Word: chiles
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
PRESIDENT FORD'S admission, in his September 16 press conference, that the United States had intervened in Chile's internal affairs with the intent to "destabilize" the democratically-elected government headed by Salvador Allende--and the international furor which had resulted from previous unofficial disclosures--may well, ironically enough, have had a positive effect on American foreign policy. Ford's blundering explanation of American activities in Chile was a remarkable example of political naivete. When asked whether intervention in another nation's internal affairs designed to weaken the foreign government could be justified under international law, and whether the Soviet...
...another point, in an effort to be more specific about U.S. expenditures for covert activities in Chile, Ford claimed that Allende had taken steps to muzzle opposition parties and press, although it was already known that the single incident which the administration could cite was the case of the newspaper, "El Mercurio," shut down for one day and then reopened by court order...
...this was indeed the reason that the trip was permitted, if it was purely a political move made by the State Department due to the precariousness of its internal position and the erosion of its credibility, it would still be a positive outgrowth of American crimes in Chile. But there may well be a more fundamental reason. President Ford has not yet publicly commented on the trip, and an aide to Javits said that the President had made no efforts to contact either Senator to prevent it. This appears to indicate that Javits and Pell at least had Ford...
...with Cuba while serving as House minority leader, there is no reason to doubt that he might not alter his stance, as he did on both China policy and the amnesty issue. It is reasonable to think that Ford is aware that the continuing exposure of American intervention in Chile can only hinder U.S. foreign policy. By allowing Javits and Pell to go to Cuba, a possible first step in an eventual detente with the Castro government, the President may be seeking to ameliorate the negative international reaction to American involvement in Chile...
Reading Lamont's essays grates against all the modern sensibilities. Samples from one year, 1973, range from an interview with Chile's president Salvador Allende to a humanist pamphlet titled "How to Be Happy--Though Married." Who is this latter-day Ben Franklin, anyway? Why is he trying to take a stance on every conceivable aspect of life in this world? How can anyone be "conversant," "critical," and "definitive" in more than the appointed intellectual niche? Corliss Lamont, yea even a Corliss Widener, who does he think...