Entradas
Ahora la derecha sueca se da el lujo de levantar esos comentarios, desfigurarlos aún más, hacer un cóctel de información donde mezclan distintos aspectos de la vida de Engler, dan información totalmente errónea y hacen un artículo que lo difama en un país que no conoce nuestra historia.
¿Hago mal en preguntarme dónde están los compañeros cuando algo así pasa?, me recuerda a lo que sucedió con Ricardo Zabalza cuando Cardoso y otros de su calaña cuestionaron la manera en que murió, y ninguno de los que se salvaron ese día y hoy son destacados ciudadanos dijo algo para defender su memoria y recuerdo. ¿O es que por sentir que perdieron se encuentran tan avergonzados de su pasado que tratan de evitar a toda costa que se los relacione a él? No nos jugamos por nuestros muertos ni por los vivos.
A fines del año pasado, se publicó uno de los documentos desclasificados por Wikileaks sobre la Embajada de Estados Unidos en Montevideo (http://91.214.23.156/cablegate/wire.php?id=07MONTEVIDEO287&search), dicho documento versa sobre la ejecución en 1971 del ex agente de la Agencia para el Desarrollo Internacional (AID), Dan Anthony Mitrione. Allí se revela que el gobierno estadounidense pidió en el 2008 al ex presidente Tabaré Vázquez que Henry Engler no ocupe cargos públicos ya que a su entender está implicado en el homicidio de Mitrione.
De más está decir que eso sirvió para que la derecha y el fascismo aprovecharan para intensificar los ataques a Engler, a través de páginas como ”En Voz Alta” o de lacayos como Cardoso (siempre él) y algún otro ”facho” de nuestra fauna política.
Por supuesto no se analiza la responsabilidad colectiva de una decisión que fue tomada en un momento muy especial de la historia, no se habla del comunicado 6 y 9 del MLN y ninguno de los integrantes de dicha organización que hoy tienen altos cargos, ha salido a defender a Engler.
También se omite el documento desclasificado el 11 de agosto del 2010 y el papel de los EEUU en toda esta historia, se evita traer a colación quien era el siniestro personaje Mitrione. El documento secreto, que menciono, fue enviado por el secretario del Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos, William Rogers, al embajador norteamericano en Uruguay, Charles Adair, el 9 de agosto de 1970, allí se le pide a Peirano Facio asesinar a Sendic como represalia por la muerte de Mitrione. Aún más interesante es la respuesta que se da desde Uruguay, donde se informa que habrá consecuencias para los familiares de los detenidos, que serán ejecutadas por el escuadrón de la muerte y no por el gobierno (?)
(http://www.larepublica.com.uy/politica/420170-nixon-pidio-a-pacheco-que-mataran-a-sendic-si-mitrione-era-ejecutado)
Simplemente algo para pensar
Veronika Engler
Notas:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.htmlres=940DE5DD1526E731BC4E53DFB16E958A
en inglés.
*****
Datum: 10 april 2011 09.53.36 GMT-03.00
Till: kristoffer.orstadius@dn.se
Article in DN About Dan Mitrione
Dear Mr. Orstadius:
As an American citizen and lecturer on international relations with an interest in Latin American affairs, I took a special interest in your article published today in Dagens Nyheter.
I think that your article is problematic on several grounds, most particularly being the title. My problems with this article concern the following three main points:
First, I don't understand the title of this article which in my country might be considered a form of libel against Dr. Engler.
The article suggests that now the "murder trail" leads to Sweden in the case of Dan Mitrione, one of the most nortorious torturers in recent Latin American history. Dr. Engler contends that he is innocent. If he is innocent, then the murder trail does not lead to Sweden. As your articles published today note, Dr. Engler suggests that the claims about him come from military officials who now sit in prison. Given the ruthless character of the Uruguayan military, one might have certain doubts about the character of these individuals or their concern for truth. Yet, your article did not discuss the character of this regime in any great depth, nor the activities of Mitrione in great depth. Given my limited understanding of criminology, I understand that there is something called a "false lead."
Your article might have been titled, "A False Lead Creates a Potential Smearing of an Upsalla University Researcher." Yet, your article did not have this title. Why did it not have this title?
Or, it could have been called, "American Embassy Documents: Fact or Propaganda?"
Anything along the lines of journalistic balance would have been appropriate.
Second, I think the word "murder" used in the Dan Mitrione case is potentially very misleading.
I use the word "potentially" because it depends on which version of history you accept.
A recently published book provides a useful characterization of Mitrione in which his death could be considered: a) an execution, or b) at least an assasination. The execution description corresponds to the limits to the legality of the Uruguayan regime when he was killed.
In Sweden today, apparently the legal status of a nation does not grant sovereignty or legitimacy to the state when the nation engages in human rights abuses or potential mass killings. This is the argument used to justify Swedish state intervention in Libya. I don't accept this form of argument in the Libyan case, but it does illustrate how the relationship between legality and violence has been complicated in recent times.
John Gerassi describes Dan Mitrione's case in a recent book: "An FBI officer from Kansas, Mitrione was trained as a CIA expert in explosives and tehn torture, and was sent to various countries in Latin America to teach the local police how to torture without leaving traces. As correspondent A. J. Langguth documented, first in the New York Times in 1970, then with specific details in his book Hidden Terrors, published by Pantheon in 1978, Mitrione became especially adept at the use of the picana, an electric cattle prod, to deliver extremely painful shocks to torture victims. He was eventually captured by the Tumpamaros, Uruguay's resistance movement, and tried in an underground people's court in 1970. He was taped confessing with such precise details that there could be no dispute about the facts, and was then executed. The CIA has steadfastly refused to admit that it furnished friendly Lat American police forces with implements used for torture" (John Gerassi, Talking with Sartre,
New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009: 289, note 9). In his taped confession, Mitrione revealed "that he had taught the Uruguayan police how to torture prisoners" (ibid.: 296, note 1).
A Wikipedia entry on Mitrione casts some doubt on these claims, but similarly provides evidence to support them (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Mitrione, Accesed April 10, 2011).
Among the evidence used to doubt the claims is this article:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940DE5DD1526E731BC4E53DFB16E958A
by Shirley Christian, "Uruguayan Clears Up 'State of Siege' Killing," The New York Times, June 21, 1987. Unfortunately for the credibility of Ms. Christian, her other statements render her a less than credible source. According to research published by Noam Chomsky, Ms. Chrisitian has engaged in distortions of the truth when it came to covering Latin American in the past. In his book, Necessary Illusions: Thought Control in Modern Societies, Chomsky documents false or misleading statements by Ms. Christian based on statements by Washington Post reporter Karen De Young and New York Times reporter Alan Riding (London: Pluto Press, 1989: Appendix 1, 165).
The claims against Mitrione in the Wikipedia article include the following:
"In spite of Sendic's memories, told almost 17 years after the events and after being imprisoned for so many years, just a few days after Mitrione's funeral a senior Uruguayan police officer, Alejandro Otero, told the Jornal do Brasil that Mitrione had been employed to teach the police to use 'violent techniques of torture and repression.'"
In summary, at the very least we can: (a) be uncertain whether or not the killing of Mitrione was a simple murder, without any potential complicating factors, or (b) the complicating factors surrounding Mitrione do not warrant the headline provided regarding whoever killed him as this is a case of a highly politicized case with complicating ethical issues attached to it, complications that can't be adequately addressed in the headline so provided.
Third, your article did not consider or explore the sources used by the Wikileaks documents in any great detail.
We know that disinformation exists and is a tool used by dictatorships like the Uruguayan regime referred to in the article. The article does not discuss this possibility at any great length which is different from a denial from Dr. Engler. The difference is that the possible denial can flow deductively or inductively from what we know about dictatorships and their control of information and their selective use of it. This phenomena is independent of the guilt or innocence, claims or counterclaims of Dr. Engler. I think that one needs to engage in much higher standards than
those found in tabloid journalism. For an example, which is related to this kind off argument, you could consider this article:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=22321 which raises questions about how Wikipedia is used as a source. I don't necessarily agree with the article, but cite it as a representative example of a real or potential problem.
I assume that an editor may have given your article this title and not you yourself. In some newspapers, journalists lose their freedom to choose titles for their own articles. In some cases, journalists then have the freedom to pull their articles or take their names off of these articles. I am very confused as to what took place here, but I have serious concerns about this article and its method of presentation.
Sincerely yours,
Jonathan M. Feldman
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario