Declassified: US Imperialism, Terror, and Support for Tyranny

Started by Horhey, Apr 12, 2011, 09:44:14 PM

Author
Declassified: US Imperialism, Terror, and Support for Tyranny (Read 42,945 times)

Eidotemit

So far this lesson seems to be old, well known, information, out of context citations and bold assumptions and strained conclusions that draw them all together.

Sure, America has done some extremely objectionable things int he past (during a specific time of extreme tension), and may continue to do so as well (though your recent statement regarding the involvement in South America is half baked and overstated), in various ways (usually involving economic manipulation these days); however this can be said of literally any country, carried in scale relative to the country. Again, I also must reiterate that you are reaching conclusions about present day American government based off of information that no longer accurately correlates to modern America.

The conclusions you are reaching are without significant merit; especially to the original root of this "lesson," that the US election is essentially meaningless as each elected official continues some secret agenda.

DoomRulz

Every government has a hidden agenda. I didn't think that was a secret. But as far as conspiracy theories go, think about this: they can't make their not-so secret plans come to fruition, never mind their secret plans.

SM

Based on recent Wikileaks, it would seem their agendas weren't so hidden after all.  All these supposed revelations coming to light about our government were generally met with "Yeah, so?  Who DIDN'T know Kevin Rudd was a control freak?"

Horhey

Horhey

#93
Part 2: The "Human Rights President"

By the late 1970s, the US government began to be concerned about a couple of things. One was that Somoza, the dictator of Nicaragua, was losing control. The US was losing a major base for its exercise of force in the region. A second danger was even more threatening. In El Salvador in the 1970s, there was a growth of what were called "popular organizations"-peasant associations, cooperatives, unions, Church-based Bible study groups that evolved into self-help groups, etc.

In the muted words of the State Department:

QuoteFaced with increasing demands for social change in the 1970s, traditional ruling groups continued their dominance by employing electoral fraud and repression.

The Oxford Companion to American Military History explains that:

QuoteIn the late 1970s, various small left wing insurgent groups allied to "popular organizations" of peasants, students, and slum dwellers began challenging the military government.

-That raised the threat of democracy.

In December 1980, New York Times, reporter Raymond Bonner asked Jose Napoleon Duarte, who had just become president of the US-backed ruling junta, "why the guerrillas were in the hills". Duarte, responded with an answer that surprised Bonner:

QuoteFifty years of lies, fifty years of injustice, fifty years of frustration. This is a history of people starving to death, living in misery. For fifty years the same people had all the power, all the money, all the jobs, all the education, all the opportunities.

The response suprised Bonner who did not expect Duarte to offer any justification for the revolution. What suprised Bonner even more was "what he had not said":

QuoteHe had not mentioned the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. There was no talk of the Cold War or the Soviet Union. What Duarte was saying was that the revolution had been caused and fueled by the conditions in El Salvador.

In a speach in 1969, Duarte said:

QuoteUS policy in Latin America was designed to maintain the Ibero-American countries in a condition of direct dependence upon the international political decisions most beneficial to the United States, both at the hemisphere and world levels. Thus [the North Americans] preach to us of democracy while everywhere they support dictatorships.

The World Bank found that Latin America has "the most unequal income distribution in the world," and predicted "chaos" unless governments "act aggressively against poverty," which is truly appalling in its depth and scale:

Quotestabilisation and structural adjustment have brought magnificent returns to the rich— in a continent with the world's most unequal distribution of income. Failures to act aggressively on poverty will likely encourage distributive conflicts, prompting discontent and perhaps even a return to populism, dirigisme and chaos.

Overall US enforced authoritarian and corporate-state capitalist programs in El Salvador were described by one Salvadoran this way in 1995:

QuoteI used to work on a hasienda. My job was to take care of the [owner's] dogs. I gave them meat and bowls of milk, food that I couldn't give to my own family. When the dogs were sick, I took them to the veterinarian. When my children were sick, the [owner] gave me his sympathy, but no medicine as they died. To watch your children die in sickness and hunger while you can do nothing is violence to the spirit. We have suffered that silently for too many years.

SM

Ah, Venezuela...

Ghostface

If it's posted on wikileaks, does that make it Canon?

SM


Horhey

Horhey

#97
The Assassination of Archbishop Romero by US Army School of the Americas Graduates

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_5B3jpRQBI#



In February 1980, the Archbishop of El Salvador, Oscar Romero, sent a letter to President Carter in which he wrote:

QuoteSan Salvador February 17, 1980

His Excellency
The President of the United States
Mr. Jimmy Carter

Dear Mr. President:

In the last few days, news has appeared in the national press that worries me greatly. According to the reports, your government is studying the possibility of economic and military support and assistance to the present government junta.

Because you are a Christian and because you have shown that you want to defend human rights, I venture to set forth for you my pastoral point of view in regard to this news and to make a specific request of you.

I am very concerned by the news that the government of the United States is planning to further El Salvador's arms race by sending military equipment and advisors to "train three Salvadoran battallions in logistics, communications, and intelligence." If this information from the papers is correct, instead of favoring greater justice and peace in El Salvador, your government's contribution will undoubtedly sharpen the injustice and the repression inflicted on the organized people, whose struggle has often been for respect for their most basic human rights.

The present government junta and, especially, the armed forces and security forces have unfortunately not demonstrated their capacity to resolve in practice the nation's serious political and structural problems. For the most part, they have resorted to repressive violence, producing a total of deaths and injuries much greater than under the previous military regime, whose systematic violation of huamn rights was reported by the Inter-American Commission on Huamn Rights.

The brutal form in which the security forces recently evicted and murdered the occupiers of the headquarters of the Christian Democratic Party, even though the junta and the party apparently did not authorize the operation, is an indication that the junta and the Christian Democrats do not govern the country, but that political power is in the hands of unscrupulous military officers who know only how to repress the people and favor the interests of the Salvadoran oligarchy.

If it is true that last November a "group of six Americans was in El Salvador...providing $200,000 in gas masks and flak jackets and teaching how to use them against demonstrators," you ought to be informed that it is evident that since the security forces, with increased personal protection and efficiency, have even more violently repressed the people, using deadly weapons.

For this reason, given that as a Salvadoran and archbishop of the archdiocese of San Salvador, I have an obligation to see that faith and justice reign in my country, I ask you, if you truly want to defend human rights: to forbid that military aid be given to the Salvadoran government; to guarantee that your government will not intervene directly or indirectly, with military, economic, diplomatic, or other pressures, in determining the destiny of the Salvadoran people;

In these moments, we are living through a grave economic and political crisis in our country, but it is certain that increasingly the people are awakening and organizing and have begun to prepare themselves to manage and be responsible for the future of El Salvador, as the only ones capable of overcoming the crisis.

It would be unjust and deplorable for foreign powers to intervene and frustrate the Salvadoran people, to repress them and keep them from deciding autonomously the economic and political course that our nation should follow. It would be to violate a right that the Latin American bishops, meeting at Puebla, recognized publicly when we spoke of "the legitimate self-determination of our peoples, which allows them to organize according to their own spirit and the course of their history and to cooperate in a new international order" (Puebla, 505).

I hope that your religious sentiments and your feelings for the defense of human rights will move you to accept my petition, thus avoiding greater bloodshed in this suffering country.

Sincerely,
Oscar A. Romero
Archbishop

Hardly news to Washington, needless to say. Archbishop Romero often spoke critically of the US, which supported the right-wing government of El Salvador and those of other Latin American countries in their so-called "dirty wars", organizing, training, arming, advising, and funding military, paramilitary, and and police forces.



A few weeks later, Archbishop Romero was assassinated while saying mass by U.S.-backed forces, and then the U.S. carried out a major war against the Catholic Church.

The UN Truth Commission in 1993 concluded that:

QuoteThe Commission finds that Major Roberto D'Aubuisson ordered the assassination of the Archbishop and that Army Capt. Eduardo Avila and former Capt. Alvaro Saravia, as well as Fernando Sagrera played an active role in the assassination. Major Roberto D'Aubuisson is cited for organizing death squads and ordering the murder of Archbishop Romero.

Three of the assassins - including Major Roberto D'Aubuisson - studied at the notorious US Army School of the Americas, a US military college in Fort Benning, Georgia, which for decades taught counter-insurgency to more than 60,000 cadets from Latin American regimes. It was renamed in 2001 after a series of scandals, including the discovery there of stacks of "torture and execution" manuals.

US Support for NeoNazi Death Squad Leader

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8Jdc4Wj5M8#



The Neo-Nazi - Major Roberto D'Aubuisson was "leader for-life" of the ARENA party (party of the death squads), which governed El Salvador untill recently; members of the party, like Salvadoran president Alfredo Cristiani, had to take a blood oath of loyalty to him. His death squad network's slogan was, "Be a Patriot! Kill a Priest."

He was considered to be the most notorious torturer and Death Squad leader in El Salvador; he was described by Robert White, former U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador, as a "pathological killer," and was widely known as "Major Soplete" (i.e., "Major Blowtorch"). The Major was Washington's dirty secret in El Salvador.

In the 1984 article entitled "Behind the Death Squads: An Exclusive Report on the U.S. Role in El Salvador's Official Terror", award winning investigative journalist, Allan Nairn reported that:

Quoteofficials of the State Department, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the U.S. armed forces have:

• furnished intelligence files that D'Aubuisson used for a series of 1 980 television broadcasts in which he denounced dozens of academics, trade unionists, peasant leaders, Christian Democrats, and members of the clergy as communists or guerrilla collaborators. Many of the individuals D'Aubuisson named in his television speeches were subsequently assassinated. The broadcasts launched D'Aubuisson's political career and marked the emergence of the paramilitary front which later became ARENA;

maledoro


Ghost Rider

Quote from: Horhey on Apr 14, 2011, 09:53:31 AM
Quote from: Eidotemit on Apr 14, 2011, 05:01:25 AM
So far this lesson seems to be old, well known, information, out of context citations and bold assumptions and strained conclusions that draw them all together.

Sure, America has done some extremely objectionable things int he past (during a specific time of extreme tension), and may continue to do so as well (though your recent statement regarding the involvement in South America is half baked and overstated), in various ways (usually involving economic manipulation these days); however this can be said of literally any country, carried in scale relative to the country. Again, I also must reiterate that you are reaching conclusions about present day American government based off of information that no longer accurately correlates to modern America.

The conclusions you are reaching are without significant merit; especially to the original root of this "lesson," that the US election is essentially meaningless as each elected official continues some secret agenda.

Let me give you an example of why I cant just "get to the point." Does anyone here really understand the dynamics of Globalization or global economics and trade in general? Has anyone here ever heard of CAFTA and read it's requirements? Has anyone here ever heard of the "Alliance for Progress?" What about the language that Washington uses to mask it's intentions? Has anyone here ever read the documents that expose what Washington means when they use such wonderful terms as "democracy" or "freedom" or "liberation"? Does anyone here know how Washington determines friends and foes or how to decode the language they use to describe governments they are targeting for regime change? Just a few examples.

Tell me. What does these statements by Obama mean to you?

President Obama himself - not just his recycled administration of Clinton officials - supports Henry Kissinger's stand:

QuoteIf we cannot manage Central America, it will be impossible to convince threatened nations in the Persian Gulf and in other places that we know how to manage the Global Equilibrium.

The latter phrase is a euphemism for our rule of the globe. In other words, we may not frighten them enough to accept our orders unless at least we can manage Central America, right near by.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxrhWTZoBP8#

QuoteRenewing U.S. Leadership in the Americas

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama

Cuban American National Foundation


Since the Bush Administration launched a misguided war in Iraq, its policy in the Americas has been negligent toward our friends, ineffective with our adversaries, disinterested in the challenges that matter in peoples' lives, and incapable of advancing our interests in the region.

No wonder, then, that demagogues like Hugo Chavez have stepped into this vacuum. His predictable yet perilous mix of anti-American rhetoric, authoritarian government, and checkbook diplomacy offers the same false promise as the tried and failed ideologies of the past. But the United States is so alienated from the rest of the Americas that this stale vision has gone unchallenged, and has even made inroads from Bolivia to Nicaragua. And Chavez and his allies are not the only ones filling the vacuum. While the United States fails to address the changing realities in the Americas, others from Europe and Asia – notably China – have stepped up their own engagement.

That is the record – the Bush record in Latin America – that John McCain has chosen to embrace. Senator McCain doesn't talk about these trends in our hemisphere because he knows that it's part of the broader Bush-McCain failure to address priorities beyond Iraq. The situation has changed in the Americas, but we've failed to change with it. The stakes could not be higher. It is time for us to recognize that the future security and prosperity of the United States is fundamentally tied to the future of the Americas.

The Bush Administration has offered no clear vision for this future, and neither has John McCain. So we face a clear choice in this election. We can continue as a bystander, or we can lead the hemisphere into the 21st century. And when I am President of the United States, we will choose to lead.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/samgrahamfelsen/gGCMCY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gopuefFpcx0#

At a campaign speech in Alexandria, Virginia, Obama stated:

QuoteWe've been so obsessed with Iraq and so obsessed with the Middle East,  we've been neglecting Latin America even in our own back yard. We've been diverted from focusing on Latin America... Is it any surprise, then, that you've seen people like Hugo Chavez move into the void, because we've been neglectful of that,

China has been sending diplomats and economic development specialists and building roads all throughout Latin America. They are securing trade agreements and contracts. And we ignore Latin America at our own peril.

Ill get to the point shortly. A big shocker coming..

This just keeps getting better and better.

The PredBen

7 Pages and going strong!

Ghost Rider

Quote from: The PredBen on Apr 14, 2011, 03:21:19 PM
7 Pages and going strong!

Yep. Let's see what other American "Imperialist"  stuff is posted.

maledoro


Eidotemit

There had better be a point coming, because so far there isn't one. Well, beyond demonstrating a lesson on how to strain information to tie it to other bits of loosely or completely unrelated history. So, if you please, finish copy-pasting and get on with it.

Also, I, as I assume most involved in this thread, know of CAFTA (the same goes for globalization, and the failed Alliance for Progress). I also disagree with it (and NAFTA) as many in America, even those in "Washington," do (including Obama who voted "no" on CAFTA).

Don't be condescending about things that are fairly common knowledge; especially when you don't seem to fully understand them.

Horhey

Horhey

#104
Washington's War against the Church

Many of the victims of Washington's war efforts in Central America were priests, nuns, Church lay workers, and for clear and explicit reasons, which you can see officially stated, like the famous School of America, which trains Latin American officers. 

In an article entiteled "Running a School for Dictators",Newsweek Magazine covered some of the training exercises at the US Army School of the Americas:

QuoteSources at the School of the Americas say that when Honduran and Colombian soldiers go through the urban-combat exercise with blanks in their weapons, half the time the village Priest (played by a U.S. Army chaplain) is killed or roughed up.

One of the School's advertising points is that the U.S. Army helped defeat liberation theology, which was a dominant force, and it was an enemy for the same reason that secular nationalism in the Arab world was an enemy – it was working for the poor:

QuoteMany of the critics [of the School of the Americas] supported Marxism — Liberation Theology — in Latin America — which was defeated with the assistance of the US Army.

This is the same reason why Hamas and Hezbollah are enemies: they are working for the poor. It doesn't matter if they are Catholic or Muslim or anything else; that is intolerable. The Church of Latin America had undertaken "the preferential option for the poor."

They committed the crime of going back to the Gospels. The contents of the Gospels are mostly suppressed (in the U.S.); they are a radical pacifist collection of documents. It was turned into the religion of the rich by the Emperor Constantine, who eviscerated its content. If anyone dares to go back to the Gospels, they become the enemy, which is what liberation theology was doing.

Human Rights Watch reports:

QuoteSince the post-Vatican II transformation of the Catholic Church in Latin America and the diffusion of theologies of "liberation" advocating a preferential option for the poor, church workers have fallen under suspician and have become targets of threats and attacks. The enmity felt for the Jesuits within certain sectors of the military and the far right has been matched by violence directed against catechists and other lay and clerical church workers throughout the country.

Archbisphop Romero's explanation of why churches and churchworkers become targets of emnity and hostility in El Salvador still seems apt:

QuoteWhile it is clear that our Church has been the victim of persecution. It is not that just any Priest or just any institution has been persecuted. It is that segment of the Church which is on the side of the poor and has come out in their defense that has been persecuted and attacked.

Here we once again encounter the key to understanding the persecution of the Church: the poor. It is again the poor who permit us to understand what has happened. That is why the Church has come to understand what persecution of the poor is. The persecution comes about because of the Church's defense of the poor, for assuming the destiny of the poor.

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News