Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Reagan: So, You Thought You Knew Him Huh?  
User currently offlineBN747 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5613 posts, RR: 51
Posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1201 times:

On March 1983, on a live broadcast on Voice of America, Reagan spoke on National Security, in doing so he painted Central America as 'a dire, imminent threat to America and it's people when he unveild his Startegic Defensive Initiative, aka Star Wars. At the same time a local General (backed by Reagan's nmilitary advisors) in El Salvador, Gen. Efrain Rios Montt (who shared Reagan's view of his own people) embarked on one of the most murderous campaigns ever... against 100s of communities, killing thousands of indigenous peoples and after approx 2 billion in US dollars went on to arrest, torture, maim and kill tens of thousands of civilians in the name od crushing a 'small insurgency' with US blessings... and getting away with it ..scott free! Actor Kris Krisstoferson when down to see the insurgency himself.. there was none... and when he returned he persona non-grata.. a lot like how the media has tarnish actor Danny Glover for calling Dubya's current scam..exactly what it is. A scam! Of course Reagan cloaked in a mission to stop the reds and Cubans from attempting to bring communism to America's doorstep.

In nearby, Reagan's 'Marxist' Nicaragua, the 2nd poorest country in the western hemisphere, the rightwing army (led by former officers of the Somoza dictatorship - funded by Reagan-- did equally damage, while Reagan dubbed them ' the founding fathers' of that nation.. that also threaten America's 'security' (freedom).

Also in 1983.. he did actually help to preserve Social Security.

Reagan went on to support James Watt's 'contructive engagement with Apartheid in South Africa policy.

"Tree cause more pollution than cars."

"ketchup is a vegetable."

"Facts are stupid things"

USIA's black list of liberal speakers.

Attacks on OHSA and work place safety.

239 troops die in Beirut and he invades Grenada to stop more Soviet/Cuban communist expansion.. a nation the size of Disneyland.

Silence on AIDS.

His friend Micheal Deaver's conviction for influence peddling.

His friend Lyn Nofzinger's conviction for influence peddling.

Caspar Weinberger's 5 count indictment.

200 officials accused of wrongdoing.

IA / LIRA), Italy">CIA Chief William Casey, lying about Iran-Contra - certain to be convicted.. but developed SUDDEN brain cancer and died within a week!

Elliot Abrams, lying about Iran-Contra - convicted and pardoned by Bush I and now back with US gov't and you're paying hsi salary again.

The MX missile nonsense.

Abolish the cabinent position of Education Department.

The Bitburg funeral laying wreaths at the tombs of the Nazi/SS. Reagan had said he earlier visited a former concentration camp.. but it proved to be a lie.

Attempting to seat Robert Bork on the US Sumpreme Court... when Archibald Cox refused to resign and demanded Nixon's tapes... Bork was as all to happy to step up the ladder and dismiss Cox and cut Nixon some slack.

It was Reagan who gave nutcases Like Jerry Falwell, Pat Roberston and the Moral Majority national notoriety and legitimacy.

His two biggest political promises -to break up big Government and use military power to bring freedom - were empty bluster. It ended up tripling the national debt, doubling the deficits he left the government 30% bigger than it was when he found it.

He ignored any notion of a balanced budget.

"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall"... it was Gorbachev who took on all the risk in glasnost and perestroika. It was Gorby who was sent to Siberia long before Reagan could belt out those words. What risk did Reagan take? None.

It was what the eastern europeans had seen transpiring in Moscow that inspired them that freedom was in reach.. not the 'day late, dollar short' rhetoric of Reagan.

Cheap angry campaign rhetoric will always hook in the angry white men... it has never failed.. esp. those in the working class. The Gipper made the class warfare respectable. Usually, it was found on the nasty scowling faces of the likes of George Wallace,Barry Goldwater and Richard Nixon. Reagan managed to put a charming smile on the very same issues and therefore making it an acceptable position to take -- a smiling face on the ugliest social positions one could have.

Reagan voted for FDR 4 times. He was very grateful for how FDR's New deal social programs had saved his family from the misery of the 1930s. Aftre hsi career tanked he was reduced to being an emcee in Las Vegas. He changed course in the prosperous 1950s -- which were very properous for him, as head of the Screen Actors Guild as he fingered and snitched on fellow hollywood types who he said had communist ties.. leading to their being black listed. He also gave MCA (Universal) a blanket waiver which basicall gave MCA control of all actors on televison. He became then head Lew Wasserman's 1st miliion dollar client and went from hosting GE Theatre to producing it! Subsequently, the Justice Department began to investigate the waiver and the sweetheart deal.. and here is where Reagan's warpath on Big Government was born.

Blacks knew they were in hot water with Reagan when he began his campaign in Neshoba County Miss. at a county fair, the same place were 3 famous white/black civil workers were murdered 16 years earlier. Reagan knew full well what he was doing. He was appealing to the lowest common denominator...scapegoating, hatred.. if you want a leg up.. who do you step one? The most defenseless, weakest and most downtrodden people. And that the time it was blacks, the poor and the uneducated. Working class whites will buy it every time. To understand the day... blacks in 1970 had just had 4-5 years since their existence to almost enjoy being a fully free american. Free to go any hotel, restaurant, service station and not fear rejection, being spat upon, jeered, beaten or murdered. But before that, Reagan signed and campaigned for Barry Goldwater in 1964, Reagan was staunchly against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 [ which had abolished segregation in public facilities] and he shared much of Goldwater's hateful and divisive politics (the same politics got Geo. Bush Sr. his 1st political office the same year).

The Gipper was bright enough and the 1st to marry politics and entertainment.. and it worked like a charm along with race politics in California (as civil rights strife was breaking out in Watts and Oakland) and his threat to bring back the death penaly (after Gov. Brown had ended it.. and Reagan wasted no time.. he gassed Aaron Mitchell as soon as he got in) to establish credibilty.. and that would be his last.. as he could not stomach it again. Reagan blasted Gov. Brown for signing legislation that would outlaw housing racial discrimination in California... thus the 'law and order' one liners that Nixon would also employ. he became the master demagogue of divisiveness.

He appointed LESS minorities to all positions (cabinet and below) than any of his predecessors. The one black man he did appoint, Samuel Pierce (HUD).. Reagan once asked at a cabinet meeting.. 'who was the black fella' seated at the table.

When radical students and Berkeley residents indulged in revoluntionary overkill.. Reagan responded with "If there has to be a bloodbath now, let's get it over with"

Reagan's endless telling and retelling of welfare queens (aimed at women), Aids as a punishment from god, all added to his seemingly non-existant malicious streak. A 61 year-old WWII vet (awarded Bronze Star) had frozed to death in the Federal Park across the street from Reagan's White House. The number of homeless exploded under his federal budget cuts and the Gipper could careless.. not since the Civil War or the Great Depression were the homeless numbers so high.

Race division wasn't his talent at being an ace. Class divison was also a master stroke of the Gipper. Never duing any admistration have the rich gotten so rich and the poor so poor.. so fast. Huge tax cuts (shrinking government) and outrageous military spending (not caring about or scrutinizing the cost of items submitted to the government for invoicing.. they just said give me the bill...and here's the check!) The share of the nation's wealth controlled by the richest people increased from 1% to 13% under the Gipper.

Yes he was skillful politician.. skillful at sticking into those who had no clue what he was doing. A great communicator to those who 'felt good' about what he was saying.. but never having the sense to look into what he was saying... and what he was actually doing. And what he couldn't do.. he had someone else execute for him so he could pose and smile for the camera.

I have not begun to go into what occured and how much damage was done as a result of the HUD Scandal, the Iran-Contra(diction) or the disasterous savings and Loan scandal which we are all still paying for.

For many, just buying what you see on television is good enough.. and that's okay. But if you really give a damn about truth and history.. go seek it for yourself. Read the writings of those who admired the man and read the writings of those who do not and judge for yourself.

But from what I saw of this of this man and what occured while he was in power.. he was very much a hero to those who just 'need to reassured and told that everything is good, we are good and they are 'bad'. These are the type of people that do need someone to follow now and for the rest of thier lives. And in somecases.. they will latch onto the 1st thing that looks good.

A hero is a brave man/woman who goes against all odds, against the firm will of many.. to say and do what's right for the greater good of all people regardless of how unpopular his actions might be. Reagan never did this over a single issue.

Ronald Reagan was no hero, was not a brave man nor was he great president to ALL the People. To some he may have been, but to many other americans and citizens of the world.. he was not even close.

He was a bad actor, a bad president and those who benefitted from him in power used televison this week to re-invent his legacy and present it as fact in the minds of many who don't have a clue.


BN747










"Home of the Brave, made by the Slaves..Land of the Free, if you look like me.." T. Jefferson
18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29791 posts, RR: 58
Reply 1, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1188 times:

Nice hate thread BN747.

I am surprised you left out his testimony before the House Unamerican Activites commitee.

 Yeah sure



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1150 times:

Hahaha...some of those things are good things, and some didn't go far enough (too bad the Democratic Congress wouldn't let him abolish the Dept of Education, period). Others are fabricated media lies (like the homeless "problem") and events that only a far left-winger would dislike.

But BN747 is a far left-winger, so...


User currently offlineCopaair737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1098 times:

BN747- you hit the nail on the head this time. Reagan wasn't a hero, he was a crackpot. I agree with you 200% on this one. People anymore are just sheep, pawns if you will, of the media. I am growing sick of it too.

Once again, nice post.

-Copa


User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 26
Reply 4, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1078 times:


Great to see at least some people really know Reagan’s FULL biography, specially regarding his role in the lives of many Central American people, when democratically elected governments were overthrown with either direct or indirect help of Ronnie.

It is frightfull to see how many US citizens are either completely unaware of ‘these little facts’, or, worse still, still believe everything is legitimate when fighting ‘evil communism’. Since the late 1970’, some 200,000 (that’s right, two hundred thousand) people in Central America have been killed by US backed Military Dictators. Many of these dictators received all kinds of support from the CIA to overthrow democratically elected Presidents. They were like Saddam Hussein but then on the American continent and with US support.

Some months after the start of the last Gulf War, I read a very interesting article by a Central American journalist (whose name I have forgotten). Basically, he expressed his surprise about the differences in how 2 enormous disasters had been covered and responded to by the US. He said that although 9/11 of course had shocked Central American countries, many o its people saw the similarities between what the people of New York and Washington experienced on 9/11 and what many people from Nicaragua and El Salvador experienced decades earlier. He furthermore pointed out how many of these people feel frustrated and hopeless when they see the general US outrage over 9/11 and the (retaliatory) military actions it has taken since, taking into account that not too long ago, these people from Nicaragua and El Salvador were direct victims of US State Sponsored Terrorism. When the US finally decided to attack Iraq “to remove a brutal dictator”, I do not believe the Bush Administration could count on much support from these regions. In fact, a (new) democratic Chile and even Mexico did not support the US at the UNSC.

Ronald Reagan was responsible for a dramatic US foreign policy change in Central American. Whatever was the reason for these change, they had dramatic effects on thousands of people and thousands of people were killed by US backed and sponsored dictators. And please, let’s not forget that during Ronnie’s watch, the US, at the UN Security Council, vetoed such important resolutions as condemning Apartheid in South Africa (1981), a resolution calling for international action to eliminate Apartheid (1984), a resolution calling for economic and military sanctions against South Africa (1986) and a resolution for the Prevention of International Terrorism (1987).

I do not mind biographies on important people, but please, let’s get all the facts and not just the ones favourable. Not too long ago, Colin Powell, when asked in an interview, admitted that US Foreign Policy probably had been a misstake regarding South America and its people decades ago. I have to admit it was the first time a heard a Republican say anything like that. If the US really wants to get out of its ‘isolation’ in the world, it should start admitting to those less favourable parts of its ‘national biography’. As long as it is unable to admit it actively supported ‘Brutal Dictators’ such as Augusto Pinochet decades ago, the further it will fall in a pit of hypocrisy everytime it asks for the removal of ‘a brutal dictator who oppresses his own people’. In this regard, it is shocking to see that Franklin Roosevelt’s famous words on Dictator Somoza (“He may be a son of a bitch, but he’s our son of a bith”) are still applicable decades later.




Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineBoingGoingGone From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1066 times:

I'm sure his rant can be found here:

http://www.moveon.org/front/

Sounds just like the bitter old man Algore.


User currently offlineScottysAir From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1038 times:

These are very longest stories about Ronald Reagan and I did never knew him before either and when I was very little boy. I never met him before either. Maybe I can meet some of those president of United States with Clinton or Bush.

User currently offlineSantosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1028 times:

Well, Ronald Reagan is at rest now. The fanfare is over. The truly breathtaking ceremonies have concluded.

It is a good time as any to delve deeper into his presidency, as BN747 sought to do. I'm disheartened by the hysterical response of some of my younger colleagues that seek to portray BN as just another liberal dipsh*t without bothering to address the content of his post.

Some people just don't like doing heavy mental lifting. They'd just rather focus on the glittering generalities thrown out by the media than on reality and dismiss anyone who dares bring up stuff that's just under the surface.

As someone who reached voting age during Reagan's second term, I can say that a number of things he did stand out in my mind as disturbing and totally wrong-headed.

  • He coddled the aparheid regime of South Africa without shame. He sold them military equipment under the quise of "law enforcement supplies." When a reporter suggested to then White House Chief of Staff Donald Regan that the United States impose sanctions on South Africa, his response was "Are the women of America ready to give up their jewelry?"


  • He paid tribute to Nazi soldiers and officers buried at Bitburg, even after receving a personal appeal not to do so from Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel. His handlers were so fixated on not caving in as a sign of weakness that they totally lost sight of how unfortunate his decision was. If you want a two and a half minute crash course on the story I recommend The Ramones' "Bonzo Goes to Bitburg."


  • He continued the sad U.S. tradition of supporting brutal dictatorships while spouting off about freedom. When he saw that the Sandinistas had overthrown Washington darling Anastasio Somoza in Nicaragua, he got some of Somoza's buddies together and created the Contras (arguably, an act of terrorism) to "destabilize" the country. The CIA mined Nicaraguan harbors and published a notorious "murder manual" for the Contras that advocated the "selective use of violence to neutralize public officials." This following the passage of an amendment barring US funding for groups engaging in political assassination. Guatemala's Efrain Rios Montt comes to mind (as BN 747 pointed out), as does Ferdinand Marcos, Augusto Pinochet, and the military juntas in Argentina and right here in Brazil.



  • "Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
    User currently offlineBoingGoingGone From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 8, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1013 times:

    With all due respect, what right does anyone of a foreign nation have to comment on what Reagan did or didn't do? He wasn't your President. He was ours. Or should we chime in on how corrupt South America has been for years?? The Ramones', you're kidding right???

    BN747 is a bit confused. Been paying too much homage to Al Gore.


    User currently offlineAirplay From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 9, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1010 times:

    With all due respect, what right does anyone of a foreign nation have to comment on what Reagan did or didn't do?

    Every right in the world. What obligation are you under to agree with someone's opinion or comments? None.

    So suck it up BoingGoingGone.....


    User currently offlineBoingGoingGone From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 10, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1008 times:

    Someone who doesn't live here, has an outside view from a corrupt nation and somehow manages to become an authority on Reagan. Kind of like an Argentinean talking about the holocaust that supposedly never happened.

    User currently offlineUshermittwoch From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 2964 posts, RR: 16
    Reply 11, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1004 times:

    Somebody has a strange obsession with everything related to the Third Reich.

    Anyway, people whom have suffered from Ronnie's politics have every right to complain or at least state their true nature. Sorry that fuzzy La-La Land doesn't exist.



    Where have all the tri-jets gone...
    User currently offlineBoingGoingGone From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 12, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1006 times:

    Maybe I'm what Hillary and Bill refer to as an F-ing Jew B-stard and I know my history.

    User currently offlineRT514 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 13, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 994 times:

    With all due respect, what right does anyone of a foreign nation have to comment on what Reagan did or didn't do?...
    Someone who doesn't live here, has an outside view from a corrupt nation and somehow manages to become an authority on Reagan


    Oh, come on now. That's just ridiculous. Based on your reasoning, no American should be commenting on France and Jacques Chirac because they don't live there... and some French may say the USA is a corrupt nation, anyway!

    Without commenting on whether I thought Reagan was great or awful, commenting on global politics is fair game.

    By the way, I lived in the USA for the majority of Clinton's term in office. I guess I'll remember that according to you, I will be entitled to comment on him should future opportunity arise.


    User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 14, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 968 times:

    BN747 -

    You forgot about Ed Meese, perhaps the most disgraceful example of an attorney general EVER in the annals of American History.


    User currently offlineSantosdumont From Brazil, joined Dec 2003, 1201 posts, RR: 4
    Reply 15, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 968 times:

    BoingGoingGone wrote:

    With all due respect, what right does anyone of (sic) a foreign nation have to comment on what Reagan did or didn't do? He wasn't your President. He was ours. Or should we chime in on how corrupt South America has been for years?? The Ramones' (sic), you're kidding right???

    Let me paraphrase Ronald Reagan in my reply to you, Boing. I am paying for this bandwidth. Where I live doesn't matter. I guess I didn't get the memo on freedom of speech on the internet applying only to people inside the United States. Until I do, I'll keep saying my piece.

    My US colleagues feel quite free to voice their opinions on Chirac, Blair, etc. It does work both ways, doesn't it?

    Be careful with that "ours" vs. "yours" crap. As head of the most powerful nation on earth, Reagan's policies inevitably affected people beyond US shores.

    I'd be happy to tell you about Latin America's corruption problems. In fact, let's make it interesting. Why don't you tell me about one specific corruption scandal that is brewing in the region right now. I can think of a sh*tload. But how well do you know your neighbors to the south?

    So I take it you don't like the Ramones. That's your prerogative. Great song, though. Notice I cited the song as a two-and-a-half minute crash course on Bitburg. If you have more time, as I suspect you do, feel free to research the issue more in depth.

    Oh, hope you can understand my English.



    "Pursuit Of Truth No Matter Where It Lies" -- Metallica
    User currently offlineJaysit From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
    Reply 16, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 966 times:

    "Maybe I'm what Hillary and Bill refer to as an F-ing Jew B-stard and I know my history."

    Maybe you ought to get your "fact-oids" from sources other than trashy right wing garbage internet sites before you post.


    User currently offlineHamfist From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 614 posts, RR: 3
    Reply 17, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 921 times:

    Well, look at those mistakes on the bright side...at least he owned up to some of his shortcomings and his former staff and associates are still alive to talk about it!

    User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 26
    Reply 18, posted (10 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 862 times:

    BoingGoingGone:

    With all due respect, what right does anyone of a foreign nation have to comment on what Reagan did or didn't do?

    With all due respect, BoingGoingGone, that is the most arrogant and ignorant remark I’ve read on this board for a long time. I’m gonna’ answer you with a simple question: what right did Reagan have to intervene and undermine democratically elected presidents of foreign countries killing thousands of innocent people in the process?

    He wasn't your President. He was ours.

    Look, if you don’t like foreign nationals critisizing your democratically elected President, than make sure your democratically elected Presidents don't intervene against these foreign nationals' own democratically elected Presidents, by actively supporting coups throughout the world.

    I believe Santosdumont has every right to critisize your Preisdents, specially when one takes a closer look at recently declassified documents about Brasil: “President Johnson urged taking "every step that we can" to support overthrow of Joao Goulart”. “U.S. Ambassador Lincoln Gordon recommended that measures be taken soonest to prepare for a clandestine delivery of arms of non-US origin, to be made available to Castello Branco supporters in Sao Paulo."

    So you believe your Presidents have every right to overthrow the President of Santosdumont, but he has no right whatsover to critisize your Presidents for doing so?

    Here’s a link to these recently declassified documents, in case Santosdumont would like to read them. It might be a good idea, BoingGoingGone, that you also read them. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB118/index.htm

    For more info on more shamefull interference in other Middle- and South American countries, visit http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/index.html#Latin%20America where a whole array of declassified documents give many foreign nationals more than enough reason to critisize Ronnie Reagan or any other US President.



    Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
    Top Of Page
    Forum Index

    This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

    Printer friendly format

    Similar topics:More similar topics...
    Ted Nugent: What Do You Think Of Him? posted Tue Apr 18 2006 20:03:48 by AerospaceFan
    Fifty Cent...what Do You Think Of Him? posted Mon Mar 21 2005 19:57:56 by MaverickM11
    So, Did You Ever Do It I An Airport? posted Wed Mar 2 2005 17:57:48 by Flyboy36y
    So, Have You Heard About Loveair.co.uk? posted Thu Sep 30 2004 00:55:49 by Msllsmith
    Juan Sebastian Veron - What Do You Think Of Him? posted Mon May 10 2004 15:06:04 by CHRISBA777ER
    So, Are You A Progessive Man Or A Real Man? posted Fri Apr 30 2004 23:23:21 by MD-90
    Would You Agree With Him? posted Thu Apr 4 2002 01:09:52 by David B.
    So Sane You're Insane posted Sun Oct 7 2001 16:16:56 by Matt D
    Somebody Tells You To Add Him To Your Visible List posted Sun Feb 4 2001 15:11:23 by Ryaneverest
    And Now: Signs That Tell You You're Still Young! posted Sat Sep 9 2006 00:18:20 by Aloges