Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site cwruecmp.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!cwruecmp!decot From: decot@cwruecmp.UUCP (Dave Decot) Newsgroups: net.flame Subject: Re: What ever happened to Human Rights Message-ID: <814@cwruecmp.UUCP> Date: Sun, 27-Nov-83 03:02:06 EST Article-I.D.: cwruecmp.814 Posted: Sun Nov 27 03:02:06 1983 Date-Received: Mon, 28-Nov-83 01:28:30 EST References: <524@ihuxp.UUCP> Organization: CWRU Computer Engr. Cleveland, Ohio Lines: 118 The indented text is from Walt Pesch. The other text is mine. I apologize for the length of this article. What a great case of snooty liberalism. Let us defend the "Islands with pathetic literacy rates" (By the way, it is quite something that islands even have literacy rates.) But back to the flame. I really think it is pitiable that people can make statements like this. Last time I checked they were Human Beings, with the full right of self-choice and self-determination. They saw neighboring people that were being refused self-choice. And I also will admit that they saw these neighbors coming over with Cuban Construction workers to rebuild their government. So they made the decision that they made, for good, bad, or indifferant. It is regrettable that you have associated the insult to island nations with the opinions of all liberals. You are correct in that their residents are human beings with self-determination, but they should NOT enjoy a "right" of neighbor-determination (nor should the US, for that matter), no matter what their literacy rate. Does the US Government's forcibly "choosing" a new government for Chile promote self-determination in that country? TO A GENERAL FLAME ABOUT WHAT THIS COUNTRY SHOULD STAND FOR, WHICH FOR FORIEGN READERS CAN BE GENERALIZED TO WHAT EVERY ONE SHOULD BELIEVE IN. Let us look at the great Leaders and what they have said. Let us see what they wrote (after all, we are from a continent, and not an illiterate island.) And what they fought for. Yes, can you liberals think of that. We have fought for our freedom in the past, from the Colonial British Empire, which was based on a lot of the same principles that the modern-day Solviet Empire is based on. In the civil war we fought for the freedom of the black people. In the first World War, we fought for the democracies, in a war that was not ours. In the second World War, we fought against tyranny itself in the Nazies. In the Korean War, we fought for the defence of a country that was invaded. In all the Arab-Israeli Wars, we supported the rights of the country of Israel to survive. We have fought in the past for the freedom of many differant people, and we will fight in the future for many differant people. It is called Welcome to the Real World. And it does come down every once in a while to Bull Shit walks while the guns will talk. This is plain human nature. I CAN think of what great leaders fought for, and if what you enumerate was what they were in favor of, I find them indeed great. I believe you have oversimplified the causes of the wars that the US has fought in. Were there any "great Leaders" from any OTHER country? Well, maybe, but they are apparently not worth mentioning. The amount of fighting s/he does is not always the best way to judge a leader's greatness, either. Guns talk, but they are somewhat more abusive to their "listeners" than humans using spoken languages. They also settle arguments by eliminating participants. This only temporarily stops an argument, unless we are talking about genocide. Why aren't we fighting for human rights in El Salvador, Chile, Afghanistan, Poland, South Africa, North/South Korea, North/South Vietnam, Pakistan, East Germany, Bolivia, the Soviet Union, Iran, or Guatemala? In each of these countries (and others), hundreds of documented human rights abuses have recently and regularly happened and continue to happen with the US's aid or indifference. Here, the term "human rights abuses" is defined as in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights that every member country must sign. I will give accounts of these abuses on request. Some of them have been covered by the media, others have not. These countries must not be "differant" enough. Perhaps you would care to define that word, I'm not familiar with it. Lets look at what has been said by our great Political leaders. Lincoln with the Emancipation Proclamation. Washington and Jefferson and the other founders of our country in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. And lets expound on this for a while. We have stood as a country for the Bill of Rgihts and other Human Rights through our history. And still do. That was why I support the American Intervention in Grenada. I wish that we, as a country, stood for human rights enough to defend it everywhere, and not only those places where large sums of US dollars are invested. BECAUSE IT WAS DONE TO PREVENT BLOODY KILLING OF HUMAN BEINGS AND TO ALLOW THE PEOPLE OF GRENADA A FREE CHIOCE. I THINK THAT WE CAN ALLOW THE ILLITERATE ISLANDERS THIS OPTION. I completely agree that everyone, including persons who have not been taught to read, deserves all the rights listed in the Bill of Rights, and the UN Declaration. Our CIA has set up several governments that exercise their right to bloody killing of human beings without so much as a wrist-slap from our government. There are unclassified federal documents describing some of those. Enough flaming for I now that by now, for those that agree with me are standing proud in agreement, while the knee-jerks (if I can borrow the term) have stopped reading now, and have gone back to Pravda or whatever is currently in vogue with the liberal population, who has the same rights as all islanders, whether they be from Carribean Islands or Rhode Island. If I have correctly gathered the intended meaning of the above sentence(?), it seems that you have made a slight error. Reading Pravda has never, to my knowledge, been "in vogue with the liberal population." You can borrow terms all you like; knee-jerks are silly persons whatever their political "views". I have not stopped reading, but I am certainly not standing before my terminal saluting. I doubt that you have ever read \Pravda/, nor would you admit it if you had. Since you portray it in a somewhat negative light, you are reviewing without viewing. Most liberals do not have a habit of reading \Pravda/, anyway. I do not advocate reading it. By the way, the next time that they hold a free election in a Russian Communist country, I will vote for a Democrat, for then I will begin to believe the tripe that they try to tell us. I assume by "Russian Communist country" you mean a country with a Soviet-style system. What has that got to do with anyone's voting preference? It's best for me to vote for whoever will best represent me. When free elections including all citizens in South Africa, El Salvador, Guatemala, Pakistan, and Soviet-controlled countries are held, I shall be happier, and proud of whoever has brought it about non-violently. Free elections do not take place by forced participation. As for what you believe, you are entitled to it. Dave Decot decvax!cwruecmp!decot (Decot.Case@rand-relay)