Ronald Reagan

[Pekka]

So, do the Reagan supporters agree with this Panama version or not?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

nah, they seem to have developped the same amnesia that reagan had.

[Pekka]

Well take no offense if I still want to hear the other side of the story

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
(paraphrasing from something che said to Ned... though this time its about starting a nuke war)

How's the crack, che?

Hoisted on my own petard.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Well take no offense if I still want to hear the other side of the story

sadly, there is no other side of this story

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia


sadly, there is no other side of this story

or maybe the fantasies are ignored - such things can drive any conspiracy addicts crazy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Pekka
Well take no offense if I still want to hear the other side of the story

Good, because LoA is talking out of his ass. Panama was led by a military dictatorship since 1972, well before Reagan's time. Noriega succeeded Torrijos and Paredas through the fun backstabbing involved in military dicatatorships. The negotiations between Torrijos and Japanese for another canal were rumored. However, an associate of Noriega, Colonel Diaz Herrera, accuses Noriega of planting the bomb on the plane that killed Torrijos.

Though Torrijos was in NO WAY democratically elected.

[Pekka]

OK so this Panama thing is definitely a beef and not clear cut simple. So why did US invade Panama afterwards? To easy up possible rebellion after attempted assassination?

[Admiral]

Even Reagan's supporters have to admit that in the end, he believed that the ends justified the means, and would go to any ends to land blows on Communism. Grenada is an excellent example. When they elected a leftist government, which tried to make American companies answerable to the Grenada government on Grenadan soil, Reagan invaded.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Good, because LoA is talking out of his ass. Panama was led by a military dictatorship since 1972, well before Reagan's time. Noriega succeeded Torrijos and Paredas through the fun backstabbing involved in military dicatatorships. The negotiations between Torrijos and Japanese for another canal were rumored. However, an associate of Noriega, Colonel Diaz Herrera, accuses Noriega of planting the bomb on the plane that killed Torrijos.

from the US library of congress

The 1978 amendments to the Constitution were the first step in the process of restoring civilian rule. That same year, the government allowed exiled political opponents to return, permitted the re-emergence of political parties, and promised to hold legislative elections in 1980 and presidential elections in 1984. Only parties that could register 30,000 members, however, would gain official recognition. Torrijos and his supporters used the new system to create their own political party, the PRD, which tried to combine the old elements of the Torrijos coalition into a single political structure. Torrijos also appointed a new civilian president, Aristides Royo, and announced that he was relinquishing the special powers he had exercised since 1972.

In the 1980 elections for nineteen of the fifty-seven seats in the legislature, the principal parties to emerge were the PRD, with twelve seats, and the opposition National Liberal Party (Partido Liberal Nacional--PLN), with five seats, and Christian Democratic Party (Partido Demócrato Cristiano--PDC), with one seat.

so he was democratically elected.

as for the rumours that it was noriega who killed him, John Perkins, an inside man who worked for Chas T MAIN in the 70s and 80s, and who knew how things worked in those times between US international investors, the CIA, and the pentagon, alleges in his book that it was the CIA would had both presidents killed off. he would know more then anyone.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

Even Reagan's supporters have to admit that in the end, he believed that the ends justified the means, and would go to any ends to land blows on Communism. Grenada is an excellent example. When they elected a leftist government, which tried to make American companies answerable to the Grenada government on Grenadan soil, Reagan invaded.

thats right, and thats also why the CIA had ecuadors and panamas prezs killed off. then they tried and failed on Noreiga, so they had to invade. they tried and failed on victor hugo (and the white house was caught with its pants down on that one, saying they supported the new government, one which they had helped to put in place due to the CIA, and then had to reverse course because the CIA failed. venezuela would have been invaded next if sept 11th hadnt happened and we hadnt invaded iraq instead, another spot where first the US companies failed to get saddam to agree with them, then the CIA failed to get rid of him, and then the army went in to take him out once and for all. also see castro. the US companies failed to get him to agree with their terms, the CIA failed, and then the invasion failed also. if they hadnt had nukes, we prolly would have tried again to invade)

[Lawrence of Arabia]

and, we can see a pattern emerging. one that cannot be ignored.

Iran: US sets up puppet regime that is pliant the US multinational firms. CIA fails to keep country under control, an anti US person takes power (Ayatollahs) so what do we do? we go to Irans enemy . . .

Iraq: US supports Saddams baath party, he allows US companies to do what they want, he gets lots of weapons to fight Iran, but then gets out of control and the US can no longer control him. CIA fails, invasion the first time somewhat works. Saddam still doesnt play ball with the US, we invade again and finish the job.

Ecuador: President kicks out SIL and refuses to deal with US oil companies. CIA takes him down, installs new leader who is dependant on his position because of US, does what US companies want him to do

Panama: president refuses to renogociate panama canal deal, doesnt play ball with US companies. CIA takes him down, but a bigger monster takes his place. Assassination attempts on Noreiga fail. Army invades.

Grenanda: leader refuses to cooperate with US. Gets invaded, and a new more pliant person to US conglomerate interests is installed.

[reds4ever]

Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia
and, we can see a pattern emerging. one that cannot be ignored.

Iran: US sets up puppet regime that is pliant the US multinational firms. CIA fails to keep country under control, an anti US person takes power (Ayatollahs) so what do we do? we go to Irans enemy . . .

Iraq: US supports Saddams baath party, he allows US companies to do what they want, he gets lots of weapons to fight Iran, but then gets out of control and the US can no longer control him. CIA fails, invasion the first time somewhat works. Saddam still doesnt play ball with the US, we invade again and finish the job.

Ecuador: President kicks out SIL and refuses to deal with US oil companies. CIA takes him down, installs new leader who is dependant on his position because of US, does what US companies want him to do

Panama: president refuses to renogociate panama canal deal, doesnt play ball with US companies. CIA takes him down, but a bigger monster takes his place. Assassination attempts on Noreiga fail. Army invades.

Grenanda: leader refuses to cooperate with US. Gets invaded, and a new more pliant person to US conglomerate interests is installed.

It's taken you *HOW* long to figure that out?

[Lawrence of Arabia]

250 pages from an insider who participated in these events.

[Pekka]

OK OK.. so south american part of his presidency is at least troublesome.

Next?