Posted on 12/11/2006 8:17:37 AM PST by rellimpank
Pinochet Is History But how will it remember him?
An NRO Symposium
Former Chilean dicator Augusto Pinochet died Sunday at age 91. National Review Online asked some experts how he ought to be remembered
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
Rest in peace. For all his faults, he was one of history's best warriors against communism.
http://www.scrappleface.com/?p=2428
Pinochet Dies As Age of Tyrant-Tolerance Dawns
by Scott Ott
(2006-12-11) — Former Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, 91, died this weekend, and therefore will “miss out on the golden age of tolerance that is dawning worldwide for men like him” according a United Nations source.
“Pinochet was a man ahead of his time,” said an unnamed U.N. official. “For the past 30 years, the world has largely scorned power-hungry tyrants who subjugate and slaughter others to achieve their egocentric ambitions under the guise of love of country or of God.”
But today, the source noted. men like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad receive the honor of speaking at the U.N. General Assembly, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah and Moktada al-Sadr are worshiped and allowed to control the governments of Lebanon and Iraq by proxy, and the world’s superpowers convene diplomatic conferences at the pleasure of North Korean President Kim Jong-Il.
“Pinochet died just as the rest of the world was catching up to his progressive thinking,” the source added. “Today, he would win a Nobel Peace Prize.”
Then Jimmy Carter stopped propping, and the Shah fell. Hostages were taken, Khomeini came in, and the Mullahs had a powerbase.
Pinochet was the Shah of Chile. Yes, he apparently killed 3000 people as he stopped socialism. But had the Socialists not been stopped, I'm reasonably sure that Chile would have seen more bloodshed, and might, even today, be a thorn in our side.
Pinochet was no saint. But I think history will be kind to him.
One of the few countries in S. American I'd feel somewhat safe in and would really like to visit.
This one is fairly easy - just contrast Chile with Cuba.
my ex is from Chile and she liked Pinochet because the socialists were taking property and her family farm was to be seized as well. Pinochet rose to power and the family farm was saved.
The irony is that many of the Chilean "moderates" who are now condemning Pinochet would have been executed or exiled had the socialists continued in power.
From the French Revolution, to the Bolshevik Revolution, from Mao to Pol Pot, from Castro to whomever ... the Left always tries to kill the following groups:
The folks on the Right
The folks in the Middle
The folks on the Left who speak out of turn.
"unnamed UN official" = nosepicking assclown
CASTRO Y PINOCHET
James R. Whelan
Martes, 9 de mayo de 2000
Cuando Fidel Castro hizo su entrada triunfal en La Habana, el 8 de enero de 1959, Cuba era uno de los países más prósperos del mundo. Cuando Augusto Pinochet y sus colegas militares depusieron al marxista-leninista Salvador Allende, el 11 de septiembre de 1973, encontraron un país al borde del colapso económico. Lo que desde entonces ha sucedido en ambos países es imposible tapar con el dedo.
Castro gobierna una nación donde prácticamente todo está racionado, un país que Freedom House clasifica como "estado policial de un solo partido" y “sin libertad” por 40 años, caso único en nuestro hemisferio.
Por el contrario, Chile figura entre los países "libres" según Freedom House, desde que Pinochet, derrotado en un plebiscito entregó voluntariamente el poder. Pero Castro es adulado y tratado con respeto por dirigentes políticos y periodistas en todas partes del mundo. El más vergonzoso y reciente ejemplo lo dio Janet Reno, Procuradora General de Estados Unidos, postrándose ante Fidel Castro en el caso del niño Elián González.
En cambio, Pinochet es perseguido y vilipendiado por una amplia gama de observadores y analistas. La misma Janet Reno aportó los formidables recursos de su Departamento de Justicia al flagelo "legal" de Pinochet.
El contraste del muy distinto trato recibido por estos dos líderes latinoamericanos parece provenir de las páginas del libro de George Orwell, "1984", donde encontramos términos como "nuevohablar" (blanco es negro, arriba es abajo) y "doblepensar" (creer en dos ideas contradictorias a la vez). Se trata, ni más ni menos, del triunfo orwelliano de la propaganda política impulsada por la izquierda internacional y del conveniente olvido de los hechos por quienes tienen la obligación de reportarlos.
Poco antes de irrumpir Castro en el poder, el ingreso per capita de los cubanos se aproximaba al de los italianos. Cuba figuraba en el lugar 22 entre las –entonces- 122 naciones del mundo en términos de desarrollo. Más de 12 mil italianos esperaban visas para emigrar a esa isla de oportunidades. Y los indicadores sociales avanzaban paralelamente: el alfabetismo se ubicaba en 80 por ciento, una cifra bastante alta para aquellos tiempos.
Cuba tenía más médicos y dentistas per capita que Holanda, Francia, el Reino Unido y Finlandia. Los cubanos gozaban de las tasas más bajas de mortalidad infantil y las más altas de longevidad de los países latinoamericanos. En 1959, los cubanos tenían ingresos similares a los puertorriqueños, mientras que hoy ganan menos de una décima parte.
Durante años, Castro pudo esconder su incompetencia detrás de las asombrosas subvenciones soviéticas. La historiadora rusa Irina Zorina calcula que la URSS le regaló a Castro cien mil millones de dólares, es decir, cuatro veces el total del Plan Marshall, y tres veces la ayuda recibida por toda la América Latina bajo la Alianza para el Progreso.
Cuando Rusia suspendió su ayuda económica en 1992, la economía cubana se contrajo violentamente, perdiendo 50% de su capacidad productiva y 80% de sus industrias se vieron obligadas a cerrar.
La mejor prueba del inmenso fracaso de Castro es que en ningún consulado cubano alrededor del mundo hay gente haciendo cola para emigrar a Cuba. Por el contrario, más de 1,5 millones de cubanos han huido de la isla, la mayoría de ellos arriesgando sus vidas y abandonando lo que tenían.
El caso Pinochet difícilmente podría ser más diferente. El ex presidente chileno, Eduardo Frei Montalva, sintetizó la situación del país en vísperas de la Revolución de 1973: "Chile está hundido en un desastre economico, no una crisis, sino una verdadera catástrofe... peor que la inflacion, la escasez, la violencia es el odio. Hay angustia en Chile..."
El mismo Allende, a pocos días de su caída, anunció que quedaba pan sólo para cuatro días. La inflación galopaba fuera de control, acercándose a mil por ciento. Un país, antes orgulloso, se había degenerado en un verdadero infierno socialista.
A partir de 1973, el régimen militar chileno tuvo que enfrentar boicots, embargos y hostilidad generalizada, no sólo de parte de países comunistas sino de los supuestamente anticomunistas, encabezados por Estados Unidos.
El gobierno de Pinochet transformó lo que era la segunda economía más estatista de América Latina (después de Cuba) en la más libre y próspera. Sin embargo, en la prensa mundial Pinochet aparece como el villano y a Castro siempre se le da el beneficio de la duda. ¿Dónde está el George Orwell de nuestra generación capaz de desenmascarar tanta hipocresía?
It's not appropriate to speak in tongues unless you have an interpreter.
In the neighboring Argentina, the junta killed 150,000 people. In other Latin American countries, including Paraguay, Uruguay, Brazil, Guatemala, etc., the massacre was non-stop. However, Pinochet was the scapegoat of all "progressive mankind".
Because the left controls the media.
However the pendulum is swinging, however slowly, the other way.
The internet is hastening the swing to more truthfull information.
All the lies of the left cannot stay hidden forever.
Leftie governments cannot control the internet like they can print and electronic media.
The problem is the media forcefeeds their propaganda, while to find out the truth people have to get off their butts and actively search the info. I don't want to sound arrogant, but it looks like the majority of the people is too lazy to go fishing for info and is quite happy to be spoonfed what the media is concocting for them. The results are obvious.
Every one of them is portrayed as a "victim" but the truth is much different.
Almost 400 of them belonged to the MIR, a known communist terror organization. Another 20 belonged to a communist guerilla group that was operating in the jungles. Almost 800 belonged to Allende-aligned communist parties.
About 100 of the deaths credited to Pinochet were really the acts of private vigilantes and mob riots that Pinochet had no control over. Another 100 of them were prisoners who got shot during escape attempts. Another 30 or so were killed in gunfights with the military and/or police.
200 died in the fighting directly related to the coup itself while Pinochet's troops stormed Allende's offices. Of the 2,300 deaths, only 400 happened after 1976 - the year that Pinochet established a new constitutional convention, and the year that the last Allendist elements were defeated. Most of those 400 occured in 1983-84, when there was a smaller marxist guerilla uprising.
The point is that almost all of Pinochet's "victims" were people who deserved it. They were not simple political opponents - the typical Pinochet "victims" were members of the Allende regime, members of marxist militias, members of terror cells, and people who got into gunfights with the police. That's why the left hates him so much, and why they ignore death counts by left wing latin american dictators like Castro and Ortega and Chavez.
I think a lot of people confuse what happened in Chile with what happened in Argentina around the same time with their military junta. Many people think that the "Mothers of the Disappeared" had something to do with Pinochet. Pinochet, himself was no friend of the Argies, and he supported the UK during the Falklands War.
Most of the people he killed were marxist thugs of the very lowest order. Among Pinochet's "victims" are some 400 members of MIR, a marxist terrorist organization. Several others were members of smaller marxist guerilla groups. Some of his "victims" are even recorded as having died in the middle of gun fights with the police. About 100 of them died during escape attempts from prison. The overwhelming majority of the deaths occurred during the coup and its immediate aftermath. During the 1980's Chile averaged less than 30 deaths per year, making it among the lowest Latin American countries by that standard.
When you here about the "thousands" Pinochet killed, just remember - the majority were about as "innocent" as Che Guevara. They weren't simply members of legitimate political opposition parties like Republicans and Democrats. Think more along the lines of bolsheviks, nazis, and hezbollah.
I disagree. There are plenty of people who research far deeper than the "established" media and post on blog sites or have their own blogs or other sites of their own.
Drudge is one example.
The bloggers that exposed the Rather lies about Bush are one. The bloggers that exposed the fauxtography during the Israeli incursion into Lebanan are another.
There are many others like them that research and post that are becoming more recognized.
Sounds right to me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.