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.

Pastimes : Don't Ask Rambi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JF Quinnelly who wrote (13246)	10/7/1998 3:12:00 AM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 71178

<<Iran/Contra arose out of Reagan's attempts to free Americans held by Iran>> On November 13, 1986 Ron looked the American people in the eye and said: "We did not-repeat, did not-trade weapons or anything else for hostages-nor will we." Isn't it generally regarded as truth, especially among conservatives, that paying in cash or kind for the release of hostages only encourages the taking of more hostages? <<and to fund the Contras to prevent the establishment of a Soviet beachhead in Central America during the Cold War>> Haven't the Soviets had a beachhead in Latin America since the late '50's? It became a security threat exactly once, which was dealt with resolutely and not repeated. Reagan's support for the Contra's was an ideological obsession, not a response to a security threat. There was no security threat. The beachhead developed because of our blind support for Batista, and expanded because of our blind support for Somoza. The blame for Nicaragua lies less with the Soviets than with the Kirkpatrick doctrine. If the leader of the free world gives you a corrupt, brutal, and incompetent dictator, where do you turn? <<certain individuals affiliated with the Contra supply who were smuggling drugs, and not the Contras as a movement.>> As the report say, "it wasn't a few people. It was a lot of people". Hardly a surprise, since the core of the Contras was the former Guardia Civil, possibly the most corrupt law enforcement agency in Latin American history. Many were dealing while they were in power, they kept it up when they were out. <<the Colombian cartels were taking advantage of the situation to use the Contra resupply as a cover>> Hardly a surprise. It is a bit more surprising that American officials cooperated with them. On the Mercury News/LA Times dispute, you might want to read the following, from the Columbia Journalism Review: cjr.org Points out flaws in both reports, and raises questions on where - if anywhere - the fraud was. Oliver North recorded in his diary that: "Honduran DC-6 which is being used for runs out of New Orleans is probably being used for drug runs into U.S." He claimed to have reported this to the DEA, the DEA mysteriously never received the report. He wasn't promoting drug runs, he was certainly turning a blind eye to them. Nothing new. Drug money has funded CIA ops in SE Asia, in Afghanistan, and in Latin America. Remember Noriega? Protection has often been extended, including direct intervention in US court cases. See DOJ reports at: usdoj.gov CIA Inspector General Frederick Hitz's revealed a special agreement that the CIA had with the Justice Department: The CIA did not have to report if its non-employee agents, paid or unpaid, were dealing drugs. The agreement obviously existed because they knew damned well that they were subsidizing and protecting drug dealers. So we pursue a vendetta against a government we happen to dislike, but which poses no security threat to us, by subsidizing and protecting an activity which created a real and enormously expensive risk. The Soviets must have been laughing their asses off. If the Clinton issue is lies, not sex, maybe we should remember the excuse Ron gave after someone pointed out the obvious untruth of the rather definitive statement quoted above: "I'm afraid that I let myself be influenced by other's recollections, not my own." In other words: "I only said what they told me to say". Clinton at least makes up his own lies. I still think lying about a blow job is less pernicious than lying about illegal arms deals and government-protected importation of illegal drugs to subsidize a bunch of thugs who were fighting only to restore their own freedom to rob and torture their countrymen. Steve