Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (17875)	5/18/2005 1:35:58 PM
From: Knighty Tin	Respond to of 361075

White collar crime, just a bunch of guys who were temporarily misguided. Blue collar crime, strap 'em down to the gurney and sharpen the needle.

To: American Spirit who wrote (17875)	5/18/2005 4:13:25 PM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361075

Bush Attempts to Tarnish FDR's Foreign Policy Image _______________________________________________________ by Byron Williams Published on Saturday, May 14, 2005 by InsideBayArea.com President Bush would attempt to systematically dismantle Franklin D. Roosevelt's prize domestic policy in Social Security, logic would suggest that any criticism of the former president's foreign policy is almost a given. While in Europe commemorating the 60th anniversary of V-E Day, the president publicly embraced one of the long-held historical positions of far-right conservatism — that the Yalta Agreement was the betrayal of freedom and Roosevelt is the culprit. As reported by The Associated Press, the president singled out the 1945 Yalta Agreement signed by Roosevelt, stating: "We will not repeat the mistakes of other generations, appeasing or excusing tyranny and sacrificing freedom in the vain pursuit of stability. "We have learned our lesson; no one's liberty is expendable. In the long run, our security and true stability depend on the freedom of others." The president went on to say that "the Yalta Agreement followed in the unjust tradition of Munich and the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. Once again, when powerful governments negotiated, the freedom of small nations was somehow expendable." The Yalta Agreement, signed months before Roosevelt's death, along with British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Soviet leader Josef Stalin, gave Stalin control of Eastern Europe. The president's knee-jerk historical analysis fails to consider several points. Neither Roosevelt nor Churchill were naive about the brutality of Stalin anymore than President Reagan was about Saddam Hussein when he dispatched Donald Rumsfeld to meet with the Iraqi dictator while the United States supported Hussein's war against Iran. For Roosevelt and Churchill, the alliance with Stalin was one of necessity. Moreover, Yalta was not an agreement hammered out in isolation. There had been several summits among the three, most notably Tehran in 1943. Much of what conservatives have historically regarded as betrayal was the result of negotiations in Tehran nearly two years prior. Given that Stalin had taken over much of Eastern Europe from the Germans — including Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland and eastern Germany — Yalta didn't give Stalin these countries as much as he already had them. But to compare Yalta to the Munich Pact, in particular, is the highest form of insult to the legacy of Roosevelt. In addition to V-E Day celebrations, this week also marked the 65th anniversary of Neville Chamberlain's resignation as British prime minister. He was replaced by Churchill. Chamberlain, whose name is synonymous with appeasement, will forever be remembered in the annals of history for his remarks following the Munich Pact that he made with Hitler in 1938, saying: Being wrong about Hitler in 1938 and forced to deal with Stalin in 1945 hardly makes for an apt comparison. I agree that Yalta was hardly perfect, but it was not appeasement cloaked in naivete that the president seems to suggest. Instead of attempting to revise Roosevelt's legacy for political purposes, the president may be better served to pay more attention to his own. Assuming the London Sunday Times is still considered to be a credible source, on May 1 it published a memo that transforms left-wing conspiracy theorists who hate the president into courageous Americans who recognize the stench of mendacity through the perfume of patriotic rhetoric. In a memo dated July 23, 2002, British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw acknowledged that the case for war in Iraq was "thin" as "Saddam was not threatening his neighbours and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran." The memo makes official what many have suspected. We have surpassed conjecture, leaving only denial as the last recourse standing against formidable facts. No amount of revision can change what is looking more and more as the proverbial "smoking gun." The repetitive nature of history reminds us that Carlisle was on to something in saying, "No lie can live forever." And that includes attempts to revise the legacy of one president in order save face for another. __________________ Byron Williams is an Oakland pastor and syndicated columnist. E-mail him at byron@byronspeaks.com © 2005 Inside Bay Area commondreams.org