KIT,

Touche' must be French for "damn, caught spreading bullshit again."

On Jun 9, 9:48 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote:
> Touche'
>
> On Jun 9, 8:03 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Since there are NO corporations in Central America they are "Sociedad
> > Anonomas" or Anonymous Societies. The intention is exactly as written. No
> > one knows who has what with one unless the S.A. releases the information....
> > Your statement is precluded by law and its very intent. I own some twenty
> > S.A. s, there is NO WAY you can find them through me or me through them
> > unless I sign to release that information. Stocks and ownership are
> > transacted in a "Book of Acts" (ACTAS) this book is held privately and is
> > the only source for actual info on who has what, if anything. These
> > Books are NOT subject to subpoena here in CR, or in Nicaragua as they are
> > considered "private".
>
> > Your statement that Ortega siezed "Nicaraguan Corporations" is correct as
> > there is no other type in Nicragua. As  to who owned them or had the
> > majority interest... there is NO WAY you or anyone else can claim he siezed
> > "Nica" owned businesses unless you have a copy of the last page in the book
> > and look at signatures. Transactions are NOT registered otherwise.
>
> > Try again... I have yet to spin though your sources are severely lacking in
> > accuracy.
>
> > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Keith In Tampa 
> > <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > > And this is the reason that twenty five years ago, Ortega went in and
> > > seized these Nicaraguan businesses that you claim he loved?  I didn't 
> > > think
> > > anyone could legitimately argue that Ortega could be considered the same
> > > brand of Lenninist/Marxist/Communist that he was twenty five years ago, 
> > > but
> > > damned if you haven't made that attempt!!!  (LOL!!)
>
> > > Come on Mark,   you're resembling a top!!!  (Spinning!!!)
>
> > > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >> Lip service to get the "Perros de mi espalda" (to make the dogs stop
> > >> barking. His policies are not changed, nor are his positions. Further, 
> > >> in a
> > >> coalition, multi-party system that opens voting and running to 
> > >> everylittle
> > >> group in the land 40% is considered a mandate.... check the Angela 
> > >> Merckel
> > >> election in Germany.... csu/cdu and the defeat of the spd and schroeder. 
> > >> Now
> > >> THAT was close, yet the world called it a mandate for change.
>
> > >> Ortega was always a proponant of NICARAGUAN business... not those
> > >> completely owned foreign concerns with a Nica titular head as is normal 
> > >> for
> > >> US industry.
>
> > >> Do  try again.
>
> > >>   On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Keith In Tampa 
> > >> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > >>> Once again Mark......Spin.
>
> > >>> Ortega has been defeated three or four times in elections, and only won
> > >>> the election this past time with a very narrow margin, and my no means a
> > >>> majority.  My recollection without googling the election was that 
> > >>> Ortega and
> > >>> his faction of Sandanistas had less than forty percent of the vote.
>
> > >>> More importantly, Ortega has totally renounced his heavy handed
> > >>> Marxist/Leninist/Communist platforms from the late 1970s and early 
> > >>> 1980s,
> > >>> now purportedly being a strong proponent of business.
>
> > >>> My, how times have changed.....Ortega has now adopted the Reagan 
> > >>> policies
> > >>> that he fought so hard against.
>
> > >>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >>>> Nicaragua says it has spent 9.7 million ......... all from the OAS.
> > >>>> Ortegas politics and policies still have not changed... As far as a 
> > >>>> supposed
> > >>>> split by the Ortega faction of the government.... he did not split, he
> > >>>> followed through then as he does now with his policies of an extreme
> > >>>> socialist bend.... so what !!!!!!!!!!!! He was just as elected and 
> > >>>> Nicaragua
> > >>>> is just as sovereign as the US despite their supposed "regional 
> > >>>> protection
> > >>>> plans" to which no one is a signatory accept the US. Unilateral 
> > >>>> policies did
> > >>>> not work then (another post wwii loss) and they do not work now.
>
> > >>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 6:35 PM, Keith In Tampa 
> > >>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
> > >>>>> Mark,
>
> > >>>>> As stated,  I openly admit that our foreign policy has been
> > >>>>> inconsistent, and we have made some mistakes.  I concede that.  Where 
> > >>>>> I
> > >>>>> differ, and where I believe you are overlooking a major point, was 
> > >>>>> that
> > >>>>> Ortega's brand of Sandanistas were communist, at the height of the 
> > >>>>> cold war,
> > >>>>> when the Truman Doctrine was in place, and when Ronald Reagan vowed 
> > >>>>> to end
> > >>>>> it, as well as "The Evil Empire".   Ortega caused a split within the
> > >>>>> Sandanistas, of which the United States was funding and agreeable to
> > >>>>> supporting in the overthrow of Somoza.  Many tend to forget this 
> > >>>>> chapter.
>
> > >>>>> The United States as committed over 500 million dollars to the removal
> > >>>>> of landmines within the region, so once again, (and I say this with
> > >>>>> humor!!!) you are "slightly spinning" when you suggest that the OAS 
> > >>>>> and all
> > >>>>> American Nation-States are funding the removal of these landmines!!
>
> > >>>>> To lay all of the blame at Ronald Reagan's feet is misplaced, unfair,
> > >>>>> and not at all a true and accurate reflection of history!!
>
> > >>>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 8:27 PM, Mark <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> Marxist/Leninist huh ?? So what.... How about Democratically elected
> > >>>>>> President of what was a peaceful nation prior to US "intervention"  
> > >>>>>> ??
>
> > >>>>>> A nation that had the same right as yours to speak with anyone they 
> > >>>>>> so
> > >>>>>> cose.
>
> > >>>>>> No spin yet.
>
> > >>>>>> As to the landmines.... HOW MANY YEARS and inadvertant innocent 
> > >>>>>> deaths
> > >>>>>> later ?? How many ICJ crimes against humanity convictions and fines 
> > >>>>>> later ??
> > >>>>>> and still six thousand to go..
>
> > >>>>>>  Oh, they don't count. Reagan withdrew from that courts oversight 
> > >>>>>> just
> > >>>>>> as he was convicted....
>
> > >>>>>> still no spin....
>
> > >>>>>> Were there political differences between the parties in Nicaragua ??
> > >>>>>> Then and now, absolutely... How does that vary from those in your 
> > >>>>>> nation ??
>
> > >>>>>> 135,000 land mines that all say "made in USA". I can guarantee you
> > >>>>>> that the Sandanistas did not pay for those.. Plus, with no spin... 
> > >>>>>> those
> > >>>>>> laid by the sandanistas were in the border area with Honduras 
> > >>>>>> blocking the
> > >>>>>> ingress of US backed rebels (Contras) the locations were mapped and 
> > >>>>>> removal
> > >>>>>> accomplished easily. As to funding for the removal...that is from 
> > >>>>>> the OAS,
> > >>>>>> NOT the USA, though the USA did contribute to the fund just as did 
> > >>>>>> every
> > >>>>>> other American nation. The un mapped and therefore the most 
> > >>>>>> dangerous mines
> > >>>>>> and still looked for were laid by the USA backed Contras..... Please 
> > >>>>>> try to
> > >>>>>> get it right...
>
> > >>>>>> still no spin........
>
> > >>>>>> Over 40,000 were killed in the Contra-Sandanista conflict.... there
> > >>>>>> was no "Contra" without US backing at Reagans personal behest.
>
> > >>>>>> As to the heroin produced in Afghanistan today.... you tell me where
> > >>>>>> they got the seed... another failed longterm plan that has 
> > >>>>>> backfired....
> > >>>>>> Yes, I blame Reagan and his team for every junky in the US that 
> > >>>>>> bangs a load
> > >>>>>> of Afghan white and all the crime that results and all the medical 
> > >>>>>> bills
> > >>>>>> that result.... He planted it.
>
> > >>>>>> As far as my intense dislike for Reagan.... it is equal with my
> > >>>>>> dislike for another USA hero Felix Rodriguez, that personally led the
> > >>>>>> Contras.... I am German.... I was assigned as an observer in 
> > >>>>>> Nicaragua
> > >>>>>> during the conflict... I saw with my own eyes and was informed by 
> > >>>>>> Felix the
> > >>>>>> Ferret personally as to what was USA policy.
>
> > >>>>>> As to Carters policy.....try again.
> > >>>>>>  The CIA's Intervention in Afghanistan Interview with Zbigniew
> > >>>>>> Brzezinski,
> > >>>>>> President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser
>
> > >>>>>> Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998
> > >>>>>> Posted at globalresearch.ca <http://www.globalresearch.ca/> 15
> > >>>>>> October 2001
>
> > >>>>>> ------------------------------
>
> > >>>>>> Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his
> > >>>>>> memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services 
> > >>>>>> began to
> > >>>>>> aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet 
> > >>>>>> intervention.
> > >>>>>> In this period you were the national security adviser to President 
> > >>>>>> Carter.
> > >>>>>> You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?
>
> > >>>>>> Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA 
> > >>>>>> aid
> > >>>>>> to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the 
> > >>>>>> Soviet army
> > >>>>>> invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded 
> > >>>>>> until
> > >>>>>> now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that 
> > >>>>>> President
> > >>>>>> Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of 
> > >>>>>> the
> > >>>>>> pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the
> > >>>>>> president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid 
> > >>>>>> was going
> > >>>>>> to induce a Soviet military intervention.
>
> > >>>>>> Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But
> > >>>>>> perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to
> > >>>>>> provoke it?
>
> > >>>>>> B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but
> > >>>>>> we knowingly increased the probability that they would.
>
> > >>>>>> Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that
> > >>>>>> they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United 
> > >>>>>> States in
> > >>>>>> Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis 
> > >>>>>> of
> > >>>>>> truth. You don't regret anything today?
>
> > >>>>>> B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had
> > >>>>>> the effect of
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to