turner (03/10/83)
#R:rabbit:-113300:ucbesvax:2900004:37777777600:2662
ucbesvax!turner Feb 17 16:20:00 1983
In your flame above, we find the following statement:
I find the behavior of college students (in my day as well)
who "KNOW" the facts in advance, and who KNOW what the speaker
is going to say, so incredibly thoughtless and anti-free speech
that I lack the ability to make a reasoned argument against them.
Without going into the issue of your ability to make a reasoned
argument, I would like first to point out that Jeane Kirkpatrick,
upon re-assuming the podium (which she did, it turns out) went on
in pretty much the same predictable vein. I.e., steering clear of
specifics, and blathering on to the effect "that concern for human
rights forms the core of U.S. foreign policy". During the question-
and-answer session that followed, someone asked bout the abysmal human-
rights record of Guatemala, and whether it merited the recent resumption
of military aid. Jeane Kirkpatrick denied any knowledge of this
resumption, which was announced several days ago. Then someone from
the audience volunteered the figure: a little over $6 million. So much
for who "KNOWS" the facts in advance. Kirkpatrick, having recently
arrived from a tour of Latin America with praise for the Guatemalan
government for their "improvements", could hardly have been ignorant
of this.
The protesters were not judging Kirkpatrick in advance (unless, of
course, they were interrupting her announcement of a recent conversion
to Amnesty International). Nor were they interested in quashing freedom
of expression. What they were attacking was a woman who consistently
HIDES facts, IGNORES them, and, when they happen to be forced upon her
attention, simply DISMISSES them, whenever these facts happen to make
U.S. foreign policy on human rights look at all hypocritical.
You have not addressed my question: Kirkpatricks "freedom of expression"
is moot, in this case, since her position as U.N. ambassador virtually
guarantees her a hearing in the press. The people for whom the protestors
speak cannot afford to do so themselves, in most cases, because they live
in countries which are not free. U.S. foreign policy (which according to
Kirkpatrick, has human rights at its core) has quite consistently
been on the side of shutting them up. So who is defending freedom of
expression here?
Personally, I don't think that booing an arrogant liar off the stage
is "Totalitarian." As for having my "perceptions of the world"
changed by an arrogant liar...well, there are only so many cold days
in hell.
Michael Turnerturner (03/10/83)
#R:mitccc:-33400:ucbesvax:2900005:37777777600:1643
ucbesvax!turner Feb 17 16:38:00 1983
There is plenty of good evidence that the lot of the
Nicaraguan peasant has improved dramatically since the revolution.
Only so much can be expected in terms of economic improvements when
the man who owned 60% of the nation's land takes his life savings
out of the country when he leaves. Somoza was a multi-billionaire,
by some accounts: how honestly he came by this wealth can be judged
the popularity[sic] of the ex-National Guard, his private army. Nobody
in Nicaragua in their right mind (no matter how much they oppose the
current regime) wants the Guardia back. Strong evidence of this comes
from our own State Department, which, while interested in destabilizing
Nicaragua by any means possible, is now withdrawing support for any
organization with strong ties with the ex-Guardia. Even THEY realize
the SOME popular support is necessary for overthrow of the current
regime. Now all they have to do is get Nicaraguans to forget who
ARMED the Guardia...a tough one.
As for the brave and free "contra" militias, I refer you to
the current issue of "Covert Action Information Bulletin". There
is a detailed report on the extent to which the Miskitu Indians
in the Northeast have been manipulated by the C.I.A. and various
right-wing evangelist groups. Of course, you never hear about the
atrocities commited by the "contras" in the U.S. press. The details
(rape and ritual murder) about the activities of these fanatics makes
current reporting on Nicaragua in the U.S. dailies look a trifle
one-sided, to say the least.
Michael Turnerturner (03/10/83)
#R:mitccc:-33400:ucbesvax:2900006:000:3172
ucbesvax!turner Feb 17 17:08:00 1983
In response to this question:
What's this about how the last time "they" (apparently foreign
oppressed workers) had a forum, the US installed a regime that
shut them up? If you're so big on concrete examples, why do you
make vague references like this? To what are you referring?
Pardon me - I sometimes assume that people know something about U.S.
interventions, while at the same time attacking the news media and
educational system which buries such items.
In Indonesia, several MILLION people died in a military take-over
in 1965. The presence of the CIA has been confirmed, but their
precise role is conveniently hazy. Continuing U.S. support for that
regime was seen in 1979 during the Carter administration, when Indonesia
invaded East Timor, a recently-decolonized Portuguese possession.
At that time, the State Department counted the total casualties in
the small thousands. This was contradicted by sources in the
Indonesia government who unapologetically offered figures in the tens
of thousands. The figures of independent relief agencies are in
the HUNDREDS of thousands, including famine deaths resulting from the
withholding of international food aid to war refugees. In all, Indonesia
seems to have wiped out a third of the population of this small country.
The U.S. role was one of being the source of uninterrupted supply of
arms to the Indonesian invading army.
Guatemala has been characterized by Amnesty International as
having the worst human rights record in the western hemisphere.
These rights violations are generally of the most straightforward
kind: decimation (and sometimes outright extermination) of Indian
villages suspected of harboring rebels. The Catholic church
has problems keeping its mission priests alive in this country.
When its current dictator, Rios Montt, had to face the moral ambiguity
of being a Catholic and presiding over a regime that kills priests,
he simply converted to a protestant sect (Maranatha Ministries, which
is also a suspected funnel for CIA arms and personnel.) This govern-
ment is so bad that Congress almost always votes down any military
or police aid. (Some civilian aviation parts are starting to go
through, however.) Reagan likes it, though. He thinks they've been
given a bad rap.
The Phillipines goes back too far to follow under the category
of OBSCURE regions where U.S. foreign policy has translated into
totalitarianism. You can actually read about this in history text-
books. Even now, though, one reads in the papers about how Marcos'
party got 95% of the vote in some election, with no mention of the
fact that voting is mandatory, and that anyone who stands for election
in an opposing party is usually found dead in a ditch outside the
city limits sometime before election day. (Actually, people don't
even try anymore, from what I understand.)
I'll go on, if you like. But it's all been written about,
believe me. Would you like a bibliography? It would save me some
typing.
Michael Turnerjjm@faust.UUCP (05/07/85)
Here here. The good Doctor and his saucey assistents are a source of much pleasure. Maybe the Doctor's humour will aid this poor misguided youth. See you eariler, joe macDougald
amy@hpcnof.UUCP (08/27/85)
/***** hpcnof:net.college / ucbvax!jordan / 10:45 am Aug 14, 1985*/ In article <530@calmasd.UUCP> cjn@calmasd.UUCP (Cheryl Nemeth) writes: >> Which machines at UCB (specifically those with accounts open to >> non-cs undergrads) have rn or equivilent running on them? Uh, if you can get an account, you can read news... (i.e., all of them...) (well.. there *may* be 1 or two...) >> Thanks! NFP ------------ Jordan Hayes jordan@UCB-VAX.BERKELEY.EDU UC Berkeley ucbvax!jordan +1 (415) 835-8767 37' 52.29" N 122' 15.41" W /* ---------- */