Talk:Jesse Helms/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

No such thing as 'death from natural causes'

He died from something (or things) specific. Other humans have lived to be 120. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.193.144.79 (talk) 19:50, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

It's a general term used when the exact cause of death has not been released, which it hasn't at this point. If you know of reliable sources that state the exact cause of death, please feel free to include them in the article. Nufy8 (talk) 21:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

--Bradley923 (talk) 03:08, 5 July 2008 (UTC): Very interesting point; it definitely makes one think. It at least made me think, and I found some interesting comments on the web from people who actually do deal with death regularly. The following is an answer one pathologist posted on a website in 1999 answering someone's question about what is death by natural causes[1]:

Specifying a cause of death is required by law in all states. Death certification provides public health statistics and prevents cover-ups of murder. Certification requires determination of a cause of death which is a disease or injury directly related to death (heart attack, stroke, AIDS) or the circumstances of death (gunshot wound to chest, death by hanging). The manner of death must also be stated (natural, accidental, suicide, homicide, unknown, pending). In your specific case, "Natural Causes" means that the death was natural but a specific cause was not apparent from the clinical history or circumstances surrounding death. In order to find a cause an autopsy would have been necessary. In older people autopsies usually aren't done if the circumstances are natural.

It seems that, especially in older people (but in younger people, too, at times), while there may indeed be a single trigger responsible for the actual death, neither the family nor doctors are suspicious, and they accept the death as a natural event that doesn't require investigation (an autopsy). According to another website, the National Center for Health Statistics recommends that: "When a number of conditions or multiple organ/system failure resulted in death, the physician, medical examiner, or coroner should choose a single sequence to describe the process leading to death and list the other conditions... "

Two examples (and these have nothing to do with Helms' death, from what I know, but are about the general topic of natural death): many people with diabetes may develop problems with their heart, kidney and limbs, all of which are further exacerbated when these conditions make exercise (something critical to treat these illnesses) difficult or impossible, and may lead to obesity, which itself complicates a variety of problems. According to the FDA, 75% of diabetes-related deaths are from cardiovascular events..

Another example: elderly individuals who are going about their daily activities, then "suddenly" break a leg (it seems sudden, but is actually just an acute event that arose after a long deterioration), get placed in a healthcare facility, catch an infection or pneumonia, develop kidney problems, which causes blood pressure and general heart problems, and next thing you know, a person goes downhill rather quickly and cannot be stabilized. Several factors contributed to the failure of multiple organs, which is known as Multiple Organ Dysfunction Syndrome (MODS), or the failure of two or more organ systems.

In such cases, the bottom line is there are multiple issues that contribute to illness and death, but neither family nor doctors feel it is necessary to perform an autopsy to determine a single responsible factor. First, it may actually still be impossible to tell; second, in any case, multiple factors play a significant role; and third, the findings do not and cannot reverse the death. Perhaps many would argue, though, that knowing the exact cause may help the family deal with closure, and it may help keep better statistics.

Anyway, point well taken, and one that perhaps gets to the core meaning of life and death. If doctors determine a specific cause of Helms' death, the page should be clarified. If not, "natural causes" may be the most we ever learn about his death. Even if we learn a specific cause about his death, the fact remains that many people's death is never clarified beyond natural causes.

Helm's abandonment of POW/MIA and KAL 007 issues?

Should something be included in the article about Helms' abandonment of pursuing the POW amd KAL 007 issues once having started the investigation? Does anyone know anything about this? Here's what I have about this -

In the United States, by the early '90s, the steam had gone out of Jesse Helms'Committee on Foreign Relations Minority Staff and interest in KAL 007 soon ceased. This may have been connected to the dismissal by Senator Helms of eight committee members, including Minority Staff Leader Jim Lucier (who later became a senior editor with the conservative “Insight” magazine). Retired Rear Admiral "Bud" Nance, a childhood friend of Jesse Helms, had ordered the "house cleaning" - incidental to his assuming the position of Minority Staff Leader in place of Jim Lucier. In Admiral Nance's own words concerning the experience of commencing his new appointment, “It [the Committee] was a zoo to me. My military mind has got to have all the men and women in line.” Not only had interest in KAL 007 fizzled, but many activists and families connected with the POW/MIA cause likewise soon became aware of the Committee's extreme drop in interest in the cause they espoused. POW/MIA matters had become intertwined with KAL 007 matters with Senator Helms' writing (Dec. 5th and 10th, 1991) to Boris Yeltsin requesting/demanding information concerning both matters (see pg. 3 of [2].89.138.16.137Bert Schlossberg89.138.16.137

I don't know anything about his alleged abandonment of those issues, but I do recall that Sen. Helms was also flying to Korea on Aug. 31, 1983. There were two KAL planes that night headed for Korea from the United States. KAL 007 departed from New York, and KAL 015 departed from LA. The two planes both landed for refueling in Alaska, and the passengers waited together in the gate area before reboarding. While they waited, Sen. Helms got acquainted with a small child, a little girl who was riding on KAL 007. She (presumably) lost her life a few hours later when the Soviets shot down her plane.

Sen. Helms had originally been booked on KAL 007, as well, but switched to the other flight, so that he could attend a Texas fundraiser hosted by Dallas Cowboys' football coach Tom Landry. NCdave (talk) 05:17, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I found a bit more info on this incident. There were actually two little girls, not one:

Jessie[sic] Helms would later write Boris Yeltsin, “This event had an element of a personal catastrophe for me, since I was on the parallel flight that night on KAL-015, which departed Anchorage, Alaska about fifteen minutes after KAL-007. Both flights stopped in Anchorage for refueling. I shall never forget mingling with the doomed passengers of KAL-007 in the transit lounge, including two sweet young girls who waved goodbye to me when they were called to return to their fatal flight.” Those two girls were Noelle and Stacy Grenfell.

The conventional wisdom is that everyone aboard KAL 007 died when it was attacked. However, that quote is from the final paragraph in the epilogue of a book whose author believes KAL 007 probably ditched successfully, and that some or all of the passengers were taken captive by the Soviets. You may read the entire epilogue here: [3]. Sorry, I don't know enough to have an opinion about whether or not that author could be right. NCdave (talk) 01:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

KAL 007 / KAL 015 & the Grenfell girls

Hi, Guycalledryan. In this edit you deleted a hefty chunk of the Jesse Helms article, including all mention of his close shave in the KAL 007 shoot-down. But you said nothing about it here on the Talk page, and your edit summary was just, "Forgot this, rmv and integrate trivia/quotes/isolated section." That makes me think that the big deletion might have been accidental, and that you might have intended to integrate at least some of that material into the article, elsewhere. But that didn't happen.

I think the material about Sen. Helms' close shave in the KAL 007 shoot-down, and his recollection of the Grenfell girls, is very important. Helms certainly thought so: he called the event, "one of the greatest tragedies of the Cold War." So I think it belongs in the article. If you do not agree, will you please say why?

Thanks. NCdave (talk) 03:52, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Still no response to NVdave. I would like permission to reinstate with slight modification :

Helms and the POW-KAL 007 Link

On December 5, 1991, Senator Helms wrote to Boris Yeltsin concerning U.S. servicemen who were POWs or MIAs. "The status of thousands and thousands of American servicemen who are held by Soviet and other Communist forces, and who were never repatriated after every major war this century, is of grave concern to the American people." Yeltsin would ultimately respond with a statement made on June 15, 1992, while being interviewed aboard his presidential jet on his way to the United States, "Our archives have shown that it is true — some of them were transferred to the territory of the U.S.S.R. and were kept in labor camps... We can only surmise that some of them may still be alive." On December 10, just five days after Senator Helms had written to Yeltsin concerning American servicemen, he wrote again to Yeltsin this time concerning KAL 007. "One of the greatest tragedies of the Cold War was the shoot-down of the Korean Airlines flight KAL-007 by the Armed Forces of what was then the Soviet Union on September 1, 1983. . . The KAL-007 tragedy was one of the most tense incidences of the entire Cold War. However, now that relations between our two nations have improved substantially, I believe that it is time to resolve the mysteries surrounding this event. Clearing the air on this issue could help further to improve relations [4]." Yeltsin would ultimately respond on January 8, 1992 by handing over to the International Civil Aviation Organization what the Russians had for so many years denied possessing: the tapes of the KAL 007's "Black Box" (its Digital Flight Data Recorder and Cockpit Voice Recorder) [5].

Helms on KAL 015

Jesse Helms would narrowly escape being shot down with Larry McDonald and the other of the 269 occupants of KAL 007 as he had decided to remain on KAL 015 which had refueled and taken on passengers and food with KAL 007 at Anchorage airport. KAL 015 would fly 15 minutes behind KAL 007 but increasingly close the gap between the two flights, only to arrive at Kimpo airport, KAL 007 never to arrive. Then is when all knew something dreadful had happened to KAL 007. Both planes were carrying U.S. congressmen to Seoul, Korea for the 30th year celebration of the Mutual Defense Treaty between the U.S. and Korea.

Jesse Helms would tell about his experience with 2 little girls from the Grenfell family [6] while waiting at Anchorage Airport - "I’ll never forget that night when that plane was just beside ours at Anchorage airport with two little girls and their parents.

Jesse Helms would tell about his experience with 2 little girls from the Grenfell family [7] while waiting at Anchorage Airport - "I’ll never forget that night when that plane was just beside ours at Anchorage airport with two little girls and their parents.

I’ll never forget that, and I know you won’t." 217.132.137.103 (talk) 19:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

UNC fix

Resolved. Fixed. Banjeboi 18:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

The text refers to Helms allegedly referring to UNC as the "University of Niggers And Communists." Yet its supporting citation quotes him as saying the "University of Negroes And Communists." The latter quote would hardly be viewed as flattering in most quarters, but the former is plainly inflammatory and indicative of bigotry, if not racism (there is a difference). I would think that at least some of the commenters here would care about accuracy.

"Despite the loss for Reagan at the convention, the intervention of Helms and Ellis arguably led to the most important conservative primary victory in the history of the Republican Party."

This quote in the section about Helms first term is as much conjecture as any comment about Helms' racism. The right wing editing of Helms Wikipedia page that has so far cleaned out even the slightest references to Helms being a racist or to racial motives to his actions, i.e. his opposition to MLK Day, is an abomination of fact and history. If it is OK to say that Helms intervention arguably shaped conservatism, then it should be OK to say that Helms was arguably a racist.

Again, the rapid-fire editing and locking of this article by Helms Defenders speaks volumes about their own problems with his racist legacy.

MLK Holiday

Resolved. Controversy section has been removed anyway. Also we can't infer or call someone racist or anything similar - we need to let WP:Reliable sources do that. Banjeboi 18:42, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

In Controversies: "Helms has long been suspected of holding racist views. Even the sympathetic conservative magazine National Review, while praising him for his stalwart conservativism, described him as "prejudiced."

Helms opposed the Martin Luther King holiday bill in 1983 on grounds that King had two associates with communist ties, Stanley Levison and Jack O'Dell, and he was also angered by King's alleged philandering."

There may be strong evidence that this man was bigoted and indeed racist but his opposition to the Martin Luther King holiday bill does not neccesarily warrant this view or at least not for the reasons mentioned. The accompanying details only support his view and position as an anti-communist and a moralist but not as a racist. Any racism is only implied there due purely on King's race and I would personally recommend entirely removing as it currently reads. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Light Bulb (talk • contribs) 22:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

Helms did not use racist arguments in opposing the MLK holiday bill. I think I recall that he made the point that President Washington was more worthy of the honor of a holiday in his name than was MLK Jr. That's hard to argue with, so Helms' critics didn't bother: they just called him names. NCdave (talk) 05:57, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow NCdave you sure know how to paint him in a good light. Helms opposed the bill using these arguments: Helms said that he thought it "ironic" that "black citizens" were the ones who most needed jobs and yet were demanding a holiday. he announced that he also opposed the holiday because King had used "nonviolence as a provocative act to disturb the peace of the state and to trigger, in many cases, overreaction by authorities" and that King supported "action-oriented Marxism." Then he yielded the floor. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/20/AR2008012002267.html Since you require hard evidence for every statement made about him, go ahead and pull the transcript from the archives. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.120.107.174 (talk) 21:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

What is your point, 71.120.107.174? Are you saying that you think either of those remarks was racist? If so, I don't see it. NCdave (talk) 18:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Honestly, If you don't see it, you're probably racist yourself. KaptainKrank (talk) 01:09, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

You don't see the first part of that remark as racist? It's because you agree with what he is saying, isn't it? Of course, to almost everyone else here, the only thing keeping it from being "over the top" racist is the lack of the word "nigger." What, do you think it takes a racial slur to make a remark racist?

Why would george washington be more deserving of a national holiday than Martin Luther King Jr.?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.114.41.153 (talk) 18:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

You even have to ask? Washington was the founder of this nation. King was one of MANY civil rights activists in our nation's history. 71.202.242.152 (talk) 20:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Alleged racism

I believe that a section on Senator Helms's alleged racism is warranted. [this anonymous comment was added on 4 June 2005 by 24.159.43.93]

Do you have sources supporting that he is racist? Or sources that say that many think he is racist? --Spangineer (háblame) 11:05, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

I didn't write the original comment, but how about this "Race was a frequent backdrop in Helms' public life. In 1950, U.S. Sen. Frank Porter Graham faced fellow Democrat Willis Smith in a hotly contested runoff. Helms supported Smith, whose supporters were accused of using racial smears. A handbill purported to show a photo of Graham's wife dancing with a black man. Smith won, and Helms was often accused of having a role in the tactics... Charges of racial politics arose again in 1990 when Helms faced former Charlotte Mayor Harvey Gantt. One Helms ad showed a pair of white hands crumpling a job rejection letter as a voice says, "You needed that job, but they had to give it to a minority." --DoorFrame

Looks convincing to me. I'm not too familiar with this senator, so I was initially a bit skeptical, especially with the kind of edits this page has been getting over the past day or so (i.e. lots of vandalism). But sounds like there's some good references to support that he was indeed quite racist. --Spangineer (háblame) 22:43, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)

Can anyone say strawman conversation? This is ridiculous. Mike 22:05, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

There's not a shred of evidence that he was racist or segregationist, ever. 71.70.174.75 15:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

• Where are you from and how old are you, anonymous? I can't point to a website that has archives, but anyone from NC who has been around a while will tell you in no uncertain terms that Mr. Helms spent the 60s editorializing on WRAL-TV against blacks and for segregation. I'm sure the evidence is in the archives at WRAL, and I'm willing to walk away from WP forever if you can prove me wrong. You willing to do the same? -Jcbarr 19:04, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to jump in here a year and a half late, but I guess it is never too late to set the record straight. I've lived in NC for 24 years, and I've been a attentive observer of the political tussles here, and I have never seen any evidence at all that Helms was racist, nor any evidence that he was a segregationist. I can't speak from personal experience about anything prior to 1984, but I witnessed several really hard-fought Senate campaigns, and there can be no doubt that if there were any reliable evidence of Helms' supposed racism his Democrat opponents would have openly used it against him. They didn't. Instead, they ran disreputable whisper campaigns, spreading false rumors about him. For example, an African-American friend here in Raleigh told me that she knew that Helms had once said that "the only good n____r is a dead n____r." Of course she had not heard it herself, but she'd been told. NCdave (talk) 04:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Surely this last post from NCDave is satirical in nature. You mean to say that verifiable anecdotal evidence, coupled with years of segregationist and racist editorials on television isn't enough to convince you Helms was racist?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gogosoul63 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

From a slate article today on Helms: "...famously deploying the "white hands" ad 20 years later, in which the genius of Dick Morris exploited the woes of the rejected white job seeker. That episode did get a mention in the obituary, but there was no recollection of Helms' role in opposing the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday, in protecting the apartheid state from the imposition of sanctions, or in defending white Rhodesia." Can we at least acknowledge a trend of racially tinged actions that might indicate racism? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gogosoul63 (talk • contribs) 15:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

An article about Jess Helms, the word racism appears only once and it's the title of a book. Are you jocking ?

"To rob the Negro of his reputation of thinking through a problem in his own fashion is about the same as trying to pretend that he doesn't have a natural instinct for rhythm and for singing and dancing." — Helms responding in 1956 to criticism that a fictional black character in his newspaper column was offensive.

Source is AP : http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5glajfJbQP2WmgGcjVzbfYrT4VKWwD91N40A80

Is it racist enough ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.200.87.186 (talk) 21:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Are YOU joking? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.61.176.6 (talk) 01:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

1956? That's over 50 years ago! And no indication even of where or when he supposedly said it, even at that. That's your proof of Helms' racism, 196.200.87.186?

I've lived in NC nearly a quarter century, and in that time I've never seen any evidence of Helms' alleged racism. In fact, it was Helms who led the effort in Congress to combat HIV/AIDS in Africa, where nearly all the victims are black, at a time when most American politicians (including all the prominent Democrats) couldn't be bothered.

If Helms was racist, then why did he care so much about all the black African babies dying of HIV/AIDS?

I've lived through four of Helms' very high-profile Senate campaigns, and if there were any hard evidence of his racism to be found then his opponents, with their multi-million dollar campaign warchests and sophisticated opposition research operations, would surely have found it and used it against him. (Jim Hunt certainly does not play softball politics!) None of Helms' Democratic opponents were able to find any such evidence, so you can be certain that there is none to be found.

I'm tired of all these unsubstantiated "racism" accusations being inserted into this article. Potato dude has again inserted a boatload of unsourced and poorly sourced attacks on Sen. Jesse Helms into his article, this time with the edit summary, "(ok, no longer a BLP)." (Some of them have since been removed, thankfully.) I think Potato Dude misunderstands Wikipedia's policies. It is not acceptable to insert dubious accusations into a biography just because the subject of the biography died a few hours earlier. If anything, that is even more offensive. In fact, it is indecent.

According to Wikipedia's policies, all information must be verifiably from reliable sources. We've discussed[8][9] this before. For instance, Potato Dude reinserted the unsubstantiated accusation that Helms "doctored photos" in the Willis Smith campaign. It was way back in March that I asked on the Talk page, "if you have evidence that Helms doctored photos or circulated doctored photos, please share it."[10] In over three months, nobody has found any reliable source for that accusation. Please, everyone, cease inserting unsourced and poorly-sourced attacks on Sen. Helms into that article. NCdave (talk) 14:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with NCdave in that we must have reliable sourcing for accusations of racism. I do however have little doubt there is at least some truth that Helms was at least seen as a racist and soon enough the article will do its best to portray Helms accurately as reliable sourcing will allow. We also have to adhere to NPOV so balancing statements that he took part in racist actions or said something racist has to include items that may explain or defend his actions. Banjeboi 18:56, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I think quotes that are self-evidently racist don't need to be labeled as such, but I don't think NPOV includes defending his actions. Let the facts speak for themselves. justinfr (talk) 19:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

If they are self-evident then we likely wouldn't be talking about them. In any case many reliable sources that do speak to bigotry, homophobia and racism seem to exist in abundance. Banjeboi 21:02, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

How about this as a source? http://www.theroot.com/id/47197?from=rss216.67.49.64 (talk) 01:27, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I think that's a great source! Banjeboi 01:58, 10 July 2008 (UTC)