[thechat] Michael Moore's message

[Martin]

aardvark wrote on 14/9/01 11:29 pm

>>>has the US trained terrorists in the past?  yes, we
>>thought they
>>>were 'freedom fighters' on too many occasions...
>>
>>That's just the doublespeak that gets sold to the
>>public.
>
>that's also the public's fault for believing it, electing those people, 

As opposed to which people who weren't prone to doing those
things. Administrations of both electable US parties have
carried out those things.

> but every time 
>we catch this happening, we do try to find ways to prevent it in the 
>future... 

I've not seen any such efforts, bar the Oliver North inconclusive
enquiry.

Generally, the US has been proud of its terrorism sponsorship:

Carter on Vietnam:
"We have no need to apologise or castigate ourselves or assume the
status of culpability. We do not owe a debt" (remember that this
was after massive defoliation and bombing of civilian targets)

Patrick Moynihan on suppressing UN condemnation of the mass
slaughter in East Timor in 75:
"The United States wished things to turn out as they did. The 
Department of State desired that the UN prove utterly ineffective
in whatever measures it undertook. This task was given to me, 
and I carried it forward with no inconsiderable success"

State Department (sorry unnamed) commentary on giving
a shooting list to the Indonesian army:
"No one cared as long as they were communists that
were being butchered"
"They probably killed a lot of people and I probably
have a lot of blood on my hands, but that's not all bad."

>>and the torture and murder of priests, nuns,
>>schoolteachers, and other civilians -- toward that end.
>>http://www.derechos.org/soa/elsal-not.html
>
>again, do we blame the nation, or people responsible for the acts?

The Nuremburg precedent is "both", particularly when the actions
stem from official policy.

>>In contrast, someone like Chomsky will express a similar
>>opinion, while being far more careful to build his case
>>into a brick wall of meticulously documented evidence
>>and logical arguments.
>
>yeah, well, that's moot here, isn't it?

So, you're really arguing with citing Michael Moore, rather than
what Moore is saying...

Cheers
Martin

_______________________________________________
email: martin at easyweb.co.uk             PGP ID: 0xA835CCCB
       martin at members.evolt.org      snailmail: 30 Shandon Place
  tel: +44 (0)774 063 9985                      Edinburgh,
  url: http://www.easyweb.co.uk                 Scotland