Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Big Mistake Freeing Lori Berenson

Lori Berenson should not have been freed by the government of Peru. In fact she should face additional charges for aiding and abetting terrorists. From her interview in 2008 she shows zero remorse and has not come to grips with her crimes.

People on the far left think that they can violate US law and conduct their own foreign policy. Berenson had zero business getting involved in another nations civil war. The Castro regime which is peachy with Berenson has executed Americans for far less than her activities.

Berenson will probably write a book, go on the University Bolshevik lecture scene. If she possessed
any degree she would parlay this into a job for no scholarship.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Those Latin American countries have such hideously corrupt governments, that rape the very livelihood of their rural inhabitants, I have zero qualms with them being overthrown if that's the will of its citizenry.

It's once again a case of our government having used the pretext that those Indians were somehow communists; thus, supporting monsters that ruled those countries. Those peasants were desperate for change and likely never gave two shits about the Marxists that sought to control the trajectory of their movement. The older I get, the more I agree with the sometimes freakshow, Pat Buchanan, on the need to be less involved in the affairs of other countries. To an extent, Ron Paul is correct here as well.

Ray

Anonymous said...

I should add that those that rightfully condemn scum-sucking dictators like Castro, Mao, Stalin, and Chavez, commit moral blasphemy by then defending or sanitizing the gruesome sins of Pinochet and the plethora of so-called conservative dictators throughout Central/South America. To seek to discount these monsters actions (lowering body counts, etc...) diminishes one's moral credibility.

Ray

beakerkin said...

Ray

Pat Buchanan was an active suporter of the Contras and is a rabid antisemite even defending Nazi war criminals.

Your ire should be directed at those who knowingly used Indians in a cynical manner as cannon fodder. Communists promised much and their record on Indians is quite bad, ask Russel Means who had to break with AIM over its support of Communists abusing Indians.You can even ask the imposter with the Sunglasses.

Pinochet does not belong lumped ith the others. He did not cause trouble beyond his borders and even in a civil war situation the casulties were low. He did not want his country turned into another Cuba and end up lik the folks at Katyn.

What business of it was Berenson's to get involved in a Civil War and aid and abet terrorist. She has not learned from her crimes and should be locked up upon her return to the USA.

Ducky's here said...

Beak wanted to give Fujimora a big kiss. There isn't a Nazi anywhere from Nuttyyahoo to the Guatemalan regime that the whore Beak won't get in bed with

beakerkin said...

The antisemitic Duck is at it again.

Commies start a Civil War and the Folks in Peru defend themselves. Sorry, but Fujimori at his worst does not compare with the crimes of Chavez.

The fact that Berenson is alive shows he has mercy. She should have been killed after she was found guilty.

How long would an American aiding anti Chavez forces remain alive?
Actual Nazis are welcome at the site of the Kapo Renagade testicle
and Troutsky.

Anonymous said...

Beak, the problem with your views is that they stem from their originating form a position of privilege. It assumes once again that the entire universe can be reduced to a struggle between the Capitalists vs. the Marxists. All other viewpoints and peoples that refuse this monopolistic framework nonetheless are violently forced to choose sides or face extermination. People brutalized for 500 years cannot be expected to declare war on their own governments, while at the same time making sure the Marxists are defeated at the same time. You also assume from the get go that these Indians had nothing to complain about to begin with, perhaps this is your own dance with western supremacy rearing its head at time.

The hundreds of thousands of Indian farmers, butchered over the course of 500 years, should not have to continually serve as the ideological cannon fodder of so-called capitalists or marxists. To act as though the support of right-wing butchers against a shadow drama of defeating Indian communists, is to engage in a tortorous exercise in moral self-delusion. I have been and will be consistent in calling a spade a spade. You cannot accuse me of sympathizing with Marxists, just as I cannot be counted on to necessarily support sociopathic right wingers operating under purposefully dishonest pretexts.

Ray

beakerkin said...

Ray

In the modern era the forces determining the fate of the planet
are pretty much Capitalism, Marxism/ Faux Green and Jihadism/Monarchy. If you have read older articles you would have seen several posts about cultural theft of history of Native Americans by Marxists. Indians also
were active traders and acquired wealth. In general they were themselves.


My view with indigenous people is that they should be left alone. Unfortunately, Communists do exploit Indians and use them as canon fodder. It is not that the actual record of Communists is good
in this area either. Indians are merely a means to an end to be used.

In general we have taken a view that Indians were passive to the world around them. This is inaccurate as populists often led people for their own reasons for better or worse. Alliance formed were broken and in the case of the Revolutionary War the Americans really tried to get the Indians to stay out. Joeseph Brandt is given far too much credit, but in reality he was little more than a lackey for his brother in law a high Government Official.

Anonymous said...

True, the 20th century was mired in this clash of economic/ideological power struggle. However, how it's played out worldwide is that the so-called free market believers have made no pretense to giving a crap about Native people, and have more often than not been ravagers of their lands. The Marxists have falsely presented themselves as caring but really do not care about Indians at all at the end of the day.

That said, those communities in Latin America face a more immediate threat than do the tribes here in the U.S. With the orgy of machete death marches throughout Guatemala in the 80s, undertaken by supposed righteous, God-fearing conservatives, can you blame these Mayan descendants for at least accepting arms from communists?

Since you enjoy reading of colonial history as it pertains to Native peoples, I'm sure you're familiar with the ingenious means by which various tribes played the rivilaries of various European powers off one another as a way of either maintaining their own survival and independence. (Middle Ground: Great Lakes tribes use the French just as the Iroquois used the British)

That's how I see those Latin American peoples; caught between several hells, they have no choice but to pay lip service to a foreign ideology as a way of surviving against a foe equally as destructive. (Right wing dictators that hate Indians). I'm joking here, but I suppose you could see those Indians using a kind of taqiyya in terms of navigating the murky world of Marxism in their homelands.

Reagan made his thoughts on maintaining treaty obligations with the Native nations in the U.S., stating at one point something along the lines that they should not have been allowed to remain separate communities, that they should have been forced to completely assimilate for their own good. I see he learned a lot from the 19th century policies, eh? If it seems as though I am at times in political nomans' land, it's because I am. I have my skepticism of all parties and ideologies for reasons that are obvious to non-Western people, which doesn't mean I don't appreciate living in this country.

Ray