[talk.politics.misc] Fantasy and Reality

dlo@drutx.UUCP (OlsonDL) (09/25/86)

[]

<sigh> I promised myself that I would leave this alone.  But now, I just
can't.

>> 
>> 2. Determine whose behavior is adversely affected by fantasy materials.
>> The existing evidence is consistent with the hypothesis that adverse
>> behavioral effects are confined to people suffering from a specific
>> cognitive deficit, which impairs their ability to distinguish between
>> reality and fantasy.
>> 					Adam Reed (mtund!adam)

>Do you suppose we could apply these findings to our President?
>           tim sevener  whuxn!orb

Do you suppose we could apply these findings to you as well?
Case in point -- The title of the following article (labled with "->")
posted was "Preventive Medicine on Porn and Censorship:re to Averack".
I'd sure like to know what they have to do with each other:

->Even after Cory Aquino's remarkable nonviolent
->revolution, her success in getting 10,000 Communists to lay down their
->arms within months of taking power, her recent peace accord with
->Islamic militants, all the bloodthirsty militarists in Reagan's
->administration can do is say: "Oh, Cory, you don't understand,
->you have to *kill* those Communists like Marcos did"

First of all, when and who did anybody in the RR administration say that?
Secondly, Cory Aquino is still having problems with insurgents in her
country.  She said so herself.  I heard her say that if they continue to
refuse to cooperate, she will use -- in her words -- "force against force.
->Frankly I find that kind of hypocrisy disgusting.

Frankly, I find that your credibility is seriously flawed.
->                      tim sevener  whuxn!orb

David Olson
..!ihnp4!drutx!dlo

"Eliminate the impossible, my dear doctor, and whatever remains, however
improbable, must be the truth."  -- Sherlock Holmes

orb@whuts.UUCP (SEVENER) (09/26/86)

    David Olson writes:
> ->Even after Cory Aquino's remarkable nonviolent
> ->revolution, her success in getting 10,000 Communists to lay down their
> ->arms within months of taking power, her recent peace accord with
> ->Islamic militants, all the bloodthirsty militarists in Reagan's
> ->administration can do is say: "Oh, Cory, you don't understand,
> ->you have to *kill* those Communists like Marcos did"
> 
> First of all, when and who did anybody in the RR administration say that?
> Secondly, Cory Aquino is still having problems with insurgents in her
> country.  She said so herself.  I heard her say that if they continue to
> refuse to cooperate, she will use -- in her words -- "force against force.
> ->Frankly I find that kind of hypocrisy disgusting.
> 
> Frankly, I find that your credibility is seriously flawed.
> ->                      tim sevener  whuxn!orb
> 
> David Olson

Perhaps you should read a good newspaper.  Criticisms that Cory Aquino
was being too "conciliatory" towards the Communists have been repeatedly
aired by anonymous "high officials" in the Reagan administration for
the past month.  They have been reported several times in the New York
Times, National Public Radio, and other sources.  Moreover General Ponce
Enrile has been quite open in his criticisms of Cory Aquino's attempts
to restrain the army from the sort of random murder and bloodshed which
marked Marcos' regime.

Other anonymous "high officials" took potshots at the new reform-minded
government in the Philipines engaging the Center for Constitutional Law
for their legal counsel in attempting to regain the property Marcos
stole from the Philipine people.  Such organizations, which have defended 
many people's human rights, were criticized as "dissident" by the
"anonymous high officials" in the Reagan administration.
Cory Aquino's government shot right back, that they had the greatest
respect for organizations like the Center for Constitutional law
and its protection of dissidents, because at one time they had to
defend their own movement for democracy in the Philipines against
the repression of the Marcos regime.

Fortunately, Reagan himself, regardless of the qualms of the right-wing
extremists in his own administration, recently embraced Aquino and
publicly voiced strong support.  At least that is the impression he
created for public consumption (a popular one to present, like
claiming to want to *reduce* nuclear arms and not just freeze them)
and it does give Aquino more leverage against Enrile and Ramos in
their press for military solutions to the problems of the Philipines.
So that is at least *one* good thing Reagan has done in foreign policy.

As to the success of Aquino's conciliatory approach: she just negotiated
an agreement with Moslem separatists to stop fighting.  She also
succeeded in getting 10,000 members of the New People's Army in one
province to lay down their arms.  Obviously she cannot tolerate
random murder and bloodshed by insurgents.  But all the evidence
indicates that she understands very well that simply committing the
random murders of civilians that Marcos did, will do nothing to
solve the grave economic problems of poverty which have provoked
militant opposition.

I am not about to quote every single source for the anonymous 
criticisms of Aquino by members of Reagan's administration.
As I said it was mentioned numerous times in the New York Times
and other good newspapers.  Perhaps you might consider subscribing
to one.
                  tim sevener  whuxn!orb