1. Can you agree that there's a huge difference between keeping terrorists captured in wartime in prison to prevent them from killing people and keeping people in prison because they disagree with you politically, or because they are homosexual, or because they have AIDS, or because they like rock and roll? Or if you think that puts a spin on Che, how would you describe the purpose of the labor camps?

2. Do you feel that Che was really motivated by a love for people, and because of that, the results of his rise to power (the political killings, etc.) are somewhat excusable?

3. Are you more concerned with being connected with an SUV than with Che? And if so, why?

Thanks!

Because filing charges would be judging others.

1. I called us to judge ourselves before judging others (hmmm… one of the core teachings of Jesus)

2. Explained the context behind Che's rise to power

3. Used the way that the arguments were written in the post to show that stories can be spun any way you'd like.

Why is it hard for people to be concerned that we keep people in captivity without filing any charges? As Christians, that should concern us. 'm not arguing that Che didn't do that, just saying, that we do similar things…

But Timbo, if you want to re-articulate my points and paint me as the guy who would drive the SUV, go ahead and do it I've always wondered what it's like driving one!

Was that you in the SUV?

The way the conservative site spun the story and how you wrote about it is misleading (about Che). Just as you thought my accurate portrayal of Bush's foreign policy was misleading.

I started to compose a more detailed response to the claims in your comment, but I think I'm better off just saying thank you for illustrating a leftist mindset better than I ever could. It's unsettling to me that someone would not be able to tell the moral difference between the two men (taking into account both contexts). I don't know if that's because you've heard years of praise for Che or years of hysterical demonization of Bush complete with speculations about his real, secret motivations (e.g., he alone knew, regardless of the evidence, there were no WMD), but there it is.

And just so you have some context for Hitler, Germany was treated very unfairly at the end of WWI, and their country had many problems, thanks to those who were fighting against them (i.e., us) and the settlements they were forced into (i.e., by us). Like Che, they had no choice (unfortunately) but to respond with military action–particularly by putting people into labor/death camps.

But I suppose that in order for that “context” to matter, they would have to be on the left.

Of course the article nor your post cites the context within which Che emerged–that the US government was taking down regimes that were not friendly to its foreign policy (including democratically elected ones), and the corruption of regimes in Latin and South America left many people (unfortunately) no choice but to respond with military action.

Finally, before judging those who raise up the Che banner and tshirts, let's remember we have millions of christians (evangelicals, mind you), who have a similar idolatry of GW–a man responsible of waging war on false pretexts and of empowering a military power that has killed hundreds of thousands of innocent lives, and imprisoned thousands of people (in Guantanomo Bay and of course the other secret prisons) without charging them with any crimes. But of course, our Lord (and savior) gw bush can do no wrong in the eyes of the conservative.