th, 2007 at 10:35 pm
Jfrater, I think you might have missed Billy’s point.
Others in this comments section have asked the question or submitted the comment about Pres. Bush being one of the worst dictators.
Billy’s point is if Saddam were alive, he would have made the top 10 here. He surely had the cult of personality, the sheer brutality, and posed a danger to everyone around him, having attacked four of his neighbors in just the last 15 years. Not to mention, he would have been the only one on the list to have used WMD on his enemies and his own people!
That in removing this brutal dictator from power, Bush would earn himself a place on this list, according to some, seems outrageous and hysterical.
My point is that if anyone thinks that Bush is the worst dictator in the world compared to these 10 baddies, they are completely unhinged and should seek professional treatment for insanity.
While it would be nice to tip-toe around the issue by ‘agreeing to disagree’ and using niceties to point out the ignorance of people you disagree with, there’s just no comparison here. You did an excellent job in listing the worst in the world. For anyone to put Bush in this list because they disagree with him politically is morbid and ignorant.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:00 am
Saparmurat Niyazov renamed himself Turkmenbashi (leader of all turkmen). he has also renmad cities, schools, and anything else he can Turkmenbashi.
August 18th, 2007 at 4:54 am
Bush is certainly no dictator- no American president was or will be. The closest any have come to dictatorship was FDR. Four terms in office and placing Japanese, Italian, and German Americans in camps from 1942 until the end of World War Two is worse than anything Bush has done. Bush may not be a very good president, but hes no where near as bad as these 10 monsters.
August 18th, 2007 at 8:34 am
Loose Cannon – you are right – I did misunderstand Billy. However, my comment is still true – the first paragraph of this article was not a criticism of Bush’s actions in Iraq.
August 18th, 2007 at 6:35 pm
Loose Cannon is right on with the point I was trying to make.
How people can honestly believe George W Bush belongs ANYWHERE near this list, I just dont know.
I hate Hilary Clinton as much as some of these people hate Bush, however, I would never compare her or anyone else to dictators such as these. You can disagree with policies and hate the way they are running the country, but to put a man as more evil then Kim Jong II is simply ludicrous.
August 18th, 2007 at 7:23 pm
Billy – hear hear!
August 20th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
I think this list should be changed to enemies of America.
August 23rd, 2007 at 10:09 pm
Woah where’s Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan. The guy who killed 5 thousand unarmed protesters mainly contained of women and children, who uses millions of children to plant and harvest cotton for him, exports all the natural resources of the country, where its own citizens don’t even have electricity in their homes, the person who keeps all the money, the country makes, the person who doesn’t even provide police officers with modern torture equipment, so that they use boiling water to torture innocent people…
August 23rd, 2007 at 10:58 pm
Why would Police need torture equipment??? Military state polilitcs??? excessive even then. Less than lethal ?????
August 24th, 2007 at 12:05 am
Simon: they are enemies of their own people! Mugabe is a criminal – regardless of US views, he is a thief.
Huh: It is probably high on the list – just not the top 10.
Crimanon: Police should never need it – I can understand for the military in some cases, but certainly not the police.
August 24th, 2007 at 1:26 am
Never need it, Yes. But reguardless of what they should never Need, it is necissary to have on hand things like Pepperspray, beanbag rounds, and tasers. People are not rational and don’t respond well to “Authorities”. Street justice isn’t legal or even a viable option, no matter how much I believe in it. Vigilantism would only work IF humans were rational until then we need trained Men And Women who can handle a crisis. Keep your nose clean and you won’t have a problem with the police. I could write an essay on this……Until Humans have learned to control themselves cops will be needed and I will stand by Any Officer who isn’t already corrupted by Indifference.
August 24th, 2007 at 1:32 am
Crimanon: oh – I have no problem with pepper spray and tasers, etc. They are definitely needed by the police.
September 10th, 2007 at 12:52 am
Stop blaming one guy (Bush) for all your problems. You are guilty, alright? Share the guilt.
—
“The army of the United States of America by request of President George W. Bush, (their commander in cheif) and with permission from the U.S. Congress invaded two countries.” quoted from eddiesammy
—
Fidel Castro is a dictator, but I dont think he’s that bad
September 10th, 2007 at 1:07 am
Özhan: Castro arrests and sometimes executes people just because they don’t agree with him – that makes him bad in my books!
October 12th, 2007 at 3:38 pm
ok,so first off, great list.
second, while i may be a bit harsh to call bush a dictator,to ignore the erosion of american civil liberties in the last 6 years is downright foolhardy.
to those of you that said “we elect presidents”, this is not true. we “appoint” a electoral college,which can then vote the way we asked, or vote what ever way they please.
also, to think that he will definitely go away is niave on a level that is astounding. hell, right now as we speak, putin of russia is suspected of setting up a “puppet president” that he can control behind the scenes, after he leaves office.
history is full of democracys(sp?) that have all but dissapeared, almost overnight. greece(several times) rome(also a couple times) france(napolean) germany (hitler). these are just the most common known examples.
so remember, while it is true we should not compare the crimes of “dubya” to,say, pol pot,he IS a criminal,and IS (in my opinion) a very dangerous man that could destroy this country,if left unchecked.
October 12th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
second, while i may be a bit harsh to call bush a dictator,to ignore the erosion of american civil liberties in the last 6 years is downright foolhardy.
Well, your ‘civil liberty’ of free speech still seems intact. I’m assuming you still have the civil liberty to use capitalizations, right? What other ‘civil liberties’ are ‘being eroded’?
October 13th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
Right to Bear Arms, Right to Privacy, False Imprisonment, Fair trial…
Should I keep going Cannon??? Read the Patriot Act, see if You are entirely law abiding.
October 13th, 2007 at 7:01 pm
Right to Bear Arms, Right to Privacy, False Imprisonment, Fair trial…
Should I keep going Cannon???
I think your going to have to ‘KEEP GOING’ since none of these have been significantly eroded and I suspect you haven’t read the Patriot Act yourself, since it doesn’t effect any of these.
You don’t have a right to privacy, perse. The dozens of suspects in recent computer child porn case and meth lab owners can tell you this. Hell, look up the Clinton-era development by the FBI of OMNIVORE and CARNIVORE for a real eye opener on the loss of ‘PRIVACY’.
You still have a right to ‘BEAR ARMS’. This hasn’t been touched by the so-called ‘PATRIOT ACT’ at all. Since the passage of the Brady Bill in the early 90’s ,and subsequent enhancements, by the Democrat congress, there has been instituted waiting periods. I can’t purchase a fully automatic machine gun, but I can still legally own rifles, shotguns and handguns, so long as their caliber is less then .50.
As far as ‘FALSE IMPRISONMENT’ and ‘A RIGHT TO A FAIR TRAIL’, again, these have nothing to do with the Patriot Act.
In these cases Bush relied on rulings by the Supreme Court dating back to the 1940’s and Civil War era. In ‘Ex Parte Quirin’ the 1942 US Supreme Court ruled, UNANIMOUSLY, that the US President could 1) create military tribunals, (2) this authority could not be regulated by Congress, and (3) this power was by virtue of the President’s power as commander in chief. Furthermore, since the one of the litigants in Ex Parte Quirin was a US CITIZEN, this applied to anyone, even US Citizens.
Further included in another ruling, from the US Supreme Court in 1865, Ex Parte Milligan is the right of the President to suspend ‘Habeas Corpus’ even to US Citizens. Both Lincoln and FDR used this right during war time without further challenge’s.
Just look at FDR’s interment of 110,000 Japanese-American citizens in 1942-1943 for a real example of the erosion of ‘CIVIL LIBERITIES’. BTW, the Canadian government did the exact same thing.
However, the recent ruling by the US Supreme Court in 2004 titled Hamdi v. Rumsfeld cited two caveats to the Presidents power but only as it applies to US Citizens: The Court recognized the power of the government to detain unlawful combatants, but ruled that detainees who are U.S. citizens must have the ability to challenge their detention before an impartial judge. So, in this case at least, your so-called ‘CIVIL LIBERTIES’ were actually enhanced, albeit with no help from Bush.
The term ‘EROSION OF CIVIL LIBERTIES’ is thrown around by socialist leftist, like yourself, who have no understanding of really what liberties you have and don’t have. And typically, because you’re so blinded by your hatred of Bush/Cheney/Rove, and suffering from what most of us call ‘BUSH DERANGEMENT SYNDROME’, you blame decades old established laws on the Patriot Act.
It’s so sad to witness the results of the break down of our education system.
October 13th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
BTW, since this thread is about the world’s ‘WORST DICTATORS’, where does Bush fall in this group, if his own power to suspend the right to ‘Habeas Corpus’, established over 140 years ago, can be overturned by the US Supreme Court?
As of right now, only a couple of US Citizens have been detained and declared ‘Illegal Combatants’ and held without charge. All since the ‘Hamdi v. Rumsfeld’ ruling have since been charged or given trials.
Does anyone else see the irony of socialist leftists protesting in our streets and ranting on public forms and in our newspapers about the loss of ‘CIVIL LIBERTIES’ when in fact, by making such claims public, they prove those ‘CIVIL LIBERTIES’ are still intact?
October 13th, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Fuck You! The freedom of speach, a favorite of mine. Give me my guns, give me my money, leave me alone on my land, Go get Stuffed. Sound at all leftist? Get out and actually see things, live the “Shittown” Life. It’s you Over Educated Bastards, high and mighty, Talk down to the little guys. You have so many good Ideas Run for Office. Some other prick will vote for you. I’ll stick to the Liberterians and my Constitutional rights.
Civil liberties- Do you really think that it would be wise to gun down protesters while being recorded, Myanmar style?
Believe whatever you want. But you’re not the only one who knows how to research:
Your bill of rights: Amedments 1-10 vs. “The Big G” (as with my comments and rantings on Scientology, you should spit a little Whenever saying Patriot.)
1: Targeting Musilums and any other Religion that is Deemed a potential for Extremism, harmless or no. Infringing on the confidentiality of “Sources” involved in press coomunications.
2: From personal experience I Know that a Credit card fraud charge (A Felony mind you) can keep you from owning a fire arm. Credit Card Fraud and Murder are classed with the same penatlties. Fortunate that I am still able to Legally Own a Weapon. This is not covered in Search and seizure clauses throughout the “Act” but directly relates to targeting of Minority Religions in America.
4. Search and Seizure. Don’t make me laugh. You can’t even carry a copy of The Catcher in the Rye, and not have your car searched. Look that one Up!
6. James Earl Ray, Need I Say More!!!
8. 2 million dollar bails for Rape, I don’t like the bastards either, but it is Excessive.
Govenment officials Fed., State, and Local; Police and even school systems are using the Patriot Act to bend the constitution in a manner Not prescibed by our Founding Fathers. I have read the Patriot act And Studied the Constitution. Don’t make assumptions, They make you look stupid.
For you to go on and on In what Was, sorry Jamie, a peaceful forum in, the manner that you have shows little reguard for the sanctity of calm discussion.
Bush is not on the list and I didn’t put him there, don’t attack me for voicing my Opinion on a differnt matter.
October 13th, 2007 at 11:22 pm
There’s your Degrading Civil liberties right there.
October 13th, 2007 at 11:29 pm
No need for apologies – I am actually quite enjoying the debate
October 14th, 2007 at 12:22 am
Crimanon: Fuck You!
I love it when I prove ignorant people wrong and the first thing they do is use a vulgar attack, then accuse ME of being uncivil.
Get out and actually see things, live the “Shittown” Life. It’s you Over Educated Bastards, high and mighty, Talk down to the little guys.
Sound leftist? Absolutely. It’s the Ad hominem attack, a typical class warfare ploy, in which you accuse others of not ‘Living Among The Lowly’ enough to know what’s going on.
This is just ANOTHER attack favored by the crazed and loony left: Attack the writer. If I’m not sharing your crazed point of view, well hell, I must be over educated enough and never lived my life ‘Among the Lowly.’ Better watch out, though, I think Edwards has that argument trademarked.
What’s hilarious and made me laugh out loud is later when you wrote:
Don’t make assumptions, They make you look stupid.
I would remind you of the same point. Who’s to say where I lived or how? I can share a different opinion even if I lived in the “Shittown” Life, whatever that is.
But the funniest, and most amusing is your so-called ‘LIST’, which could only come from the depths of a very disturbed person:
Targeting Musilums and any other Religion..
Sorry, but they’re terrorists. Just because they happen to share the same religion doesn’t make our persecution of them any less valid. If Jews or Witch were being persecuted, you’d be claiming the same argument. But it fails.
From personal experience I Know that a Credit card fraud charge (A Felony mind you) can keep you from owning a fire arm.
Then I suggest, in the future, you don’t steal people’s credit cards if you still want to carry a weapon. Seems pretty common sense to me.
Search and Seizure. Don’t make me laugh. You can’t even carry a copy of The Catcher in the Rye, and not have your car searched. Look that one Up!
I’m not really sure if you know how this works. I don’t do the leg work to prove you right. You got something to prove, YOU LOOK IT UP. Don’t be so lazy, do your own homework. Besides, no judge in America would ever uphold such a blatant disregard for the 4th Amendment. You fail.
6. James Earl Ray, Need I Say More!!!
Love how you want from 4 to 6 on your list. I wonder if your ‘CIVIL LIBERTY’ for the right to use number 5 was somehow taken away by the Patriot Act!
Unfortunately, I don’t follow the nutty conspiracy theory story of of the week. Was it actually an alien who killed MLK or just Bigfoot up to his old tricks?
Please enlighten all of us on how the killer of one of the most revered civil rights leaders in history was somehow maligned by the ‘Gum’ent’
And you last example. appropriately numbered 8, right after number 6, is:
2 million dollar bails for Rape, I don’t like the bastards either, but it is Excessive.
Fine, let the lawyers battle it out. This isn’t an overextension of the Patriot Act, excess bails have been handed out for decades, long before the Patriot Act became.
Bush is not on the list and I didn’t put him there, don’t attack me for voicing my Opinion on a differnt matter.
Heavens, why not? What you call an ‘ATTACK’ is simply my right to voice my contrary opinion. You disagree with it, so you label it an ‘ATTACK’. Next you’ll be trotting out your children who were somehow scarred for life for my ‘ATTACK’.
You didn’t, with perhaps the exception of the Search and Seizure’ rant, disprove my post in any way, shape or form. I find it very hard to believe that anyone was convicted of a crime simply for carrying a book, or the evidence of a crime was based on finding that book.
You fail, sir.
I doubt you’ll read my entire reply because, well, I’m right and you couldn’t bear to open your mind to the possibility that you might be deranged and wrong. So I’ll leave this part for the loyal reader:
I don’t necessarily believe in the legality of the Patriot Act, but it was properly passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. I’ll let the judges rule on the parts that are constitutional. My contention is with those would tell us our ‘CIVIL LIBERTIES’ are being deeply eroded, even while they post, scream, and
march, all ‘CIVIL LIBERTIES’ protected by the constitution.
The irony of it all is just too funny not to miss!
‘Niters!
October 14th, 2007 at 1:48 am
Damn.
I didn’t realize comments could be that long.
October 14th, 2007 at 11:58 am
ok, so loose cannon would like some reference.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=ROG20070521&articleId=5721
there’s my newest favorite.
this is almost identical to what hitler did, back when he took control of germany. remember folks, hitler wasn’t even President when he seized total control. he was merely a “prime minister”.
oh, and after you read the article i have linked there, check this one out (BTW, this is on a CONSERVATIVE website, i figured it would seem more trust worthy to those who may “think” that the “conservative agenda” is being followed, and those who speak up are obviously just leftist nuts) http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965
and lastly, for those of you that have the balls to watch the truth, and aren’t afraid to have your entire understanding of civilization shaken to the ground http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/ i will warn you, the film is nearly 2 hours long, and you need to pay attention from begining to end.
oh, and loose cannon, as far as your argument with “crimmon” goes, you said you would need proof. here ya go, buddy.
remember, history shows us that in order to erode a democracy of any form into a dictatorship, the people have to beleive that is it good for them, that is actually their will, and for the people to DO NOTHING ABOUT IT.
it amazes me, then, how you can seem to have been educated and yet seem entirely oblivous to this fact. and i say you seem educated, because despite the “eyes wide shut” approach (i.e. “I don’t necessarily believe in the legality of the Patriot Act, but it was properly passed by Congress and signed into law by the President. I’ll let the judges rule on the parts that are constitutional.”), you are quite composed in your arguments, and are quite coherent in making your points. they are, however, points that you have taken for fact without doing much research, as espoused by the fact that you didn’t know (or didn’t believe) our civil liberties were being taken away.
sorry for the novel, folks, but i’ve been busy, and felt i should try and catch up :p
October 14th, 2007 at 12:28 pm
Our civil liberties are being taken from us every day. It’s not just the Patriot act. Smoking bans, red light cameras, trans-fat bans, bicycle helmet and seat belt laws- just to name a few.
All in the name of “Protect the Cheeeldren! What about the cheeeldren?! Think of the cheeeeeldren!
Fuck the children.
Your job as senators, congressmen, judges and presidents is to, quite literally, protect me from invading forces and build infastructure and regulate trade. That’s it.
Stop trying to regulate how I live my life.
That’s my wife’s frickin’ job!
October 14th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Yarr: You better believe that is your wife’s job!
Without her you would be sitting in the corner not knowing what to do next.
/sorry had to comment…that is a fabulously funny comment.
October 14th, 2007 at 12:42 pm
“Smoking bans, red light cameras”
I’m kinda left as hell, but they’re about protecting other people.
I couldn’t care less if you wanna do those things and put your own life at risk- but putting other peoples? And since when are forcing smoke on other people/running red lights (putting others at a pretty much inavoidable risk) “civil liberties”?
October 14th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
Hobalad: concerning the smoking – the law permits people to smoke. If people don’t want to inhale secondary smoke, they can avoid places where smoke might be. Something is seriously wrong when the government allow something, take a lot of money from it (via cigarette taxes), and then turn you in to a pariah for doing what you are legally allowed to do. That is, in my opinion, a breach of civil liberties.
October 14th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
“Hobalad: concerning the smoking – the law permits people to smoke. If people don’t want to inhale secondary smoke, they can avoid places where smoke might be. Something is seriously wrong when the government allow something, take a lot of money from it (via cigarette taxes), and then turn you in to a pariah for doing what you are legally allowed to do. That is, in my opinion, a breach of civil liberties.”
Smokers can still smoke- just outside or in their own homes. Remember what it was like say, a year or two ago? Restaurants, bars, bus stations- full of smoke. It wasn’t that easy to just avoid (unless you were a complete hermit).
“Secondhand smoke causes approximately 3,400 lung cancer deaths and 46,000 heart disease deaths in adult nonsmokers in the United States each year.”
Forcing it on other people, legal or not, is just kinda ignorant. “I want to smoke so I’m gonna put you all at risk too when I could just step a few feet outside.”
October 14th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
here’s an erosoin for ya :
find me a law the gives provision for Federal income tax. go ahead, try and find one. there isn’t one, yet there is an agency that everyone i know is afraid of, that takes ones money each and every year. in fact, it is estimated the the average american spends four months out of the year working to pay income taxes.
or, how about the provision that IS in the patriot act that allows search, seizure, and holding of American citizens, and all the government has to do is say you might be a terorist.
and as far as freedom of speech goes, OF COURSE I CAN SAY WHAT I WANT! the mainstream media is all that matters, and everyday fox news will tell you that people that think the way i do are crackpots!
its really quite simple, in other words. if you let people have useless rights, then you can slowly and systematically take away all the ones that actually add up to something.
oh, and even though i should rise above this, i cant help but point out that even though you commented on my comment, all you really did was make a snarky remark about how i tend not to use capitalization. well, ya got me there…. i also tend to use “ya” in place of “you”, and “yer” in place of “your”… and i tend to missspell things from time to time… there, i think i got that out nof the way, so maybe next time, you can respond to my comment, instead of taking a poke at how i said it.
October 14th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
Red light cameras give you tickets you can’t protest in court. You have to pay the fine just because they tell you that you committed the offense.
“Innocent until proven guilty?” I think not. Money grab? Yep.
I’m not advocating the running of lights. But the enforcement of the LAW should be done by cops and courts.
As far as smoking, 2 things:
1. If it’s so damn bad for me and everyone else, if everyone who even knows what a cigarette is is going to die of cancer, then just ban the product and call it a day. If not, then shut the hell up.
2. If I own a business, it’s my right to refuse service to anyone, and as a property owner, it should be my right to decide what and what not to do with said property. You, my non-smoking friend, can make a choice to come into my bar, or not to come into my bar if you don’t like smoke. It is not being forced on you. You choose. But, my non-smoking friend, you bitched. And now the government has taken away my rights as to what I can or can’t do in my own building. Business is down 40%, and I can’t do anything about it, all because of the fucking CHEEEELDREN!!!!
So, punishment without trial, and a stomping on the rights of property owners.
Are we good on how things like these these are chipping away at little freedoms?
October 14th, 2007 at 1:18 pm
Cosmic unwinding – there’s my newest favorite.
My first reaction is obvious: YAWN
It’s just typical leftist hysteria.
OMG! Bush is declaring himself DICTATOR! HELP!
All that it does is extend the rights of the President in the event of a “catastrophic emergency.” – a simple follow up of what most people would consider ‘Marshall Law’- by specifying the procedures for continuity of the federal government.
Seriously, that’s all. Similar executive security directives have been issued by previous presidents, but their texts have been kept secret; this is the first to be made public in part. Why would a supposedly power-grabbing dictatorship list any part of it’s plans to the public when previous presidents have made it secret? If anything it shows an integrity in releasing it publicly.
A Continuity of Operations Plan has been a part of government operations since at least the Cold War, when President Dwight D. Eisenhower provided by executive order various measures which were supposed to ensure that the government of the United States would be able to continue in case of nuclear war.
According to the Washington Post article on this “Norman J. Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and an adviser to an independent Continuity of Government Commission, said the order “is a more explicit embrace of what has been since 9/11 an implicit but fairly clear set of assumptions.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/09/AR2007050902719.html
That’s it.
You’re second link, from HumanEvents.com has to do with extending NAFTA and to secretly “dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union.”
What this has to do with your claim that our civil liberties are being eroded, I haven’t the faintest clue. Frankly, I don’t think you do either, since you list the site with some forbearance but refuse to summarize what it’s about.
as far as your argument with “crimmon” goes, you said you would need proof. here ya go, buddy.
I’m still waiting! All you’ve done so far is list a directive for procedures for continuity of the federal government – YAWN, something nearly every president during the cold war has done – and an unrelated article about the extension of NAFTA. I wonder if you even bothered to read the article yourself, since it has nothing to do with the erosion of our civil liberties that you’ve claimed.
So far as your challenge to watch ‘Zeitgeist, the Movie’; If I want to be bored for two hours while watching some propagandist film pocked with factual holes I’ll stick to ‘An Inconvenient Truth’. At least as I understand it, it actually lists some sources and entertains.
One reviewer wrote of this film: ‘The over-all temper of the video is rather like the John Birch Society on acid, with interludes by Harry Smith.
Even the Producer of the film states “It is my hope that people will not take what is said in the film as the truth . . .”
http://www.boingboing.net/2007/08/06/jay-kinney-reviews-z.html
For those who don’t wish to subject themselves to what the reviewer wrote as “like I was getting Malcolm McDowell’s treatment in Clockwork Orange: eyes pried wide open while getting bombarded with quick-cut atrocity photos.” Picture this:
1) 9/11 Conspiracy claims
2) The ultra-rich have been secretly manufacturing wars.
3)Christianity is used by the rich and powerful to control people.
Just your run-of-the-mill left-wing, hysterical conspiracy, propaganda film lacking sources and facts.
Your hysterical pleas that somehow Bush/Cheney/Rove are forming a dictatorship are old and tired. Your ilk have been claiming this since Bush was elected. It’s like a one note song you keep playing over and over. First they claimed there would be no election in ‘04, now they’re claiming they’ll be no election in ‘08.
Seriously, stick to your original premise that that there has been an “erosion of american(sp) civil liberties in the last 6 years.”
Be ORIGINAL! Instead of posting some whacked out sites that have nothing to do with your original claim, give us some evidence that today, right now, as I sit here typing this, my ‘CIVIL LIBERTIES’ are gone or at least ‘ERODED’.
You failed terribly and embarrassingly in your post. Try to do better.
October 14th, 2007 at 1:21 pm
yarr, i must congratulate you on toeing the line and speaking the truth.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-10-03-smoking-bans_N.htm?csp=34 now there’s some scary stuff, people. they wanna ban us having a cigg in our apartments!
point of fact is, like yarr said, if it’s such a damn problem, why not just OUTLAW the damn things????
October 14th, 2007 at 1:32 pm
“Red light cameras give you tickets you can’t protest in court. You have to pay the fine just because they tell you that you committed the offense.
“Innocent until proven guilty?” I think not. Money grab? Yep.
I’m not advocating the running of lights. But the enforcement of the LAW should be done by cops and courts.”
Isn’t photographic proof sufficient evidence to be proven guilty?
“As far as smoking, 2 things:
1. If it’s so damn bad for me and everyone else, if everyone who even knows what a cigarette is is going to die of cancer, then just ban the product and call it a day. If not, then shut the hell up.
2. If I own a business, it’s my right to refuse service to anyone, and as a property owner, it should be my right to decide what and what not to do with said property. You, my non-smoking friend, can make a choice to come into my bar, or not to come into my bar if you don’t like smoke. It is not being forced on you. You choose. But, my non-smoking friend, you bitched. And now the government has taken away my rights as to what I can or can’t do in my own building. Business is down 40%, and I can’t do anything about it, all because of the fucking CHEEEELDREN!!!!”
Ban it? That probably won’t happen ’cause of the whole industry behind it(And isn’t banning it outright worse than just banning it in situations where others would be put at risk?)
We didn’t like it, and it got changed. You guys can try reverse it in the same way- let’s see how much support you get. Good luck with that.
Again, it wasn’t as easy to avoid as you claim. Everywhere allowed it, there was no where to go. Now there’s gonna be thousands of less deaths a year, just because some people have to step a few feet outside to smoke for a bit.
Can I ask what the whole “cheeldren” thing is a reference of? Or how it’s related to the smoking ban in any way?
Oh, and please could you mellow down for a bit? You seem quite heated, y’know? After all, it’s only the internet.
October 14th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
I can understand banning smoking in resturants specially places like Big Boy’s, Golden Corral, the McD type places and the such. But at small resturants where the owner is the cook and his wife is the waitress and his kid is the busser (I.E. Grape’s in Oxnard, California) it should not be the case. They are not a huge corperation that not be affected by a smoking ban.
Also bars and adult clubs should not be affected by the bans either. The children are already banned from going in even if it is with thier parent. (I remember my grama always taking me to the bar with her when I was real young). An adult is responsible enough to realize they don’t like the smell of smoke and can choose to go to a bar that is smoke free. There were many of them before the ban was enforced and they were doing well. Now the bars that use to allow smoking that can not anymore are loosing business at a very rapid pace. So many have been hit so hard they were forced to close down and sell the building. This isn’t just bars that it happens to, but bars are the easiest to reference. It is sad that a ban can affect businesses so dramatically.
The prohabition on alcohol didn’t last long, this one hopfully won’t either. Think about what would happen if they desided to ban hamberger and steak due to people dying from obesity. Think of all the businesses that would crumble.
Hey, maybe that whole “Every resturant is Taco Bell now.” statement from Demolition Man isn’t to far from being accurate…..
October 14th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Hobolad: I simply do not believe the numbers of “passive smoking” related deaths that are often reported; I need to see to believe, and in my own life I have not seen a single example of this in a predominantly long term smoking extended family and friends. Because of that – and the fact that you probably do believe the numbers, I will bow out of the debate on this topic because we will only argue back and forth and smoking is not a topic worth losing friends over
October 14th, 2007 at 1:39 pm
This topic will go down in the annals of listverse history I think
October 14th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
cannon, while you make claims that i have no proof, you fail to actually say how, so here’s a challenge to all others. do a google search, and try these topics out for size.
Prescott bush – nazi link
the amero- and how it will effectively ABOLISH the constitution
the patriot act- dont be suprised to find out most of this “law” is deemed classified
i’d list more, but these three will keep most busy for months, if not years.
October 14th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
Yes j…it very well may….
October 14th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
. Cosmic unwinding – find me a law the gives provision for Federal income tax. go ahead, try and find one.
The 16th Amendment is pretty clear on that: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
How about I provide you with several more? The IRS conveniently lists a brochure on it’s website pointing out the fallacies of the so-called ‘Lack of Law’ in Federal Tax code.
You can get the PDF for yourself here: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/friv_tax.pdf
For your convenience I list some of the pertinent laws right here:
The requirement to file an income tax
return is not voluntary and is clearly set forth in sections 6011(a), 6012(a),
et seq., and 6072(a). See also Treas. Reg. § 1.6011-1(a).
Relevant Case Law:
Helvering v. Mitchell, 303 U.S. 391, 399 (1938) – the U.S. Supreme Court stated that “[i]n assessing income taxes, the Government relies primarily upon the disclosure by the taxpayer of the relevant facts . . . in his annu
return. To ensure full and honest disclosure, to discourage fraudulent
attempts to evade the tax, Congress imposes [either criminal or civil]
sanctions.”
United States v. Gerads, 999 F.2d 1255, 1256 (8th Cir. 1993) – the court held that “[a]ny assertion that the payment of income taxes is voluntary
without merit.”
United States v. Tedder, 787 F.2d 540, 542 (10th Cir. 1986) – the court upheld a conviction for willfully failing to file a return, stating that the premise “that the tax system is somehow ‘voluntary’ . . . is incorrect.”
United States v. Richards, 723 F.2d 646, 648 (8th Cir. 1983) – the court upheld conviction and fines imposed for willfully failing to file tax returns stating that the claim that filing a tax return is voluntary “was rejected in United States v. Drefke, 707 F.2d 978, 981 (8th Cir. 1983), wherein the
court described appellant’s argument as ‘an imaginative argument, but
totally without arguable merit.’”
Woods v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 88, 90 (1988) – the court rejected the claim that reporting income taxes is strictly voluntary, referring to it as a “‘tax protester’ type” argument, and found Woods liable for the penalty of
failure to file a return.
Johnson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-312, 78 T.C.M. (CCH) 468 471 (1999) – the court found Johnson liable for the failure to file penalty
and rejected his argument “that the tax system is voluntary so that he cannot be forced to comply” as “frivolous.”
And the list goes on and on.
Do us all a favor and actually educate yourself on the relevant facts before posting such nonsense here. You just look silly.
October 14th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
“Hobolad: I simply do not believe the numbers of “passive smoking” related deaths that are often reported; I need to see to believe, and in my own life I have not seen a single example of this in a predominantly long term smoking extended family or friends. Because of that – and the fact that you probably do believe the numbers, I will bow out of the debate on this topic because we will only argue back and forth and smoking is not a topic worth losing friends over
”
You do have a point, who was that guy who said statistics often hide more than they show? Still, I guess we’ll be able to see how the smoking ban affects these statistics in the future.
Y’know we’re all entitled to our opinions- there’s no way any online argument (Hmm, prefer the word “debate”) is gonna make me think any worse about anyone (Well, neo-nazi’s and the like… maybe
) but definately not the genius behind this class site!
October 14th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
Cosmic unwinding – cannon, while you make claims that i have no proof, you fail to actually say how,
No, actually I’m pretty specific in my post; You fail to list anything factual, but merely opinionated drivel from left-wing nut websites.
Anyone can say – “LOOK HERE”, “SEARCH THE GOOGLES FOR THIS”, “HERE’S SOME PROOF”, but it takes real intelligence and research to state your case coherently and summarize your references.
You fail miserably.
You claimed our ‘CIVIL LIBERTIES’ are being ‘ERODED’, now you have your bored readers searching for ‘PRESCOTT BUSH’ and “NAZI”? Why, is Prescott Bush now President? How does this relate to your original claim?
It seems appropriate that during this season you would erect scarecrow after scarecrow, but seriously, it’s not what you originally claimed.
October 14th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
For fans of Cecil Adams’ ‘The Straight Dope’, I’ll provide this link on who Prescott Bush was:
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/030214.html
To summarize Cecil Adam’s article, I’ll simply list his conclusion here:
So, did Bush and his firm finance the Nazis and enable Germany to rearm? Indirectly, yes. But they had a lot of company. Some of the most distinguished names in American business had investments or subsidiaries in prewar Germany, including Standard Oil and General Motors. Critics have argued for years that without U.S. money, the Nazis could never have waged war. But American business has always invested in totalitarian regimes–witness our dealings with mainland China.
What this has to do with “Cosmic Unwinding’s” claim about our ‘CIVIL LIBERTIES’ being eroded today, I’ll leave him/her to explain.
October 14th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
cannon- while you claim my sources to be “left wing nut websites” like i aid in one of my previous posts, the info i showed about the north american union (which is NOT, i might add, part of nafta) was from a CONSERVATIVE website.
but you keep on acusing me of being a “left wing nut”, even though i’ve made no political affilation known… strange how that accusation arises ever time you post.
as far as telling people to do research on prescott, i told people to do a search on that for one simple reason. if you lok hard enough, you’ll find that all the evidence in the matter shows that he vastly expanded his fortunes off the nazi movement, and was a big fan of a thing called eugenics.
what i’m saying here is, while you merely try to put down everyones ideas that dont fall into to line with yours, i just say, “here, look for yourself, be educated, learn”
so my question to you is, who are you, and why are you so driven to squash any free thinking here?????
if what you say is right, then why be against people taking a look for themselves, and claiming that i’m just “boring them”?
hmmmmm, strange how i invite people to take a look and think, and you’re right there, going “NO!! he lies, dont look!”
oh, and the 16 amemdment was never ratified, so nope. that one’s a bust(as are, in turn, all laws based on it). dont beleive, look it up.
October 14th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
cannon, so in response to your post entirely about prescott, you say “well, there were lots of people funding nazi germany”…. um so, that makes it right???
and as far as your comment on our dealings with mainland china…gee, thanks for making that point for me
October 14th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
“cannon, so in response to your post entirely about prescott, you say “well, there were lots of people funding nazi germany”…. um so, that makes it right???”
Looks like LC was quoting someone about that, for us too lazy to do the googling
October 14th, 2007 at 2:26 pm
oh, and cannon, i already listed some sites about the erosion of civil liberties, and invited other to look for more, as i will do again.
DONT BE BLIND, PEOPLE, MAKE AN EFFORT TO BE INFORMED FURTHER THAN THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA WANTS!
October 14th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
Cosmic unwinding – what i’m saying here is, while you merely try to put down everyones ideas that dont fall into to line with yours, i just say, “here, look for yourself, be educated, learn”
No, what I’m saying is that you’re lazy.
Most people, when told to ‘LOOK HERE’ and “GOOGLE THIS” simply won’t. But, either way, it doesn’t make your argument any stronger by simply listing ‘LOOK AT THIS’. It just means you’re a robot who can point to articles somewhere on the ‘net but can’t formulate a cohesive opinion on your own.
My post concerning Prescott Bush was from a very well known journalist and researcher most people would trust for a reference. I used something called ITALICS to show I was quoting from his article.
Google: ITALICS and CECIL ADAMS. Now Google: CITING A SOURCE. Now Google: USEING REFERENCES.
See, I can win an argument by telling you to ‘LOOK IT UP’, too.:)
But none of this goes back to your original claim of our ‘ERODING’ civil liberties. Why do you continue to run away from that topic, by telling us to ‘LOOK UP’ Prescott Bush and Americo?
By the way, according to the excellent article from Cecil Adams, Prescott Bush owned just one single share in UBC and when it liquidated in 1951 it was worth $1.5 million. Hardly a ‘vast expand(tion) (of) his fortunes’ for a guy who was already worth many millions of dollars.
October 14th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
Cosmic unwinding – so my question to you is, who are you, and why are you so driven to squash any free thinking here?????
I’m not at all. I’m telling you why you are wrong, by citing and summarizing references that actually contain something we call ‘FACTS’.
Look this up: FACTS. Now look up: DEBATING.
See, it’s not my place to prove you correct. That’s your job. My job is simply to prove you wrong and tell you why I am right.
Also, I think it’s important to keep it informative and entertaining. After all, who’s going to bother to read this if we don’t provide something interesting or fun to read?
Google: READING IS FUNDAMENTAL. Now look up: ENTERTAIN and INFORMATIVE.
hmmmmm, strange how i invite people to take a look and think, and you’re right there, going “NO!! he lies, dont look!”
Actually, I invite everyone to take a look. Sometimes it’s entertaining and fun to watch the delusional. But to continue to do my job in pointing out you’re wrong and I’m right, I also provide the reader with some clue about WHY you are incorrect or that it might be just a gigantic waste of time, such as the two hour ‘MOVIE’ you suggested.
Google: MOVIE CRITIC. Now look up: SUMMARIZE. Now look up: DELUSIONAL.
October 14th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Thinking about it, we are losing our civil liberties (over here in the UK at least- can’t speak for any other countries).
I mean, what a surveillance society we’ve become! Phone/email instrusions legal (And not just from the government), CCTV all over the place (Places where they don’t help, just intrude- whereas they do at red lights, I reckon)
And the policing- the friendly bobby on the beat is now a myth- it’s squads of military style cops appearing in vans and dragging people off.
The vote is just a vote between two evils as well- what’s that thing where it’s like, we’re getting fooled into thinking we’ve got a choice by being given two choices that don’t make a difference to the outcome- ’cause it’s the guys behind the scenes who call the shots? The rich b*st*rds?
And ID cards to possibly become compulsary as well as passports, and not being cheap either.
Etc. etc. etc. Could go on all day, but His Holy Bobness is on BBC4.
October 14th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
oh, and the 16 amemdment was never ratified, so nope. that one’s a bust(as are, in turn, all laws based on it). dont beleive, look it up.
Actually, it was ratified and it’s part of the US Constitution.
From Wikipedia: On February 25, 1913, the Secretary of State Philander Knox proclaimed that the amendment had been ratified by the necessary three-quarters of the states, and thus had become part of the Constitution.
It further goes on to list the 42 states that ratified it and on exactly what date it was ratified.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Ratification_process
Don’t believe me?
Google: RATIFICATION. Now look up: US CONSTITUTION.
October 14th, 2007 at 4:11 pm
BTW, Cosmic unwinding, failing to pay your taxes based on the misconception that the 16th Amendment wasn’t ratified will lead you to jail; Do not pass ‘GO’, do not collect $200!
From the article: Joseph Banister, a Certified Public Accountant and former IRS Special Agent was arrested at his San Jose home last month on a federal indictment accusing him of numerous tax crimes. According to news reports, Banister advised clients they didn’t have to file federal income tax returns because “the 16th Amendment was not properly ratified.” If convicted of all counts, Banister could be sentenced to 14 years in prison and face a $1 million fine.
If you would like to bet your freedom and wallet that the 16th Amendment wasn’t ratified, be my guest.
But, as the writer of this article points out: …the federal government had the power to impose income taxes before the Amendment was ratified, or not ratified, and it would retain that power even if the Amendment was torn out of the Constitution and thrown in the trashcan. All the Amendment did was settle the constitutional controversy as to whether income taxes fall in the category of direct or indirect taxes.
His excellant article can be read here: http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/04/12/29/greenslade.htm
For a more direct source, let’s read the US Constitution itself:
Article I, section 8, Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
If you don’t believe me, look it up!
October 14th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
Hobolad:
“Isn’t photographic evidence enough?” (paraphrased)
Um, no.
1. Not me driving. (mom, wife, friend driving- I still get the ticket they were supposed to get.)
2. Equipment malfunction (camera mistimed, etc.)
3. In our system, you can rape a nun on the 50 yard line at the halftime show at the superbowl, and you are still entitled to a fair and speedy trial. Of your peers. In a court.
4. If all you need is a picture to prove that something exists, movie night at your house must be spectacularly interesting…
To smoking: “we won, try to change it back.” (paraphrased)
You are sitting happily in a bar that is about to shut down. The owner is being told by the guv’ment what he can or can’t do with his or her own property. That is a violation of our rights.
You can sit happy in your smoke free bar knowing that the owner is being screwed by your “victory”.
And the next thing that bothers you enough to complain is going to take away someone else’s rights.
You do not have the RIGHT to a smoke free bar unless you buy a building and create one. Otherwise you are simply stepping on other people’s freedoms for your own selfish desires.
I’ll admit, smokers are and have been rude and careless, and a lot of the backlash we have brought on ourselves. But, don’t think for a second that Mr. Smoker down the bar is the one you are hurting.
We’ll adjust.
We’ll stay home and put dartboards and pool tables in our own houses.
You are only really hurting small business owners- who suffer whether they personally smoke or not, but are forced to refuse service to a customer based on another customer’s preferences.
And their ability to bitch alot.
October 14th, 2007 at 7:56 pm
Also, you asked if outright banning it wasn’t worse than just restricting. I’m just tired of the word ban, I guess. Everything has to be banned. Heavy Metal (Thumbs up there Mrs. Nobel prize winner) light bulbs, pit bull dogs, SUV’s, etc.
BUT, the Gub’ment likes to tax on one end and restrict on the other.
Like I said, if everyone that ever saw a cigarette is doomed… if it’s THAT bad…
Well I’m not for bans, and I haven’t bothered to go to Wikipedia for a reference, but last I checked the domestic sale and distribution of cyanide is pretty limited, if not banned outright.
It’s not because a lobbyist had his AMEX declined. It’s because cyanide is BAD FOR YOU!!!
If the politicians really give a shit, and/or it is really that bad, it should be banned altogether. Stop taxing me on Monday and restricting me on Tuesday.
Shit or get off the pot!
The CHEEELDREN thing is because every time I see a useful idiot out on the street with a megaphone calling for the banning or restricting of whatever, they always have to use children as the reason for their protest. It’s always really dramatic and maudlin, and somehow in my town, strippers have to wear pasties over their nipples in an age restricted venue over 1500 feet away from any church and/or school because of the CHEEEELDREN!!! (that would have to travel 1/4 mile, sneak through security and then not get noticed by anyone at all in the club– I say if he can accomplish all that, a little piece of tape shouldn’t stop him from seeing the boobs he worked so hard for!)
And finally, I dropped into this discussion just to shoot off a little about eroding civil liberties. I say, smoke ‘em if you got ‘em, or not. I don’t care. Didn’t mean to start a smoking debate, and I’m sorry, but the wounds are still fresh. Friends of mine are losing their livelihoods because of this. It hits really close to home. I’m usually a lot more fun.
October 14th, 2007 at 9:17 pm
Hobolad:
Didn’t read comment 95 before going off before. Sorry.
I’m not exactly sure how your court system in the UK works, but here the red light cameras are not only insulting, but their automated punishment is absolutely illegal and unconstitutional, yet they are there.
They are there and nobody seems to be willing to fight them.
It’s government out of control, and not a Bush/Cheney conspiracy.
Loose Cannon and Cosmic are arguing.
It’s entertaining.
But ultimately we will be subjugated and enslaved; not by GWB, but by ourselves.
As long as we lean on the government to solve our problems; as long as we shout in the street and in the courts for one or another to be forced to conform; as long as we keep giving them power they will continue to take it and use it against us.
Every day we are a little less free.
And nobody seems to care.
October 14th, 2007 at 9:24 pm
And yes, I am the guy who commented that my favorite teen movies were pornos.
I’m usually so much more fun.
Somebody say something funny, dammit!!!
October 15th, 2007 at 5:15 am
Something funny, Dammit!
October 15th, 2007 at 7:03 am
Hobolad:
30. “The gavel of the speaker of the House is in the hands of special interests, and now it will be in the hands of America’s children.” – Nancy Pelosi, on the prospect of Democrats winning back Congress
Right out of listverse!
October 15th, 2007 at 10:59 am
I understand where you’re coming from about the red light cameras- but without them I’d guess (I’m not gonna pretend to know the facts and figures and whatnot
) that it’d be very hard to get anyone convicted.
Possibly- have a trial, in which the photo can be used as evidence? That would be likely increase the cost of the fines though, to cover costs and things.
As it is, you can appeal if you think it’s unfair- I think? Not too sure if that’d end up costing more than the ticket though. It’s not a subject I’m an expert on, to be honest
About the smoking- I didn’t know it was that bad. People aren’t going to bars because they can’t smoke in them? I just don’t understand the mentality behind that, when they could just nip outside for a smoke (what all my smoker-friends do).
Maybe we’re each talking about different smoking laws? I haven’t a clue how it works over there, but over here it doesn’t seem to be doing much damage to any local bars or whatever over here.
October 15th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Hobolad: The red light cameras here in the U.S. are not used properly. They catch you for everything you do (which is good) and everything you don’t do (which is bad) They will tic you for running the red light if you are stopped just barely over the line and send you the still pic in the mail. If you take it in to dispute it there is nothing you can do since it is a still pic with you just over the line. Whether you are stopped or not is not expressed correctly and you get fined. They also are very inacurate judging speed. We were doing just fine catching the “bad guys” without the cameras…Now we are trapping the “good guy”. The cameras are (and I hate to say it) making the police lazier than they were.
The smoking thing…well it is reduculous. Most places that permitted smoking do not have an outdoor patio or something of the such for smokers to retriet to. There were plenty of smoke-free bars for those who would rather. Those bars were doing great. As were the smoking permitted bars. Now you can not smoke in front of the building in plain veiw of the public and many bars do not have a back area. You must be I think it is 30 feet from any establishment. Many smokers who drink want to smoke while they drink. It is part of their inebriated enjoyment. Since they can not smoke inside and they can not drink outside they deside to stay home. This hurts the bars as they are losing up to 85% of their business. Some lost even more. This ban is also in effect for private clubs like the lions or the VFW. They left no place for a smoker to smoke except inside their own home. Before the non smokers had a choise of going to a smoke-free bar or dealing with a smoking-permitted bar. Now the smokers don’t have a choise of establishments to enjoy they either go to a smoke-free bar or stay home. Now they are even looking at banning smoking in apartment complexes and other multi-family dwellings. They might as well ban smoking out right instead of taking this pittlefooting route. As I said before, the alcohol prohabition didn’t last long because they figured people were going to do what they wanted no matter how bad it is for themselves. Eatting meat is bad for your health too (It has it’s good sides too though). Imagine if the government banned beef because the skinny people were tired of seeing people getting fat (which is not always the case but it runs along the same lines of people complaining about other people). What do you think would happen to the mom & pop resturants?
I am not trying to be arguementive just stating what I feel. This post will probably sound really stupid though.
October 15th, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Tody it was announced in California that the government is banning the use of “Gender-specific” words in schools.
Words like mom, dad, sister, brother, etc.
Banned.
Boy, Girl, Man, Woman…
Banned!
Homecoming King & Queen?
Banned.
I give up. This country has gone mad.
I feel more and more like I’m caught in Wonderland.
“But I don’t want to be going about mad people.”
“Oh, you can’t help that, dear. We’re all mad here.”
October 15th, 2007 at 2:33 pm
Our ban doesn’t seem as strict as yours. 30 feet from a restaraunt? That’s quite needless, just outside the door is fine over here.
“Tody it was announced in California that the government is banning the use of “Gender-specific” words in schools.”
Yeah, it’s focussing on the little things that don’t make a difference so that they can comfortably ignore the things that matter.
Like banning the word “blackboard” due to racist connotations (What? It’s a board and it’s black…) while doing exactly zero about the educational disadvantage ethnic minorities have.
It’s ridiculous, and I think the people who pass these things know exactly how ridiculous they are- but y’know, the rich can get away with murder and it’s the rich who make the laws
October 15th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
I think it is 30 feet from the door. That is supposed to be the closest you can get to where the smoke completely disapates before getting a chance to enter the door and further damaging the non-smokes comfort. I do agree with it being banned in resturants that are frequented with young children. I do agree they should not be subjected to someone elses ignorance because they have no desision on where their parents take them. But an adult can make a choise as to enter the bar with smokers. The made the desision to enter and then complain because they are there with smokers. I don’t get people. I don’t think I ever will.
Be careful what you say…they may ban the black crayon…until it is renamed something like… like… um… what could they name the black crayon so it is not a racist connotation?
October 15th, 2007 at 7:19 pm
Slate.
October 18th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
I hate to get in on the back end of a debate like this but I gotta do it anyway. First off, if you want someone to actualy listen to your argument and maybe see your point of view try not to call them names and cuss them out. If someone says to me “Hey you fucking idiot, light comes from the sun” I would probably take an oposition stance even if I previously agreed with them.
Alot of crazy stuff has been going on since 9/11 and some of it doesn’t jive with me either but to call W a dictator is just plain ignorant. I know I shouldn’t use such harsh language to back up my argument but I just can’t be kind about this. Look at that list above, those are some really evil dudes.
Now back to the topic. I agree that Castro is a pretty bad dude and definitely a dictator but I think there are others even worse. I think I would bump him down to the 12-15 range.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:06 am
Bush is a neo nazi dictator, he’s using executive privialge to push through a far right fascist war mongering agenda backed by those sahit fucks in the heritage foundation and that rabid shit fuck, Cheney.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:32 am
lol some of these comments are just too much. Gotta love the looney left
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:36 am
evan: I love reading the comments – we get some real gems from time to time
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:54 am
ok well my two cents…
Anywho. The Federal Gov’t in general has grown out of control. Not because of Bush, it started long ago. We need to get back to a smaller less controlling government that is true to the ideals of the Constitution. The Federal gov’t has no business interfering with it’s citizens lives except for what is specifically stated in the Constitution. Everything else should be left to the State and local governments.
As for the smoking laws. I can’t believe this has been passed buy some states and cities. It’s a private business, the owner should be able to carry out the policies they see fit. If they want to allow smoking, smoke! Why does the govt feel it has the right to force a non-smoking policy? Its simple free market economics. If you don’t smoke and the establishment in question allows it, guess what? DONT GO THERE. Don’t spend your money there. Then maybe, if the business loses enough money because non-smokers refuse to go there, they may change their policy voluntarily. The govt has no place enforcing some smoking ban.
To paraphrase
“One thing is certain, the founding fathers never envisioned a government where its citizens pay nearly one half of their income to taxes.”
-Ron Paul
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:56 am
evan: I agree completely on the smoking issue – it annoys me to no end!
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:31 am
evan-Gotta love the looney left.
When Bush won the 2004 election, the nuts at the Democrat Underground website closed their forum, for fear of the emotional posts the nutty left would post. A guy took out a Craig’s list ad asking if he could beat up some Southern guy to work through his frustration.
The ‘looney-left’ in this nation are emo pussies. They don’t posses the emotional maturity and logical intelligence to sort through their feelings and express them rationally, hence you get such statements that ‘Stalin is Bambi compared to Cheney’.
I’m not saying that Bush/Cheney/Rove are right or that I can defend their decision-making abilities. There are plenty of actions I would criticize. Rationally discussing bad ideas and failures and why you disagree with them is what mature people do. But labeling Bush a ‘Nazi’ is what emotionally-stunted, intelligence-challenged people do.
Calling someone a Nazi or Hitler is what a teenage girl would do if her father told her she was grounded. Does that really make him comparable to the Nazi’s or Hitler?? Do we really need to exam him for Nazi-like or Hitler-like comparisons?? Do we then politely disagree with her, because she’s entitled this opinion??
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:51 am
yeah, generally speaking, I know a lot of left leaning people aren’t this way, but on personal level (people ive personally talked to), and on a national level the ones who make headlines, are like you said. They are completely devoid of making a logical, fact based argument. They “debate” strictly on emotional, irrational feelings about an issue. Which not only have their arguments lacking creditability, it also makes them look like a small child throwing a crying fit.
Im a big second amendment supporter and the arguments against gun ownership that ive personally heard have usually been ridiculous. Looney leftist will say something like “guns are bad” or simply repeat some talking heads statement, then you ask them “why are they bad”. They usually go into a daze unable to explain why.
The difference between “liberals” and “conservatives” , again generally speaking in my personal experience talking to the bunch, is simple. Conservatives are generally more rational, are realists, fact based, and business-like individuals, while the liberals come off as emotional, irrational, feelings based cliques. “I (more accurately the govt) knows how you should live you life better than you do” types.
One thing the liberals need to do is to simply agree on a more definable policy. The democrats problem is they try to encompass too many different view points, usually damning ones that are on the extreme. If that party could more efficiently come together on some specific issues they might be able to actually accomplish something.
November 2nd, 2007 at 7:35 am
I see it a bit different- Righties seem to be all self, self, self- money, money, money- while liberals seem to mean well at least (not the politicians though- the hippy Green Peacey types).
I’m a big anti-gun type chappie. I’d explain why but this really isn’t the place and anywho, there are websites that explain more eloquently than I can (Did you know- people with guns in their houses are 2.4 times more likely to lose a family member or themselves in the event of a robbery or “home invasion” type scenario? Though that’s your choice if you wanna put family at increased risk, none of my business).
And hunting for fun is pretty despicable. And those gun companies aren’t too nice either. And guns used in crime more often than not were originally made and bought legally.
I’m not gonna get too involved in any discussion here though (Maybe if you do a top ten guns list I’ll be there spreading my hippy bullsh*t- but not here
)
November 2nd, 2007 at 7:53 am
Sorry for the double post- out of time to edit and I misremembered a statistic (Sorry!)
“Homicide of a family member is 2.7 times more likely to occur in a home with a firearm than in homes without guns. Keeping one or more firearms was associated with a 4.8 fold increased risk of suicide in the home.”
I posted 2.4 when it’s 2.7
From http://www.guncontrol.ca/Content/TheCaseForGunControl.html
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:17 am
I would say it differently, its about self-responsibility, being able to choose yourself, not the government choosing for you, and to be able to keep more of ones money because you earned it, not out of greed. IMHO more in line with ideals of the founding fathers and the Constitution. Again, like you said with the democrats, politicians often corrupt these ideals though and some republics have fallen victims to this as well. Changing it more to big business and greed then the individual citizen keeping his earnings and choice. Not to mention the religious right, bah i dont even want to get started about them.
As far as the gun statistics, I agree this isn’t really the place to get in to it, perhaps if jfrater creates a firearms relate list
Ill just say I disagree with both the static you listed and it’s validity (the group you linked as your source is incrediablly bias on the subject and has terrible reputation for its “stats”, not to mention those are canadian statistics, i live in the US) as well as your stance on hunting. While I don’t hunt myself, there is reasoning behind support of hunting besides just sport. Wasting disease in deer and overpopulation comes to mind. But I digress.
Ill leave it at that, we don’t need to get in to it on this list
edited to add
hmmm, i could do a top ten firearms of all times list, i believe both the history channel and the NRA has already done it. could use those.
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:37 am
Hobolad:
Ever see the Simpsons episode where Homer tells Marge that anyone can just make up a statistic and it’s true? 44.9% of experts say so…
I started the smoking debate here, and I apologized, and I’m not even about to get into gun debate, except to say that a warning shot from a 9mm handgun saved a buddy of mine’s wife from rape a couple months ago. (in her home, no less…)
The problem with partisan politics is that most, if not all politicians are corrupt or at least corruptable. The difference is only their constituencies.
Think about it: Democrats are suposed to be all “green” and “Tolerant” and “Diverse”. They’re not. They are simply suits and talking heads that appeal to a section of the population to vote for them. They would no more invite you to a party at their house than the man in the moon. And, if you were to show up to one of their fundraisers, you better hope you have ample cash to donate, or you can be on your way.
Republicans are no different. They at least are forthcoming with their elitism. Do you think Hilary REALLY cares about your health? Or is she merely trying to set up a platform that might eventually be called a “Legacy” of her time in office.
I do not like Bush/Cheney AT ALL!!! But, it is what it is, and it’s almost over. I might vote republican if there’s a viable candidate, but like in the last election, Kerry was bad, Bush just as bad… I left it alone. I am not the type to just shrug it off and go for one of two bad choices.
Conservatism is not about ME MONEY ME MONEY ME MONEY!!! Though it sometimes seems that way. For me, it is about leading life without the government arbitrarily telling me what to do. I do not mind paying taxes. What I do mind is the government raising taxes on me, telling me it’s for something and then spending it on something else. (Not to get into the smoking thing again, but here’s an example- The state raised taxes on cigarettes by $1 a pack, to go to schools. They were adamant that it was going directly into the education system to buy books and computers for inner-city schools. OK, fine. Schools are good. OOPS!!! Now it’s in a ‘General Fund’- a fund that can be used on anything. Schools still don’t have books. The general fund decision was proposed and passed by Democratic lawmakers!) Why you gotta lie, bro?
As I grow older, I become more conservative. I think it’s a natural progression. Once I hit the 25% tax bracket and bought a house, I started paying much more attention. Now I just have to say to the government,”Leave Me The Fuck Alone!!!”
Unfortunately, Liberals say, “Oh, him? He’s got over an 80K income. Sure, he’s already paying income, property, and sales tax, and surely he didn’t work 80 hours a week for years to get to the position to earn that kind of money; he’s ‘rich’ so let’s soak him!”
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:47 am
its like the saying Yarr, if youre not a liberal before your 30, you have no heart, if you not a conservative after youre 30, you have no brains
speaking of Hilterly Clinton, has anyone seen that hillary exposed video? caught on tape commiting a felony crime on campaign fund raising. How they got the case thrown out is pretty scary too. I forget the website that hosts it, its like hillary-exposed.com or something. its a two part video that can be found on youtube as well. Not saying repubs havent done this kind of stuff, but this is big because shes caught on tape admitting full knowledge of the fund raising.
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:49 am
Yarr: Not seen it but I know what you mean- you can make up statistics/find statistics to support whatever you want. But that goes both ways- weren’t liberals just criticised here for not being rational and fact-based (a generalisation as bad as my Righties and money one- which I used to make a point about such generalisations, sorry that I wasn’t clear) and when they supply statistics they’re dismissed because it’s liberals giving these statistics. But then again, I’m equally distrusting of Righty-supplied statistics.
I think *all* politicians are ME ME ME, MONEY MONEY MONEY- left and right, they’ve all got their own agenda. I’d class myself as very left, but I don’t support any particular party or ideology. If I thought a right-wing party would do the least harm then I’d vote for them, but the Righties over here are all motivated by greed and getting the rich richer, or else they’re unashamedly racist (in the case of the BNP).
Having said that, our so called “left” parties are pretty much the same.
EDIT: Hillary exposed? I’m kinda unwilling to search for it, just in case I get results I don’t want (REALLY REALLY don’t want
)
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:59 am
lol hobolad, yea searching for that might come up with some very scary results
November 2nd, 2007 at 2:50 pm
Hobolad:
You see, folks like you and me are representative of the majority of people. We have ideas and opinions based on our experiences and education. I hold no ill view of liberals, in fact, I used to be one. However, time and experience has led me to see that a lot of so-called ‘liberal’ politicians are actually socialists and are pushing this whole “From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs” doctrine, which is the slippery slope to communism. It scares the hell out of me.
And, though politicians make it seem so sometimes, I, as a conservative am neither racist nor bigoted. I have many friends and acquaintences of different ethnic backgrounds, as well as different sexual orientations. Nobody cares. And the people I hang out with are secure enough in their personalities that we can laugh and joke and make fun of each other (like friends do) without anyone being offended. Wouldn’t it be nice if everyone was this way?
I tell you- most people are this way. The problems come from media-whores trying (and succeeding) to stir up trouble for ratings.
Anyway, it’s Friday afternoon and there’s beer that needs my attention. You guys have a good weekend!
And I’m not going to look up Hilary Exposed either. She’s scary enough without seeing if the curtains match the carpet!
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:09 pm
I cannot stand George Bush. I feel that he’s lied to us since he began campaigning. No, I don’t think he’s a dictator (yet), but we’ll see what happens in 2008. But here’s excerpts from a party platform I could agree with – does this make me a loony liberal? If you read to the end you can find out just which party it is.
“Citizens must have the confidence that their personal privacy will be respected in the use of technology by both business and government. That privacy is an essential part of our personal freedom and our family life, and it must not be sacrificed…”
“We will reopen Pennsylvania Avenue in front of the White House as a symbolic expression of our confidence in the restoration of the rule of law.”
“An administration that lives by evasion, coverup, stonewalling, and duplicity has given us a totally discredited Department of Justice.”
“Sending our military on vague, aimless, and endless missions rapidly saps morale. Even the highest morale is eventually undermined by back-to-back deployments, poor pay, shortages of spare parts and equipment, inadequate training, and rapidly declining readiness.”
“Nor should the intelligence community be made the scapegoat for political misjudgments.”
“The United States seeks a comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East. America can use its prestige to encourage discussions and negotiations. But peace must be negotiated between the parties themselves. We will not impose our view or an artificial timetable. At the heart of the peace process is the commitment to resolve all issues through negotiation.”
“Environmental regulations should be based upon the best science, peer-reviewed, and available for public consideration.”
“As we strive to forge a national consensus on the crucial issues of our time, we call on all Americans to reject the forces of hatred and bigotry.”
Did you figure it out? It is the Republican Platform from 2000
Doesn’t quite seem to be the way things worked out, does it? Do not make the mistake of being so quick to conclude that everyone who detests Bush is a liberal. Some of us are conservatives or moderates who are not very happy with having been so blatantly lied to.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:34 pm
I don’t like Bush. He’s corrupt, and pushes an agenda I find antithetical with the American value system of liberty for all humans. But he’s not a dictator. Unfortunately, our country has been set up to protect the rich and powerful, which is similar to other countries that do in fact have dictators. However, we are at least lucky enough to be able to rotate our leadership within reasonable time periods. We do have a pretty messed up country though.
Evan: “The difference between “liberals” and “conservatives” , again generally speaking in my personal experience talking to the bunch, is simple. Conservatives are generally more rational, are realists, fact based, and business-like individuals, while the liberals come off as emotional, irrational, feelings based cliques. “I (more accurately the govt) knows how you should live you life better than you do” types.” A few things here. First off, you say conservatives “are” one way, while liberals “come off as” a different way. So I have to assume you are part of the former group, since you can only make an assumption about the cause of the latter’s behavior. It also seems strange that conservatives are described as rational and fact-based, when they’re the ones pushing a religious agenda (not always considered rational or fact-based, in fact I think its usually called Faith Based). And why are you saying only the liberals think the government knows better than “you” how to live your life? Are the conservatives not part of the government that is always making laws about how we are all supposed to live our lives? Aren’t the conservatives the ones pushing for a constitutional amendment saying two men or two women can’t get married because they are evil sinners? Isn’t that the government telling people how they should live their lives?
Loose Cannon: “The ‘looney-left’ in this nation are emo pussies. They don’t posses the emotional maturity and logical intelligence to sort through their feelings and express them rationally, hence you get such statements that ‘Stalin is Bambi compared to Cheney’.” Why is it that if a conservative has a point, its logical. But if a liberal makes a comparison, its “looney” and emo? And you have stated a few times you don’t respond to name calling. Why the name calling? Also, we do have Americans serving prison terms for political reasons. They just aren’t as obvious as “I don’t like the government so now I’m in prison.” They are more about the politics of our corrupt and dysfunctional prison systems.
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:47 am
Bush is a Benedict Arnold on the war on terrorism, he supports an Arabian terrorist group abreviated M.E.K. and his terrorist group, Blackwater.
The patriot act is a step to fascism cause it’s unconstitutional, I cant say what I want to say or write what I wanna write cause I’ll dissapear or the brutal cops will kill me. If we’re not toward fascist, then how come our police brutality rate is higher than ever? cops getta kill people who run away and get away with raping 14 year old girls, how come? Thats what the soviet union and nazi germany dit! Bush is a dictator! There might as well be annother American Revolution to take back America, cause President Bush !! ain’t cuttin it! once he’s outa office, I’ll enjoy watching Bush and company get tried for treason, abuse of power, and war crimes, then publicly hung! he’s so worried about spreading “Democracy” when ours is under fire, and fighting terrorism when theres terrorism going on in our own back yard! And as far as bin laden goes, papa bush made him as well as sadam. Soon he’ll pull a fast one and invade Iran and/or issue a draft. Why do we continue to listen to the bastard? Pick up guns and march on Washington and restore our country! Bush calls himself “The Decider” and that seems equivelant to “Il Duce”
“Dur Furer” We need a revolution to rid tyrany cause we’re back were we began, under tyrany.
Join The Revolution!
November 3rd, 2007 at 8:42 pm
Mathilda – I cannot stand George Bush. I feel that he’s lied to us since he began campaigning. No, I don’t think he’s a dictator (yet), but we’ll see what happens in 2008. But here’s excerpts from a party platform I could agree with – does this make me a loony liberal?
No, you’re preceding statement that he isn’t a dictator *yet*, and we should wait til 2008 to find out makes you a *looney liberal*.
There is absolutely no rational evidence to suggest that Bush/Cheney/Rove or anyone else, are planning on anything but leaving office after their tenure.
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:11 pm
aplspudWhy is it that if a conservative has a point, its logical. But if a liberal makes a comparison, its “looney” and emo?
It’s not a ‘point’ if you call Bush/Cheney one of the worst dictators to have ever lived or compare him to Stalin or Hitler. *THAT’S THE POINT!*
The comparison is emotional, unrealistic, and hysterical. As I said previously, it’s like a teenage girl calling her father a Nazi for grounding her.
Also, we do have Americans serving prison terms for political reasons.
No, we don’t, but don’t let reality encroach on your daydreams.
November 3rd, 2007 at 9:38 pm
Loose_Cannon – If you had read my post carefully you should have realized that I am not anyone’s idea of a liberal. To make it quite clear to you, there are many, many conservatives who do not feel that George W. Bush represents their values; the fact that he is a Republican does not require anyone to assume that he is infallible. Why exactly would you presume to know my political ideology based on the fact that I think he is a terrible President?
By the way, Karl Rove has already left office, in August 2007. Did it not make FOX News, perhaps?
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:31 pm
Once again guys, you shouldn’t be getting angry at each other for opposing views. Anyone here that is completely on one side or the other is either uneducated or stupid. There are some of you (most in fact) that are what you are because of one or two prevailing issues that you believe strongly. There are very few far left or right-wing people. Most are just a little left or right of center. The problem is partisan politicians and polarizing issues that they use to get your vote.
Aplspud: The potential marraige ammendment is not because gays are sinners or God will get angry. It’s because enough people are making a big enough noise against it that the politicians have no choice but to pay attention.
Senator Suk T. Nutz: Democrat-Ohio does not give a shit if two dudes love each other. All he cares about is winning the next election. His polling center has told him that 80% of people polled are against gay marraige. How do you think he going to vote?
I don’t think that republicans are pushing a religious agenda. I think that they pay attention to potential votes and attempt to please that base. Say that there’s a candidate that is perfectly conservative in every way except for the fact that he’s pro-choice. He will have to answer to that one issue, and his stance could cost him the election. It might just be that he keeps that little secret to himself, or he might just jump on the wagon to make his constiuents happy. I don’t see an agenda there, just playing to win.
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:33 pm
Mathilda- To make it quite clear to you, there are many, many conservatives who do not feel that George W. Bush represents their values..
True, but are they also speculating that Bush won’t leave office in 2008, as you did?
See, that’s what makes you sound like a member of the *looney left*. It’s not that you have to agree with Bush, or love him. When you cross the line from disagreement to lunacy is when speculated that he might not leave office in 2008. See?
There is absolutely no rational, logical reason to believe he won’t. You might as well speculate that he’ll commit suicide or do some time-traveling.
*You* asked if you sound like a member of the ‘looney left’. I didn’t accuse you being anything. I simply answered your question.
November 3rd, 2007 at 10:48 pm
Loose_Cannon – Are you suggesting that the possibility of someone becoming a dictator (which has actually happened before, although obviously not in the case of Bush) is somehow akin to the possibility of someone time-traveling, which, to the best of my knowledge, has not? I would suggest with all due respect that you might want to carefully consider before you start stating that others sound like lunatics.
November 3rd, 2007 at 11:32 pm
Mathilda-Are you suggesting that the possibility of someone becoming a dictator (which has actually happened before, although obviously not in the case of Bush) is somehow akin to the possibility of someone time-traveling
In this nation, at this time? Yes, I am. Our nation is over 225 years old, we have one of the most stable, liberal societies on the face of the Earth, and our Constitution has faced civil war and survived.
Again, there is not a shred of evidence that Bush or Cheney intend to stay after their term, except emotional, hysterical, politically-based bias.
November 4th, 2007 at 6:30 am
I kinda like how Bush is defended ’cause he ain’t as bad as some of the others… I mean, should we tolerate a serial killer who’s killed five people ’cause others have killed more?
A serial killer is pretty much what Bush is- though I agree he’s not a dictator- doesn’t mean someone who was democratically elected (Does that include Bush? I dunno) can’t be evil.
November 4th, 2007 at 9:16 am
Hobolad – A serial killer is pretty much what Bush is …. doesn’t mean someone who was democratically elected (Does that include Bush? I dunno)
This is exactly what I mean when I say the *looney left*. Emotional, unrealistic, illogical and hysterical.
Thank you for a perfect example, Hobolad.
November 4th, 2007 at 9:34 am
I can say I’m glad to be counted among the “looney left.”
Definition: “an individual (or conspiracy), operating with or without governmental authority, who directly, or by directive, is responsible for the deaths of 3 or more persons in separate incidents for unjust reasons.”
I would count Bush as a serial killer.
EDIT: Sorry for the childish comment but:
“emotional, unrealistic, illogical and hysterical.”
Needless name calling without any actual refutation is none of these things?
November 4th, 2007 at 1:35 pm
Hobolad – I would count Bush as a serial killer.
Well, then I guess you would have to include Tony Blair, John Howard, and a host of other national leaders, huh? If you’re assuming it was for ‘unjust reasons’.
That doesn’t seem a bit nutty to you? To put these men in the same league as Ted Bundy?
Needless name calling without any actual refutation is none of these things.
I was referring to your comments.
Yes, calling Bush a ‘Serial Killer’ is a bit off the deep end. It’s not based on logic and reason, but rather emotion and hysteria.
Our congress approved the use of force in Iraq. Does that make them all accessories to murder? What about the British parliament, are they also accessories to murder?
By extension, what about those of us who elected Bush and support the war, aren’t we, likewise, accessories to murder?
Do you see how illogical and irrational your argument gets when you try to extend it?
November 4th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
You’re the one saying to extend it.
The voters shouldn’t be held accountable- if they were told that it would lead to an unjust war with thousands upon thousands of innocents losing their lives to make the top brass richer then they would be.
I would also class Blair as a serial killer.
The victims tally of these two is much higher than Ted Bundy’s.
What exactly is irrational about it?
“an individual (or conspiracy), operating with or without governmental authority, who directly, or by directive, is responsible for the deaths of 3 or more persons in separate incidents for unjust reasons.”
Bush fits that description- so doesn’t logic dictate that that is what he is? If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and acts like a duck?
So do many others- but the discussion I joined was about Bush.
EDIT: Can you give me any reason why these people aren’t serial killers? Or is your whole argument just to describe it as illogical and irrational without ever coming close to a reason why that would be?
November 4th, 2007 at 5:28 pm
Hobolad – The voters shouldn’t be held accountable- if they were told that it would lead to an unjust war with thousands upon thousands of innocents losing their lives to make the top brass richer then they would be.
This is exactly what’s wrong with your argument.
Who gave Bush, Blair, Howard, and other leaders the authority to conduct such a war? Congress and the respectful parliaments.
Congress held their own inquiry into the Iraqi intelligence. So, shouldn’t the killers accomplices also be called serial killers? And since Bush didn’t actually do the killing, aren’t the members of the military who actually followed these orders, also serial killers?
Your argument falls apart into shreds because if Bush is a serial killer and he didn’t act alone, then everyone associated with the war is a serial killer.
My question to you is simple: Since Congress gave Bush the authority to conduct war in Iraq, are they, like-wise, serial killers? And are the other 21 national leaders, who conducted operations in Iraq during the war, also serial murderers?
One other question: Since Saddam H. had killed thousands and thousands of people unjustly by invading Kuwait, conducting war against Israel, Iran and Saudi Arabia, is he also a ‘Serial Killer’? Doesn’t stopping a serial killer, by your definition, mean it was justified?
November 4th, 2007 at 5:37 pm
Hobolad – Bush fits that description- so doesn’t logic dictate that that is what he is?
Also, since former Pres. Clinton used missiles on Baghdad to “..attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors” presumably killing more then 3 Iraqi’s, and we assume now that they didn’t exist, does that make him *ALSO* a ‘SERIAL KILLER’?
November 5th, 2007 at 5:54 am
Congress + National leaders – I would say yes. Saddam was also a serial killer- he died, yes- but so did tens of thousands of others, needlessly. Saddam wasn’t the reason for the war- we’ve proven ourselves not a bit squeamish about dealing with such evil people so long as we’re getting money from them (And by “we” I mean our leaders- the voters really don’t have a say).
I’ve said it before- the voters weren’t told that Bush would lead us to this war, and then afterwards they were given false reasons. You’re making too many assumptions (Dare I say- acting illogically and unrealistically?) about who I deem responsible, I’ve never said once that I blame the voters, they didn’t know.
And I don’t know much about the Clinton situation- but if he caused the killing of innocents for unjust reasons then yes I would class him also as a serial killer.
These people are just Ted Bundy with suits, PR, connections and money.
EDIT: About “Congress”- I really don’t know how it works- were they as decieved as the rest of us or what?
November 5th, 2007 at 6:23 am
Before this gets mentioned- for the record, I consider the soldiers as victims. Y’know, they’re willing to put their lives at risk to help their country and protect innocents yet lots are getting used to further the causes of the higher ups.
There are gonna be some bloodthirsty ones who just want to kill (That guy giving the interview in the British papers a few weeks ago, that nutter in the Fahrenheit 9/11 war footage, etc.) but it seems like they’re a minority, and you’re gonna get nutters in any large group of people.
The leaders are the ones who should be held accountable, I reckon. These people who send these lads and lasses off to get killed and kill and then abandon them as soon as they’re no longer useful.
November 5th, 2007 at 7:05 am
Hobolad – Congress + National leaders – I would say yes. Saddam was also a serial killer
So, all the members of our congress who voted to go to war, Clinton and his staff, Bush and his staff, Tony Blair, John Howard, plus the leaders of the other 19 countries and their staff, parliament, etc. and Saddam were all serial killers? And you don’t think this sounds a bit loopy?
However, the actual people doing the killing are not ’serial killers’? You used the definition:
“an individual (or conspiracy), operating with or without governmental authority, who directly, or by directive, is responsible for the deaths of 3 or more persons in separate incidents for unjust reasons.”
By your own logic, this would include every solider who fought in Iraq, since they committed the ‘unjust’ killings, directly and indirectly.
November 5th, 2007 at 8:03 am
WOW, so now every member of congress that voted for the war now a serial killer? Man, im glad ill be voting for Ron Paul now, seesh as if i needed another reason not to vote for Hillary Clinton, now shes a serial killer too. lol
*cough* looney left *cough*
November 5th, 2007 at 8:26 am
Aplspud, it seems you only read post 117 and not my post 120. Where I said some of the corruptions and shortcoming of the “right”.
I wouldnt consider the religous right true republicans, which is why I said “Not to mention the religious right, bah i dont even want to get started about them.” In my mind they are as bad as the socialist left. People such as Hillary Clinton.
“We just can’t trust the American people with this kind of decision… the government must make it for them.” -Clinton on health care.
thats the type of “we know better than you do” stuff im refering to.
I would say Im a Republic/Libertarian, I would hesitate to say conservative because of such groups like the “religious right” who get lumped in with us. I would say im conservative in the notion that I want the govt to be limited to what the constitution layed out.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Great way to twist my words guys! I said at the end I don’t know how “congress” works, I’m a foreigner- I don’t know how much they’re told, how much power they have etc.
The soldiers are doing it under orders, for them it’s kill or be killed. They shouldn’t be put in the situation where the killing of innocents is likely, but thanks to the powers that be they are.
I’ve not said to extend it, that’s entirely Loose_Cannon. I mean, do you extend it with, for example, Ted Bundy? Is it his parent’s fault for bringing him into the world? Is it the hospital’s fault? Is it the people who sold him his food so that he didn’t starve to death? No, but it is Ted Bundy’s.
November 5th, 2007 at 12:55 pm
Im not sure how we twisted your words. Loose_cannon asked you…
“My question to you is simple: Since Congress gave Bush the authority to conduct war in Iraq, are they, like-wise, serial killers? And are the other 21 national leaders, who conducted operations in Iraq during the war, also serial murderers?”
and you replied…
“Congress + National leaders – I would say yes. ”
how did we mis-interupt that?
November 5th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
You took it out of context (It was a throwaway remark, rectified at the bottom of the comment- I made an assumption of how much power and knowledge of the war your congress as but then realised I know nothing about it, so put in the EDIT.)
“EDIT: About “Congress”- I really don’t know how it works- were they as decieved as the rest of us or what?”
If I’d have put that edit in and deleted the original comment I would have probably been called up on that, so I chose to keep it in, then add in my mistake at the bottom.
And the twisting of words I’m most annoyed about is the extension thing, which seems to be staple of Loose_Cannon’s argument, which he himself conjured out of thin air. If that isn’t a “twist of words” then whatever, but you know what I mean.
I also don’t appreciate being called a “looney liberal” or whatever when I’m trying to civilly discuss a point. It’s unneeded.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
alrighty then, to a person reading your post, it’s not as clearly stated and as easy to determine your meaning as you may think in your head when you wrote your post.
To say one thing very clearly, yes they are serial killers and then supposedly make that a throwaway comment in jest or something by saying EDIT: About “Congress”- I really don’t know how it works- were they as decieved as the rest of us or what? isn’t exactly clear.
But to answer your question (it was already answered by Cannon in a previous post), Congress held their own investigations and then voted to invade iraq.
November 5th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Out of edit time
@evan: I agree with you about the controlling lefties (though there are righties who are as bad). Most schools of liberalism tend towards freedom though- according to wikipedia at any rate!
EDIT: Yeah, it’s a tone of voice thing really. I say we introduce a colour coding/tone of voice system (Am I being serious? Impossible to tell!
)
Held their own investigations… hmm, I dunno. Did these investigations say that all these innocents would end up being blown up for no good cause?
If I wanna start arguing about whether your Congress are to blame I should probably do some research and actually know what I’m talking about before I start talking! So I’m gonna reserve judgement ’til I do
EDIT: Saying they voted to go to war is hardly explaining though. Was the war that actually ended up happening the one they voted for?
November 5th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
“Held their own investigations… hmm, I dunno. Did these investigations say that all these innocents would end up being blown up for no good cause? ”
OK, um is this a comment a joke? cause…
1. No one can see the future. So there was no direct mention to my knowledge that “all these innocents would end up being blown up” even for a good cause but..
2. All modern wars (with possible exceptions from jfraters shortest wars post) have collateral damage and innocent people end up killed. So by default, anyone voting for any war at any time in any country is in essence voting with knowledge that innocent people will die.
That does not mean they want the innocent people to die, but aware it’s a consequence of war itself.
They voted for, after conducting their own investigation, The invasion of Iraq, the removal of Saddam from power, and the search for NBCs and WMADs. Which is what has been done. The US did not set out with the plan to simply kill a bunch of iraq’s people. But that is the answer to your voting question.
The current situation in Iraq is the aftermath. Cause=Reaction. Whether the members of Congress were too shortsighted to see they had no viable exit plan and still voted for the war is anyones guess.
But that hardly qualifies as serial killers or evil people. More along the lines of shortsighted, naive, or possibly people with good intensions but poor plans. But not evil serial killers.
November 5th, 2007 at 2:15 pm
It all kinda sounds like incompetence from the Congress rather than intentional deception and use of the unstable times for personal gain (a la Bush and his use of 9/11).
Y’know, the war they voted for was the one where we went in, got Saddam, got a hold of the WMDs, liberated, etc. Some civilian casualties maybe but the end would justify the means, as the people of Iraq would be safe from Saddam. In others words- a regrettable but *just* war.
The one we got was (still is?) a long, drawn out thing, no WMDs, got Saddam after a while, Bush and his oil magnate buddies get even richer, stirs up the hornets nest, promotes even more bad feeling towards the West, lots and lots of civilian casualties, and lots of military deaths, leaves the country a smoking ruin. A war that, if handled right, could have been just but was handled more with monetary gain in mind and screw the people.
Seems, from what I can gather, that these chaps and chapettes were decieved as much as the rest of us.
Wait a second… what the hell am I doing defending politicians!
November 5th, 2007 at 2:39 pm
so even if all you say on here is true (which I would say isn’t), that Bush acted alone to start a war for the sole, and only reason to somehow “get rich” from it (I fail to see how he is personally getting more income from this, he was making much more as a private citizen), you believe he is MORE “evil” than the people on this list?
let me just say, Im not a Bush fan by any means, i too believe this war was handled incredibly bad by all members, not just Bush and his inner circle, and Bush was not exactly truthful for his reasons for war (which to me, was not to get rich btw).
November 5th, 2007 at 2:54 pm
@evan: I’ve never said he’s more evil than these people, I’ve just said that he is evil. That’s my fault though, what with the topic being Worst Living Dictators and stuff- sorry!
And he has made lots of money- and more to the point, the oil people who financed his bid for presidency have made a lot of money. Whether it was solely for the money, for religious reasons or to try and get a place in history or whatever, it’s still unjust.
November 5th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
Ah, I’d said that I think Bush to be evil but not as evil as the ones in the list on the “Most Evil Men” list, and then got this list mixed up with it. Sorry, thought I’d written it here!
“Yeah, the radicals who actively try to kill innocents deserve all they get.
WW2, yeah something needed to be done- but war? Like in Iraq, it’s not the “bad guys” who take the brunt of the war, it’s the people. Y’know, WW2 was still just some blokes given guns and told to fight against another load of blokes given guns and told to fight.
Maybe it was necessary, I can’t pretend to have all the answers (I say there should be an alternative yet I can’t think of a viable alternative, so I dunno), but it was still pretty bad.”
Damn, I got a -1 for that
Are we meant to minus them if we disagree or if it’s offensive or what?
At least I know where all my bad karma is coming from though
November 5th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
is that what those +/- things are for? karma? huh, never clicked on one.
ugh, with soooo many comments on several similar threads, it is getting hard to follow exactly who is saying what and why.
I guess we can leave it at that, you feel Bush is evil, but not necessarily worse than the listed dictators above. I mean no matter how i fee, based on my research and conclusions about it, and all the figures and the stats and arguements loose_cannon has put forth, probably isnt going to change the way you feel based on your research, conclusion, etc. so, i think its one of those agree to disagree things.
November 5th, 2007 at 3:31 pm
I haven’t seen any of Loose_Cannon’s statistics (Except the “our nation is over 225 years old”) and the arguments seem to be “stop being hysterical you looney liberal!!!” (Not an exact quote, before anyone says anythng
)
I would’ve probably ignored this thread long ago if you hadn’t been so civil evan (Y’know, actually reading my comments before disagreeing with them!) so thanks for humouring me and my dirty hippy ways
November 5th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
hobolad: I see an error on your previous comment – did you try to delete it?
evan: you can up vote or down vote for whatever reason you please – it is completely anonymous (even I don’t know who is up voting or down voting)
November 5th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Loose Cannon: you know who John Howard is? Are you Australian or just well read?
November 5th, 2007 at 3:37 pm
“hobolad: I see an error on your previous comment – did you try to delete it?”
Nah, maybe it’s been voted down too many times for the internet to handle
Dunno what’s going on- the arrows are lit up for me though, which is pretty wierd.
November 5th, 2007 at 3:41 pm
Hobolad: for me too – though when I try to up vote it says the comment doesn’t exist – I can’t even begin to imagine where in the quagmire of the SQL database I might look for a solution – and, frankly, I am not sober enough to give it a rough guess
November 5th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Would it be easier to just delete it? It’s hardly a poetic masterpiece that needs to be conserved for all to see- if it’s causing trouble, get rid
November 5th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
Hobolad: nah – no need to delete it – tomorrow I might be sober enough to figure it out
In the meantime it adds an air of mystique
November 5th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
hmm wow – this list is somehow making Google think it should advertise the Spice Girls concert – I can’t even begin to fathom how it has figured that out
November 5th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
Hobolad: just out of curiosity, what part of the UK are you in?
November 5th, 2007 at 3:50 pm
Two entries for the Top Ten Bizarre Listverse Mysteries possibly?
EDIT: The North of England, near Liverpool.
November 5th, 2007 at 4:51 pm
jfrater – you know who John Howard is? Are you Australian or just well read?
Very well read and well traveled.
“Remember, Remember the 5th of November,
The gunpowder, treason and plot,
I know of no reason
Why gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot.”
My friends in Lewes will no doubt be enjoying themselves tonight!
November 5th, 2007 at 4:53 pm
Loose_Cannon: meh! Poor Saint Guy!
November 13th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
Anybody who says that Bush is the “world’s worst dictator”….and is still ALIVE…has lost their sense of irony.
November 25th, 2007 at 6:14 am
anyone who says bush is as bad as any of these fuckers should have thier skin peeled off. These people send thier citizens to work camps, tortures thousands, killls thousands…ect, anyone who makes the comparison is just showing why they should be sent to a camp themselves.
November 28th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Bush isn’t a dictator, thats being idiotic. Go and live in any of these countries for a while and you’ll come back to the U.S. loving whoever is in charge.
November 28th, 2007 at 10:06 pm
For those of you calling Bush a dictator, please, pick up a dictionary and actually learn the meaning of the word before you spout off. He might not be popular or well liked, and his actions may be highly controversial, but that does not put im on par with Hitler. I do not agree with alot of what Bush or our governemt does, but as long as they continue to allow me to live a life of comfort (im lower-middle class but have nothing to complain about) with a wide range of freedom, I will support them unconditionally.
For those of you with nothing of complaints, please try living in one of the countries listed above.
Cheers!
December 7th, 2007 at 10:59 pm
Chavez in Venezuela isn’t so bad today but he is like a boil that is waiting to be lanced. Bay of Pigs anyone?
December 12th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
All I can say is whatever money our Govt. (not only Bush, its the whole system) spent on war (especially Iraq war), could have been used for country’s well being. Man, think of all the positive results we would’ve gotten if we had spent money on discoveries scientists are making these days. For ex: the new stem cell research. We won’t even need oil, which is what U.S. Govt. aim is at Iraq war, if we gave money to the scientists and acted on their discoveries. And hey, the environment would’ve been a happier place if we had electric cars, which were demolished by the big oil companies in U.S., back in 80’s (I think).
December 12th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
deep – And hey, the environment would’ve been a happier place if we had electric cars, which were demolished by the big oil companies in U.S., back in 80’s (I think).
They were ‘demolished’? Really?
http://www.toyota.com/prius/
Someone should tell Toyota!
December 12th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
Beth – Bay of Pigs anyone?
No, thanks. I’m still trying to finish my MK Ultra.
December 13th, 2007 at 11:04 pm
as much as I hate Bush and everything he and his pals stand for , he is NOT a dictator . Definition of a dictator as found in most dictionaries is as follows : “A RULER WHO IS NOT RESTRICTED BY LAWS , CONSTITUTION OR OPPOSITION” . Although alot of what Bush and co have done is morally repugnant and deceptive , they have more often than not operated within the framework of the constitution. But I guess this shows that the constituiton is a crock of shit huh? …….
December 14th, 2007 at 12:17 am
Right. So, definitely do not consider Bush a dictator. History books may not be kind to him in fifty years, but there will be nothing in print associating him with a dictatorship, unless they drastically change the definition of “dictator” between now and then.
And Loose_Cannon, I’m really not trying to be offensive, but I think it’s time you stop harassing people about their spelling or capitalization, when you yourself cannot use your/you’re properly. Really now. Quit it. It only discredits your arguments further. Make fun of them for what they say, it’s your right, but don’t be a hypocrite.
January 3rd, 2008 at 12:06 am
Saparmurat Niyazov was successfully sued by Johnson & Johnson for copyright infringement for impersonating a Q-Tip.
January 11th, 2008 at 3:51 am
strangely…. all characters that have objected to american hegemony are prominently featured here. with the exception probably of saudi arab n guniea equatorial.
pretty political approach, even in a harmless little website.
you guys are despicable.
January 11th, 2008 at 5:49 am
Ari: I wrote the list and am not American or British – I come from a country that has no political ties with the US.
January 13th, 2008 at 5:56 pm
Loose Cannon: Your comments are so long I can’t read beyond the 2nd paragraph. My ADD gets the best of me and I start thinking about happy things like butterflies. Ever considered using Occam’s Razor?
January 13th, 2008 at 9:10 pm
Chestica -Ever considered using Occam’s Razor?
I prefer Gillette. I hear it’s the best a man can get.
January 14th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
In response to several comments on the accusations of W Bush stealing elections and committing high crimes, my opinion is absolutely yes.
The manipulation of the 2000 and 2004 elections are just starting to be revealed by some of the media. Counties were boxed in key areas as well as Diebold machines hacked. Thousands of people were turned away from the election buildings with the excuse of some error in their designated voting locations and others were wrongly labeled as convicts with no right to vote just because they had the same common last name as a true convict such as Jones or Johnson and turned away at the voting locations or notified by mail days before election day. They had the opportunity to clear up any error with a process that would take several weeks. All of these tactics were only used in certain counties of key states that were needed to steal both elections.
John Kerry was notified of these discretions and did nothing as he was nothing more than a ringer for Bush. He conceded with no inquiry even though ample evidence of voting corruption was presented to him by his own campaign staff. Skull & Bones members take an oath to do things like that for their brothers.
As far as other crimes, there are so many that have come to light that is would just be a broken record to waste my time typing it in this post.
While he may not be a traditional dictator, he has accomplished his 8 year mission to transfer almost a TRILLION DOLLARS of the US Treasury to his connected people.
And really, what did his Christian base get for their blind faith is this con artist and his team that wear religion on there sleeve? Not a God Damned thing. That’s what you get when you mix religion with the politics of a world power. Absolute disaster and death.
January 14th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Keylargo: The sad thing is, we as a nation totally deserve it, as we were totally fooled not once, but TWICE. And the Christians? They fall for it every time!
Actually, the Christians in this country aren’t really “Christian,” according to Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Kirkegaard; the Christians that inhabit the Republican party are a rollback to the middle ages, outdated Puritan models that result in, if given power, the sort of misanthropy we saw in Europe during WW2 and especially Iran in the 1980s.
But my essential point is that we were fooled once, twice, and probably will be thrice with a possible election of Mike Huckabee, who is a Southern Baptist minister (think Jerry Falwell) and I think is highly likely to be the Harbringer of The Handmaid’s Tale.
January 21st, 2008 at 8:49 pm
King Abdullah is actually way better than its predecessors. He’s working to make Saudi better for everyone.
Of course this takes time. And also he faces stiff rejection from the elites who will lose the most from the positive changes.
Re: Castro- in Cuba, he jailed the journalists.
In USA, the journalists are slaves to their editors, and ultimately, media owners. Many souls are suffering because of this. Some have managed to break free from the situation, but most have not. Have pity on them too.
January 21st, 2008 at 11:41 pm
ALL YOU ANTI-BUSH HATERS ARE FUCKING MORONS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ANY OF YOU, ANY OF YOU, GO LIVE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY EXCEPT THE UNITES STATES, I BET YOU A FUCKIN WEEK IN ANY OTHER SHIT HOLE COUNTRY, YOU WILL WANT TO COME BACK TO A BUSH RUN COUNTRY IN A SECOND, WHERE YOU CAN SAY WHAT YOU WANT, WRITE WHAT YOU WANT, JOIN ANY GROUP YOU WANT, ADN COME ON THIS WEBSITE AND SAY SHIT ABOUT BUSH WITHOUT ANY CONSEQUENCES, DUMBASSES WOULD LEAVE AMERICA FOR ANYTHING EVEN IF BUSH WOULD STAY IN POWER., I AINT PRO BUSH AT ALL, I’M JUST SAYING, DONT DISRESPECT A COUNTRY THAT ALLOWS YOU THESE FREEDOMS, BE REAL.
January 23rd, 2008 at 11:23 pm
As for those you think think Cubans want Castro need to get a brain.. my family fled from Cuba to American when Castro took over..he took everything they owned they came with virtually nothing and my grandfather fought in the Bay of Pigs in which Kennedy royally screw.. he was captured after a week with no water and barely missed being executed by the firing squad when America traded the exiles for money.. Do you honestly think that he would of risked that if he really wanted Castro??
January 31st, 2008 at 6:53 pm
why is hitler not on this list?
January 31st, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Um, maybe cos he’s dead? Not that I have any proof or anythibng, I haven’t seen a body…
luckyaz- any other country? I’m kind of ok here in the UK actually…
January 31st, 2008 at 10:11 pm
em – why is hitler not on this list?
Folks, you can not BUY this kind of entertainment!
February 8th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
i want to say that George W Bush is a idiot for the murder that MINHUSTA which is the UN Army have done against t Haiti, the first Black Independent Nation in the World, I know for a fact that USA will never like Haiti, will never Help the Positive government in Haiti to do good stuff for the Haitian People, But Haiti is a strategic positioned for the terrorist to target USA, if USA Authority don’t stop being stupid and Evil, but connect with all of the Caribbean country …… IDIOS USA, USA will be like HAITI One day,,,, AYIBOBO
February 8th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
I would love to make the DEA aware of the fact that they have to get out of haiti, and stop making arrest against the drug dealers in Haiti, but let the Haitian Government do their job, I’m sure that everybody knows that The DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) does not have no fucking Right to invade this small country to arrest colombian drug dealers in Haiti, and not helping haitian government to get the job done,,,, Get the fuck out of my Country DEA, UN, USAID,PNUD, FAO, UNICEF,UNESCO,
February 8th, 2008 at 11:11 pm
Hi Y’all. Calm down. Yes President Bush will be blamed for any and many injustices that happen in Iraq. This is sad but true and I am sure he knew that when he made his decision to oust The bearded drunkard dictator. It is just part of the job. The war in Iraq is about protecting our foriegn interests both political and petroleumical (new word..not yet in Wikipedia)
Yes our liberties are being eroded but not without our knowledge. Read what you vote on. I live in Ca. and smoke tobacco. When I go out to a bar I have to go outside to smoke but I can’t take my drink but it’s okay because all of the other patrons as well as the bar tender are outside smoking too. It’s pretty funny to watch. My city recently passed a law banning smoking on the beach, supporting the need partly due to the butts….but the ban exempted camp fires, oh and it’s still okay to throw styrofoam, cans, paper, critters or plastic in the fire pit. Ever hear of dioxins? On January 1st I am now not allowed to smoke in my own vehicle if I have a passenger
February 23rd, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Don’t you know? The Darfur Genocide was orchestrated by the Zionists in order to encourage Sudanese immigration to Israel. Stop trying to pass your imperialist conspiracies off as true!
February 23rd, 2008 at 11:24 pm
This again??? Jordan: FYI, Pokemon are actually aliens!
February 24th, 2008 at 11:31 pm
I want to see that one day, Haiti will be great and US will suffer
February 27th, 2008 at 8:17 am
Who thinks the famous Glasgow Celtic will win the SPL this year?
I for one think we will.
I would also defend my right under freedom of speech to sing pro-irish republican songs anywhere I see warrants a good old rebel song.
p.s. Hurry up and get Bush tae fuck, he’s fuckin nuts.
are you’s ready for a Black preisdent or a wumin?
March 24th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
most of you people are idiot’s open your eyes and look at what is happening in this world. no i don’t agree with everything that bush has done but he is not the bad guy in all of this. it is not bush’s fault with all of the high gas prices it is the politichians. they have deals with oil companies and they get alot of money from them. look it up!!
March 24th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Wow Beachgirl! I am going to run to my local library and look up all that really smart stuff about gas and physicians that you mention. Are there any particular musicians I should look up? Or should I simply google “Fruitichian”?
April 7th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
come on… castro!!! the poor guy is almost death…
April 13th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Crimanon
No, they’re actually Western tools of imperialism. Those sneaky Zionists… now they’re trying to conquer the world with pokemans? Where will it end?
April 22nd, 2008 at 8:36 pm
oh come one, CASTRO!
Hes not even that bad compared to alot of other leaders out there…
But my view is a bit biased, as im a socialist myself.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:40 am
where is king abdulla he is the worst out of all of them in my opionen….that bulllshit..and gorege w fucking bush he suck
May 8th, 2008 at 10:44 pm
wow…reading the debate between loose cannon and cosmic unwinding was more fun… and educational than this list…no offense to the writer of course…..
oh an one more thing…
there are a lot of ways you can argue about bush…is he good???? is he bad??? does he suck??? does he swallow…i dunno
fact of the matter is…this is the US…people here dont have any idea what it is like to live under a dictator…come to think of it i dont either…but ive lived pretty close…..
you can bend any way you want to….but the fact remains that America will not…EVER…become a dictatorship…
if there is one thing i know, its that however diverse and different this country is, the people here have a tendency to put everything behind them and help out when the country needs help.
May 21st, 2008 at 3:39 am
em:it says living dictators hitler is dead
June 17th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Mr. Hu is not a dictator… not perfectly free, but ok.
July 2nd, 2008 at 3:30 am
Hey western emperialists remove my President-Robert Mugabe from your stupid list with immediate effect.The man is a true hero to all Zimbabweans and his only crime is empowering us with our land which the Rhodesians forcibly took from us.It seems confronting the west is a sin in this world for which we are saying thats wrong ,just give us a few more years everyone will know Bush and his dogs (EU) are not that powerful anyway.
I know you may not post this but you can’t stop this wave of change being fronted by Zimbabwe.I HATE EMPERIALISTS
July 2nd, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Comrade Doug: Wow! Zimbabwe is lucky to have such a decent humanitarian as President.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/world/africa/12zimbabwe.html
July 5th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
its a mistake to assume that a “dictator” is never elected and simply seizes control. Hitler was elected, for instance. It should also be pointed out that Bush uses alot of the same tricks, including propaganda to demonize the opposition.
July 11th, 2008 at 6:14 am
On the issue of Fidel Castro being a dictator:
I think it is inescapable that Castro is indeed a dictator, I just disagree that it is necessarily an entirely negative thing. It seems that the word “dictator” has been, in a modern sense, characterised as an entirely bad political phenomenon.
Historians Freidrich and Brzezinski during the cold war published a list of criteria for what makes a dictator, namely:
1. A central ideology
2. A mass party interwoven with state bureaucracy
3. Central control of the mass media
4. Central control of the economy
5. Central control of mass media/communications
6. A secret police force/use of terror
Castro fits all of the above criteria, so I believe that it is reasonable to call him a dictator. I don’t however think that his rule is characteristically negative. It is certainly more beneficial than Battista’s rule, and has had several social benefits, such as national literacy. On the other hand, increased freedoms, in particular press freedoms, would probably be beneficial.
July 11th, 2008 at 8:15 am
george bush?
July 23rd, 2008 at 7:03 pm
i do not think that George w Bush is a dictator. he is still a bad president though. but you guys who said Fidel Castro is not bad are total communists and do not know what goes on there. i know alot about history and evil men, and castro is one of them. but he is deffinitly not the worst, kim jung il is. he has something wrong with his brain. chris and steve i can tell are not that bright, are they able to read? im not sure?
July 23rd, 2008 at 7:20 pm
comrade doug, to think that mugavi is a hero can mean only thing. your some weirdo who works for him! trojan man, you are the most gullible guy i have ever read a comment off! jordan g, i have met zionists, and they are nicer than you. i do not mean to be mean but im not going lie about some of the stupid things some people wrote(at least i dont swear in my comments. beachgirl you are one the smartest girls on the page.
August 5th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
I think satan should be leader of america, all of you guys are poo stabbers and ball knockers. all of you are going to hell satan rules i wish he was hear poking you in the ass with a pitch fork.
August 16th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
\ /
\ /
\ /\ /
\ / \ /
\ / \ /
\ / \ /
\ / \ /
\ / \ /
\ / \ /
\/ \/
August 26th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
I wouldn’t call Hujintao a dictator, but China has a lot of problems and he isn’t alleviating them. Only 5 percent of the chinese population have the opportunity to receive higher education, the statistics for highschool entrance is staggering. People blame China’s problems on its heavy population but the Chinese government had just spent millions on the olympic games, a complete meaningless,expensice publicity stunt. China would have benefited more if such funds were spent on public facilities.
Chinese people are strangely patriotic due to its brain-washing education system.
August 26th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
No wonder you named yourself beachgirl. Why don’t you get a dictionary and look up ” politichians” and let the smart kids do the talking.
August 26th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
God I hate politics, violence doesn’t solve any problems we should just all learn to get alone. Whether or not China, or India becomes s superpower it would benefit humanity eventually. Countries should just mind their own business and hopefully work together.Does being a global bully have any meaning?
August 26th, 2008 at 9:12 pm
Elections are almost pure self-advertising, slandering the opposition, making false promises that are never executed.Whoever has the most campaign fund wins, is that really democracy? In the end the most connected and rich candidate wins, this stuff runs in families too eg. Bush, Kerry,Kennedy. What’s the distinction between a democracy and a monarchy? Ugh, none.
September 5th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
I like number 8’s hat
October 1st, 2008 at 4:44 am
Briefly avoiding any more mentions of George W Bush, where the hell is Vladamir Putin on this list?
October 11th, 2008 at 2:17 am
khameneie(iran)
October 15th, 2008 at 1:37 am
I want Saparmurat Niyazov’s hat
October 16th, 2008 at 4:49 am
you should add:
g.w.bush, ariel sharon & friends
November 19th, 2008 at 3:25 am
I disagree on Hu JinTao
he is NOT a dictator
the people of China loves him and respect him
the dynamic of China is different from other countries and sometimes people from other countries can’t understand it. But the people here are happy and content with their lives.
I have been studying in China for a few years now and I never have a feeling that I was studying in a country led by a dictator.
November 23rd, 2008 at 11:35 pm
juniejun- it is weird that you say that china is not run by a dictator. when i went to china i was at a high school for a foriegn exchange program and just trying to get on to websites that i would use anywhere else in the world was impossible. if you go to a library it is rather pathetic by western standards andeven their school history books are sad.
the worst thing was bringing up the “three t’s” tibet, taiwan and tienamen. they would just act like nothing happened bu have the look of “we do not talk about it” and even their accounts of what is going on is messed up. if you ask about the pollution they say “no it not there”.
i felt very much like i was in a country led by a dictator and stuff but thats just me.
November 24th, 2008 at 11:26 am
i hate obama
January 3rd, 2009 at 6:22 pm
guy:china is a communist state run by a comunist chairmen china is no dictatorship wich is run by a military leader but they have few rights so ill give u that
January 16th, 2009 at 8:58 am
May i just say the list is outdated castro has left ithink.
January 18th, 2009 at 5:48 am
guy: That is weird because I took Journalism courses in China and we talked alot about that ‘three t’s’ you mentioned. What school did you go to?? Because my school have an amazing library and if I couldn’t find anything in there I could just go to the Public Library (and I’m sure not all of the libraries in the west is up to the ‘western standards’ also). And I surf the web fine, China only banned websites that has an attachment to adult material (as in porn etc).
January 19th, 2009 at 9:52 pm
TO EVERYONE WHO HAS CONSIDERED BUSH A DICTATOR:
I think it is appropriate to say that in order to be considered a dictator, one must have complete control and authority over the nation on rules. Bush is indeed the head exectutive of the united states, but he is not in complete control, and is either to much of a fool, or to much of a doormat to command complete and total control. His actions as president, although not considered totally appropriate for a president by many, did not even come close to crossing the line over into illegal, dictator-like behavior.
January 19th, 2009 at 9:58 pm
OK, jettpack, so Shrubya isn’t a dictator, I agree with you. The honor belongs to Cheney.
January 19th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
like the presidents of usOFa run the country we all know its the oil men that tell him what to do/say/dress like
January 19th, 2009 at 11:48 pm
@sidvee – oilmen, and Israel. Bush is Israel’s dog
.
Actually, anybody’s dog really. As long the relationship will give him some sort of benefit.
.
Truly despicable.
January 19th, 2009 at 11:58 pm
OK this is pretty bad. Not only Israel is able to order Bush around, they even able to BRAG about it.
.
Informed Comment: Israeli PM Ehud Olmert Claims to be Able to Order Bush Around
.
My condolences to Americans, who had to endure 8 years of rule of this jerk.
February 8th, 2009 at 12:39 am
**TO EVERYONE WHO THOUGHT BUSH WAS A DICTATOR….
Don’t look now, but he is no longer president. Just wanted to point out the obvious to the “loony-left”.
February 8th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
Can I just protest about the King of Swaziland. I am african (white) and can I say that in African tradition breasts are not seen as a sexual symbol, rather a mechanism for which children are fed. If you travel to many places in africa, women bare their breasts. I agree that him choosing any woman to be his wife is crazy, but it was in no way linked to her bearing her breasts. This tradition is so so normal and although I am all for human rights, western people often get confused about what that means. western mentality is in no way proven to be the correct and right way of thinking.
February 14th, 2009 at 10:10 pm
canacan ur right, us westerners do have many miss conceptions but we havent the chance to lern ur customs
February 16th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
How about a bonus entry: Hugo Chavez. He nationalized (ie, seized) the country’s petroleum industry, shut down a television station critical of his policies, replaced that station with a state-run station, and frequently arrests opposition leaders. Oh yeah, and he pushed through a referendum (on his second attempt) to eliminate term limits, so he can get re-elected for life. Classic dictator.
And like his buddy Fidel Castro, he tends to blame all his county’s problems on the US.
February 18th, 2009 at 1:50 am
Here in Britain, there’s nothing in the (unwritten) constitution that explicitly says the leader of the party cannot always be the leader of such party (and therefore Prime Minister if so elected to their seat) – so long as they have the consent of the MPs. So in practice, they can stand for re-election each and every time. So the ‘re-election for life’ reason you give just doesn’t stand up to the ‘classic dictator’ conclusion. At least he is allowing the population a chance to vote in a free election! Had Tony Blair continued to this very day as Prime Minister and continued to win elections, there wouldn’t be outcries of a dictatorship.
I by no means defend Chavez on everything, however. Freedom of media and of public expression is paramount to human liberty – curtailment of this must be scrutinised. On the whole though, Chavez is nowhere near as tyrannical as those posted above.
March 4th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Hugo Chavez just announced that he’s going to launch a “War
On The Media” to stamp out any and all opposition voices. For all intents and purposes, he has just eliminated Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Expression from Venezuala. I think we can new safely add him to the ‘dictator’ list.
March 5th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
By the way: the inflation rate in Zimbabwe is a little bit higher than the 500% mentioned in the list. … just a little bit.
231,000,000% to be precise.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:32 am
Hu is not supposed in this list ok? Doesnt make any sense.
March 7th, 2009 at 12:34 am
sounds like im a chinese now.
March 9th, 2009 at 7:52 pm
this stuffs hilarious. just saying. GOOD LIST! helped a lot with a paper im writing on the comparison between Augusto Pinochet and two living dictators. thanks!
ps. too bad Pinochet just died a few years ago or he would be a contender.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:58 am
u assholes always have sumthing to talk about africa and asia what about u fucking western european dickfaces who have caused so much destruction towards other societies such as slave trade u americans are also the cause of the war in DRC congo. white people are the worst dicktators finish!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:03 am
249. jason : Yeah, the Western Europeans have probably caused the most harm in history overall, although don’t look past the Japanese/Chinese/Korean conflicts – dare you to try and pin that on whitey. And some “Americans” have done some pretty amoral things, but as it stands the US is THE largest and most powerful bastion of freedom there is. So at the moment, which is what this list was dealing with, there’s no doubt that Africa and Asia have the lion’s share of poor government.
April 10th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
okay, seriously its ridiculous how people are saying that Bush should be on this list as one of the worst dictators..we do not live in a MONARCHY or a DICTATORSHIP we live in a DEMOCRACY. Thus Bush was not a dictator. I do not agree with everything that he did, but i know that he did try his best to do everything he could for the U.S. So i honestly think that everyone should just stop complaining and saying how bad of a president he was. I would honestly like to see anyone who says that to go up and try to be President. I doubt you could do any better, i bet a whole lot worse.
April 13th, 2009 at 1:45 pm
I like the list, I agree with most of them.
You will never get Chinese people to agree about Hu, or really any of their leaders for that matter. Maybe in the future democracy will bloom in China, but for now I guess they’re stuck.
I think Castro is pretty hard to define, personally. He’s done a lot of bad things, no question. At the same time though, he did liberate Cuba from a pretty unpleasant US supported regime. Im really hopeful that his brother will bring Cuba up to scratch with regards human rights etc. Im really happy that Obama is at least talking to the Cuban govt. because without dialogue there would be very little chance of improvement.
April 13th, 2009 at 3:52 pm
242. Andrew
Thank you! I started reading this list hoping to see Chavez on here and had to read through 240 comments on calling Bush a dictator before I saw somehting that made sense.
I´m not pro-Bush AT ALL but come on now…
Yes, Hugo Chavez deserves at least an honorary mention on this list. So far, no outright torture and political murders but I honestly dont think he´s that far from them. He seems to think he has unlimited power and that just does not bode well…
April 15th, 2009 at 2:37 am
Bush is not a dictator but has caused more atrocities than most of the people on this list (over 100 000 dead iraqis for example.) The United States is not a morally acceptable country just because it doesn’t have dictators, and is not even a true democracy (read material by Noam Chomsky for those who disagree.)
And I don’t think Hu Jintao is a good fit for the list. I have lots of friends from mainland china and they do not feel they are living under any sort of scary repressive regime. And the 4000 executions is because china has the biggest population. If you look at executions per capita, China is actually beneath some countries. I think the person who made this list is being too strongly influenced by the “China is evil” portrait painted in the western media.
Also I don’t think Fidel Castro is nearly as evil as the American media has tried to portray him as. It’s obvious why America needs to make communist countries look bad (for ideological reasons.) I’m sure he’s done some really bad stuff. But again, not as bad as US makes it seem and not as bad as George Bush and most American presidents for that matter. US traditionally portrays other countries as evil to hide it’s own evils.
April 21st, 2009 at 2:34 am
Castro’s real unforgivable atrocity is his repression of the free media. Other than that, if you really apply the same standards to him than to other countries, then he isn’t that bad:
Arresting dissenters – isn’t that what we did to the SHAC 7 and Leonard Peltier?
Assassinating ‘counterrevolutionaries’ – in every war, the opposition is killed out. That’s war
Funding guerrillas in other countries – United States has done exactly that in the same latin american countries, only by funding right wing guerilla groups, rather than left wing guerilla groups. We fund assassins that defend business interests. Cuba funds assassins that try to defend the working class.
Bad economy – when you consider that most of our (latin american countries) exports go to America and Cuba can’t do that, then they aren’t too shabby.
Something interesting is that after the last hurricane, Cuba asked if United States could lift the embargo just for one month, that Cuba could buy from America supplies to rebuild ravaged towns. They didn’t ask for aid; they asked for permission to conduct business.
America refused. Bush would rather have innocent Cuban civilians suffer in catastrophe than forgive the countries’ ideological differences.
Castro’s brother Raul used to be into communism way before Fidel actually, so I don’t think Cuba will stop being communist. Most cubans don’t even hate cuban socialism; they understand that America doens’t fight for “democracy”, it fights for capitalism.
But anyway, hopefully Raul will allow legitimate opposition parties to have a voice, so that there’s also ideological freedom, and hopefully America will lift the trade embargo, and we’ll see that Cuba is not the oppressed country most Americans think it is.
April 21st, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Another good and thought-provoking list by jfrater. I’m glad that the “George Bush is a dictator” comments didn’t disappear when Bush peacefully left office. The anger-inspired errors of the left are here for all of us to learn from.
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:06 am
choadius – I’m glad that the “George Bush is a dictator” comments didn’t disappear when Bush peacefully left office. The anger-inspired errors of the left are here for all of us to learn from.
Excellent point, Choadius. The more time passes, the more silly and ridiculous the leftist cries of ‘dictator’ and ‘evil’ will seem. Their unhinged views were already ludicrous, but now they’re very amusing.
Cheers
May 2nd, 2009 at 12:35 pm
I really don’t understand why the US has such a big problem with communism. In Europe communism is legal and is represented in the parliament and the US still considers it evil.
Yes, Castro is a dictator and has oppressed many human rights. Yes, many Cubans didn’t like him and left the country. But no one can deny that the majority of the population is very affraid of the time that he dies. Cubans adore Castro and one can sense it when visiting the country.
And don’t get me started on Chavez. You just don’t like him because he is telling the truth about the crimes commited by your previous president. For the rest of us it was soooo fun that someone finally stood up to you and told you the truth.
May 3rd, 2009 at 1:11 pm
It´s interesting that two of the countries listed, Equatorial Guinea and Saudi Arabia, have great USA’s support because of its oil. The USA invaded Iraq which had the same “sins” that S.A. because the dictator was against the USA and not becouse of ethical reasons
May 8th, 2009 at 11:29 am
I like pancakes.
Dictatorial pancakes of doom.
DOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!
May 20th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
? do pancakes of doooooooooom have 2 do with anything.
June 16th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
kim jong il is a champagne socialist!!!!
June 18th, 2009 at 5:57 am
Another good and thought-provoking list by jfrater. I’m glad that the “George Bush is a dictator” comments didn’t disappear when Bush peacefully left office. The anger-inspired errors of the left are here for all of us to learn from.
It’s the left in the UK that are now voting for the BNP (British Nazi Party)
June 24th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
add sarkozy to this list… he bans every damn thing in the world. he lives in the world of bikinis and thongs. whoohoo. and he obviously hasn’t heard of ‘freedom of choice’.
June 30th, 2009 at 1:03 am
As we shake our heads at the silliness of those who call Bush a dictator, let’s also remember what Obama is being called on Fox News, etc.