-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 99-02-14 10:28:22 EST, Teo1000 writes:
<< China is
sinister and evil (as a nation, not speaking about people here) all they do
is
contrary to basic human rights etc. That is why I don't like any dealings
with them, MFN, sale of technology, etc. I'd rather have them at a safe
distance, but then they are in the mesh of international entanglements and
cannot be divorced from it, so is the issue one of keeping your enemies
closer
than your friends in order to keep an eye on them? >>
When the issue of China comes up, I am more easily swayed into thinking
there's really no difference between Dems and Repubs at all. I recall when
the issue of MFN status came up in either the Reagan or Bush years, many Dems
made eloquent arguments against it, mostly based on human rights issues,
specifically the Tiennaman Square (sp?) massacre. I was most definitely
opposed to MFN status.
When Clinton pushed to grant it again, I didn't watch Congress closely to
see who was on what side of the issue, but was equally opposed myself. I
recall headlines where Republicans were screaming "human rights, Tiennaman
Square" which, of course, was contradictory.
I don't think our politicians (most of them) even try to pretend America
gives a damn about human rights throughout the world anymore. It's all about
business interests and the economy. As for China, for all I know, it's about
keeping the opium-trading business healthy.
It's important to note, as I haven't seen it mentioned here yet, that
Clinton continued a policy of supplying missile technology to China. It was
begun in the Reagan years and continued in the Bush admin. I don't think
Clinton is the "second-coming" or the "antichrist" and find generalizations
like that insulting. His foreign policy makes him look like a Bush clone, and
makes a strong argument for the assertion that all our Presidents are
controlled by the same forces.
Reminds me of LBJ. He made great strides with civil rights and aid to
the poor, but his Viet Nam initiatives were abhorrent. L. Fletcher Prouty, in
his book, "Secret Team," makes a strong case for Johnson being manipulated by
his intelligence/military advisors. Perhaps all Presidents have been since
Truman. There is no doubt in my mind that the "permanent" employees on the
Hill and in the Pentagon pull the biggest strings.
Samantha
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
