This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 211.30.205.254 (talk) at 23:18, 7 September 2005. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 23:18, 7 September 2005 by 211.30.205.254 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)is it true that her biography is a hoax?
- See: Journalism fraud. –Hajor
I think the allegations of fraud are too important to be left on another page, there should be more about it on the main page. My main problem is this sentence "Detractors claim that the book contains many fabrications", the claims are true the book is false, so I have taken out the sentence. I have done a google search and have found nothing about Pres. Clinton supposed apology the only thing I found was this quote "United States . . . support for military forces or intelligence units which engaged in violent and widespread repression . . . was wrong." unless someone can find a link to an actual apology the remarks do not belong on the page.
stevenscollege
- The US support for military regimes in Guatemala which violated human rights has been widely proven, go read ther other articles about Guatemalean history.
______________________________________
It MUST be remembered that in helping Central American governments to destroy Moscow's proxies, we were also defending ourselves. Clearly a Red Central American would have meant a Red Mexico. For the consequences of what that would have meant I direct you to John Milius' excellent movie Red Dawn (the fact that Lib-Lefties hate it so much is proof of how closely it hits the mark).
In the 90s, Guatemalan government created something similar to South African's "Truth and Reconciliation" commission. It reached conclusions that both sides, the American-backed government trying to keep the country from becoming another Leninist hell-hole and the Moscow-supplied and supported terrorists were both guilty of atrocities. Given the fact that communists murdered 100,000,000 people--a conservative estimate--in the 20th century alone (and are torturing and killing people are you read this) is proof enough that the communists are by far the guiltier party.
Let me put it this way, any group that took aid from Hitler (say Franco's regime) is still execrated, often mindlessly, by the Left. If that's the standard, then any group that took aid from the Leninist-Stalinist Politburo is just as worthy of execration. PainMan 08:42, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
Hey you fucking Americrap I hope the Soviets invade your disgusting country and kill retards like you.
- That's one interesting interpretation, however I don't think, if far-leftists had taken power in a Central American country, that they would have turned so dictatorial had it not been for disturbances coming from the exterior. You've got to agree that, for example, in Cuba, things like the embargo and the Bay of Pigs are what made Castro more paranoid and his regime more hardline.
- BTW, the 100 million deaths is not a conservative estimate by any means. It came up in the Black book of communism, which was a collection of many articles, directed by Stéphane Courtois I think. He himself came up with that number but several people dispute it, including many who contributed to the book. Besides, it can be argued that several of these deaths are the result mostly of totalitarism, which in those specific cases took the form of a communist government, or one that claimed to be communist. And sometimes it was done by simply insane people. I mean come on, can we really call, say, Pol Pot and Kim Jong-Il communists? They're just crazy, that's what I say. Anyway, back to the topic, Rigoberta Menchu, err, what does she have to do with any of this? She might have been a marxist, but certainly not stalinist.
- She may not be a Stalinist, bus she sure is a lying sack of shit. TDC 00:05, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
- Sack of shit I don't know, there's lots of worse people out there, and she didn't harm anybody, but I think everybody were already agreeing she was a liar, that's not an issue.
- True, there are worse liars out there, but few won Nobel prizes for their lies. TDC 16:26, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
Actually I thought she was a capitalist (see latest entry). She certainly backed Berger and opposed FRG's pro Indian rob the rich to give to the (FRG supporting) poor, SqueakBox 17:49, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
Another Marxian Liar & Stooge of Moscow
Menchu is an admitted liar and a Marxian propagandist. She would have been right at home in the Lubyanka before 1991. Even the New York Times--an organization hardly less zealous in transmitting propaganda than the KGB--published articles about Menchu's fabrications. She admitted her lies in an AP story found in the New York Times archives.*
The equivication in the article is simply unacceptable. Therefore I have edited it to present the factual picture. One has either lied or one has told the truth about a given set of facts. Claiming, as some Communist apologists and supporters of the Moscow-led terrorist campaign against the Guatemalan government do, that "facts" are irrelevant simply reveals the Left's utter contempt for the truth.
The following letter--from the NY Times--is quoted under the Fair Use provisions of US Law:
To the Editor:
The Nobel committee gave Rigoberta Menchu the peace prize because she supposedly speaks for all the Indians of the American continent (news item, Dec. 18). Nonsense. Ms. Menchu, a Marxist ideologue, not only didn't even speak for most Indians in her own country, as suggested in your Dec. 15 front-page article, she supported the Sandinistas' repression of the Miskito and other Indians of Nicaragua in the early 1980's.
It is no surprise the Nobel committee will not revoke her prize, for much of this was known -- though now in greater detail -- before the prize was awarded. That's because Ms. Menchu fit the committee's political agenda, and it just hoped that no one would ever catch it up in such detail. A touch of justice has prevailed.
WILLIAM RATLIFF Stanford, Calif., Dec. 18, 1998
The writer is a senior research fellow at the Hoover Institution.
Published: 12 - 20 - 1998 , Late Edition - Final , Section 4 , Column 4 , Page 12
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E2DD143CF933A15751C1A96E958260
Despite her lies and support of Moscow's attempt to conquer Latin America and other crimes against freedom, the laughable Nobel Committee has not, to my knowledge, revoked the travesty of Menchu's Peace Prize. But the Stockholm committee did award the same prize to the vicious, unrepentant murder Yasser Arafat and another, only slightly more repentent killer of babies, Nelson Mandela.
Compare and contrast the treatment received by Kurt Waldheim, against whom war crimes charges were never brought, let alone admitted, and the treatment given to former and present Communists. Waldheim was savaged for merely belonging to a German military unit accused of war crimes while an admitted murderer like former KGB Gen. Oleg Kalugin and a suporter of mass murder like Rigoberto Menchu are given a free pass. That Socialism, Leftism and Liberalism are the vestibule of Stalinism cannot be seriously disputed by anyone conversant with the history of Marxism-Leninism. Not only are people still being murdered by Communist governments as you read this (2005), but their fellow travelers in the West are still murdering the truth as well.
You Americrap shit are the real ones trying to invade Central America.
*Peace Prize Winner Admits Discrepancies
( By The Associated Press ) 244 words Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 12 , Column 1
DISPLAYING FIRST 50 OF 244 WORDS - A Nobel Peace Prize winner conceded yesterday that she mixed the testimony of other victims of Guatemala's civil war with her own life story in her account, I, Rigoberta ... Scholars have questioned the accuracy of some episodes described in the book, published in 1983...
PainMan 01:47, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
- Word up G-Money. Speak truth to power!!!!!! TDC 01:58, August 13, 2005 (UTC)
Was this guy serious?
- Well, Menchu is pretty much a documented super fraud. TDC 18:11, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
Oh, I knew about her lies in the autobiography, but what this guy wrote is very disturbing, from his part.
I'm not sure who "this guy" is or exactly what is "very disturbing, from his part" means, but if its directed towards me, I can back up every assertion I made with copious documentation. Anyone wishing to defend Leninism is welcome to be destroyed by the truth anytime. PainMan 08:45, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
- You've got documentation proving that Nelson Mandela killed babies? Interesting. I don't see what leninism has to do with whatever I said, though.