tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post3217553771974040917..comments2023-10-17T04:51:08.765-10:00Comments on KauaiEclectic: Musings: New Day DawningJoan Conrowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00172330100788007499noreply@blogger.comBlogger71125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-90486644940682124652008-11-25T16:44:00.000-10:002008-11-25T16:44:00.000-10:00Kaua'i needs to vote on cannabis initiatives to st...Kaua'i needs to vote on cannabis initiatives to stop wasting millions of dollars on invasive Green Harvest helicopters and to uphold the medical marijuana laws in this State.<BR/>Hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S. die each year from alcohol, tobacco and prescription drugs. The historical deaths from cannabis are ZERO.<BR/>I refuse to accept a drug scheduling policy created by President Nixon that says cocaine and meth are less dangerous than cannabis and have no medicinal value. <BR/>What then, is Marinol? Marinol is synthetic T.H.C. that has been approved by the F.D.A.<BR/>Cannabis prohibition is a lie and it is the War on Citizens. Read "The Emporer Wears No Clothes" by Jack Herer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-10210401348853319592008-11-11T08:53:00.000-10:002008-11-11T08:53:00.000-10:00Anon.November 11, 2008 8:14 AMSorry couldnʻt under...Anon.November 11, 2008 8:14 AM<BR/><BR/>Sorry couldnʻt understand a damn thing you just said. <BR/>Do you have any thoughts that are not broken, that you would like to share with everyone?awolgovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839526260230337689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-19990124128713058942008-11-11T08:14:00.000-10:002008-11-11T08:14:00.000-10:00"Set up numerous sovereignty groups in order to di..."Set up numerous sovereignty groups in order to divide the movement."<BR/><BR/>Nobody set them up. They formed themselves. So the question remains, why the Reinstated Hawaiian Nation, which isn't after all anything of the sort. Nice try ducking the question btw, but your typical left with undergrad speak doesn't cut it as real arguments.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-25640737318660674172008-11-10T14:27:00.000-10:002008-11-10T14:27:00.000-10:00I am sorry, but not surprised, that the responses ...I am sorry, but not surprised, that the responses seem to have ended. The time taken to so respond is appreciated. It allowed for a number of recollections to be refreshed. So thank you, and I hope I was able to pass along some information that is of value to you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-25681431410119058012008-11-10T00:10:00.000-10:002008-11-10T00:10:00.000-10:00"Trick Diversion #13 on the Colonial Top 100:Set u...<I>"Trick Diversion #13 on the Colonial Top 100:<BR/><BR/>Set up numerous sovereignty groups in order to divide the movement."</I><BR/><BR/>Apologies for nitpicking, but that's #14.<BR/><BR/>#13 is to scare sovereignty groups into believing their national security would be in danger without the military might of their colonial masters to protect them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-13355610309063185202008-11-09T19:45:00.000-10:002008-11-09T19:45:00.000-10:00Trick Diversion #13 on the Colonial Top 100:Set up...Trick Diversion #13 on the Colonial Top 100:<BR/><BR/>Set up numerous sovereignty groups in order to divide the movement.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-41234088520916658102008-11-09T12:38:00.000-10:002008-11-09T12:38:00.000-10:00Chavez - and I am not uncritical of him, or any le...Chavez - and I am not uncritical of him, or any leader for that matter - was elected overwhelmingly by Venezuelans three times.<BR/><BR/>-- Yes and it was good to see him acknowledge the couple of electoral/constitutional amendment defeats.<BR/><BR/>The elections have been deemed fair and democratic by international observers.<BR/><BR/>-- Kinda, sorta, like Nicaragua in '84<BR/><BR/>I think the Venezuelans have indicated their preference.<BR/><BR/>-- I hope you are not suggesting the political climate is “free” there...it is about as “free” as Singapore..<BR/><BR/>US policy in Latin America has always been driven by corporate interest. It benefits capitalist accumulation in the US to keep wages low in Latin America and to keep resources flowing cheaply to the north.<BR/><BR/>-- [Certain aspects of] US policy [and/or or actions] in Latin America [have] been [influenced] by [US] corporate interests [and direct lobbying]. Over the course of several decades in a few key L.A. countries in particular, and largely ending in the 1970’s via US congressional acts, the CIA blab la bla (in short – see Dulles, Pinochet, Dole...it is a heck of a list). Conversely, save for a few key examples, such as the Panama Canal, US policy generally towards L.A. did not begin to materially benefit the region until after WWII. The bulk of the region could be described as “still developing,” and is assisted by various international governmental and non-governmental organizations.<BR/><BR/>Neo-colonialism, whereby wealthy elites in Latin America act in concert with US interests to supress wages and workers' rights,privatize natural resouces so that they benefit the big market players rather than the population, and enforce the concentration of land into the hands of the very few, is a terribly old story line in Latin America and across the global South. (See Galleano,"The Open Veins of Latin America.")<BR/><BR/>-- You might consider reviewing the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act...and the extent to which it is enforced….and similar rules in other countries, and the extent to which those countries enforce such a rule. This review, if complete, will not jive really well the “US is bad” view, but will help in part the reviewer better frame some of what you describe.<BR/><BR/>Again and again, with astounding persistence, the poor of Latin America (and elsewhere) have fought to assert their rights to land, food, shelter, medicine and control of their own resources. Again and again, with grim predictability, the US has poured in resources, troops, arms and deadly schemes to re-assert, or maintain, the neo-colonial order. (By the way, the claim that health care access improved under Pinochet in Chile is absurd. Perhaps the commenter meant it had improved under Allende, who was assasinated in the US-backed coup which installed Pinochet and ushered in a reign of terror and Chicago-school neoliberal privatization which decimated the social safety net of the general Chilean population and further concentrated the wealth into the hands of the very few.)<BR/><BR/>-- Clearly you see the US as a net (or completely) “Bad Global Actor”…a contention which I suggest does simply not hold up to objective scrutiny.<BR/><BR/>-- I notice some people REFUSE, for example, to note and/or give credit to, the high literacy rate (just to pick a program/stat) in Cuba under Castro...I always thought was weird, as well as a sign of a combination of intellectual dishonesty and/or people having a simplistic or painfully incomplete understanding of Cuba. Please note – this is not a criticism of a given person just not being “aware” of certain facts (in this case literacy in modern Cuba)...it is a criticism of an unwillingness to acknowledge when presented evidence. Buy hey…people are people...they can get emotional...they have agendas...many tend to want to see things as orderly and black and white...so such “unwillingness” (“unreasonableness,” in my view) is to be expected to an extent. Noting that some good, innovative and effective health-care programs were adopted in Chile when Pinochet was there often generates a very similar response…and some people don’t want to hear that, let alone acknowledge it (as if to do so is tantamount to OKing everything else Pinochet, rather than wonder who the internal policy people were who oversaw such programs and/or how they were organized to perhaps gleam something for modern application and/or consideration). As a side note – your chances were much better of showing that the Sandinistas were able to do some good things (and had a net positive impact)...and that the Contras were not worth “helping” (to I would have responded... ~ “ a large portion of the Contra leadership originated within the initial Sandinista movement that took power...but Ortega started to get ‘Castro power hungry’ and they left...and that large subset of the Contra movement was worth supporting).<BR/><BR/>-- The “pace” for many countries is going to be different...small El Salvador can not really well follow all of the steps taken by resource rich Peru...Nicaragua is a ways away from being able to follow the “tech” investments strategy of Costa Rica. I believe this is obvious to the casual observer. <BR/><BR/>-- The above [“rejection” paragraph] strikes me as overstating changes and policies made in L.A. over the past 10 years (and if I were a better typist...I’d describe why, country by county...as well as readily note the examples which support what seems to be your contention).<BR/><BR/>-- Good. And you will be happy to learn that the lion’s share of the world’s proven lithium reserves, such as are needed for li-ion car batteries, lay under Bolivia, Chile and Argentina. <BR/><BR/>PS - "Why I write" A review of nunya's comments were, unless written by a juvenile, showing examples of an understanding of the world that is arguably as disheartening as a US high school senior not able to find Canada on a map. Yes, nunya is a rather extreme example. But I picture a person a couple of levels up from that, yet in some ways similar. And I wonder "where do the inaccuracy come from...why the warped views?" Poisoning the minds of people with some of the "information/views" posted on this page is just as bad, just as harmful, as the "information/views" put forward by what I suspect are your ideological opponents, such as: 1) ... ~ "protestant work ethic" bla bla bla "and that explains everything about countries A,B,C" 2) Obama is a socialist 3) "trickle down economics is theoretically sound" 4) "the bell curve is largely true/accurate" 5) "too many international food programs support co-ops (aka communisim)<BR/><BR/>...not the nest examples, but you kinda get my drift. some of what i see here is about as helping as smoking in front of kids, sorry.<BR/><BR/>also and lastly,if one wanted to also better understand a large part of why L.A. (as it has been discussed a lot) tends to be corrupt...lots of payola...bribery...it was/is the basic MO...and to be expected...etc....well there are a number of dynamics of course as to why this is, and one of the more interesting ones is the historical legacy of how the Spanish (in Spain) administered their colonies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-48590981640601382752008-11-09T07:01:00.000-10:002008-11-09T07:01:00.000-10:00Chavez - and I am not uncritical of him, or any le...Chavez - and I am not uncritical of him, or any leader for that matter - was elected overwhelmingly by Venezuelans three times. <BR/><BR/>The elections have been deemed fair and democratic by international observers.<BR/><BR/>I think the Venezuelans have indicated their preference.<BR/><BR/>US policy in Latin America has always been driven by corporate interest. It benefits capitalist accumulation in the US to keep wages low in Latin America and to keep resources flowing cheaply to the north.<BR/><BR/>Neo-colonialism, whereby wealthy elites in Latin America act in concert with US interests to supress wages and workers' rights,privatize natural resouces so that they benefit the big market players rather than the population, and enforce the concentration of land into the hands of the very few, is a terribly old story line in Latin America and across the global South. (See Galleano,"The Open Veins of Latin America.")<BR/><BR/>Again and again, with astounding persistence, the poor of Latin America (and elsewhere) have fought to assert their rights to land, food, shelter, medicine and control of their own resources. Again and again, with grim predictability, the US has poured in resources, troops, arms and deadly schemes to re-assert, or maintain, the neo-colonial order. (By the way, the claim that health care access improved under Pinochet in Chile is absurd. Perhaps the commenter meant it had improved under Allende, who was assasinated in the US-backed coup which installed Pinochet and ushered in a reign of terror and Chicago-school neoliberal privatization which decimated the social safety net of the general Chilean population and further concentrated the wealth into the hands of the very few.)<BR/><BR/>These days, the ideology of the neo-colonial order is generally known as "neoliberalism." The people of Latin America have shown their rejection of this ideology consistently over the past decade in a string of overwhelming electoral victories for a different model known as Latin American "developmentalism." (See Klein, "The Shock Doctrine.")<BR/><BR/>Latin America is a region of great natural resouce wealth. I see no problem whatsoever in the people of Latin America choosing to use that wealth to care for the needs of the average person there, rather than for the global elite.Katyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09145011324294730195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-32601134057802550232008-11-08T21:41:00.000-10:002008-11-08T21:41:00.000-10:00Yea youʻre right - itʻs getting a little choppy. V...Yea youʻre right - itʻs getting a little choppy. Vague and general too, in case you havenʻt been reading what you write. Be nice, sentence structure isnʻt something you should be calling me on.<BR/><BR/>-- You are granted the traits of “nerve” and “wishful thinking” (by the way – what educational system claims you...and feel free to be as vague as you wish, truly). And sorry about all of my numerous "vauge and general" specific and on-point examples...<BR/><BR/>You see I donʻt claim to be the armchair politico expert as you do talking to minions, you missed my point: what I believe has been formulated from the relentless lies of the U.S.<BR/><BR/>-- Sadly, but as is now a pattern, you mistake casual observations and widely known material as something “expert”...and it is far from that. What you seem to believe...heck if I know, but we have seen some “gems” for sure. <BR/><BR/>Oh as a matter of fact, I liked it very much. Since you decided to be very ʻgeneralʻ on this also...he shut down U.S. corporations infiltrating the airwaves. Probably setting up for another coup.<BR/><BR/>-- I apologize for assuming you know more than you do.<BR/><BR/>You go, Chavez! Donʻt get me started on Fidel. Americanos, got their nasty fingers in everybody elseʻs business.<BR/><BR/>-- Your understanding of the world was indicated earlier. <BR/><BR/>If Americans didnʻt try to homogenize everybody elseʻs country into the likeness of Burger King and McDonalds sprawl zones so their mediocre populace could take ʻsafeʻ unfettered vacations - we might not be having these world conflicts.<BR/><BR/>-- It is little more than moderately interesting (to me anyways), but feel free to list the “conflict” zones over the last 20 years and cross reference them with where McD’s can be found. This information, such reports, can be found online. If your point was (but it does not seem to be) that many Americans end up visiting McD’s while abroad...then yes, and others have noticed this as well.<BR/><BR/>When I travel to a foreign country I like to enjoy the diversity. Itʻs to GET AWAY from America.<BR/><BR/>-- Please visit FARC and/or Mugabe.<BR/><BR/>-- Do my responses seem curt or harsh? They are pretty close to it. And they were also a reflection of the quality of your commentary. But if you are by chance under 16 (or 18), then I apologize and sincerely compliment your being aware of some of the names mentioned and having an interest in the issues noted.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-52738723068315675112008-11-08T20:49:00.000-10:002008-11-08T20:49:00.000-10:00Yea youʻre right - itʻs getting a little choppy. V...Yea youʻre right - itʻs getting a little choppy. Vague and general too, in case you havenʻt been reading what you write. Be nice, sentence structure isnʻt something you should be calling me on.<BR/><BR/>You see I donʻt claim to be the armchair politico expert as you do talking to minions, you missed my point: what I believe has been formulated from the relentless lies of the U.S.<BR/><BR/>"but did you like the part where Chavez shut down all those TV and radio stations that had a thing or two to say that was not in lockstep with his program?]]"<BR/><BR/>Oh as a matter of fact, I liked it very much. Since you decided to be very ʻgeneralʻ on this also...he shut down U.S. corporations infiltrating the airwaves. Probably setting up for another coup.<BR/><BR/>You go, Chavez! Donʻt get me started on Fidel. Americanos, got their nasty fingers in everybody elseʻs business.<BR/><BR/>If Americans didnʻt try to homogenize everybody elseʻs country into the likeness of Burger King and McDonalds sprawl zones so their mediocre populace could take ʻsafeʻ unfettered vacations - we might not be having these world conflicts.<BR/><BR/>When I travel to a foreign country I like to enjoy the diversity. Itʻs to GET AWAY from America.awolgovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839526260230337689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-44966852901483524232008-11-08T19:15:00.000-10:002008-11-08T19:15:00.000-10:00For a long time I have noticed a pattern with U.S....For a long time I have noticed a pattern with U.S. policy; whenever a leader is popular, tries to better the citizens or internalizes resources and assets...the U.S. paints the smear. [[too simplistic...too general...many, many exceptions]] Whenever we hear about treacherous regimes, old or rising up, brutal dictatorships, we discover the long time affiliation and propping up tactics by the U.S. [[id]]<BR/><BR/>The pattern is almost a gauge. And now, whenever I hear the U.S. slant on a country’s leadership, I can know in my heart, it is the opposite.<BR/>They sure trashed Mugabe because he returned his people to THEIR lands and kicked the occupiers out. [[...you have got to be kidding...want a class act? See Mandela. Want to see a guy who has been acting like a thug lately? See Mugabe]]<BR/><BR/>So whatever you say, or any U.S. propaganda says about Chavez, I have only seen eye opening deeds of good public policy from him. And what a courageous man, the only one that called Bush out for the lowly coward that he is. [[just a random item here...not really on point as my head is still spinning from the Mugabe comment – but did you like the part where Chavez shut down all those TV and radio stations that had a thing or two to say that was not in lockstep with his program?]]<BR/><BR/>All the lies that surrounded Saddam too. Unbelievable. He never gassed his own people (citizens) he executed traitors. What do they do in the U.S. for other than treason? The maximum penalties. What do they do for treason in U.S. - promote the bastard. [[are you fing kidding? That guy mowed down Kurds like it was going out of style. Only now do I understand these other comments you make. Wow. And by the way, not that mine are any work of art...but give “sentence structure” another shot...something – it was getting hard to follow that towards the end there. Thanks. ]]Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-43569081011287403192008-11-08T18:51:00.000-10:002008-11-08T18:51:00.000-10:00Anon., just because you lived in Central/South Ame...Anon., just because you lived in Central/South America doesn't mean you had an accurate grasp of what was going on with the region's political, guerilla and social movements [granted, as I hope was/is obvious, I am not claiming perfection on all things L.A...but sorry, my understanding of that region – as to some things – is pretty darn good; sorry if it conflicts with your view/understanding/recollection/eye-witness accounts...and my compliments on the link, it was nice to see that effort]. I'm assuming you live here, yet you don't seem to know much about the Hawaiian independence movement [yes I do not know a “ton” about it...but I have gleamed a thing or two...though if you are seeing misconceptions or like items on my part as to that movement, please point it/them out so I can better consider it/them, thanks]<BR/><BR/>You do seem to recognize America's real attempts to destabilize and influence the region — not for the good of the people there, but for its own self-interest. Yet for some reason that doesn't bother you. [I think I would be able to laundry list what you are referring to better than…well, I’ll just say “most” – as well as provide a valuable “context.” Yes, that is a vague response on my part. Some want or can to only see the "good," and some just the "bad"...I think it is better to see both, and I am grateful that on some things I can...or at least I'm starting too.]<BR/><BR/>Yes, historical facts should apply, so on what "facts" are you basing your dismissal of the drug-contra link? [I would no sooner try to claim with a straight face Contras never smuggled cash paying drugs than I would suggest it never occurred to the British to drug-up the Chinese with Opium. What I am saying is that the circumstances, choices, big picture, motivations, etc etc etc are not accurately encapsulated in “CIA gives out crack in Los Angeles to control bla bla bla”....which is a school of thought that is out there. That said, can a valid argument be made that the US should not have helped the Contras at all? Sure (tho it has not been made here, and nor do I, at this point, want to debate Ortega's merits...the "big picture" interests me more). So...I am dismissing the simplicity of it...and I am dismissing that idea the US is – and we’ll keep it in L.A. – doing nothing more than, and/or just largely, simply “screwing” with L.A.] <BR/><BR/>As for getting in bed with the mafia and drug runners, where does morality come in? What about the hypocrisy of that approach when we're supposedly waging a "war on drugs?" Where does that "ends justify the means" approach take a nation, except into moral bankruptcy? [Yes, the world is complex...and yes I have no problem with asking for mafia help to stop NY harbor sabotage during WWII or help retaking Sicily...and yes I hope US agents are willing to work with whoever they need to - including a drug smugglers - in pursuit of plutonium or a high level terrorist operative. Oh and I just thought of a Hawaii/Kauai specific "moral bankruptcy" topic...so many steps are taken to avoid, and many concerns are expressed as to, "drugs"...yet the attitude towards cannabis use is quite lax...is there any conflict there? See a bit of a paradox? I am not claiming this is a great example, it is not, and of course cannabis is a far cry from methamphetamine...still...ah, anyways - thoughts welcome. thanks]Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-1884887447202560202008-11-08T18:48:00.000-10:002008-11-08T18:48:00.000-10:00For a long time I have noticed a pattern with U.S....For a long time I have noticed a pattern with U.S. policy; whenever a leader is popular, tries to better the citizens or internalizes resources and assets...the U.S. paints the smear. Whenever we hear about treacherous regimes, old or rising up, brutal dictatorships, we discover the long time affiliation and propping up tactics by the U.S.<BR/><BR/>The pattern is almost a gauge. And now, whenever I hear the U.S. slant on a countryʻs leadership, I can know in my heart, it is the opposite.<BR/>They sure trashed Mugabe because he returned his people to THEIR lands and kicked the occupiers out. <BR/><BR/>So whatever you say, or any U.S. propaganda says about Chavez, I have only seen eye opening deeds of good public policy from him. And what a courageous man, the only one that called Bush out for the lowly coward that he is.<BR/><BR/>All the lies that surrounded Saddam too. Unbelievable. He never gassed his own people (citizens) he executed traitors. What do they do in the U.S. for other than treason? The maximum penalties. What do they do for treason in U.S. - promote the bastard.awolgovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839526260230337689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-42491580732911666732008-11-08T18:02:00.000-10:002008-11-08T18:02:00.000-10:00Actually no, it was not “your point”...it was “my ...Actually no, it was not “your point”...it was “my point” (or my helping you make a point...or my giving some basis as to what you might have been possibly thinking...or my charitably providing you with “a/the retort” which seemed to be missing from your post).<BR/><BR/>Now, the next “truthful” response is that increasingly in the years prior to, and after, the USSR went by-bye...many portions of Latin America no longer needed as much US AID as was being received during the Cold War 0or such was the view at least). By 1990, for example, places like Brazil, Costa Rica, and Argentina were making significant progress on their own...and, thankfully and understandably, many other countries started to give more aid to Latin America (like the re-built Germany, and much more recently, China). Anyways, “just fighting Russians” logic does not completely carry the day...NGO activity, percentage of GNP/GDP given as foreign aid, and genuine goodwill and humanitarian efforts (and more things I would imagine) factor into it. The US still does nice things there.<BR/><BR/>Did the US (finally via Sen. Lugar, among many others) pressure the South African white guys to stop/ease up/change the very truly classic oppression of the Black population there? Yes. Was that US pressure very late in coming? Yes. Did the US know it had a heck of a lot of influence on this? Yes. Was this in the best economic interests of the US...was there really a “payoff” to it? No. Should the US get some degree of credit for this (as well as scolding for being overdue)? Yes. Did the US do more for Blacks in S.A. relative to the ANC or Madela? Heck no...those fellows did the hard struggle, not the US. <BR/><BR/>I’ll stick with another Africa example – recent increased US funding of fighting the AIDS problem there. This one is more grey. Other than humanitarian dividends...does the US get much out of this? No. Did Bush put that funding forward for humanitarian reasons? Who knows...I suspect some, sure, but it also smells like political grandstanding. Were other countries way ahead of the US in helping Africans with AIDs? Yep. <BR/><BR/>I will admit I hesitate to give examples that (at a minimum) cause another person to pause in their “assertions” because often you get a “well that is just one example/exception to my belief/impression/interpretation/world view...it still stands” response. Ok so then what? More examples? 5? 25? How many examples need be given? I am not interested in playing that game. <BR/><BR/>Chavez? He is like a President Peru used to have...he really liked (likes) being President, and he is a “home grown” guy. Plenty of middle class people left there prior to his arrival, and he has certainly given many more cause to leave. Do I feel bad for Exxon? Yes and no. It sucks to have assets nationalized or get a threat like that (please see also Peru) and it sends out bad signals...on the other hand, Exxon, BP, etc...those are big boys, I am not worried about them (they are not the underdog in that one...in Russia yes, in Ven. they are not). Is Chavez a renegade? Yes? Does most of the world not like him? Yes. Does he give oil money to the poor? Yes (see "re-election). Does he suppress “human rights” there? Yes. Would the US/Bush have you believe he lines people up and kills them? Yes. Does Chavez do that? No. Has the US been friends with guys, in Africa (again, for example), who line up people and shoot them? Yes. Did the US make a half-assed attempt to help overthrow him? Yes. Would Ven. be better off with another President? Yes (many of those L.A. Presidents are pretty respectable). Do I hope Chaves is using more oil money (more than I and others realize; and I don’t pretend to follow this much) to do basic reinvestment in that country so it has a better future? I sure hope so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-64425731323287990912008-11-08T17:15:00.000-10:002008-11-08T17:15:00.000-10:00Anon., just because you lived in Central/South Ame...Anon., just because you lived in Central/South America doesn't mean you had an accurate grasp of what was going on with the region's political, guerilla and social movements. I'm assuming you live here, yet you don't seem to know much about the Hawaiian independence movement.<BR/><BR/>You do seem to recognize America's real attempts to destabilize and influence the region — not for the good of the people there, but for its own self-interest. Yet for some reason that doesn't bother you.<BR/><BR/>Yes, historical facts should apply, so on what "facts" are you basing your dismissal of the drug-contra link?<BR/><BR/>As for getting in bed with the mafia and drug runners, where does morality come in? What about the hypocrisy of that approach when we're supposedly waging a "war on drugs?" Where does that "ends justify the means" approach take a nation, except into moral bankruptcy?Joan Conrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00172330100788007499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-12937109521056530822008-11-08T16:53:00.000-10:002008-11-08T16:53:00.000-10:00"“Most US foreign policy directed towards Latin Am..."<BR/>“Most US foreign policy directed towards Latin America, including the billions in humanitarian assistance via A.I.D., was motivated by and calibrated to “combat” a sometimes real and sometimes only perceived “threat” from the former Soviet Union – that US “assistance” was not simply and only a series of random and benevolent acts. After the collapse of the USSR, such funding and projects decreased.”<BR/><BR/>Yea, thatʻs my point. You said it. The U.S. doesnʻt do anything unless thereʻs the payoff. And of course the people in the field probably have to, in many instances, ʻfix the policyʻ to stay. They get so caught up in assignments they perpetuate them at the risk of international catastrophes.<BR/><BR/>By the way, got any thoughts on Venezuela and why the U.S. keeps trying to mess with Chavez?awolgovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839526260230337689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-51429672444164187972008-11-08T16:24:00.000-10:002008-11-08T16:24:00.000-10:00Wow. “Basic historical facts” need not apply huh?...Wow. “Basic historical facts” need not apply huh? Nice. And if that genuinely seemed like “science fiction”...well then that impression tells me much.<BR/><BR/>Just out of curiosity: The murder rate in the major slums in Brazil, the troubles of the Tamil Tigers, fighting in Sudan...is all of that on the shoulders of the US? <BR/><BR/>And was that post a retort? Boy I hope not. If it was...here, let me do it for you:<BR/><BR/>“Most US foreign policy directed towards Latin America, including the billions in humanitarian assistance via A.I.D., was motivated by and calibrated to “combat” a sometimes real and sometimes only perceived “threat” from the former Soviet Union – that US “assistance” was not simply and only a series of random and benevolent acts. After the collapse of the USSR, such funding and projects decreased.”<BR/><BR/>The above paragraph is true, and at the same time there is a truthful response to it which supports the contention that “the US” still does a lot of good work in Latin America.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-15345192347379445732008-11-08T15:21:00.000-10:002008-11-08T15:21:00.000-10:00You know, your views, whether they come from exper...You know, your views, whether they come from experience or reading too many fiction books, I donʻt know and donʻt care. <BR/><BR/>Why? Because for all your justifications, in most part could be from guilt over having done ʻthingsʻ to people like Hawaiians, for instance, or even inner city kids (as Joan correctly referenced) as victimized by-products of the U.S. policies and filthy people like the bush family, the U.S. HAS NO (0) zip credibility. One wrong to cover another wrong and over and over. <BR/>So whatever you say, your rationales are all fruit of the poisoned tree.<BR/>And gee I really was impressed with the Sandinistas as I struggled to decipher U.S. spin or truth.awolgovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839526260230337689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-35671717572309670582008-11-08T15:02:00.000-10:002008-11-08T15:02:00.000-10:00“So the way to support people who are supposedly o...“So the way to support people who are supposedly oppressed by their democratically elected government is to send in death squads funded by the sale of crack cocaine to oppressed people in the US?”<BR/><BR/>Is that comment for real? I have only met one (1) other person on Kauai that stepped foot in 1970s/1980s Nicaragua, let alone also ever met either a true-blue street-level Sandinista or Contra. If you are the 2nd such person...”hi.” Considering the “crack cocaine” comment (and I will assume that was more of an “emotional” comment, as opposed to an attempt at historical fact) I guess I should be grateful nobody tried to cite me as saying “Somoza was a great guy” (as I am loath to note he never placed guns in the hands of any kids...much like I am loath to note a pretty good health care system for the poor in Chile was put together when Pinochet was around…”health care for all…but some of you I might shoot in the head”).<BR/><BR/>As for the Apology Bill...credit is due to the Supreme Court in Hawaii for trying to give that Bill more teeth than it has. I am tempted to call the Apology Bill “gutless.” Why? The 3rd tenant of the Bill disavows all liability (like a disclaimer). And to the extent to it gave or does still give new life to a group of people and/or a worthwhile social movement? Great. Fantastic. I am glad.<BR/><BR/>Ps – Internal Contra financing operations, “the US ‘helping’ the Contras 101,” bases in northern Costa Rica (yes I lived there as well), a DEA guy bumping into a CIA guy as he gets out of a known drug plane...all old news thanks (and welcome to the complexities and difficulties and shades of gray to it…as you are already aware of the stupid missteps, US inter-agency fighting and diametrically opposed priorities and policies). New(er) scenario: For many reasons you want to eliminate a group of armed people in a given valley who are “very bad guys”….you need to do this ASAP...the only 3rd party that can help you do this such that you have a decent chance of success is also a 3rd party that is heavily involved in the drug trade….what do you do? Long term partnership with that 3rd party? Work with them some on this one thing for a little while? Look around for another 3rd party? Tough but real questions. Did the US drop the ball in Afghanistan by not helping it after the Russians left? Boy is that an understatement. <BR/><BR/>PPS – The US worked with the Chinese/Hong Kong mafia to smuggle some dissidents out of China after Tiananmen? I hope that was ok with everybody.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-33620036276001145052008-11-08T15:01:00.000-10:002008-11-08T15:01:00.000-10:00Thatʻs right, the constitution must acknowledge th...Thatʻs right, the constitution must acknowledge the Native Hawaiian customary rights..BUT..after every section thereʻs a stopper: unless deemed otherwise by this legislature.<BR/><BR/>Great thing about the reinstatment process, and they really are to be commended for the impossiblities they have so far overcome,<BR/>they are deciding whatʻs best for them, they are aware of the indoctrination obstacles and they are truly self determined. Pretty amazing also considering they donʻt take a dime from county, state, federal or grants.awolgovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839526260230337689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-627827722175498042008-11-08T14:57:00.000-10:002008-11-08T14:57:00.000-10:00"From the 19th century to this day, Congresses and..."From the 19th century to this day, Congresses and State Legislatures have used specious data on What The Natives Themselves Want to justify their pre-ordained profiteering from Native lands, while weaving an arcane web of regulations to protect the status quo."<BR/><BR/>Please give me an example of "specious data" regarding the goals of Native Hawaiians.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-36078987859655077062008-11-08T14:52:00.000-10:002008-11-08T14:52:00.000-10:00"The answer is, we're not telling the Hawaiians wh..."The answer is, we're not telling the Hawaiians what's in their best interest, you are. We're raising hell with our fellow American politicians and businessmen whose greed perpetuates the colonialism that started this crap in the first place."<BR/><BR/>I've never told my Hawaiian friends what to think or what to do, as they are perfectly capable of thinking and acting on their own. I would imagine that if they disagreed with you, it would be because they suffer from having a "colonized mentality". By the way, I haven't notice any "hell" being raised by non-Hawaiians on behalf of Hawaiian sovereignty. Must be an underground movement.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-80976921574327889112008-11-08T14:38:00.000-10:002008-11-08T14:38:00.000-10:00> If it is a question of self determination, sh...<I>> If it is a question of self determination, shouldn't the Hawaiians be the ones making the decision? <</I><BR/><BR/>Trick Question #44 on the Colonial Top 100.<BR/><BR/>The answer is they should be allowed to decide whatever they want to decide, in whatever manner they wish.<BR/><BR/>The reality is that the political progeny of the businessmen who engineered the takeover have made sure that a toxic tangle of laws, woven over decades, prevents any meaningful "vote by Hawaiians" from happening.<BR/><BR/>From the 19th century to this day, Congresses and State Legislatures have used specious data on What The Natives Themselves Want to justify their pre-ordained profiteering from Native lands, while weaving an arcane web of regulations to protect the status quo. <BR/><BR/><BR/><I>> Instead, we'll let you tell the unenlightened what's in their best interest. <</I><BR/><BR/>Trick Diversion #12 on the Colonial Top 100.<BR/><BR/>The answer is, we're not telling the Hawaiians what's in their best interest, you are. We're raising hell with our fellow American politicians and businessmen whose greed perpetuates the colonialism that started this crap in the first place.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-48943454986744183102008-11-08T14:25:00.000-10:002008-11-08T14:25:00.000-10:00Joan, you are astute in your response.I was starti...Joan, you are astute in your response.<BR/><BR/>I was starting to get the overwhelming feeling by reading (anon.November 8, 2008 1:42 PM) that there was some pleading: ʻweʻre not as bad as everyone else and allow us a few ʻtakesʻ for all the ʻgoodʻ we have counteracted with...regardless of whether they wanted our help. <BR/><BR/>U.S. doesnʻt go on humanitarian missions unless the headlines are scripted as such and especially if they arenʻt getting something in return.<BR/><BR/>The rape analogy: bad one. For the Hawaiians, we are talking rape of their women, children, language, resources, culture, necessities of life, right to self determination, , , Better stop, I think Iʻll run out of space.<BR/><BR/>Lastly, Americans seem to believe that the law begins and ends with them. Whatʻs so above the fray about the reinstatement process...it is not race based, it does not answer to the U.S. as an ultimate ʻdeciderʻ of what they may and may not proceed with; although it does appear they always make every to work with the U.S. even though the U.S. usually seems to disregard their efforts.awolgovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11839526260230337689noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7875069982976812251.post-67664431109271985332008-11-08T14:13:00.000-10:002008-11-08T14:13:00.000-10:00"Let's ask the Native [insert ethnic group name he..."Let's ask the Native [insert ethnic group name here] what they want" is a trick question that is centuries old. It really means "Let's ask them what they want after we've pounded it into their brains for generations that they can't take care of themselves without us -- and if they still say they want sovereignty, we'll just pound harder!"<BR/><BR/>Instead, we'll let you tell the unenlightened what's in their best interest.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com