Ronald Reagan dies

[shemp]

It also specifically accused John Negroponte of a number of human rights violations. Yet, back in his office that day in 1982, John Negroponte assured us that he had no idea what had happened to the women we were looking for. I had to wait 13 years to find out. In an interview with the Baltimore Sun in1996 Jack Binns, Negroponte's predecessor as US ambassador in Honduras, told how a group of Salvadorans, among whom were the women we had been looking for, were captured on April 22, 1981 and savagely tortured by the DNI, the Honduran Secret Police, before being placed in helicopters of the Salvadoran military. After take off from the airport in Tegucigalpa, the victims were thrown out of the helicopters. Binns told the Baltimore Sun that the North American authorities were well aware of what had happened and that it was a grave violation of human rights. But it was seen as part of Ronald Reagan's counterinsurgency policy.

[RandFan impersonation]Yeah, sure, threw them out of a helicopter! Hahahahahaha! I bet you expect us to believe that they were raped first too! HOOHAHAHAHA!!!
[/RandFan impersonation]

 

[Skeptic]

it is indeed horrifying to think that he should be chosen to represent our country at the United Nations, an organization founded to ensure that the human rights of all people...

...except for jews...

...receive the highest respect...

...which is why Syria is on the Security Council, and Sudan a member of the human rights commission.

I don't see the problem. If we assume the data about Mr. Negroponte is accurate, then, considering the way human rights are really treated in the UN, he would fit right in.

 

[a_unique_person]

Like I said, when do you let go of the balloon. In the end, the answer is always, the sooner the better. It's going to be painful either way, but the longer you hold on, the more painful it will be when you let go. Propping up the Shah was a criminal act.

Which is why the US should have given up on western Europe and let it be dominated by Communism. After all, everybody knows that in the end Communism will win there; the only question is, is it going to be before or after the US sinks more money into it? You always let go of the baloon in the end, you know, so it is better to cut and run now.

Any thug who said "I'm anti communist" seemed to be good enough for the US. I'm not talking about tolerating bastards, I'm talking about actively supporting them. Why? So the US didn't have to worry about communism. As if the US was ever going to have a communist insurgence.

Have you ever wondered what the reaction of a regime might be to continual arms buildups on it's borders? It might just try to match you. They may not be legitimate borders, it might not be a legitimate regime, but if someone starts nukes right next to you, you would react.

Oh wait, I'm sorry. Is it 2004 already? I thought it was 1984; I was just on my way to protest Reagen's insane, simplistic escalation with the USSR. He actually thinks of putting nuclear missiles there! Doesn't he know that won't help stop the inevitable Soviet advance, and will only make it into a nuclear conflict instead of merely a defeat? He's crazy, CRAZY, I tell ya'!

Which was always totally pointless anyway. There was already more than enough weapons targetting the USSR to obliterate it several times over. The missiles in Europe was not about logic, it was always about posturing. Once the first nuke was set off, we were all going to hell in a handbasket anyway.

This, of course, is the "Vietnam Syndrome": the idea that any conflict the US is involved in is inevitably headed for defeat, is unwinnable, is nothing more than a sinkhole one throws money into, and therefore the "corageous" thing is to cut and run as soon as possible. It is PRECISELY this attitude that Reagen changed. He believed, quite rightly, that the US CAN win conflicts, if it stays the course and does "silly" and "simplistic" things like putting misslies into western Europe.

And the US lost Vietnam, and the world is still a free place.

There was in fact nothing inevitable about Khomeini's or North Vietnam's victory, and more than there was in the USSR's or Nazi Germany's victory, both of which were often predicted at the time. But in one case there was a president who cuts and runs and a nation which was unwilling to fight, and in the other, a president who stood his ground and made clear that he will fight, and a nation that backed him.

Like Carter would have curled up and cried if the USSR launced a pre-emptive nuclear strike.

Reagan, if he had been president during the Cuba crises, would have started a nuclear war. We are lucky we didn't have a simplistic posturer in charge of a nuclear arsenal then. As I said about Bush in charge of the US army in Iraq, it's like giving a baby razor blades to play with.

 

[RandFan]

Yeah, sure, threw them out of a helicopter! Hahahahahaha! I bet you expect us to believe that they were raped first too! HOOHAHAHAHA!!!

What the sam hell are you talking about? I'm attacking the asinine assumption that the U.N. cares about human rights. Such a notion is belied by the fact that they put Syria on the human rights panel.

Do you have something intelligent to say or are you incapable of anything remotely representative of reason or logic?

Your argument is fallacious.

 

[shemp]

What the sam hell are you talking about? I'm attacking the asinine assumption that the U.N. cares about human rights. Such a notion is belied by the fact that they put Syria on the human rights panel.

Do you have something intelligent to say or are you incapable of anything remotely representative of reason or logic?

Your argument is fallacious.

What the hell does the U.N. have to do with this really? Negroponte and Reagan backed up a bunch of nun-murderers!

My argument may or may not be fallacious, but yours is asinine. It has nothing to do with the point.

 

[RandFan]

What the hell does the U.N. have to do with this really? Negroponte and Reagan backed up a bunch of nun-murderers!

You DIDN'T even bother to read your own post?????

Shemp, do yourself a favor, in the future read ALL of the quote before posting. I hate to hold your hand but ok.

From your post.

Given the history of John Negroponte in Central America, it is indeed horrifying to think that he should be chosen to represent our country at the United Nations, an organization founded to ensure that the human rights of all people receive the highest respect.

Do you see the bolded words? Note what they say. "United Nations" AKA the U.N.

My argument may or may not be fallacious, but yours is asinine. It has nothing to do with the point.

Considering you didn't even read your post I would be careful about what you call asinine.

 

[subgenius]

As the nation mourns the death of Ronald Reagan, the Bush administration is
sending Vice President Dick Cheney to memorialize the 40th President Wednesday on Capitol Hill. Cheney's kind words now, however, stand in contrast to his words while Reagan was president.

Last week, Cheney said, "during the decisive years of the Cold War, I saw
the conviction and the moral courage of Ronald Reagan". Yet it was Cheney who, as a top leader in the U.S. House of Representatives, said Reagan was "tolerating a decision-making process in the upper reaches of the
Administration that lacked integrity and accountability".

He also chastised Reagan's defense policies - the same policies
conservatives are trumpeting as Reagan's lasting legacy. Cheney said at the height of the Cold War that if Reagan "doesn't really cut defense, he becomes the No. 1 special pleader in town." Cheney urged Reagan to cut defense spending, saying, "the president has to reach out and take a whack at everything to be credible," and told the White House that "you've got to
hit defense".

Six years later, Cheney followed through on his statements by changing the same Reagan defense policies he now touts. In 1990, he bragged to Congress that as Defense Secretary he "cut almost $65 billion out of the five-year defense program" and that subsequent proposals would "take another $167 billion out." He highlighted, "we're recommending base closures," "we're
talking about force structure cuts" and "we've got a military construction freeze".

 

[a_unique_person]

What the sam hell are you talking about? I'm attacking the asinine assumption that the U.N. cares about human rights. Such a notion is belied by the fact that they put Syria on the human rights panel.

Do you have something intelligent to say or are you incapable of anything remotely representative of reason or logic?

Your argument is fallacious.

How do you get someone to learn about being a part of the community. By isolating them, or bringing them in. Syria is by no means the worst of human rights defenders. It is a totalitarian regime, no argument, but it is not just a bunch of murderous thugs. I know of no massacres on the scale, of, for example, Saddam. It is secular, and not run by bunch of fanatic mullahs.

Some of the biggest advances in the world were done by breaking the walls down. Eg, Nixon to China. The fruits of that event are still being experienced. He didn't smash it, but it is slowly turning into a democratic state. Chinese now experience a better standard of living than they did under Mao.

 

[shemp]

You DIDN'T even bother to read your own post?????

Shemp, do yourself a favor, in the future read ALL of the quote before posting. I hate to hold your hand but ok.

From your post.

Do you see the bolded words? Note what they say. "United Nations" AKA the U.N.

Considering you didn't even read your post I would be careful about what you call asinine.

DEAR MORON:

I read my posts. Did you read my entire post? The point of the post is that A BUNCH OF F*CKING BASTARDS WHO WERE BACKED BY REAGAN KIDNAPPED 32 WOMEN AND THREW THEM OUT OF A F*CKING HELICOPTER, AND REAGAN'S PUPPET NEGROPONTE BACKED THEM UP AND COULDN'T ADMIT THE TRUTH! THE F*CKING POINT IS ALSO THAT REAGAN WAS A SCUMBAG AND A SON OF A WHORE WHO VIOLATED ALL STANDARDS OF DECENCY AND HUMANITY TO GET TO WHATEVER ENDS HE DESIRED! Whether or not the United Nations is corrupt has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!

You are truly a f*ckwad. Go back to kicking puppies and stealing purses from old women.

 

[shemp]

Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism

One of the things I love most about Reagan is that he did what he said he would do, defeat the soviets. The liberals mocked him saying his ideas were naive but he got the last laugh. He worked the Libs into a frenzy and they just couldn't wait for him to die to spit on his grave. I started out feeling sad by all of the vitriol. I'm coming around now. I get to sit back and watch the attempts to re-write history. To spew and puke as much hate as possible to soothe there addled pointy headed little minds. They just can't let go. Clinton does the same for his detractors. The right will always blame the ills of this world on Bill and the left on Ronnie.

For that they both deserve kudos.

If your love is conditional on a person doing what they say they will do, I bet you get a big f*cking hardon thinking about Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.

 

[RandFan]

DEAR MORON:

I read my posts. Did you read my entire post? The point of the post is that A BUNCH OF F*CKING BASTARDS WHO WERE BACKED BY REAGAN KIDNAPPED 32 WOMEN AND THREW THEM OUT OF A F*CKING HELICOPTER, AND REAGAN'S PUPPET NEGROPONTE BACKED THEM UP AND COULDN'T ADMIT THE TRUTH! THE F*CKING POINT IS ALSO THAT REAGAN WAS A SCUMBAG AND A SON OF A WHORE WHO VIOLATED ALL STANDARDS OF DECENCY AND HUMANITY TO GET TO WHATEVER ENDS HE DESIRED! Whether or not the United Nations is corrupt has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!

You are truly a f*ckwad. Go back to kicking puppies and stealing purses from old women.

Dear shemp,

1.) I read the ENTIRE post.

2.) Your point is NOT my point.

3.) The person who you quote claims the U.N. is a bastion of Human Rights.

4.) The U.N. put Syria on it's human rights panel.

5.) This makes me wonder, WHAT THE HELL ELSE DOES THIS PERSON LIE ABOUT???

Now, go back to sticking your head up your ass.

 

[RandFan]

If your love is conditional on a person doing what they say they will do, I bet you get a big f*cking hardon thinking about Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.

No, I'm getting a woody thinking about Reagan getting all that national attention and just how much it just pisses you off.

Let's see,

• Ted Kennedy praises Reagan.
  
• John Kerry praises Reagan.
  
• Jimmy Carter praises Reagan.
  
• Gorbachev Praises Reagan.
  
• Clinton praises Reagan.

Clinton is upset because he didn't get to speak at Reagans funeral.

 

[Kerberos]

How do you get someone to learn about being a part of the community. By isolating them, or bringing them in. Syria is by no means the worst of human rights defenders. It is a totalitarian regime, no argument, but it is not just a bunch of murderous thugs. I know of no massacres on the scale, of, for example, Saddam. It is secular, and not run by bunch of fanatic mullahs.

A large part of the reason Syria isn't run by a bunch of fanatical mullahs, is that when the mullahs (IIRC) rebelled against Asad in Hama, he levelled large parts of the city with the ground. I read about it in Thomas Friedman's book “from Beirut to Jerusalem”. I also found this website which puts the civilian death toll at 30,000-40,000 http://www.shrc.org/english/99reports/18021999.htm . It is possible that Asad isn't quite as bad as Saddam, but he's certainly no boy scout.

 

[Kerberos]

The person who you [shemp] quote claims the U.N. is a bastion of Human Rights.

Technically he/she only said that the UN was formed to protect human rights, which isn't quite the same.

Edited to add: You could say it was implied that the UN still is a bastion of human rights though.

 

[RandFan]

Tecnically he/she only said that the UN was formed to protect human rights which isn't quite the same.

Technically she said "...an organization founded to ensure that the human rights of all people receive the highest respect."

It's kind of hare to ensure anyones human rights when you put Syria on your human rights panel. I think she protests too much.

 

[RandFan]

How do you get someone to learn about being a part of the community. By isolating them, or bringing them in. Syria is by no means the worst of human rights defenders. It is a totalitarian regime, no argument, but it is not just a bunch of murderous thugs. I know of no massacres on the scale, of, for example, Saddam. It is secular, and not run by bunch of fanatic mullahs.

Some of the biggest advances in the world were done by breaking the walls down. Eg, Nixon to China. The fruits of that event are still being experienced. He didn't smash it, but it is slowly turning into a democratic state. Chinese now experience a better standard of living than they did under Mao.

Interesting idea. However Human Rights Watch has asked the U.S. to stop sending Syrian detainees back to syria because they are then tortured. United States: Stop Handing Over Detainees to Torturers

Also, it seem Syria doesn't really want to cooperate with this whole human rights stuff.

U.N.: Setback on Human Rights Votes

A growing bloc of repressive governments – including Algeria, China, Cuba, Libya, Russia, Sudan, Syria and Zimbabwe – have become progressively more aggressive in blocking or obstructing resolutions critical of any specific country. The African group voted as a bloc against action on Zimbabwe and (with the exception of Uganda) against the resolution on Sudan.

Perhaps they just need more time.

 

[a_unique_person]

A large part of the reason Syria isn't run by a bunch of fanatical mullahs, is that when the mullahs (IIRC) rebelled against Asad in Hama, he levelled large parts of the city with the ground. I read about it in Thomas Friedman's book “from Beirut to Jerusalem”. I also found this website which puts the civilian death toll at 30,000-40,000 http://www.shrc.org/english/99reports/18021999.htm . It is possible that Asad isn't quite as bad as Saddam, but he's certainly no boy scout.

I would never claim he was. I have met Xian Arab refugees from Syrian, and they felt it was time to flee their homeland. I think that the people of Syria deserve a better government than they have. Being on the human rights panel at the UN may open up a few eyes. I think you can guarantee the US won't be invading to free them from tyranny.

 

[a_unique_person]

No, I'm getting a woody thinking about Reagan getting all that national attention and just how much it just pisses you off.

Let's see,

• Ted Kennedy praises Reagan.
  
• John Kerry praises Reagan.
  
• Jimmy Carter praises Reagan.
  
• Gorbachev Praises Reagan.
  
• Clinton praises Reagan.

Clinton is upset because he didn't get to speak at Reagans funeral.

They are all professional politicians. They all say nice things about each other when they die, not matter how much they hate them. Professional courtesy.

 

[rikzilla]

DEAR MORON:

I read my posts. Did you read my entire post? The point of the post is that A BUNCH OF F*CKING BASTARDS WHO WERE BACKED BY REAGAN KIDNAPPED 32 WOMEN AND THREW THEM OUT OF A F*CKING HELICOPTER, AND REAGAN'S PUPPET NEGROPONTE BACKED THEM UP AND COULDN'T ADMIT THE TRUTH! THE F*CKING POINT IS ALSO THAT REAGAN WAS A SCUMBAG AND A SON OF A WHORE WHO VIOLATED ALL STANDARDS OF DECENCY AND HUMANITY TO GET TO WHATEVER ENDS HE DESIRED! Whether or not the United Nations is corrupt has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH IT!

You are truly a f*ckwad. Go back to kicking puppies and stealing purses from old women.

SIMI VALLEY, Calif. - They began arriving in the cold coastal fog long before dawn on Monday. Postal workers who called in sick. High school teachers playing hooky. A Los Angeles Dodgers usher with a personal card for Nancy Reagan. Retired businessmen in dark suits. A truck driver turned author in a black cowboy hat.

Together they huddled in the early morning mist, waiting for sunrise and the chance to pay their last respects to Ronald Reagan, the Great Communicator and 40th president of the United States, as he began his final, weeklong journey home after losing his decade-long battle with Alzheimer's disease on Saturday, at age 93.

Thousands of mourners, including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and TV host Merv Griffin, made the solemn pilgrimage Monday past the flag-draped coffin of the former president as he lay in repose at his hilltop presidential library overlooking southern California hills stretching to the Pacific Ocean. They blew kisses, crossed themselves, dabbed at their eyes, saluted.

Residents of the state that catapulted him into public office as governor in 1966 were the first to pay their respects. Thousands waited hours for a chance to pass by the former president's flag-draped coffin for less than a minute. It lay on a black velvet-shrouded catafalque in the lobby of the library.

As Reagan's casket was carried to the hearse for its trip to the presidential library, several mourners began softly singing "God Bless America."

The 40-mile route was lined with scores of well-wishers on sidewalks, street corners and virtually every freeway overpass.

Health care workers in surgical scrubs stood along the streets. Santa Monica firefighters saluted as the hearse passed by. In one dramatic gesture, Los Angeles fire fighters suspended a giant American flag between two ladder trucks parked on a prominent overpass.

Nancy Reagan peered out the window of her black limousine, waving to the assembled crowd.

Soon, dozens of buses began arriving with hundreds of mourners, some of whom had traveled hundreds of miles and camped out overnight for the chance to say farewell to Reagan.

"I'm a Democrat, but I've always admired his sense of humor and the way he treated people," said Orvella Phillips, a 54-year-old West Covina, Calif., church youth counselor. She had slept in her truck so she could be among the first to pay last respects to Reagan. "He talked at your level and he won your heart over that way."

President Reagan was not perfect, but he was the best President this country has had in recent memory. But don't take my word for it. Read the link that the above quotes come from here There are dozens of other articles just like it. Witness the disconnect between your biased opinions and the rest of this country. How does it feel Shemp, to be so isolated in your bitter hatred of a man you've never even met?

Tonight my daughter and I will be among those filing through the Capitol rotunda to pay our respects to the man. I am proud that someday the same flag which covers his coffin will also cover mine.

The United States is not a good country, nor is it a bad country...it's just that it's my country. You can choose your country of origin no more than you can choose the family you were born into. You don't have to agree with every action your nation or family members make...but you do have to love them anyway. I appreciate the chance that the Reagan state funeral will give me to tie my family into an event of historical signifigance, and help further instill in them a sense of love and awe for America.

I don't know what happened to you that you should be so immature and angry Shemp, but whatever it is, you need to let it go.

-z

 

[shemp]

Dear shemp,

1.) I read the ENTIRE post.

2.) Your point is NOT my point.

3.) The person who you quote claims the U.N. is a bastion of Human Rights.

4.) The U.N. put Syria on it's human rights panel.

5.) This makes me wonder, WHAT THE HELL ELSE DOES THIS PERSON LIE ABOUT???

Now, go back to sticking your head up your ass.

You're point is nothing but a diversion from the real issue.

My Fact: 32 women were kidnapped and thrown out of a helicopter by Reagan's lackeys.

Your Opinion: The U.N. is morally corrupt.

I think facts trump opinions around here, but if that has changed, please let us all know.