========
Newsgroups: alt.anarchism,alt.society.anarchy,talk.politics.theory,
talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.economics,alt.fan.noam-chomsky,
alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.libertarian,
talk.politics.libertarian,alt.individualism
Subject: Re: Chomsky's bad faith proven:  the Khmer Rouge record
  [was  Re: Chomsky, was " If the left is understood to include'Bolshevism,' then I would flatly dissociate myself from the left. Lenin was one of the greatestenemies of socialism, in my opin
From: fishe@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Carwil James)
Date: 21 Sep 1996 18:41:06 GMT

Hugo S. Cuningham writes:
|From the "Nation" article:
|
|"The 'slaughter' by the Khmer Rouge is a Moss-'New York Times'
|creation" (N., p. 792, column 1)

Here deletion of context is extremely important. To suggest that subject
here is the existence of a slaughter, rather than a particularly cited
report of slaughter is disingenuous at best. The quotes around slaughter
refer to a specific claim, rather than an attempt to write off all
allegations (which Herman and Chomsky admit may be true).

Here is the entire paragraph:

In the New York Times Magazine, May 1, 1977, Robert Moss (editor 
of a dubious offshoot of Britain's Economist called "Foreign Report" 
which specializes in sensational rumors from the world's
intelligence agencies) asserts that "Cambodia's pursuit of total 
revolution has resulted, by the official admission of its
Head of State, Khieu Samphan, in the slaughter of a million 
people." Moss informs us that the source of this statement is
Barron and Paul, who claim that in an interview with the Italian
weekly Famiglia Cristiana Khieu Samphan stated that more than a 
million died during the war, and that the population had been
7 million before the war and is now 5 million. Even if one places
some credence in the reported interview nowhere in it does
Khieu Samphan suggest that the million postwar deaths were a result
of official policies (as opposed to the lag effects of a
war that left large numbers ill, injured, and on the verge of 
starvation). The "slaughter" by the Khmer Rouge is a Moss-New York
Times creation. 

|
|>People interested in reading Chomsky's 1977 Nation article can
|>get it at:
|
|>http://wwwdsp.ucd.ie/~daragh/articles/a_nation_distortions.html
|
|    Good addition!
|
|    If anyone finds a substantive disagreement between what I put in
|quotation marks above and what appears at that site, I would  v.e.r.y
|much appreciate hearing about it!  (But don't try to look up my
|"Dissent" cites in the "Nation" article.)
|
|--Hugo S. Cunningham
|

Carwil James

--
 /\  / Chan | Fish-E Carwil James |    Seek Peace & Justice Everywhere     |
/o \/- bpen | Northwestern Univ.  | CTD '88, '89, '90, '91, '94, '95 '96   |
\/ /\- bplah| Class of '96  | "But there is | "Life's a beach and the tide |
 \/  \      |               |  no context"  |  just came in."  ~Osadczuk   | 

========
Newsgroups: alt.anarchism,alt.society.anarchy,talk.politics.theory,
talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.economics,alt.fan.noam-chomsky,
alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.libertarian,
talk.politics.libertarian,alt.individualism
Subject: Re: Chomsky's bad faith proven:  the Khmer Rouge record
  [was  Re: Chomsky, was " If the left is understood to include
'Bolshevism,' then I would flatly dissociate myself from the left.
 Lenin was one of the greatestenemies of socialism, in my opin
From: hcunn@tiac.net (Hugo S. Cunningham)
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 05:48:29 GMT

fishe@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Carwil James) wrote:

[deletion]

>Here deletion of context is extremely important. 

[rest deleted]

I have reposted the above message, with my answer, to the one Mr.
James answered (my 215-liner in the "Chomsky's bad faith proved"
thread).

--Hugo S. Cunningham


========
Newsgroups: alt.anarchism,alt.society.anarchy,talk.politics.theory,
talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.economics,alt.fan.noam-chomsky,
alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.libertarian,
talk.politics.libertarian,alt.individualism
Subject: Re: Chomsky's bad faith proven:  the Khmer Rouge record
  [was  Re: Chomsky, was " If the left is understood to include
'Bolshevism,' then I would flatly dissociate myself from the
 left. Lenin was one of the greatestenemies of socialism, in my opin
From: fishe@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Carwil James)
Date: 22 Sep 1996 15:44:24 GMT

In article <522jn6$4jd@news-central.tiac.net>,
Hugo S. Cunningham  wrote:
|
|fishe@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Carwil James) wrote:
|
|>Hugo S. Cuningham writes:
|>|From the "Nation" article:
|>|
|>|"The 'slaughter' by the Khmer Rouge is a Moss-'New York Times'
|>|creation" (N., p. 792, column 1)
|
|>Here deletion of context is extremely important. To suggest that subject
|>here is the existence of a slaughter, rather than a particularly cited
|>report of slaughter is disingenuous at best. The quotes around slaughter
|>refer to a specific claim, rather than an attempt to write off all
|>allegations (which Herman and Chomsky admit may be true).
|
|>Here is the entire paragraph:
|
|>In the New York Times Magazine, May 1, 1977, Robert Moss (editor 
|>of a dubious offshoot of Britain's Economist called "Foreign Report" 
|>which specializes in sensational rumors from the world's
|>intelligence agencies) asserts that "Cambodia's pursuit of total 
|>revolution has resulted, by the official admission of its
|>Head of State, Khieu Samphan, in the slaughter of a million 
|>people." Moss informs us that the source of this statement is
|>Barron and Paul, who claim that in an interview with the Italian
|>weekly Famiglia Cristiana Khieu Samphan stated that more than a 
|>million died during the war, and that the population had been
|>7 million before the war and is now 5 million. Even if one places
|>some credence in the reported interview nowhere in it does
|>Khieu Samphan suggest that the million postwar deaths were a result
|>of official policies (as opposed to the lag effects of a
|>war that left large numbers ill, injured, and on the verge of 
|>starvation). The "slaughter" by the Khmer Rouge is a Moss-New York
|>Times creation. 
|
|>|
|>|>People interested in reading Chomsky's 1977 Nation article can
|>|>get it at:
|>|
|>|>http://wwwdsp.ucd.ie/~daragh/articles/a_nation_distortions.html
|>|
|>|    Good addition!
|>|
|>|    If anyone finds a substantive disagreement between what I put in
|>|quotation marks above and what appears at that site, I would  v.e.r.y
|>|much appreciate hearing about it!  (But don't try to look up my
|>|"Dissent" cites in the "Nation" article.)
|>|
|>|--Hugo S. Cunningham
|>|
|
|I don't see that you've proven anything.  How many different times can
|the same million people be "slaughtered"?

I don't think you've gotten the point of the paragraph. The official
admits to the death of one million people in the post-war period. Given
the level of destruction, many of these deaths are likely to be results
of the US-bombing: destroyed civilian infrastructure, poor agricultural
situation, etc. all result in deaths. At the same time, many of the 
deaths were attributable to the Khmer Rouge regime. The Moss-NYT
claim is that the population claim constituted a slaughter, and one
that the Khmer Rouge admitted to. Moss & the NYT saw a population 
decline and inferred a slaughter. Since their were many other reasons
for population decline, this inference was clearly illegitimate. The
claimed slaughter than was a creation of the authors.

Now, were these million people slaughtered? Answer: some of them. 

Suppose that all of them had been killed by KR (which is not true).
Moss did not have sufficient evidence for this conclusion. His
allegations of slaughter would still have been artificial when he
wrote them.

Moreover, the purpose of the articles was an analysis of how 
reporting is carried out, not an analysis of the human rights
situation.

    When the facts are in, it may turn out that the more extreme
    condemnations were in fact correct. But even if that turns out
    to be the case, it will in no way alter the conclusions we
    have reached on the central question addressed here: how the
    available facts were selected, modified, or sometimes invented
    to create acertain image offered to the general population. The
    answer to this question seems clear, and it is unaffected by
    whatever may yet be discovered about Cambodia in the future.
      (The Political Economy of Human Rights, Vol II, p. 293)

|Perhaps Chomsky should have said, "The confession to 'slaughter' by a
|Khmer Rouge leader was a Moss-'New York Times' invention," but that is
|not what he did say.

It turns out that there was not a slaughter of one million people,
encompassing the entire mortality of Cambodians since the end of US
bombing. This was the NYT contention, the confession was a side note.

|  In any case, you are splitting hairs.  Do you
|deny that a "slaughter" did take place?

No. However, it was not the one described by the New York Times.

|Or do you deny the
|implication of my other quotes, that Chomsky's "Nation" article would
|lead the average reader to believe that accusations against the Khmer
|Rouge had been wildly exaggerated?

     We do not pretend to know where the truth lies amidst
     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     these sharply conflicting assessments [on the number of
     people killed under Pol Pot]; rather, we again
     want to emphasize some crucial points. What filters
     through to the American public is a seriously distorted
     version of the evidence available, emphasizing alleged
     Khmer Rouge atrocities and downplaying or ignoring the
     crucial U.S. role, direct and indirect, in the torment
     that Cambodia has suffered.

I can't imagine this being any clearer. The article was addressed
to the process of media reporting on an official enemy, rather than
the characteristics of the enemy itself.

Carwil James


--
 /\  / Chan | Fish-E Carwil James |    Seek Peace & Justice Everywhere     |
/o \/- bpen | Northwestern Univ.  | CTD '88, '89, '90, '91, '94, '95 '96   |
\/ /\- bplah| Class of '96  | "But there is | "Life's a beach and the tide |
 \/  \      |               |  no context"  |  just came in."  ~Osadczuk   | 

========
Newsgroups: alt.anarchism,alt.society.anarchy,talk.politics.theory,
talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.economics,alt.fan.noam-chomsky,
alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.libertarian,
talk.politics.libertarian,alt.individualism
Subject: Re: Chomsky's bad faith proven:  the Khmer Rouge record
  [was  Re: Chomsky, was " If the left is understood to include
'Bolshevism,' then I would flatly dissociate myself from the 
left. Lenin was one of the greatestenemies of socialism, in my opin
From: fishe@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Carwil James)
Date: 22 Sep 1996 16:12:12 GMT

In article <522jq3$4jd@news-central.tiac.net>,
Hugo S. Cunningham  wrote:
|hallinan@borg.com (Terry Hallinan) wrote:
|
|A common estimate is 200,000 dead, a third of a far smaller population
|than in Cambodia.
|
|I repeat:  there was a war in East Timor.  When the shooting lets up,
|military operations and damage by the Indonesian government lets up.
|(Whether that war was advisable is another question.) 

That is a ghastly ultimatum. Even more so when you consider that
Indonesian army violence is directed primarily at the civilian
population. That there is a war confers no moral equality, especially
when only one side's territory (and villages) are the battlefield.

|In contrast, Cambodia lay unresisting, prostrate at the feet of the
|Khmer Rouge.  In 1975, the US wanted no part of any further Indochina
|entanglements.  Khmer Rouge Cambodia had diplomatic support from
|China, and neither of its important neighbors (Thailand and Communist
|Vietnam) was looking for trouble.  The Khmer Rouge were as secure in
|power as Stalin was on the eve of the Great Purge (1936).  Their
|attack on their own people was pointless viciousness and bloodlust.

While Indonesia was defending itself? Was engaged in a "legitimate"
invasion?

Indonesia was under no threat. It was quite secure, with
a powerful military. Outside powers, especially the West, had no
intentions of intervening. The US had given the green light. Suharto,
orchestrator of genocide 1965-67, was as secure as Stalin.


|>Indonesia was given a wink and a not by
|>President Ford and Kissinger when they invaded the fledgeling
|>republic.  An American warship was said to be strategically stationed
|>offshore to warn the Portuguese to not interfere.
|
|I wonder about that.  It is news to me that Portugal in 1975 was a
|global naval power.
|
|>For any that do not know this is a venture of  Freeport McMoran Mining
|>Company in cooperation with Indonesian government which in addition to
|>adding to the empire coveted the income from mining.  Anything that
|>that has interfered with this fine business venture has been dealt
|>with harshly indeed.  Few of the surviving inhabitants of EastTimor
|>have not suffered imprisonment, torture, rape, and the other niceties
|>of totalitarian regimes.  It is said guards at the McMoran mine when
|>bored have shot at natives much as some of us once shot at
|>jackrabbits.

Freeport's crimes (accurately reported here) occur in a different
province of Indonesia, Irian Jaya. Abuses in East Timor do however,
facilitate the appropriation of Timor Gap oil by American and Australian
oil interests.

|>The vast killing has naturally led to some resistance (the war Mr.
|>Cunningham refers to)
|
|The "killing" and the "resistance" presumably started about the same
|time.  Or would you have us believe the original Indonesian invaders
|were greeted with flowers, and unaccountably got seized with a wild
|bloodlust?

Indeed, the initial resistance was to an invasion (still illegal
under international law, you know). Indonesia has a weaker claim to
East Timor than Iraq does to Kuwait.

|>Some people have the effrontery to resist
|>torture, rape, and murder.  The only hope for the people of East Timor
|>is the bad publicity that was generated by a recent massacre that was
|>witnessed by foreigners.
|
|Another difference between the Indonesian regime and the Khmer Rouge
|is that foreign witnesses are allowed.

East Timor has been closed to outsiders for most of its history. The
foreign witnesses were beaten by Indonesian troops and videotape
footage escaped capture by being buried in a graveyard. The reporter
on the scene, Allan Nairn is now persona non grata in all of Indonesia
because he is a "national security threat."

|
|>At least one was a casualty.  Businesses
|>like to keep their nefarious activities in the shadows as it tends to
|>repel customers and stockholders and such and there are currently some
|>hopes of a semi-autonomous government.  The only other option for the
|>Indonesian government is to complete their extermination of the
|>population.
|
|>I have seen few postings where the hypocrisy of the writer was so
|>evident.  Strange how he condemns Noam Chomsky's blind ideology.
|
|Where in my posting did I say that all was sweetness and light in East
|Timor?

You merely state that Indonesia had "legitimate fears" of East Timor and
suggest that they should have declared a protectorate over it. In short,
the threat to the 5th largest country in the world from a nation of
600,000 (and its ability to host opposition guerrillas, with no
evidence that they would) justified ignoring the fundamental right of
those people to self determination. By your own logic, you are obligated
to condemn Suharto as a murderous thug (he's on "your side").

--
 /\  / Chan | Fish-E Carwil James |    Seek Peace & Justice Everywhere     |
/o \/- bpen | Northwestern Univ.  | CTD '88, '89, '90, '91, '94, '95 '96   |
\/ /\- bplah| Class of '96  | "But there is | "Life's a beach and the tide |
 \/  \      |               |  no context"  |  just came in."  ~Osadczuk   | 

========
Newsgroups: alt.anarchism,alt.society.anarchy,talk.politics.theory,
talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.economics,alt.fan.noam-chomsky,
alt.politics.radical-left,alt.politics.libertarian,
talk.politics.libertarian,alt.individualism
Subject: Re: Chomsky's bad faith proven:  the Khmer Rouge record
  [was  Re: Chomsky, was " If the left is understood to include
'Bolshevism,' then I would flatly dissociate myself from the
 left. Lenin was one of the greatestenemies of socialism, in my opin
From: hcunn@tiac.net (Hugo S. Cunningham)
Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 20:03:00 GMT

(reissued under my own name.  For those puzzled by its brief
appearance under "FAIR (by Hugo S. Cunningham)", that mixup occurred
because I was considering posting a message I had received from FAIR,
and got it mixed up with this one.)



fishe@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Carwil James) wrote:

>In article <522jq3$4jd@news-central.tiac.net>,
>Hugo S. Cunningham  wrote:
>|hallinan@borg.com (Terry Hallinan) wrote:
>|
>|A common estimate is 200,000 dead, a third of a far smaller population
>|than in Cambodia.
>|
>|I repeat:  there was a war in East Timor.  When the shooting lets up,
>|military operations and damage by the Indonesian government lets up.
>|(Whether that war was advisable is another question.) 

>That is a ghastly ultimatum. Even more so when you consider that
>Indonesian army violence is directed primarily at the civilian
>population. That there is a war confers no moral equality, especially
>when only one side's territory (and villages) are the battlefield.

Such an "ultimatum" used to be routine, and remains common.  I list
some other former colonies that were eyed by surrounding states.

date           colony    former         fate
de-colonized             owner
?

1950           Tibet     balanced       Occupied by China
                            betw China
                            and British
                            India

1956           Cyprus    Britain        Turkey demands partition,
                                                    secures it in 1974

1962       West Irian    Netherlands    given to Sukarno's Indonesia

1963            Goa      Portugal       India sends in army

1970s          Belize    Britain        British garrison defends
                                                 it from Guatemala,
                                                with Mexican approval

1970s       W. Sahara    Spain          Empty waste seized by Morocco.     
                                             Algeria harasses Morocco,
                                            due to other border claims
         
1982?       Falklands    Britain        Defended from Argentina for
                                              domestic British reasons

1997        Hong Kong    Britain        To be given to China

?           Gibraltar    Britain        Spanish claims resisted by
                                                 Britain


Question:  would you rather be ruled by (1) a regime that will leave
you alone and let you earn an honest living if you don't fight them,
or (2)  a regime that will kick down your door and shoot you (or send
you on a death march) for no reason at all?
   (And please don't answer that you refuse to dignify such an
outrageous "ultimatum" with a response.  It is a question billions of
people are faced with every day.)

     As for violence being directed "at the civilian population," some
blame must also be shared by those who choose a guerrilla strategy,
deliberately blurring the line between civilians and combatants.
Sometimes a cause is indeed important enough to justify putting
civilians in the line of fire, but those who do so should at least
give conscious consideration to the risks involved.

>|In contrast, Cambodia lay unresisting, prostrate at the feet of the
>|Khmer Rouge.  In 1975, the US wanted no part of any further Indochina
>|entanglements.  Khmer Rouge Cambodia had diplomatic support from
>|China, and neither of its important neighbors (Thailand and Communist
>|Vietnam) was looking for trouble.  The Khmer Rouge were as secure in
>|power as Stalin was on the eve of the Great Purge (1936).  Their
>|attack on their own people was pointless viciousness and bloodlust.

>While Indonesia was defending itself? Was engaged in a "legitimate"
>invasion?

No.  I previously said it was a stupid, unnecessary invasion:  a
protectorate or "Finlandization" option would have served Indonesia
far better.  Nevertheless, the invasion was within the bounds of
common international practice in "de-colonization."

>Indonesia was under no threat. It was quite secure, with
>a powerful military. Outside powers, especially the West, had no
>intentions of intervening. The US had given the green light. Suharto,
>orchestrator of genocide 1965-67, was as secure as Stalin.

East Timor was being handed over by a far-Left Portuguese government
to a Left-wing guerrilla movement.  Suharto might logically have
feared a local version of Castro's Cuba, chronically exporting
guerrillas and poison, if unfriendly powers were once allowed to
consolidate a foothold.  (But, again, a protectorate or
"Finlandization" could have parried this threat at infinitely less
cost.)


>|>Indonesia was given a wink and a not by
>|>President Ford and Kissinger when they invaded the fledgeling
>|>republic.  An American warship was said to be strategically stationed
>|>offshore to warn the Portuguese to not interfere.
>|
>|I wonder about that.  It is news to me that Portugal in 1975 was a
>|global naval power.
>|
>|>For any that do not know this is a venture of  Freeport McMoran Mining
>|>Company in cooperation with Indonesian government which in addition to
>|>adding to the empire coveted the income from mining.  Anything that
>|>that has interfered with this fine business venture has been dealt
>|>with harshly indeed.  Few of the surviving inhabitants of EastTimor
>|>have not suffered imprisonment, torture, rape, and the other niceties
>|>of totalitarian regimes.  It is said guards at the McMoran mine when
>|>bored have shot at natives much as some of us once shot at
>|>jackrabbits.

>Freeport's crimes (accurately reported here) occur in a different
>province of Indonesia, Irian Jaya. Abuses in East Timor do however,
>facilitate the appropriation of Timor Gap oil by American and Australian
>oil interests.

Good clarification.  Quite possibly in Irian Jaya, brutal colonization
came before any sustained resistance.

>|>The vast killing has naturally led to some resistance (the war Mr.
>|>Cunningham refers to)
>|
>|The "killing" and the "resistance" presumably started about the same
>|time.  Or would you have us believe the original Indonesian invaders
>|were greeted with flowers, and unaccountably got seized with a wild
>|bloodlust?

(If the earlier poster had realized [and made clear] he was not
talking about East Timor, my sarcastic comeback would have been
pointless.)

>Indeed, the initial resistance was to an invasion (still illegal
>under international law, you know). Indonesia has a weaker claim to
>East Timor than Iraq does to Kuwait.


     Neither Iraq nor Indonesia could prove a continuous chain of
title to the territories in question (Kuwait, East Timor).
    Kuwait, however, had a  m.u.c.h  longer history of independence,
dating back before Iraq's founding in 1921.  Kuwait had at least since
1961 been recognized by all countries in the world (except possibly
Iraq).  In contrast, East Timor's claimed independence from Portugal
was hardly a year old (if that), not universally recognized.

>|>Some people have the effrontery to resist
>|>torture, rape, and murder.  The only hope for the people of East Timor
>|>is the bad publicity that was generated by a recent massacre that was
>|>witnessed by foreigners.
>|
>|Another difference between the Indonesian regime and the Khmer Rouge
>|is that foreign witnesses are allowed.

>East Timor has been closed to outsiders for most of its history. The
>foreign witnesses were beaten by Indonesian troops and videotape
>footage escaped capture by being buried in a graveyard. The reporter
>on the scene, Allan Nairn is now persona non grata in all of Indonesia
>because he is a "national security threat."

On Saturday 21 Sep 96, I ran across a Western pro-East-Timor activist
who matter-of-factly mentioned plans to see the place for himself.  He
told me East Timor has been opened up to tourism, and that some human
rights activists believe the presence of numerous foreign witnesses
will help deter renewed repression.  (The Indonesian government,
perhaps, hopes that a little prosperity may heal some wounds and coopt
some former opponents.)

Such apparent naivete highlights an illogical aspect of human nature:
part-time warriors (like Suharto) frequently leave off killing once a
war ends, allowing former enemies to recover and prosper.  To abridge
Winston Churchill, "In war, resolution; in victory, magnanimity!"  In
contrast, domestic revolutionaries (eg Stalin and the Khmer Rouge)
might have no logical stopping point for their "permanent revolution."
     (Minor side note:  the author of the Book of Revelation
recognized foreign war and civil war as distinct evils, assigning them
different "horsemen"  [Rev 6:2 and 6:3].) 


>|
>|>At least one was a casualty.  Businesses
>|>like to keep their nefarious activities in the shadows as it tends to
>|>repel customers and stockholders and such and there are currently some
>|>hopes of a semi-autonomous government.  The only other option for the
>|>Indonesian government is to complete their extermination of the
>|>population.
>|
>|>I have seen few postings where the hypocrisy of the writer was so
>|>evident.  Strange how he condemns Noam Chomsky's blind ideology.
>|
>|Where in my posting did I say that all was sweetness and light in East
>|Timor?

>You merely state that Indonesia had "legitimate fears" of East Timor and
>suggest that they should have declared a protectorate over it. In short,
>the threat to the 5th largest country in the world from a nation of
>600,000 (and its ability to host opposition guerrillas, with no
>evidence that they would) justified ignoring the fundamental right of
>those people to self determination. By your own logic, you are obligated
>to condemn Suharto as a murderous thug (he's on "your side").

If I am as vile a hypocrite as the other poster claimed, my proposed
remedy for East Timor (protectorate, or "Finlandization") would have
to be as bloody and evil as the Khmer Rouge regime I condemn.  Surely
you can see the silliness of such a comparison?

    In East Timor, Suharto has been a blood-spattered incompetent.  

     His rule in the backward territory of Irian Jaya has also been
unhappy (though I believe with a much lower death toll).  It fits a
common pattern of more advanced Third World societies colonizing
backward regions, eg in Brazil, China, and elsewhere.

    To Suharto's credit, however, he ended Sukarno's pointless war
against Malaysia, allowing both countries to prosper.  He has given
over 100 million people a generation of peace, and a broad-based rise
in living standards.  (It is instructive that anti-corporate activists
have condemned some multinationals for moving some low-wage factories
out of Indonesia to lower-wage new markets like Vietnam.  Under
Suharto, wages have risen enough to make such a move worthwhile.)


--Hugo S. Cunningham

Go back to beginning of Khmer Rouge debate.