>Back to bbs menu.

but this message will have to be censored fpor the security and the rights of
 the Greater Good of the US Public.  Thank you for your co-operation!
[End of message]

Message editing menu

L List mess

Leave message menu

U Leave public message
R Leave private message
L Leave message for ALL
S Leave private message for Derec [The Blank]
A Abort to message menu
T Back to top menu

Main menu

M Enter message system
L Access files libra
[Paging Derec [The Blank]]

Hello User.  What may i assist you with?

Very funny. Actually, I really was looking forward to seeing how the people here would react to some of the revealtions I've come across recently after reading the Christic Institutes affadavit! Amazing stuff. Who is this?

Have you heard of the reporter with the Washington Post that Casey confided in often, all the way up to his death...  At his death, Casey, stated that Regan knew everything, and that, indeed, it was all neatley covered up leaving the necessary scape-goats, or congressional sacrafice.

Right, Bob Woodward. Althoug Danieal Sheehan, the Washington Lawyer, and John Maytes, the Miami public defendant, have uncovered even more startling things. Yeah, I know: Ronnie did approve of the arms deals, etc, the lying, senile idiot,                                                                     it will never come out, though. The public wont learn anything it doesn't want to learn.
Agreed.  But the main reason the public doesn't want to know is it enjoys national security and stability.  I can understand that, since i don't feel it jepordizes the good of the nation.  It was stopped, and i can't say i necessarily disagree with the whole thing.  The operation was a good idea, if it was carried out properly.

It was carried out by idiots, however. I would like to see them encoubter the justicd they claim they support. Is this Robert?

What makes them idiots?

If these individuals were well informed, their actions would be known and scofed at. The data that tje US gave 10,000 TOW missiles to Iran is a matter of public r}cord. All any semi-intelligent persoin has to do is think about this
: Why would "we" Deliver these weapons, AFTER Buckley had died, wheile Ronnie claimed that the Unitedv                                                    ?States would not deal with terrorist nations? These peoiple were idiots in my opinoin because they were careless and naive. They made to many assumptios regarding the political interests of the US people.

They were careless, agreed.........  But they were not naive.  This is Robert.  First off, the USSR has steadily become closer and coloser to Iran, while maintaining a safe distance for world opinion's sake, and also for the Arab's table sake...  Keeping good with all sides involved, and attmepting to alienate the US from the war.  The USSR can't lose in this situation really...  If Iran loses the war and Iraq continues the agresssion into Iranian territory they can "defend Iranian" interests...  However...  Mistake , they can lose...  If Iran continues to win the war, with the help of outiside nations (such as the US and Israel with arms sales), the USSR can not act.  Except perhaps to save their quasi allie Iraq....  So, the USA is choosing the greater of the two evils in nmaintaining its own interests.  That war benefits us as long as Iran wins, within limits.  We can't stand for Iran falling...  Especially undercivil war after Khomeni's death. 

Right. My choive of naive as an adjective was used to describe the choice of individuals used to carry out the scheme. Noeth, who made many of the actual deals, was in fact veryignorant about missiles, etcetera. He made a few erronious assumptions. The fact is, there are people here who care wabout whether our leaders intend to obey their laws or not.

Laws should always be disregarded when they conflict with the interests they are attempting to uphold.  That is exactly what happened.

Yes, but I'm not making that sort of judgement. North should have realized these things.

He did, that is why, in a manner, he superseded laws...  Although he didn't have the guts to state so, or maybe he didn't know he was.  North went beyond and above the laws to carry out what our constitution attempts to accomplish.  Whether or not he knew that that was what he was doing is somewhat moot to me.

Yes, but as a result, North will end up in jail before Easter.

I wonder about that.  Perhaps he will...  With the new administration , if it is democrat, he probably will.  But, i don7t think the new adm. will be a strong democrat.... or a strong republican.  It will be someone inbetween.  I see a radical in the office next year.  A radical within one of those two parties.

Hmm. I don't know. A lot of this depends on the Walsh and Christic indictments which are certainly on the way (although a presidential pardon would impede Walsh). I certainly would not want to see Bush elected. I was expecting perhaps Dukakis, Maybe Baker.

Baker is strong, and so is Bush.  I would favor Bush though...  I like his policies and his politics on a whole.  He's got the necessary experience also for dealings with the soviets and third world.  Wha  do you think of Jackson?

I'm sort of ambivalent. You know, I don't expect him to be nominated because of the superficial fact he's blacl. He seems to come of fairly well in the few inteviews I've seen, though, before I would support him I'fd have to see a lot more.

Him being black is of no isssue i feel.  It doesn't matter anymore.  The majority of the voting public is hardly racist.  Its not an issue.  He is superficial, and he is a radical.  And possibly a rascist, or more speci. a culturalist.  His associations have increminated him time and time again...  Farakan, the PLO, etc...  Assad...  Not nice people.  He's not a good man.

WEll, I won't deny you your judements! But while, to most of the peoiple whose opinions I conside, his race is of no issuse, I will say that no one I've spoken with regards him as a serious (likely) candidate. My prediction is that it will be Bush and Dukakis.

No one considers him as a serious candidate because he is a sensationalist.  I see Bush, ever so possibly Dukakis, but more probably Hart.  I would like to see
on the rep. ticket Robertson somewhere... On the dem. ticket i would like to see Simon somewhere also.

Yeah. Simon I would like to see. Robertson? Any desire I have to see him I would attribute to my need for entertainment. That would simply be 'fun' as far as I'm concerned. Though, if all the data about the CIA comes out, Bush will NOT be nominated.

True about Bush.....  But, Robertson is doing very well when it comes down to the line of action....  The polls show him weak, but you have to look at the audience they are asking...  We've got to go.  Maybe we'll stop by on the way to my houe, i doubt it though....  Leave your message if you will.[Resetting timers]

Not tonight, but later. Chatting woith you is interesting. Thanks.

OK...  Talk later.  [Resetting timers]
[End of chat]

Main menu

M Enter message system
L Access files library
U List names of users
S Chat with Derec [The Blank]
C Change your user info
T Display time and time logged on
G Log off BBS

>Drink Beer
You can hear the muffled noise of your
home Log off?  Confirm (Y/N): N

Main menu

M Enter message system
L Access files library
U List names of users
S Chat with Derec [The Blank]
C Change your u