Matthew King wrote:
> On Thu, 13 May 1999, Christopher Chase wrote:
>
> > So what's your point?
>
> That, contrary to what I keep reading in the mainstream media, Milosevic
> is hardly more a "dictator" than is the head of any liberal democracy.
>
Who cares if he is a dictator or not? Eisenhower was certainly no dictator
but during his regime the democratic capitalist regime of Guatemala, lead by
President Arbenz was overthrown by a CIA sponsored coup. He, as well
as the CIA, is repsonsible for that killing and he has its blood on its hands.
In 1972, Pakistan invaded Bangladesh after B. decided, by democratic election,
that
it was no longer a Pakistani province. They killed over 2 million people, mostly
just
slaughtering civilians as they slept and hounded them as refugees into India.
Pakistan
was no dictatorship at the time.
My point here is that your point is irrelevant. It does not matter one bit...not
1 BIT,
whether he is democratically elected or not. He and his armed forces are
directly responsible
for the killing, rape and torture, and eviction of ---at the least--thousands
upon thousands
of people. Your point seems to be a non-starter.
If I am incorrect, then please provide me with your argument that his democratic
election makes a difference.
-----
Incidentally, I did a search on several news websites, including ABCNEWS.COM
and MSNBC.COM for this rampant abuse of the term "dictator."
I failed to find even one news or opinion article that used the words
"dictator," and "Milosevic" in the same article at all. All the articles I
could
find call him either "President," "Yugoslav President," or simply
"Slobodan Milosevic." This was true of even the opinion articles.
I now also humbly ask that you produce your evidence of this terminological
abuse you speak of. It certainly isn't above the mass media to do this...but
I'm suspicious of your particular claim, given that I can't find even one
article
or record online to corroborate it.
---
Christopher W. Chase
-----------------------------------------------
ECA 377 Department of Religious Studies
Arizona State University Tempe, AZ
(480) 965-7145
christopher.chase@xxxxxxx
http://www.public.asu.edu/~heresy
-----------------------------------------------
Niles: Well, as some illustrious person once said,
"Popularity is the hallmark of mediocrity."
Frasier: You just made that up, didn't you?
Niles: Yes, but I stand by it.
-----------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 13 May 1999, Christopher Chase wrote:
>
> > So what's your point?
>
> That, contrary to what I keep reading in the mainstream media, Milosevic
> is hardly more a "dictator" than is the head of any liberal democracy.
>
Who cares if he is a dictator or not? Eisenhower was certainly no dictator
but during his regime the democratic capitalist regime of Guatemala, lead by
President Arbenz was overthrown by a CIA sponsored coup. He, as well
as the CIA, is repsonsible for that killing and he has its blood on its hands.
In 1972, Pakistan invaded Bangladesh after B. decided, by democratic election,
that
it was no longer a Pakistani province. They killed over 2 million people, mostly
just
slaughtering civilians as they slept and hounded them as refugees into India.
Pakistan
was no dictatorship at the time.
My point here is that your point is irrelevant. It does not matter one bit...not
1 BIT,
whether he is democratically elected or not. He and his armed forces are
directly responsible
for the killing, rape and torture, and eviction of ---at the least--thousands
upon thousands
of people. Your point seems to be a non-starter.
If I am incorrect, then please provide me with your argument that his democratic
election makes a difference.
-----
Incidentally, I did a search on several news websites, including ABCNEWS.COM
and MSNBC.COM for this rampant abuse of the term "dictator."
I failed to find even one news or opinion article that used the words
"dictator," and "Milosevic" in the same article at all. All the articles I
could
find call him either "President," "Yugoslav President," or simply
"Slobodan Milosevic." This was true of even the opinion articles.
I now also humbly ask that you produce your evidence of this terminological
abuse you speak of. It certainly isn't above the mass media to do this...but
I'm suspicious of your particular claim, given that I can't find even one
article
or record online to corroborate it.
---
Christopher W. Chase
-----------------------------------------------
ECA 377 Department of Religious Studies
Arizona State University Tempe, AZ
(480) 965-7145
christopher.chase@xxxxxxx
http://www.public.asu.edu/~heresy
-----------------------------------------------
Niles: Well, as some illustrious person once said,
"Popularity is the hallmark of mediocrity."
Frasier: You just made that up, didn't you?
Niles: Yes, but I stand by it.
-----------------------------------------------