FREEDOM 101 – Jason Hirthler and Jeff Brown share their stories of hope, on China Rising Radio Sinoland

The buck stops with YOU. If you don’t share this, who will?

Downloadable SoundCloud podcast (also at the bottom of this page), as well as being syndicated on iTunes and Stitcher Radio(links below):


[dropcap]P[/dropcap]ictured above is Jason Hirthler on the left, in New York and myself on the right, in China. We are twelve time zones apart, geographically halfway around the planet from each other. Yet, we have both succeeded in coming out of the anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist closet, continue to work at normal jobs and have friends and family who respect us. We empathize with you that it may seem like mission impossible. We too face the foghorn of withering Western propaganda, with its relentless societal pressure to conform and be a mindless Myrmidon in the mainstream matrix. But, it can be done.


 

That’s you on the left and the elites’ mainstream media on the right. There’s only one solution: quit watching, listening to and reading their brainwashing propaganda. It’s like a bad drug that makes you stupid and babble. I know, because I used to be a muttering idiot myself. Then, get smart and find your freedom elsewhere in the information world. Read on…

In today’s discussion, you can see by the long list of tag words that Jason and I covered a lot of fascinating and interesting territory. Listen to our stories about how we gained our freedom and dignity, so you too can find the will to liberate your innate intelligence and the courage to unshackle your powers of reason. Regardless of your age, it is never too late. Jason figured it out in his forties, me in my late fifties. Everyone has their own unique life experiences through which to take their journeys of discovery and enlightenment. And there is a critical bonus. It gives you the knowledge and satisfaction of not living the rest of your life as an imperial ventriloquist dummy. That in itself is priceless.


1950’s British ventriloquist Peter Bough on the right and his dummy Archie Andrews, on the left. They are playing the perfect allegory of the West’s deep state and its manipulated masses, respectively. That’s also me on the left, until I was about 58 years old, when I took my life-changing journey across China, in 44 Days (https://ganxy.com/i/88276/). You too can choose to not be Archie Andrews. Read on…

The French have a wonderful proverb, A clear conscience makes a soft pillow. Jason and I both took our separate paths to get there, but we can finally say we sleep soundly at night. You, us, we all deserve the sweet dreams of self-respect.

Jason’s résumé is impressive. He is a writer, media critic, and veteran of the digital communications industry. As a digital media strategist, he is familiar with the techniques and tactics commonly used by mainstream news media to shape narratives that disguise imperialism. He is interested in the false historical narratives that underpin the foreign policies of the United States and which ensure those policies are only feebly resisted. To that end, Hirthler has published more than 150 articles across a variety of progressive sites like CounterpunchDissident Voice, and The Greanville Post. He has also authored two collections of his political essays, The Sins of Empire, and most recently, Imperial Fictions. He lives in New York City and can be reached at jasonhirthler@gmail.com.

You can read Jason’s work here:

Counterpunchhttps://www.counterpunch.org/author/hav3h/

Dissident Voicehttps://dissidentvoice.org/search/?q=jason+hirthler&sa=Search

Greanville Posthttps://www.greanvillepost.com/?s=jason+hirthler

To start debrainwashing, may I suggest replacing your four favorite mainstream media bookmarks with the three aforementioned websites, along with www.chinarising.puntopress.com? I promise you that overnight, your IQ will go up ten points and your self-worth will suddenly find a noble purpose.

Jason and I talked about a few things to follow up with, on your journey to freedom and dignity:

You can read the prologue to Book #2 of The China Trilogy (http://chinarising.puntopress.com/2017/05/19/the-china-trilogy/) here: http://chinarising.puntopress.com/china-rising-the-book/

Jason recommended Alex Carey’s book, Taking the Risk out of Democracyhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Carey

He also likes reading Paul Street, David Harvey and Anthony De Mello: https://www.paulstreet.org/http://davidharvey.org/and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_de_Mello.

I mentioned Edward Bernays and his classic treatise, Propagandahttp://whale.to/b/bernays.pdf

I also talked about socialist Upton Sinclair and his history changing investigative book, The Junglehttps://www.gutenberg.org/files/140/140-h/140-h.htm

The book I mentioned about the US’s drive to become a global colonial power is: The War Lovers: Roosevelt, Lodge, Hearst, and the Rush to Empire, 1898https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7323969-the-war-lovers

Friends and fans of China Rising Radio Sinoland, it’s time to get smart, and to gain your freedom and dignity from our parasitic elite owners. They may own the system, but they can’t control your brains, once you make the decision to cross the Rubicon and into the realm of clarity and truth.

So, just do itAnd when you are ready to celebrate leaving the matrix, send Jason and me an email (jasonhirthler@gmail.comand jeff@brownlanglois.com). We’d love to hear your stories of redemption and newfound liberty.

Finally, while you are attending your own Freedom 101 class, don’t forget to read Jason’s and my books. Sharing is caring. Keep posting our work on all your social media. Your contacts will be glad you did.

SOURCE: Freedom 101 – Jason Hirthler and Jeff J. Brown share their stories of hope, on China Rising Radio Sinoland 171126


Or better yet, buy one of Jeff’s books offered below. 
Lizard

Screen Shot 2015-08-05 at 6.19.17 PM

ABOUT JEFF BROWN

jeffBusyatDesktop

Punto Press released China Rising - Capitalist Roads, Socialist Destinations (2016); and for Badak Merah, Jeff authored China Is Communist, Dammit! – Dawn of the Red Dynasty (2017). As well, he published a textbook, Doctor WriteRead’s Treasure Trove to Great English (2015). He is also currently penning an historical fiction, Red Letters – The Diaries of Xi Jinping, to be published in late 2018. Jeff is a Senior Editor & China Correspondent for The Greanville Post, where he keeps a column, Dispatch from Beijing. He also writes a column for The Saker, called the Moscow-Beijing Express. Jeff interviews and podcasts on his own program, China Rising Radio Sinoland, which is also available on SoundCloud, YouTube, Stitcher Radio and iTunes.

More details about Jeff Brown's background.
 In China, he has been a speaker at TEDx, the Bookworm and Capital M Literary Festivals, the Hutong, as well as being featured in an 18-part series of interviews on Radio Beijing AM774, with former BBC journalist, Bruce Connolly. He has guest lectured at the Beijing Academy of Social Sciences and various international schools and universities.

Jeff grew up in the heartland of the United States, Oklahoma, much of it on a family farm, and graduated from Oklahoma State University. He went to Brazil while in graduate school at Purdue University, to seek his fortune, which whetted his appetite for traveling the globe. This helped inspire him to be a Peace Corps Volunteer in Tunisia in 1980 and he lived and worked in Africa, the Middle East, China and Europe for the next 21 years. All the while, he mastered Portuguese, Arabic, French and Mandarin, while traveling to over 85 countries. He then returned to America for nine years, whereupon he moved back to China in 2010. He lives in China with his wife. Jeff is a dual national French-American, being a member of the Communist Party of France (PCF) and the International Workers of the World (IWW).

Jason’s résumé is impressive. He is a writer, media critic, and veteran of the digital communications industry. As a digital media strategist, he is familiar with the techniques and tactics commonly used by mainstream news media to shape narratives that disguise imperialism. He is interested in the false historical narratives that underpin the foreign policies of the United States and which ensure those policies are only feebly resisted.

Jeff can be reached at China Rising, jeff@brownlanglois.com, Facebook, Twitter and Wechat/Whatsapp: +86-13823544196.


 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.


social media outlets

CHINA RISING BOOKS & OUTLETS CLICK HERE


[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]




Ron, Gorby and Nancy Too: What Might Have Been

black-horizontalPast in Present Tense with Murray Polner

 

Reagans and Gorbachevs

President Ronald Reagan and first lady Nancy Reagan greet Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and his wife Raisa outside the White House before a State Dinner, Dec. 8, 1987. Earlier in the day, Reagan and Gorbachev signed a treaty to eliminate intermediate-range missiles. (AP Photo/Ron Edmonds)

 


[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he first and only time I saw Mikhail Gorbachev was when his motorcade sped down Manhattan’s Third Avenue one sunny day in the eighties while tens of thousands cheered the man who was trying to reform his morally and politically bankrupt nation and reduce the threat of cold and hot wars. As his car raced by I raised two fingers in  V, Dove-like, style.

I also saw Ronald Reagan once when I caught sight of him as he and Nancy entered a posh Manhattan hotel for some party bash. The large crowd cheered, but I didn’t raise my fingers in salute. I had, after all, voted for the Carter and Mondale.

Who thought then that Gorby the communist, and Ron the hawk, urged on by his shrewd and smart wife to meet and talk with the Russian, would become friends and warm pen pals  and more importantly, advocates for a more peaceful, non-nuclear world, as we now definitively know from the release of the Gorbachev File, which marked the Russian’s  85th birthday on March 2, 2016, by the non-governmental National Security Archive [NSA], which houses an invaluable collection of declassified material.

The Gorbachev File covers once-secret British and American documents from March 1985 to 1991 and especially the Reagan-Gorbachev correspondence. After meeting Gorbachev in London in December 1984, Margaret Thatcher was so taken with him that she wrote Reagan the Russian was “fully in charge” and “determined to press ahead with his internal reform,” except on nuclear abolition, which she opposed but Reagan did not. Still, she told Reagan, who she liked and admired, “I like Gorbachev. We can do business together.”

Three months later, the CIA agreed, accepting that that something new and different was happening in the Soviet Union and Gorbachev was “the new broom,” a conclusion Washington’s unreconstructed cold warriors and especially its neocons, always ready to fight wars with our kids but rarely if ever with theirs, found hard to accept.

But the CIA had its doubts and still considered Gorbachev a “tough” hard-liner who would be a difficult partner at any summit meeting. They believed his “new broom” only applied to domestic affairs, which was an error, comments the NSA, given that, for example, the old Stalinist Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko was soon  dumped by the moderate Eduard Shevardnadze, indicating to NSA that Gorbachev was in fact concerned with foreign policy.

In 1985, Reagan sent Gorbachev a handwritten letter (Reagan, as we know, was a compulsive, serious writer who kept a diary and  often wrote his own letters, without secretarial help) telling him he was ready “to cooperate in any reasonable way to facilitate” a “Russian removal” from Afghanistan, Moscow’s calamitous version of the American debacle in Vietnam.

That same year the two men met for the first time in Geneva. NSA commented, “both spoke about the mistrust and suspicions of the past and of the need to begin a new stage in U.S.-Soviet relations….They both spoke about their aversion to nuclear weapons.”

Gorbachev quoted the Bible about moving past disagreements and Reagan responded by remarking  that “if the people of the world were to find out that there was some alien life form that was going to attack the Earth approaching on Halley’s Comet, then that knowledge would unite all peoples of the world.” Again NSA: “The aliens had landed, in Reagan’s view, in the form of nuclear weapons, and Gorbachev would remember this phrase, quoting it directly in his famous ‘new thinking’ speech at the 27th Party Congress in February 1986.”

Visibly impressed, Reagan again wrote Gorbachev of his wish to work with him on arms control measures to “provide us with a genuine chance to make progress toward our common ultimate goal of eliminating nuclear weapons,” yet another outrage to Washington’s entrenched hawks when they learned of Reagan’s intentions. They were even more indignant when Reagan invited Gorbachev to a summit in Washington where their friendship deepened.

Gorbachev, obviously pleased, wrote back that the USSR and USA had to maintain peace and “not let things come to the outbreak of nuclear war, which would inevitably have catastrophic consequences for both sides.”

Was Reagan, untutored in the intricacies and duplicities of foreign policy, a man who had once played dumb about Iran-Contra and backed a proxy war in Central America simply naive and too trusting? Yet somehow, unknown to his closest aides, let alone his pugnacious supporters, Reagan, the loner, was taken by his fear of a nuclear clash. Their correspondence and the 1986 Reykjavik, Iceland, summit shows them trying to pursue a course which their successors have ignored. NSA’s post has Reagan’s letters “sometimes personally dictated, even handwritten, explain their positions on arms control, strategic defenses, and the need for nuclear abolition.”

When they met in Iceland, they shocked many of their advisors and supporters by agreeing “in principle”  to remove intermediate range nukes from Europe and to restrict the number of missile warheads and then all nukes by within ten years.

The deal fell apart for a variety of reasons such as differences over “trust and verify” and the Star Wars Initiative, which Thatcher considered unworkable. The next year, however, saw some progress with the approval of the INF treaty but for both nation’s unrepentant hawks, the two leaders had been too nice to one another, too forgiving, too willing to forgive and forget. Reagan was denounced as an appeaser by some of his former admirers, and Gorbachev would be forced out in 1991. Among his other sins: Letting East Germany go without killing rebels, as the Chinese did at Tiananmen Square, and withdrawing Russian troops from Afghanistan, something Bush2 and Obama have not done. For both nations, then, negotiation was out and escalation was in.

All the same, one supportive group, the National Threat Initiative, chaired by former Senator Sam Nunn, had it right: Reykjavik “has remained in history as a near successful attempt of leaders of nuclear powers to agree on complete elimination of nuclear weapons.”

With Reagan retired, the deposed Gorbachev opposed the bombing of Yugoslavia in 1995, the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and especially, despite American promises, the US-NATO move ever closer to Russia’s borders, which he believed represented a serious threat. Interviewed by the British newspaper, the Telegraph, in May 2008, he sounded bitter. “We had ten years after the Cold War to build a new world order and yet we squandered them,” adding, “The United States cannot tolerate anyone acting independently,” and “Every U.S. president has to have a war.” The article was headed, “Gorbachev: The U.S. Could Start a New Cold War.”

But still, Mikhail Gorbachev never forgot Ronald Reagan and their unusual friendship and what they hoped to accomplish. In 2004, he represented Russia at Reagan’s funeral and also traveled to Eureka College, Regan’s old school, where the aging Russian reformer was named “Honorary Reagan Fellow of Eureka College.”

And when Nancy died, Gorbachev told Interfax: “It was with deep sorrow that I learnt the sad news and I can rightfully say well done, Nancy. She said to Ronald Reagan: when you quit the post of U.S,. president, you need to go as a peacemaker. And the fact that we established human relations, which led to trust was mainly Nancy’s merit. Without trust, there is and can be no moving forward.”


Murray PolnerContributing Editor, Murray Polner wrote “No Victory Parades: The Return of the Vietnam Veteran“; “When Can I Come Home,” about draft evaders during the Vietnam era; co-authored with Jim O’Grady, “Disarmed and Dangerous,” a dual biography of Dan and Phil Berrigan; and most recently, with Thomas Woods,Jr., ” We Who Dared to Say No to War.” He is the senior book review editor for the History News Network.


ALL CAPTIONS AND PULL-QUOTES BY THE EDITORS, NOT THE AUTHORS.


Note to Commenters
Due to severe hacking attacks in the recent past that brought our site down for up to 11 days with considerable loss of circulation, we exercise extreme caution in the comments we publish, as the comment box has been one of the main arteries to inject malicious code. Because of that comments may not appear immediately, but rest assured that if you are a legitimate commenter your opinion will be published within 24 hours. If your comment fails to appear, and you wish to reach us directly, send us a mail at: editor@greanvillepost.com

We apologize for this inconvenience. 

horiz-long grey

Screen Shot 2015-12-08 at 2.57.29 PMNauseated by the
vile corporate media?
Had enough of their lies, escapism,
omissions and relentless manipulation?

GET EVEN. ACTION ITEMS:
 


 But be sure to support YOUR media. If you don’t, who will?

black-horizontal=SUBSCRIBE TODAY! NOTHING TO LOSE, EVERYTHING TO GAIN.=
free • safe • invaluable

If you appreciate our articles, do the right thing and let us know by subscribing. It’s free and it implies no obligation to you—ever. We just want to have a way to reach our most loyal readers on important occasions when their input is necessary.  In return you get our email newsletter compiling the best of The Greanville Post several times a week.  

[email-subscribers namefield=”YES” desc=”” group=”Public”]

 




Exposés: Did Reagan Know about Baby Thefts?

Exclusive: Many Americans [have been taught to] adore President Reagan for lifting their spirits after the discouraging 1970s. Yet, in secret, he collaborated with some of the Western Hemisphere’s most brutal neo-Nazis, including Argentine generals just convicted in a grotesque baby harvesting scheme, reports Robert Parry.

By Robert Parry

Ronald Reagan, a master phony and a media-manufactured creature.  Easily, one of the most malignant and hypocritical figures in American history.

An Argentine court has convicted two of the nation’s former right-wing dictators, Jorge Rafael Videla and Reynaldo Bignone, in a scheme to murder leftist mothers and give their infants to military personnel often complicit in the killings, a shocking process known to the Reagan administration even as it worked closely with the bloody regime.

Testimony at the trial included a videoconference from Washington with Elliott Abrams, then-Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs, who said he urged Bignone to reveal the babies’ identities as Argentina began a transition to democracy in 1983.

Abrams said the Reagan administration “knew that it wasn’t just one or two children,” indicating that U.S. officials believed there was a high-level “plan because there were many people who were being murdered or jailed.” Estimates of the Argentines murdered in the so-called Dirty War range from 13,000 to about 30,000, with many victims “disappeared,” buried in mass graves or dumped from planes over the Atlantic.

A human rights group, Grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo, says as many as 500 babies were stolen by the military during the repression from 1976 to 1983. Some of the pregnant mothers were kept alive long enough to give birth and then were chained together with other prisoners and pushed out of the planes into the ocean to drown.

Despite U.S. government awareness of the grisly actions of the Argentine junta, which had drawn public condemnation from the Carter administration in the 1970s, these Argentine neo-Nazis were warmly supported by Ronald Reagan, both as a political commentator in the late 1970s and as President once he took office in 1981.

Lost History.]

A Happy Face

Yet, Reagan kept up a happy face, hailing the Contras as the “moral equals of the Founding Fathers” and heaping gratitude on the Argentine junta.

The behind-the-scenes intelligence relationship apparently gave the Argentine generals confidence that they could not only continue repressing their own citizens but could settle an old score with Great Britain over control of the Falkland Islands, what the Argentines call the Malvinas.

Even as Argentina moved to invade the islands in 1982, Reagan’s U.N. Ambassador Jeane Kirkpatrick joined the generals for an elegant state dinner in Washington. The Reagan administration itself was divided between America’s traditional alliance with Great Britain and its more recent collaboration with the Argentines in Latin America.

Finally, Reagan sided with British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher whose counterattack drove the Argentines from the islands and led to the eventual collapse of the dictatorship. It was in that time frame that Abrams apparently spoke with Bignone about identifying the children who had been taken from their mothers and farmed out to military personnel.

The idea of giving the babies to right-wing military officers apparently was part of the larger Argentine theory of how to eradicate leftist subversive thought. Gen. Videla, in particular, fancied himself a theorist in counterinsurgency warfare, advocating clever use of words as well as imaginative forms of torture and murder.

Known for his dapper style and his English-tailored suits, Videla rose to power amid Argentina’s political and economic unrest in the early-to-mid 1970s. “As many people as necessary must die in Argentina so that the country will again be secure,” he declared in 1975 in support of a “death squad” known as the Argentine Anti-Communist Alliance. [See A Lexicon of Terror by Marguerite Feitlowitz.]

On March 24, 1976, Videla led the military coup which ousted the ineffective president, Isabel Peron. Though armed leftist groups had been shattered by the time of the coup, the generals still organized a counterinsurgency campaign to wipe out any remnants of what they judged political subversion.

Videla called this “the process of national reorganization,” intended to reestablish order while inculcating a permanent animosity toward leftist thought. “The aim of the Process is the profound transformation of consciousness,” Videla announced.

Along with selective terror, Videla employed sophisticated public relations methods. He was fascinated with techniques for using language to manage popular perceptions of reality. The general hosted international conferences on P.R. and awarded a $1 million contract to the giant U.S. firm of Burson Marsteller. Following the Burson Marsteller blueprint, the Videla government put special emphasis on cultivating American reporters from elite publications.

“Terrorism is not the only news from Argentina, nor is it the major news,” went the optimistic P.R. message.

Since the jailings and executions of dissidents were rarely acknowledged, Videla felt he could deny government involvement, giving the world the chilling new phrase, “the disappeared.” He often suggested that the missing Argentines were not dead, but had slipped away to live comfortably in other countries.

“I emphatically deny that there are concentration camps in Argentina, or military establishments in which people are held longer than is absolutely necessary in this … fight against subversion,” he told British journalists in 1977. [SeeA Lexicon of Terror.]

In a grander context, Videla and the other generals saw their mission as a crusade to defend Western Civilization against international communism. They worked closely with the Asian-based World Anti-Communist League and its Latin American affiliate, the Confederacion Anticomunista Latinoamericana [CAL].

Latin American militaries collaborated on projects such as the cross-border assassinations of political dissidents. Under one project, called Operation Condor, political leaders — centrist and leftist alike — were shot or bombed in Buenos Aires, Rome, Madrid, Santiago and Washington. Operation Condor sometimes employed CIA-trained Cuban exiles as assassins. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Hitler’s Shadow Reaches toward Today,” or Robert Parry’sSecrecy & Privilege.]

The Baby Harvest

General Videla also was accused of permitting – and concealing – the scheme to harvest infants from pregnant women who were kept alive in military prisons only long enough to give birth. According to the charges, the babies were taken from the new mothers, sometimes after late-night Caesarean sections, and then distributed to military families or sent to orphanages.

After the babies were pulled away, the mothers were removed to another site for their executions. Some were put aboard death flights and pushed out of military planes over open water.

One of the most notorious cases involved Silvia Quintela, a leftist doctor who attended to the sick in shanty towns around Buenos Aires. On Jan. 17, 1977, Quintela was abducted off a Buenos Aires street by military authorities because of her political leanings. At the time, Quintela and her agronomist husband Abel Madariaga were expecting their first child.

According to witnesses who later testified before a government truth commission, Quintela was held at a military base called Campo de Mayo, where she gave birth to a baby boy. As in similar cases, the infant then was separated from the mother.

What happened to the boy is still not clear, but Quintela reportedly was transferred to a nearby airfield. There, victims were stripped naked, shackled in groups and dragged aboard military planes. The planes then flew out over the Rio de la Plata or the Atlantic Ocean, where soldiers pushed the victims out of the planes and into the water to drown.

After democracy was restored in 1983, Madariaga, who had fled into exile in Sweden, returned to Argentina and searched for his wife. He learned about her death and the birth of his son.

Madariaga came to suspect that a military doctor, Norberto Atilio Bianco, had kidnapped the boy. Bianco had overseen Caesarean sections performed on captured women, according to witnesses. He then allegedly drove the new mothers to the airport for their death flights.

In 1987, Madariaga demanded DNA testing of Bianco’s two children, a boy named Pablo and a girl named Carolina, both of whom were suspected children of disappeared women. Madariaga thought Pablo might be his son.

But Bianco and his wife, Susana Wehrli, fled Argentina to Paraguay, where they resettled with the two children. Argentine judge Roberto Marquevich sought the Biancos’ extradition, but Paraguay balked for 10 years.

Finally, faced with demands from the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Paraguay relented. Bianco and Wehrli were returned to face kidnapping charges. But the two children — now young adults with small children of their own — refused to return to Argentina or submit to DNA testing.

Though realizing they were adopted, Pablo and Carolina did not want to know about the fate of their real mothers and did not want to jeopardize the middle-class lives they had enjoyed in the Bianco household. [See Consortiumnews.com’s “Argentina’s Dapper State Terrorist” or “Baby-Snatching: Argentina’s Dirty War Secret.”]

Another Argentine judge, Alfredo Bagnasco, began investigating whether the baby-snatching was part of an organized operation and thus a premeditated crime of state. According to a report by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Argentine military viewed the kidnappings as part of a larger counterinsurgency strategy.

“The anguish generated in the rest of the surviving family because of the absence of the disappeared would develop, after a few years, into a new generation of subversive or potentially subversive elements, thereby not permitting an effective end to the Dirty War,” the commission said in describing the army’s reasoning for kidnapping the infants of murdered women. The kidnapping strategy conformed with the “science” of the Argentine counterinsurgency operations.

According to government investigations, the military’s intelligence officers also advanced Nazi-like methods of torture by testing the limits of how much pain a human being could endure before dying. The torture methods included experiments with electric shocks, drowning, asphyxiation and sexual perversions, such as forcing mice into a woman’s vagina. Some of the implicated military officers had trained at the U.S.-run School of the Americas.

The Argentine tactics were emulated throughout Latin America. According to a Guatemalan truth commission, the right-wing military there also adopted the practice of taking suspected subversives on death flights, although over the Pacific Ocean.

For their roles in the baby kidnappings, Videla, now 86 and already in prison for other crimes against humanity, was sentenced to 50 years; Bignone, 84 and also in prison, received 15 years.

Yet, as Americans continue to idolize Ronald Reagan – with scores of buildings named after him and his statue on display at Washington’s Reagan National Airport – a relevant question might be what did the 40th U.S. President know about these barbaric acts and when did he know it.

To read more of Robert Parry’s writings, you can now order his last two books, Secrecy & Privilege and Neck Deep, at the discount price of only $16 for both. For details on the special offer, click here.]  

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush, was written with two of his sons, Sam and Nat, and can be ordered at neckdeepbook.com. His two previous books, Secrecy & Privilege: The Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq and Lost History: Contras, Cocaine, the Press & ‘Project Truth’ are also available there.

Select Responses (from original threads) to Did Reagan Know about Baby Thefts?

  1. ray on July 6, 2012 at 7:45 pm

    You nailed it, Bob. Small wonder such a concerted effort was made in those days to “controversialize” you. Intrepid is the word for you. Thanks. ray

  2. F. G. Sanford on July 6, 2012 at 8:41 pm

    For those of you who doubt the veracity of the Neo-Nazi aspect of this story, may I suggest an enlightening read: “The Nazi Legacy, Klaus Barbie and the International Fascist Connection” by Magnus Linkletter, Isabel Hilton and Neal Ascherson, Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1984. The shocker is that we weren’t just ignoring “Neo” Nazis, many of these South American dictators had REAL EX NAZIs on their payrolls and our government could not possibly have been ignorant of that fact. Just so I make my point clear: we’re talking about people that had actually worked for Himmler, Heydrich, Muller, and Goering that got jobs working for these “associates” in South America. Still think Reagan was a good guy?

    • Jack on July 7, 2012 at 1:00 am

      Klaus Barbie, himself, was working for the U.S. State Department (or the Secret Service, I can’t remember which) as an intelligence asset in the years immediately following WWII until they relocated him to Bolivia in the early 1950′s. Of course, while in Bolivia, Barbie worked with narco-trafficers, and trained right-wing paramilitary groups in the art of interrogation, torture, and murder. Heck of a guy.
      An excellent article on this unbelievably dark episode in recent history. The Reagan “Revolution” and all the talk of Reagan’s illustrious legacy is quite an achievement of propaganda and some of his own special brand of “perception management”.

  3. incontinent reader on July 6, 2012 at 10:41 pm

    Thank you, Mr. Parry. This is a much needed journalistic window into the nasty history of, and U.S. complicity in, the brutal human rights abuses of Argentina and the other dictatorships that were our allies in Latin America in the 1980s.

    It would be ironic if the contents of this one memo were somehow spun to burnish the human rights image of Eliot Abrams who, as Reagan’s Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs (an oxymoron if there ever was one). I believe Abrams was confirmed in 1983, after Argentina had been defeated in the Falklands by our primary ally, Britain, and Videla and Bignone had fallen out of favor with the U.S. and had been overthrown by the Argentine people. So, one wonders if, by that time, the Reagan Administration could have ever continued to cover for Videla, or remain quiet about the human rights abuses it had been so complicit in, once information about the mass child kidnappings had become so public. So, one could as well interpret Abrams use of the word “humanitarian” in this secret memo, with reference to its political as opposed to underlying “human rights” implications for Argentina- i.e., vis a vis obtaining a waiver or reclassification to remove Argentina from the State Department’s list of human rights violators. The declassified State Department memo can be accessed at:https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/394541-19821203-abrams-doc-full.html

    Still, Abrams was a public apologist for the many other Latin American dictatorships, such as El Salvador, Guatamala, Honduras, who were slaughtering suspected “leftists”, and for the Contras who were spreading terror in Nicaragua, as well as for the Israelis during their invasion of Lebanon when they stood by as the Phalangists massacred the Palestinian refugees in Sabra-Shatilla. Throughout, Abrams clashed frequently with human rights NGOs, such as Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International at a time when they were still free of government influence. Later, he became a key player in the Plan for the New American Century that resulted in 10 years of devastation in the MIddle East. So while his testimony may be helpful for the Grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo who seeking justice against Videla, Abrams himself has been guilty of more than a war crimes and should be in the dock of the next War Crimes tribunal.

    We seem to be gravitating back to the same with our involvement in the overthrow of the Honduran and Paraguayan
    governments, an ever increasing military base presence in Columbia, and behind the scenes influence in Chile, and Peru.

  4. Rehmat on July 7, 2012 at 8:35 am

    The label ‘NeoNazi’ like the myth of ‘anti-Semitism’ was coined by former supporters of the Nazi Party, the Zionist Jews. They have used it for the last six decades to shut the criticism of Israel. Many of Nazi Jews settled in Argentina. One of them was Hitler’s SS officer Adolph Eichmann. He was kidnapped by Israelis from Argentina and executed in Israel in 1961 for ‘war crimes’.

    Zionist historian, Lenni Brenner, in his book 51 Documents: Zionists Collaboration With the Nazis has reported that Adolf Eichmann was himself a Zionist and supported the creation of a ‘Jewish Homeland’ in Palestine. Hennecke Kardel in his book Adolf Hitler: Begruender Israels, says that Eichmann was a full-blooded Jew. According to Eichmann himself, he was a radical Zionist.

    http://rehmat1.com/2011/03/16/hannah-arendt-and-eichmanns-show-trail/

  5. Gregory Lynn Kruse on July 7, 2012 at 12:20 pm

    This makes ever more sense as a persistent strain of human depravity called “eugenics” and justified by the right-wing Germans in their propagandist phrase describing their victims as “life undeserving of life”. Though right-wing propaganda purposes to make us believe that only the Nazi’s held such murderous convictions and utterly lacked sympathy or compassion, as one lives and learns, the ideology thrives all over the world. It just keeps coming back, like a comet, visiting calamity upon the innocent. Only by concentration and persistent revelation can we hope to survive the next visit.

  6. Robin Abaya on July 7, 2012 at 5:23 pm

    The Argentine Junta had the ‘baby trade’ as part of an effort to obliterate the ‘leftist family’ – subversion has been considered ‘genetic’ and environmental. After all – the Catholic Church and the Franco Fascists distributed tens of thousands of Spanish children to Church orphanages and to become servants to the wealthy – while hiding the fact that their leftist parents had ended up in unmarked mass graves. In their minds, these kids were ‘saved’. At least they survived.

    On the other hand, the US government (and especially with the likes of Elliott Abrams) would have considered the Argentine passion for ‘handing out’ the children of murdered leftists to be pointless, wasteful and ‘sentimental’. After all, the existence of these kids have come back to bite their adopted parents and agencies and land some former leaders in prison for crimes against humanity.

    US Imperialism has never viewed children with quite the ‘romance’ of the Clerico-facists and Generals. That’s why children were never spared in US- led wars – they had no intrinsic value until now.

    Now these children (and their parents) may enter a more practical form of commerce: The organ trade. The wealthy and powerful of the world have only to ‘shop’ for the needed organs and … so what if the donors disappear. Elliott Abrams would have condemned the death flights out to sea of healthy leftists (so many kidneys, hearts and livers – such a waste) as well as the ‘farming out’ of their children.

    Put in this context, the Argentine clerico-fascist desire to ‘save’ the children of leftists is really more civilized than the US Administrations attitude toward the kids of its ‘enemies’.

     

Let’s keep this award-winning site going!

Yes, audiences applaud us. But do you?

If yes, then buy us a beer. The wingnuts are falling over each other to make donations…to their causes. We, on the other hand, take our left media—the only media that speak for us— for granted. Don’t join that parade, and give today. Every dollar counts.

 
Use the DONATE button below or on the sidebar. And do the right thing. Even once a year.

Use PayPal via the button below.

THANK YOU.

 




WTMS: Why game show hosts are mostly rightwingers

_____________________________

Why Game-Show Hosts Vote Republican

He’ll take Michael Steele for $2,000, Alex.

With this, he cemented his place in one of the conservative movement’s most elite and rarefied constituencies: right-wing game-show hosts.

on the right when it comes to solving America’s problems.—Eds]

Sajak alone has given more than $10,000, including fat checks to Fred Thompson, Bob Dole, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, George Allen, and Rick Lazio, as well as Steele. Alex Trebek, host of Jeopardy!, gave $3,000 to former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska.

“I am a conservative thinker. My political choices usually follow that path,” says John O’Hurley (left), a former host of Family Feud who donated more than $2,000 to Giuliani’s 2008 presidential campaign. “I am a strong believer in individual responsibility both in the quality of my actions and in setting the direction for my life.”

O’Hurley’s fellow hosts, like all successful television personalities, are loath to risk alienating even one possible viewer by talking openly about anything controversial.
Is there something about the traditional game-show format—its reinforcement of old-fashioned family values, its populist sensibility, its neat 22-minute crystallization of the American dream—that draws a more conservative type to host? Is it that the show’s core audience, residing in the flyover states, generally prefers a certain red-blooded sort of man in charge? Is it all just a silly coincidence?
“It makes sense to me that these hosts are pretty heavily Republican,” said Olaf Hoerschelmann, a professor at Indiana University, author of Rules of the Game: Quiz Shows and American Culture and perhaps the world’s leading (“only,” in his words) expert on game shows. “To have the right sensibility to be a game-show host, you do have to have a belief in rugged individualism—either you make it or you’re not worth it.” 

Game Show Hosts

Hoerschelmann’s research showed that these programs—while never exactly rocket science—grew precipitously less intellectual and more populist in the early 1980s, in tune with the Reagan years. With the exception of Jeopardy!, popular shows increasingly tested not actual knowledge but everyman intuition, he says. Family Feud, for example, challenged contestants to guess what 100 randomly surveyed people on the street would say in response to some hypothetical question.Supermarket Sweep had them run around a grocery store.

Wink Martindale operates Wink’s World, which attempts to spread a patriotic message—and many own a piece of their shows.

Trebek (right), a Canadian by birth who became an American citizen in 1998, was listed as a host for a February 2010 fundraiser in Malibu, hosted by the PAC Combat Veterans for Congress, supporting 18 Republican candidates. A spokesman for Trebek said the host “didn’t actually do that,” and that “My guess is that they asked to use his name, and since veterans were involved and he’s worked for years with the USO, there might have been some confusion. But he did not attend, or host, or sponsor. “

Sajak—whose first National Review Online column asserted that since “none of my family and friends is allowed to appear on Wheel of Fortune,” government employees shouldn’t be allowed to vote—declined, through the magazine, to comment. Carey also declined to comment, through a spokesman. The other hosts did not respond to repeated requests.

“To have the right sensibility to be a game-show host, you do have to have a belief in rugged individualism—either you make it or you’re not worth it,” says Professor Hoerschelmann.

O’Hurley, who listed his primary extracurricular interests as his wife and child, is involved with a company called Energy Inc., that processes landfill waste into energy, and is a founder of a charity called Golfers Against Cancer. He’s not one to trumpet his politics.

Rebecca Dana is a senior correspondent for The Daily Beast. A former editor and reporter for The Wall Street Journal, she has also written for The New York Times, The New York Observer, Rolling Stone, and Slate, among other publications.

_________________

COMMENTS (BE WARNED, SOME ARE ASININE, AS USUAL)

Mauiboy

(2)

2:25 pm, Nov 1, 2010

eurydice9276

3:10 pm, Nov 1, 2010

Matt Gilliland

3:15 pm, Nov 1, 2010

His Excellency

5:15 pm, Nov 1, 2010

TeddyKGB

2:38 am, Nov 1, 2010

10:20 pm, Nov 1, 2010

drstevebrule

i think jeopardy is like capitalism but wheel of fortune is obviously socialism. and that makes who wants to be a millionaire fascism, and tic tac toe a theocracy.

12:04 am, Nov 2, 2010

whipmawhopma

8:23 am, Nov 2, 2010

nycwerewolf

11:35 am, Nov 1, 2010

His Excellency

nycwerewolf: If Hagel is your favorite Republican you are a liberal Democrat. Enjoy your day tomorrow.

5:16 pm, Nov 1, 2010

12:01 pm, Nov 1, 2010

saskia520

12:24 pm, Nov 1, 2010

Pooner

1:01 pm, Nov 1, 2010

lillymckim

1:32 pm, Nov 1, 2010

Dylan111

9:11 pm, Nov 1, 2010

co-intheknow

3:38 pm, Nov 1, 2010

martymartymarty

Jeez, disrespect your mother (and seniors in general) much?

5:23 pm, Nov 1, 2010

webcommoner

All crash-and-burn political losers. Stick to your day job, Sajak.

4:08 pm, Nov 1, 2010

MistyKnight

4:18 pm, Nov 1, 2010

martymartymarty

5:22 pm, Nov 1, 2010

vercingetoriz473

OF COURSE they are Republicans! The are paid enormous amounts of money for a few hours of work each week, which requires no special talent or education. Sounds like a banker to me!

5:35 pm, Nov 1, 2010

5:53 pm, Nov 1, 2010

Chinanski

8:07 pm, Nov 2, 2010