Two months ago, hundreds of thousands of Chileans somberly marked the 40th anniversary of their nation’s September 11th attack. It was on that date in 1973 that the Chilean military, armed with a generous supply of funds and weapons from the US, and assisted by the CIA and other operatives, overthrew the democratically-elected government of the moderate socialist Salvador Allende.

Sixteen years of repression, torture and death followed under the fascist Augusto Pinochet, while the flow of hefty profits to US multinationals – IT&T, Anaconda Copper and the like – resumed. Profits, along with concern that people in other nations might get ideas about independence, were the very reason for the coup and even the partial moves toward nationalization instituted by Allende could not be tolerated by the US business class.

Henry Kissinger was National Security Advisor and one of the principle architects of the coup in Chile. US-instigated coups were nothing new in 1973, especially those in Latin America. Kissinger and his boss Richard Nixon were carrying on a violent tradition that spanned the breadth of the 20th century and continues in the 21st – see, for example, Venezuela in 2002 (failed) and Honduras in 2009 (successful). Where possible, such as in Guatemala in 1954 and Brazil in 1964, coups have been the preferred method for dealing with popular insurgencies. In other instances, direct invasion by US forces such as happened on numerous occasions in Nicaragua, the Dominican Republic and many other places, has been the fallback option.

The coup in Santiago occurred as US aggression in Indochina was finally winding down after more than a decade. From 1969 through 1973, it was Kissinger again, along with Nixon, who oversaw the slaughter in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos. It is impossible to know with precision how many were killed during those four years; all the victims were considered enemies, including the vast majority who were non-combatants, and the US has never been much interested in calculating the deaths of enemies. Estimates of Indochinese killed by the US for the war as a whole start at four million and are likely far more. It can thus be reasonably extrapolated that probably more than a million, and certainly hundreds of thousands, were killed while Kissinger and Nixon were in power.

In addition, countless thousands of Indochinese have died in the years since from the affects of the massive doses of Agent Orange and other Chemical Weapons of Mass Destruction unleashed by the US. Many of us here know soldiers who suffered from exposure to such chemicals; multiply their numbers by 1,000 or 10,000 or 50,000 – again, it’s impossible to know with accuracy – and we can begin to understand the impact on those who live in and on the land that was so thoroughly poisoned as a matter of US policy.

Studies by a variety of organizations including the United Nations also indicate that at least 25,000 people have died in Indochina since war’s end from unexploded US bombs that pocket the countryside, with an equivalent number maimed. As with Agent Orange, deaths and ruined lives from such explosions continue to this day. So 40 years on, the war quite literally goes on for the people of Indochina, and it is likely it will go on for decades more.

Near the end of his time in office, Kissinger and his new boss Gerald Ford pre-approved the Indonesian dictator Suharto’s invasion of East Timor in 1975, an illegal act of aggression again carried out with weapons made in and furnished by the US. Suharto had a long history as a bagman for US business interests; he ascended to power in a 1965 coup, also with decisive support and weapons from Washington, and undertook a year-long reign of terror in which security forces and the army killed more than a million people (Amnesty International, which rarely has much to say about the crimes of US imperialism, put the number at 1.5 million).

In addition to providing the essential on-the-ground support, Kissinger and Ford blocked efforts by the global community to stop the bloodshed when the terrible scale of Indonesian violence became known, something UN ambassador Daniel Patrick Moynihan openly bragged about. Again, the guiding principle of empire, one that Kissinger and his kind accept as naturally as breathing, is that independence cannot be allowed. That’s true even in a country as small as East Timor where investment opportunities are slight, for independence is contagious and can spread to places where far more is at stake, like resource-rich Indonesia. By the time the Indonesian occupation finally ended in 1999, 200,000 Timorese – 30 percent of the population – had been wiped out. Such is Kissinger’s legacy and it is a legacy well understood by residents of the global South no matter the denial, ignorance or obfuscation of the intelligentsia here.

If the United States is ever to become a democratic society, and if we are ever to enter the international community as a responsible party willing to wage peace instead of war, we will have to account for the crimes of those who claim to act in our names like Kissinger. Our outrage at the crimes of murderous thugs who are official enemies like Pol Pot is not enough. A cabal of American mis-leaders from Kennedy on caused for far more Indochinese deaths than the Khmer Rouge, after all, and those responsible should be judged and treated accordingly.

The urgency of the task is underscored as US aggression proliferates at an alarming rate. Millions of people around the world, most notably in an invigorated Latin America, are working to end the “might makes right” ethos the US has lived by since its inception. The 99 percent of us here who have no vested interest in empire would do well to join them.

There are recent encouraging signs along those lines, with the successful prevention of a US attack on Syria particularly noteworthy. In addition, individuals from various levels of empire have had their lives disrupted to varying degrees. David Petraeus, for example, has been hounded by demonstrators since being hired by CUNY earlier this year to teach an honors course; in 2010, Dick Cheney had to cancel a planned trip to Canada because the clamor for his arrest had grown quite loud; long after his reign ended, Pinochet was arrested by order of a Spanish magistrate for human right violations and held in England for 18 months before being released because of health problems; and earlier this year, Efrain Rios Montt, one of Washington’s past henchmen in Guatemala, was convicted of genocide, though accomplices of his still in power have since intervened on his behalf to obstruct justice.

More pressure is needed, and allies of the US engaged in war crimes like Paul Kagame should be dealt with as Pinochet was. More important perhaps for those of in the US is that we hound Rumsfeld, both Clintons, Rice, Albright and Powell, to name a few, for their crimes against humanity every time they show themselves in public just as Petraeus has been. That holds especially for our two most recent War-Criminals-in-Chief, Barack Bush and George W. Obama.

Written by Andy Piascik at [email protected].

Photo by flickr user Cliff1066

Virtually alone among world nations, the United States has refused to recognize the election of Nicolas Maduro as president of Venezuela. Unfortunately, this activity has become the norm in international affairs: the U.S. stands alone like the schoolyard bully, or nearly isolated with Israel, Saudia Arabia and Great Britain.

The people of Venezuela remember all too well that the American government instigated a coup that temporarily deposed the late Hugo Chavez, Maduro’s predecessor, in 2002. In the eleven years since, Washington has continued to fund opponents of the revolution and foment strikes, demonstrations and general unrest. In recent months, Venezuela expelled three U.S. diplomats who were working with opposition forces to undermine Maduro’s presidency.

Venezuela is justified to fear that this interference might escalate. Profits of investors are preeminent and any person or movement seeking to take control of resources for the popular good is branded an enemy and treated as such. The following examples are just the tip of the imperial iceberg:

Iran, 1953: The CIA helped overthrow the popular anti-monarchist Mohammad Mossadegh, largely because he nationalized Iran’s vast oil resources, and replaced him with the Shah. Oil reserves were returned to Western control and 26 years of despotic rule followed.

Guatemala, 1954: The U.S. overthrew the democratically elected Jacobo Arbenz and soon turned Guatemala into killing fields. Earlier this year, former dictator Efrain Rios Montt was convicted of genocide by a Guatemalan court. Those in the U.S. who made the killing possible and profited most from it, however, remain at large.

Vietnam, 1950’s: After the Geneva accords of 1954 set up elections to unify Vietnam, the U.S. spent the ensuing years making sure no elections were held, knowing Ho Chi Minh would win in a landslide. Twenty years later, after American forces had killed four million people and destroyed three countries, the Vietnamese drove the U.S. out anyway.

Congo, 1961: Three months after Patrice Lumumba became the first democratically elected Prime Minister of the newly-independent Congo, the U.S. helped overthrow his government (he was executed by his captors several months later). Soon thereafter began the murderous reign of Mobutu Sese Soku, who also embezzled billions of dollars, much of it “aid” from U.S. taxpayers, though successive American presidents were happy to look the other way because he ensured Western business elites easy access to the Congo’s vast resources.

Brazil, 1964: Reformer Joao Goulart had been president for three years when the military, with U.S. support, overthrew his government. Fifteen years of despotic rule followed, as all traces of democracy vanished amidst an orgy of torture and killing.

Indonesia, 1965: One of the bloodiest episodes in recent history began with a Washington backed and armed coup that resulted in the killing of approximately one million peasants and the installation of the dictator Suharto. Ten years later, Suharto invaded East Timor, again with crucial U.S. support (and weapons) and wiped out 30% of the Timorese population.

Dominican Republic, 1965: Shortly after the CIA assassinated long-time dictator and American puppet Rafael Trujillo because his act had gotten too extreme, Juan Bosch became president in the nation’s first free election in 38 years. Five months later, U.S. backed generals ousted Bosch, and a groundswell of popular support for his reinstatement was snuffed out by a U.S. invasion. Another Washington puppet, Joaquin Balaguer, became president in a fraudulent election that took place with 40,000 American soldiers occupying the tiny nation and participating in the murder of Bosch supporters.

Chile, 1973: Much as it has done in Venezuela in recent years, the U.S. began funding oppositionists and fomenting strife as soon as Salvador Allende was elected president in 1970. With additional help from the U.S., the Chilean military overthrew and murdered Allende in 1973 and the long reign of fascist Augusto Pinochet began.

Haiti, 1990-2004: In a country that suffered one agony after another under U.S. playmates Papa Doc and Baby Doc Duvalier, a popular upsurge led by the Lavalas party swept Jean Bertrand Aristide into office in 1990. A coup three years later by generals close to drug cartels begat brutal repression until Washington allowed Aristide to return on the condition he implement harsh austerity measures. When he chose instead to push the widely supported program of Lavalas, the Clinton administration whisked Aristide out of the country at gunpoint. Haiti has been ruled by heirs of the Duvalier tradition since.

One dramatic change in the last 50 years is the consistent opposition of the American public to such interventions. This was perhaps best illustrated in the 1980’s when U.S. solidarity movements undoubtedly prevented greater bloodshed in South Africa, El Salvador, Nicaragua and possibly other places. One striking feature were the thousands who travelled to work alongside Nicaraguan peasants as well as to serve as a human shield, knowing the U.S. backed contras were less likely to murder Americans. The intelligentsia here, if it ever reported this remarkable phenomenon, surely prefers to forget; people in Nicaragua and the rest of Latin America, not to mention the Washington planners of contra terror, most definitely have not.

Nicolas Maduro is not the issue. Hugo Chavez was never the issue and none of the individuals mentioned above were ever the issue. What was, and is, the issue is the effort of a galvanized populace to wrest control of their economic life from U.S. investors and the local stooges who do their dirty work. That is something the Super Rich here cannot abide, and all preventive measures are on the table, including war, unspeakable atrocities, even genocide.

By remaining ever vigilant and supporting those throughout the hemisphere (indeed, the world) who work to create a new day, we can perhaps block further U.S. interference in Venezuela, not to mention Colombia, Bolivia, Mexico, Honduras and oh so many other places.

Andy Piascik is a long-time activist and award-winning author who has written for Z Magazine, The Indypendent, Counterpunch and many other publications and websites. He can be reached at [email protected].

Not many people can cross over from professional wrestler to Hollywood actor to Governor of a state – unless of course, you’re Jesse ‘The Body’ Ventura.

After leaving the world of wrestling, Ventura ran for mayor and then Governor of Minnesota as an independent candidate, proving that defeating the two-party monopoly is possible. Since his gubernatorial run, he’s hosted a popular television show and written several best-selling books.

His latest book is called ‘They Killed our President: 63 Reasons to Believe There was a Conspiracy to Assassinate JFK.’ With the 50th anniversary of President John F. Kennedy’s assassination, Ventura joined me on Breaking the Set to discuss the evidence of a government conspiracy and the potential for a 2016 presidential run with radio host Howard Stern.

Abby

***

Jesse Ventura on Breaking the Set

***

The most dangerous man alive is not the President of the United States or a terrorist. He is not thought of as a mass murderer, and he is not a Premier or a military dictator. The often referenced Adolf Hitler was only known to have killed one person, and that person was himself. Osama Bin Laden did not kill anyone. Stalin did not kill anyone. Pol Pot did not kill anyone. This is not to say that these were good men. They were not. They were sociopathic monsters. But they were impotent without the help of the most dangerous man alive. They were probably, of their own accord, cowards.

The most dangerous man alive killed all the Jews who died during the holocaust. He was the one who killed all the innocent civilians on both sides of World War II and all other wars. He dropped The Bomb on Hiroshima and he flew aircraft into the World Trade Centers. This man is known as The Troop.

The Troop kills.  The Troop is not necessarily strong or intelligent, although he can be both.  The Troop has no conscience, or if he does have one, he does not use it. The Troop believes.  Facts that contradict The Troop’s beliefs are considered false by definition.  The Troop has a weakness for sociopathic monsters. The Troop follows orders and has never heard an order he will not try to obey.  The Troop dominates, and uses force to ensure that others cannot do as they please.  The Troop works for money.  The Troop finds what he does to be glorious.

The Troop is self-replicating.  His actions lead to the creation of other Troops. The Troop obeys the laws of physics. For every Troop there is an equal and opposite Troop.  In spite of his penchant for violence, The Troop needs lots of support. He is particularly bolstered by unconditional praise and small tokens of gratitude from anyone, including people who do not know him or anything specifically he has done.  The Troop is parasitic. He lives off the sweat of taxpayers.

On some possible future night, when there is a knock on your door and a man in a uniform holds a gun to your head and demands your computer, that man will be a Troop.  If someone destroys your home with a bulldozer, or your village with artillery and missiles, that someone will be a Troop.  When people die in a drone strike in a far away land, a Troop pulled the trigger.  When prisoners are tortured, a Troop attached the electrodes to the testicles and flipped the switch. When your freedom is gone, The Troop will be the enforcer. If you are killed for resisting, The Troop will be the killer.

Like Zombies, Troops start out as normal people.  But Troops are real-life.  As horrible as it may seem, your son or daughter, or your best friend might become a Troop.  To prevent this from happening, it is best to get to Troops while they are still normal people.   That is when they are most open to reason.  One must be vigilant. Almost any normal person between the ages of 18 and 35 can become a Troop. The initial warning signs can start much earlier.

To be successful in stopping Troops, it is important to know what things can cause a normal person to become a Troop.  Sociopathic monsters, who are often found in high governmental positions, need Troops to be their henchmen. For this reason, they use the resources of government to attempt to turn normal people into Troops.  Government advertising makes becoming a Troop sound lucrative and adventurous and glorious. The government will claim to provide valuable training to normal people that become Troops, and also claim that becoming a Troop will give one discipline and direction.

Let your loved one know that the government propaganda they hear is, after all, produced by sociopathic monsters.  Given them real-life examples such as, Waco, Texas or Tiananmen Square, or the occupied West Bank to prove your point.   Point out the remarkably small percentage of high ranking politician’s children who are Troops.

A person who is looking for glory or adventure is at risk of becoming a Troop.  If your child or friend is looking for glory or adventure, talk to them. Let them know that it is not glorious to be a henchman for a sociopathic monster. Offer to go on a camping trip to an underdeveloped country with them.   Get flying or sailing lessons for them.  Explain to them that these things can be done without the need for killing other people.

If your loved one needs discipline or direction, show them how to polish their shoes.  Have them do some pushups.  Have them sleep on a cot.  Show them that one does not have to join the armed forces to do these things, and that with a little imagination; they might get discipline and direction by doing something entirely different like attending college or learning a trade.

Your loved one might be looking for camaraderie.  Don’t be afraid to show them the love you have for them. Do things together.  Demonstrate how fulfilling it is to spend time with one’s family and friends.  Remind them that you love them and want them to remain close to you and safe, and not in some faraway place killing or getting killed.

Money is probably the most common reason a normal person becomes a Troop.  A man has to survive and provide for his or her family by whatever means is necessary.  This is where the government, with its virtually unlimited financial resources, has leverage.  Talk to your loved one about self-respect and self-reliance.  Assure them that as friends or family you will stick together and ensure each other’s well-being.  Explain to them that someone with the motivation and the willingness to sacrifice that they have demonstrated will find a way to provide for themselves and their family, and that they won’t have to sacrifice their morals or self-respect to do it.

The task is not easy, but working together, the people of our world can cure Troopism in our lifetime.  With love and perseverance we can prevail.  As the number of Troops worldwide decreases, so will the incidence and extent of war.  Sociopathic monsters will still exist, but they will be impotent and easily managed by traditional law enforcement.  Ultimately, a world without troops would truly be a world without war.  In that glorious day, together we will have stopped the most dangerous man in the world.

Written by David Wiggins

Flickr user US Army