[net.politics] The Big Lie

black@pundit.DEC (Don Black DTN 261-2739 MS: NIO/N9 Loc: Pole B6) (06/19/85)




	     I do appreciate Tom Schlesinger's comparing my "line" with
	the John Birch Society.  I neither deny it nor confirm it.  The
	open-minded and inquisitive among you will want to check it out a
	little further.  After all, you wouldn't want me to stand unjustly
	accused of such a heinous offfense, would you?  The only real way
	to find out if Schlesinger is right is to find out what the Birchers
	are saying, and compare it to my postings.  

	     Their address is:

		The John Birch Society 
		393 Concord Ave.
		Belmont MA  02178

	     It seems to me that the only rational way to be opposed to some-
	thing or some group is to find out everything you can about them, and
	read every piece of their literature.  Find out what they're saying, 
	and refute it.  Am I right, or am I blowing smoke?

	     
	     Speaking of paranoia---World War II ended forty years ago.  Forty
	years later, people are still making a career of chasing down "war 
	criminals."  

	     It must be nice being a professional Nazi-hunter.  Imagine being
	able to travel to exotic places like Brazil and Paraguay, all expenses 
	paid.  And then when you get back, you can publish a book and collect
	all sorts of lecture honoraria.  Meanwhile, the guy you're looking for 
	is a geriatrics patient or a name on a tombstone.  Like this guy 
	Mengele.  He's probably been dead for years, but they still collect 
	funds to hire somebody to hunt him down.  And the case against Klaus 
	Barbie is a real can of worms.  If the French prosecute him, it will 
	expose what really happened in the Maquis during the war. 

	     But yet, nobody raises a finger to the people who provided Nazi
	Germany with the materials to prosecute the war, to wit, the petroleum
	products, the ball bearings, the aviation engines, the bauxite, etc.
	Nobody says a word about the connection between I.G. Farben and Standard
	Oil Company, between the Bank for International Settlements/Reichsbank
	and the Chase National Bank (Chase-Manhattan), or the bearings manufact-
	urer, SKF, that shipped bearings from the US and Swedish plants when
	their German factory at Schweinfurt was bombed.  Or how about the ITT/
	Folcke-Wulf connection?  The Big Lie, you say.  Paranoia.  

	     And just for chuckles, the next time you're in the Big Apple,
	go over to the UN and find out who donated the land that the UN
	building sits on.  Then think about what we're in for.

	     Sleep well tonight.

	--Don Black


thill@ssc-bee.UUCP (Tom Hill) (03/17/86)

>
>
>  
> 2)The Soviets *have* unilaterally stopped all their nuclear testing.
>   They have stopped such testing since last August.  Yet the US refuses
>   to stop its testing (specifically Reagan refuses to stop and to this date
>   Congress has not cutoff funds for nuclear testing) Indeed Reagan 
>   ordered a nuclear test soon after the Geneva Summit in case there was
>   any doubt of his determination to continue the nuclear arms race.
.
.
.
>  
>    tim sevener  whuxn!orb

The Soviets offered this test ban only AFTER THEY WERE DONE.  Offering their
test ban meant nothing to them since they did not have anymore planned
in the near future.  Awfully generous of them, eh Tim?  You also implied that
the Soviets have cutoff funds for testing, how about posting your source.
No testing != no testing planned for the future.

Now suppose we finish our current testing and ask the Soviets to continue
theirs, what do you really think will happen when the Soviets are ready
for their next round of testing?


	Tom Hill

	"Time is Mother Nature's way of keeping everything from happening
	 all at once."
				?


berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman) (03/21/86)

> > 2)The Soviets *have* unilaterally stopped all their nuclear testing.
> >   They have stopped such testing since last August.  Yet the US refuses
> >   to stop its testing (specifically Reagan refuses to stop and to this date
> >   Congress has not cutoff funds for nuclear testing) Indeed Reagan
> >   ordered a nuclear test soon after the Geneva Summit in case there was
> >   any doubt of his determination to continue the nuclear arms race.
> .
> >    tim sevener  whuxn!orb
>
> The Soviets offered this test ban only AFTER THEY WERE DONE.  Offering their
> test ban meant nothing to them since they did not have anymore planned
> in the near future.  Awfully generous of them, eh Tim?  You also implied that
> the Soviets have cutoff funds for testing, how about posting your source.
> No testing != no testing planned for the future.
>
Recently I have read that Gorbachov extended the suspention of tests
since US have not done any tests in the meantime.  Less recently,
I have read that US wants to tests the conversion of nuclear explosion
into a directed X-ray beam, and that this is probably the reason that
the administration refuses a test ban.

It seems that none of the sides needs any tests to build additional warheads:
the principles of their action are known sufficiently.  What Reagan
wants is to have the right to develop completely new kinds of weapons.
Otherwise, WE ARE ALSO DONE with nuclear tests.

> Now suppose we finish our current testing and ask the Soviets to continue
> theirs, what do you really think will happen when the Soviets are ready
> for their next round of testing?
>
>       Tom Hill

If this were the case, Reagan could propose to enact a ban on tests effective,
say, in two years from now.  But he did not do it.

Piotr Berman