rene@nlm-mcs.ARPA (Rene Steiner) (09/25/84)
I know Reagon's said a lot of dumb things in his time, such as his infamous comment about trees causing pollution. What I'd like is a list of such comments, along with where and when he said them. I'd like what Reagon said, not the administration remarks (such as ketchup being a vegetable). Thanks! - rene -- rene@nlm-mcs
markb@sdcrdcf.UUCP (Mark Biggar) (09/26/84)
In article <5218@nlm-mcs.ARPA> rene@nlm-mcs.ARPA (Rene Steiner) writes: >I know Reagon's said a lot of dumb things in his time, such as his >infamous comment about trees causing pollution. > - rene But trees (and other plants, sage brush being worst) do contribute to pollution levels. A recent study done in LA (sorry no reference) showed that only about 20% of the hydro-carbons in LA smog come from the burning and use of fossil fuels. 80% of the hydro-carbons are produced by trees and other plants. This was determined by looking at the carbon-14 levels in the sampled hydro-carbons. Because oil and coal were produced so long ago the level of carbon-14 in them is too small to be messured. Hydro-carbons produced by plants via the normal process of combining CO2 and water have the same level of carbon-14 as the CO2 in the atmosphere. These levels of carbon-14 are maintained fairly constant by reactions in the upper atmosphere. Trees may not cause all pollution (Reagon didn't say that) but they do contribute. Mark Biggar {allegra,burdvax,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,akgua,sdcsvax}!sdcrdcf!markb
myers@uwvax.UUCP (Jeff Myers) (09/27/84)
Shortly after his comment about trees being a major cause of pollution (especially when one burns them, of course), Reagan was campaigning somewhere in California, and a group of students hung signs on trees all over which read: "Stop Me Before I Kill Again" Rather amusing, no? Anybody remember where this was (or did it themselves)?
orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (09/27/84)
> I know Reagon's said a lot of dumb things in his time, such as his > infamous comment about trees causing pollution. What I'd like is a > list of such comments, along with where and when he said them. I'd > like what Reagon said, not the administration remarks (such as ketchup > being a vegetable). Thanks! > > - rene Not only is there a list, there is a whole book devoted exclusively to Ronald Reagan's past distortions, gaffes and outright lies. It is called "Ronald Reagan's Reign of Error" and lists Reagan's past statements aong with the facts and references that show those statements to be distortions or lies. Besides his famous remark about "trees causing pollution" he also claimed there were more forests now in America than during the 13 colonies. The National Park Service reported this was far from true. But one could go on and on...... The latest distortion by Ronald Reagan is the attempt to blame the Beirut bombing on Carter (!!???). Carter, he said, weakened our intelligence apparatus by not allowing spying to proceed and reducing intelligence staffing. Certainly Carter tried to stop such noxious CIA activities as overthrowing democratically elected governments (like Chile) and mining other nations harbors (like Nicaragua) To my knowledge he never fired or laid off ANY intelligence personnel. Actually the classification of ketchup as a vegetable was not promoted by the Reagan administration. There are distortions on both sides-- but Ronald Reagan's "reign of error" is monumental in proportion. In fact,Mark Green, the author of "Ronald Reagan's Reign of Error" just recently said Reagan had made yet another preposterous error in taking his book to apply to Carter--he said, Reagan may get away with distorting others statements or turning them to his purposes but he was not going to allow that to happen to his book! for truth, justice and the American way, Tim Sevener
wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (09/28/84)
Well, Sevener does it again. When will he stop shooting from the hip? Reagan never, I SAY NEVER, mentioned Carter in his remarks about the CIA and our other intelligence branches. The media took his words and twisted them to sound as if he had. I heard the so-called offending remarks and they refered to past administrationS. See the S Sevener. That indicates a plural. Reagan was talking about Ford and Nixon too. And, if you don't think the CIA has been emasculated by the liberals in Congress, then your living in a dream world. Keep repeating the BIG LIE, Sevener, maybe someone will believe you. The following is the text of what Reagan said. You tell me where it says Carter. "To say...spying is somehow dishonest and let's get rid of our intelligence agents and we did that to a large extent." "We're trying to rebuild our intelligence to where you'll find out and know in advance what the target might be and be prepared" This is the section of the speech that is supposed to accuse Carter. Tell me where it says Carter. It is, further, a known fact that the CIA budget was greatly reduced under the Carter administration, so, if Carter and his lackey liberals are screaming foul, I think they must feel guilty, even though not charged. If the shoe fits, wear it. So Sevener, get your facts together before you start making charges based on hearsay. Your beginning to sound like a parrot for the Ultra Left. T. C. Wheeler
david@fisher.UUCP (David Rubin) (10/02/84)
[] There goes TC Wheeler again. The Carter administration did not reduce funds for spying for the CIA. After all, intelligence gathering is what it's all about. What was reduced were funds for "operations", i.e. covert intervention. As far as I can recall, the Ford administration placed similar emphasis in budgeting the CIA. Thus, the ability to gather information was not what was gutted, but rather covert activity. The Carter administration would certainly have flown spy planes over Nicaragua (and were), and placed operatives in the country for information (and did), but would not support a covert war (well, I think they wouldn't have) or mined harbors or poisoned Ortega's soup (I don't think the CIA is back to this, even under Reagan). Besides, how much intelligence (read this both ways) does it take to realize the Embassy was insecure? Yet the Reagan administration WITRHDREW most of the Embassy Annex's marine guard. Security measures had no more priority, it appears, then kitchen renovations. It doesn't take more than a day to dig a ditch to prevent vehicular access. When the Embassy was bombed, Reagan blamed terrorism. When the Marine Compound was bombed, Reagn took the blame. When the Embassy Annex was bombed, Reagan blamed previous administrations. Thus, a new version of that famous Scot adage: Fool me once---shame on you. Fool me twice---shame on me. Fool me thrice---shame on Carter and Ford.
orb@whuxl.UUCP (SEVENER) (10/02/84)
> Reagan never, I SAY NEVER, mentioned Carter in his > remarks about the CIA and our other intelligence branches. The > media took his words and twisted them to sound as if he had. > I heard the so-called offending remarks and they refered to > past administrationS. See the S Sevener. That indicates > a plural. Reagan was talking about Ford and Nixon too. And, > if you don't think the CIA has been emasculated by the liberals > in Congress, then your living in a dream world. > > T. C. Wheeler Well, I suppose you must be right- Reagan not only meant to blame the Beirut bombing on the Administration from four years ago but Administrations from 8 years ago as well. Therefore former President Ford has criticized Reagan's remarks as well as former President Carter. President Ford said that Reagan should take responsibility for the bombing and not try to blame past administrations (whether Carter's or Ford's) for his own mistakes. What does the statement "the CIA has been emasculated by the liberals in Congress " supposed to mean? Two Congressmen appeared on the MacNeil- Lehrer report the other night-one Republican ,the other Democratic-- neither denied that Congress has voted every penny for CIA intelligence gathering the Reagan administration has ever requested. There is an important distinction between "intelligence-gathering" and covert operations. I think the Congress has tried to place some limits on CIA meddling in other countries affairs--the mining of Nicaragua, the overthrow of Allende in Chile,etc. I think the CIA has no business determining other people's governments or engaging in terrorist activities such as mining other countries harbors. However, placing limits on such activities does NOT mean that the Congress has placed any limits upon the CIA's intelligence gathering activities or budget. Tim Sevener Bell Labs, Whippany whuxl!orb
haldenf@teklabs.UUCP (Halden Field ) (10/03/84)
Indeed, Reagan's statement about the trees was accurate, though maliciously
misleading. Hydrocarbons are a pretty minor component of the pollution
that irritates us and makes us sick today. Reagan's comparison only
considers one particular pollutant. What really hurts is such
pollutants as sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide. These are produced
by industry.
There *is* a list of Reagan's mistakes published. It is called *There He
Goes Again: Ronald Reagan's Reign of Error* and is published by (I'm
not sure about the publisher) Pantheon Books. It's a paperback and
should be in the humor (inappropriately) or politics sections of book-
stores. The book details approximately 300 statements by Reagan and
explains how the statements differ from the facts.
-halden
UUCP: {allegra, decvax, ihnp4, orstcs, ucbvax, zehntel, ogcvax, reed,
uw-beaver, hplabs}!tektronix!teklabs!haldenf
CSnet: haldenf@tek ARPAnet: haldenf.tek@rand-relay