Wednesday, December 06, 2006

Pinochet in the hands of God...

Pleased to see that Margaret Thatcher’s old pal, General Pinochet is recovering from his heart attack.

A couple of days ago, the former Chilean dictator was on the brink of death and he had the last rites. But the latest bulletins say he’s on the mend.

I do hope he lives long enough for millions of Chileans to see him face justice before his people for his alleged crimes.

More than 3,000 people were killed or "disappeared" during his 1973-1990 rule.

Pinochet has long been accused of human rights abuses but has never faced trial.

Despite his record, Lady Thatcher entertained Pinochet to tea at Downing Street when she was Prime Minister.

Pinochet was finally placed under house arrest in October for alleged human rights abuses committed at the infamous Villa Grimaldi detention centre, but was later freed on bail.

He was again placed under house arrest last month and now faces charges over the abduction of two people in 1973.

The charges relate to the so-called Caravan of Death - a military operation which toured Chile sytematically removing General Pinochet's opponents during his rule of terror.

The two men were security guards for former President Salvador Allende, who was overthrown by the military in a bloody coup led by Pinochet.

Pinochet’s latest arrest came days after his 91st birthday, when he said he accepted political responsibility for everything that happened during his time in office.

He claimed he had acted in the interests of Chile and that his coup was necessary to prevent the country descending into political and social turmoil.

Wasn’t that Thatcher’s excuse…?

Pinochet’s family say he’s in the hands of God.

That was definitely Maradona’s excuse!

16 comments:

Michael Oakeshott said...

Pinochet of course saved Chile from Alliende and the other barbarians. I am sure the leftists bringing these false charges will be thwarted in the face of the overwhelming public warmth for Pinochet. I for one am very grateful for the help he gave us during the war to win freedom for the Falkland Islanders.

I wish him a long(er) and happy retirement.

If only the left had been so keen to talk about the 30,000,000 murdered by communism in Russia, rather than these 3,000.

Brynley said...

Michael, my dear old mucker, I do appreciate the sheer precision of your analysis.

First the charges are false, you say. Then you say that 3,000 were murdered.

Michael Oakeshott said...

I don't deny people died under Pinochet. My exact argument is that these people were criminals. Communists and others who were a danger to the state and the well-being of the Chilean people. They died. They were killed. But the charges seem to idicate that they were victims. No. They were a menace. Hope this clarifies the point.

Brynley said...

Some of them were Marxists, some of them were Social Democrats, some of them were religious people like Sheila Cassidy, a Britsh citizen who was horribly tortured by the Pinochet regime.

They represented a movement that had done very well at the polls, formed a government and had championed the families who had got nothing from the free market, so called.

Yes, you have certainly clarified your point, Michael. You are in favour of a coup against elected government and you are in favour of killing and torturing to that end.

Michael Oakeshott said...

Allende got 36 percent. He spent his three years worshipping Castro. Castro spent ages in Chile, and I think most people realised what Allende had in store for Chile. And it wasn't democracy. Didn't his Head of the Interior hold up a woman with a gun, or am I confusing that with some other tinpot lefty regime in South America? He had been condemned by his own Supreme Court for using the police in a politcally partisan way. He had been condemned by Parliament for attacks on democracy. He had loaded the cabinet with military figures.

I rejoice in the destruction of such a regime. Relatively few people died. I suspect most of them deserved it. Most of them deserved it. And unsubstantiated sob stories from the dregs of history will not persuade me otherwise.

Brynley said...

Michael rejoices [his word] in the destruction of a democratically elected government.

"Castro spent ages in Chile" He did? Why has this secret not come out before?

Allende was probably as radical, but less mouthy, than Hugo Chavez, the recently re-elected President of Venezuela.

How times change! Except for Michael, who's still fighting the Cold War, bless him.

Brynley said...

Factual point on Chile's multi-party democratic elections.

Michael claims that Allende was elected president on 36% of the vote.

This is correct.

But he omits to mention that Unidad Polular were re-elected on 44% of the vote.

fairdealphil said...

michael:

Pinochet...

you say "I am sure the leftists bringing these false charges will be thwarted"

How on earth can you or I judge whether the charges are false?

Falklands...what a pity Thatcher's policies of axing Royal Navy ships in the south Atlantic gave the Argentinians the signal to invade the Islands.

Russia...i celebrate the fall of soviet communism which was particularly brutal under Stalin. Even the left in Russia hates Stalin.

fairdealphil said...

michael:

you're a menace sometimes, (and no doubt so am i) but i wouldn't advocate a Pinochet Caravan of Death, not even for you...!

Pinochet has to face his accusers for justice to be done.

So General Jackson thinks the democratically elected Government should do some things differently - would you support a military coup, taking out anyone he considers a menace?

Get real.

Michael Oakeshott said...

Yes I forgot, the left had trouble backing Britain in that war. Quite how British troop depoyments justify Argintinian aggression is anyone's guess. I have been to Russia recently, and I can assure you that Stalin is more popular than ever. The darling of the world's first fully socialist state. What a showcase for lefty stupidity.

I would gladly support those who raised weapons if socialists ever threatened to lead us to the dictatorship Alliende had planned for Chile. And I would gladly have Chavez and any of his henchmen choke in their own blood to save the people of Venezuala from their fate under him. I can only hope the CIA pop him. Not just a matter of disagreeing with these sorts. Communism has to be confronted and I support those who do it. Full stop.

As for the fool above questioning the Castro information. Every man and his dog knows that Castro spent four weeks touring Chile in the summer of 1973. Public knowledge. I suggest he does some research before making a fool of himself again.

Brynley said...

Michael, I realise you're only here to wind us up, but since you're in favour of murdering the recently re-elected President of Venezuela, may I be so bold as to enquire what fate you would advocate for Bolivia's Morales or even Brazil's Lula?

..and, moral aspects apart, do you not feel that this murder spree might be a tad counterproductive with the voters?

Brynley said...

...not forgetting President Bachelet of Chile.

She leads a centre-left government.

Her Dad was murdered by Pinochet.

Michael Oakeshott said...

Of those you mention, only the "murder" of Morales would make me happy. I don't see the others as a threat to liberty at this stage. I would of course love to see them lose elections to politicians a bit more interests in protecting the rights of citizens and investors in South America.

If her father was "murdered" by Pinochet, maybe he had a good reason. It would of course explain the politcally motivated charges being brought again Pinochet.

Brynley said...

You only want to murder two elected Presidents (Venezuela and Bolivia)!

As for President Bachelet of Chile.

Let me say how pleased I am that you don't want to murder her.

For your information. Her father was an officer in the Air Force (flying British planes, as it happens) who remained loyal to the elected government of the day. Not, perhaps, a concept we could expect you to understand, Michael.

Michael Oakeshott said...

People have always died in revolutions. I am sorry he backed such a corrupt regime. His fate after that was sealed. Loyalty to traitors is treachory.

fairdealphil said...

michael:

Falklands War:

You suggest that the left had trouble supporting the Falklands war. (in fact, so did the Americans).

For the record, I believe "we" were right to sink the Belgrano - the Argies were ther aggressors who had declared war, and the Belgrano, though ancient, was a threat to our forces regardless of the direction in which it was sailing at the time.

Speaking personally, I believe Thatcher was right to commit our troops to retaking the Falklands, once the Argies had invaded British soil, and once the Defence Chiefs gave her their assessment that it was possible to retake the islands.

As it happens, many mistakes were made and we were extremely fortunate to have won the Falklands War.

We came so close to losing. It was almost a yomp too far - we sent the wrong troops (in my view we should have sent Infantry rather than the wooden-top Guards).

We'd run out of artillery by the time we reached Stanley.

Fortunately, the Argies surrendered at the right time and Thatcher won the General Election.

However, history has forgotten that Thatcher got us into the mess in the first place by giving all the wrong signals to the Argies, selling off HMS Endurance etc.

Few people appreciate that five years before the War, when the Argies made earlier moves to take the "Malvinas", the then British PM James Callaghan warned them that the UK had a nuclear sub over the horizon in mid-south-Atlantic and that if necessary, we would use it.

It worked. There were no further Argie threats until Thatcher became PM -and announced the reduction of the British presence in the south Atlantic.

Russia:
you said: "I have been to Russia recently, and I can assure you that Stalin is more popular than ever."

I too have been to Russia recently - five times since the fall of Communism - I can assure you that (in my experience) Stalin is definitely not more popular than ever (though I doubt he ever was genuinely popular).

I have discussed Stalin, Lenin and Communism with young and not-so-young Russians.

Every Russian I have spoken with, whether in rural or city settings, despises Stalin, Lenin and Communism itself.

There is a feeling amongst older Russians that "at least no-one starved under Stalin", (the massive Army for example was used to gather in the harvest),

But even people with this rather generous view realise that he was a despot who murdered millions - certainly no better than Pinochet.

I recall seeing one of the few remaining Moscow street statues of Lenin in his familiar pose. I asked a young Moscovite woman who was a teenager at the time the Soviet Empire collapsed what she thought of Lenin.

She told me "I hate him. He stole my childhood..."

Nuf said eh...?