Ronald Reagan's Mark on History

Such terrible things he did yet not one credible source.
/Stop

 

The stupidity is yours. You write that garbage because of your complete ignorance of the facts. It is a FACT that the fascist government of Guatemala killed all those Ixil peoples there:

https://www.hmh.org/la_Genocide_Guatemala.shtml


And it was done with the help of your fascist genocidal hero Reagan as illustrated above.


Next time you discuss a subject be sure to inform yourself of the FACTS, not the right wing politically correct nonsense that you believe in.

 

As anyone who has even the slightest knowledge of the FACTS knows, the Holocaust Museum acknowledges Reagan's actions as racist Hitlerian genocide.

 

You've clearly taken off from the planet.

 

PN is a Holocaust denier.

That should make the right wingers on this forum angry at him since they have previously posted numerous threads on holocaust denial.

 

I asked a moderator to delete the content I posted because it was deterring web traffic from my blog. Besides, the information is like the Arc of the Covenant for unworthy eyes, as evidenced by PatriotNews' subsequent behavior:

"Keep your eyes shut!" - Indiana Jones



​

 

Interesting. Did you have anything to do with Tipped Kettle?

 

No. I did intel collection & that was before I was assigned there.

 

What desk?

 

Then how could you not know who America's Watch is? They are part of Human Rights Watch.

 

I think it probably would have been a good start if someone had told you there were no gorillas in Central America.

 

^ that post is further proof that the right wingers here are holocaust deniers

 

you are quite mistaken as President Carter STRENUOUSLY fought against death squads unlike the Republicans who helped finance them

as to when they started go back further into the 1950s under Eisenhower, not to Carter's time in office

 

Remember that Human Rights Watch report I showed about US Embassy officials collaborating with a death squad abduction of 2 law students in 1980? That was on Carter's beat. Reagan didn't enter the White House until January 1981.

 

Look... I already told you I'm not getting into the weeds on this with you. If you've got an argument to be made, then make it. I don't mind if you refer to links that back up your arguments - that way I can click on them or not. But to just post a bunch of documents without any identification as to their source or their context is just a waste of both your time and mine.

If you can't make your case based on your own words and your own arguments, then it doesn't make any difference how correct or incorrect you might be, nobody is going to be listening to you.

 

The first one is a prepared statement by Americas Watch in a Congressional hearing. The last is the report by the Arms Control and Foreign Policy Caucus, referred to in the New York Times article. It pains me that I have to let it be known that Americas Watch is part of Human Rights Watch. It's even sadder that I have to argue such basic facts about the role of US advisers in the war. Really, what did you think they were doing over there? They trained soldiers and then sucked each other's dick's after they finished? One of the reasons for such widespread ignorance on this subject and others is that too many people don't know where to look. Google is not the only tool. Read the scholarly literature. Check the National Security Archive.

 

You know, I think I agree with you on a lot of what you're saying... at least I think I do... you're not presenting your case very well, so it's hard for me to tell. I know the US has made plenty of bad decisions over the years where it comes to Latin America. Looking at it from my perspective, I can see where the Reagan Administration did some pretty unsavory things and got into bed with some real scumbags. It's one thing to criticize, though... it's another thing entirely to come up with viable alternatives. Who exactly do you figure the US should have been supporting? What shape should that support have taken?

 

right wing death squads continued their reign of terror despite Carter's great efforts - by contrast Reagan supported their crimes

 

That's because my hands are tied. I can't post any of the good stuff from my blog because it will deter web traffic.

Oh you're still under the false impression that it was "a war against communism". Go to my blog and on page 1, look for the heading entitled "Soviet Master Plan of Conquest? A Lot of Show, but No Tell, TIME, 03/22/82". There's 2 of them. Then you can rethink your tacit assumptions.

His "best efforts" included sending operations advisers, gunships, and small arms. U.S. advisers even trained security forces in "crowd control". *Cringe*

 

That shouldn't be a problem... I wasn't going to go there anyway.

 

Sorry to pop anyone's balloon here, but Ronald Reagan was an actor and just a puppet of the bankers like every president of the US has been the last century.
(except for JFK that is, and we all have seen what happens to a president who doesn't obey the orders he gets)

 

And we're off to conspiracy land....

So what exactly was so different about the Kennedy Administration that distinguished it's banking policies from everyone else?

 

So instead of repeating opinion and assertions when will you get around to providing credible evidence?

 

Wow... all of that and Noam Chomsky too.

I think I'd be remiss if I didn't point out that there would have been no fighting in Vietnam whatsoever if the North hadn't invaded the South. I think that's an Unpleasant Truth that needs to be realized from time to time too.

 

What is not credible? Point it out please.