Peter Kornbluh Quotes

This historian’s view of the role of the historian, while totally at odds with academic, cultural, and political values with America and most industrial democracies. However, he does represent the proper role of the historian as seen by most theocracies and non-democratic nations. Indeed, there are countries today where this statement would be considered a model for patriotic historians and journalists. Another interesting comparison can be made between Otto and another historian of the era who represented a more democratic academic and journalistic point of view. So the issue has been in conflict for over a thousand years. See Anna Comnena {587993}

Actually the United States has a long history in interfering with foreign elections throughtout Latin American Countries, Europe, Asia,, and Africa. Russia also has been trying to tilt elections recently in Eastern Europe and befroe the COld War the International Communist Party was involved trying to swing elections since shortly after the Russin Revolution. Before that the Czars agents were involved in many foreign elections. But the United States and Russia historically are relative newcomers and rank amateurs in interering with foireign elections when compared with Germany and France and the Champion--Great Britain who controlled much of the world and very often promoting democratic values like elections throughtout the world and then workign to manipulate those elections. Japan and Chine did much less of this historically. Instead they just conquored other counties and placed their puppets in charge. What was new in teh 2016 Russian interference in the American Election was the fact that it was done by hacking computers. Putin had accused Hillary Clinton of Interfering with the Russian election when he last ran for President by funing Russian organziations that oppo

For similar quotations, see {630422} and {633250}.

In Chile’s first Democratic election, to the chagrin of our Ambassador Korry and others in the U. S. Government, an avowed Socialist, Allende, was chosen by the people. Korry and others then stopped any U. S. Aid and did what they could to have the Allende Administration. However, Henry Kissinger and the CIA did not want to wait for economic sanctions to work. Keeping our Ambassador in the dark, they helped the right wing Chilean Military organize a coup to remove Allende. Allende committed suicide rather than be captured by General Pinochet and other military who commonly tortured political enemies and killing many. The result was an end to socialism, but the cost was tens of thousands of Chileans, murdered, tortured and disappeared by Pinochet and his forces. Pinochet was finally convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The 40 Committee was a secret committee of officials to deal with major national security covert operations possibilities. Chile had democratically elected Salvador Allende, a strong socialist, as President. He then, as he had promised in his campaign, begun to nationalize mining and other heavy industry and nationalized the very large farms. Kissinger and some others thought that Allende might probably transform Chile to communist state. The committee was discussing whether or not the United States should, via covert operations, try and destabilize or overthrow the Allende government. There was a strong minority aristocracy of the wealthy who would definitely support such an activity. Kissinger argued for intervention and some others observed that Allende had been fairly elected as a leftist by the people. Kissinger made this famous statement, and America covertly though the CIA worked with the Chilean right wing and fascists to overthrow Allende. The military, having been given the “green light” started attacking the Presidential Palace. Allende made a radio speech to the nation. A few hours later, the military seized the palace and reported that Allende had committed suicide.

Kissinger stating that the US should “correct” the election “mistakes” of other countries was of course Top Secret and the official US position was to support the right of any people to elect their preferred leaders. Normally, the public would never have seen the transcript of the meeting until many decades had passed but part of the transcript found their way to a manuscript of a book about the CIA. That agency went to the courts to block the publication and Kissinger’s statement. However, although the quote was removed from the book, enough people had now seen it, and the quote was leaked.

The quote is historically important for the real story of what really happened in Chile as General Pinochet who seized power turned out to be guilty of Crimes Against Humanity and Allende is today a national hero and martyr. In addition, it is a wonderful example of “overclassification”. After the action was completed, why should the American Public not know that its Secretary of State did not believe in democratic elections if the people would elect communists? --especially when the official stated policy he was presenting was just the opposite. The argument faded when the Watergate Scandal broke and consumed America’s attention.

Although Father Dudko hated the Soviets, he was very much a Russian nationalist. So he adopted the Communist Regime position on anti-Communist foreigners who would help the anti-Soviet dissidents.

Leftist Salvador Allende, despite covert CIA efforts to make him lose, was elected President. The CIA was then planning a coup to remove him from power. The CIA agents in Chile had kept the Ambassador in the dark, but he found out and cabled Secretary of State Henry Kissinger this warning. To Korry’s great surprise and disappointment Kissinger was in on the coup plans and he ordered Korry to stay out of it. Traditionally, the Ambassador is in charge of all U.S. Government Activity in the country, but in cases of covert operations, the Ambassador might or might not be in the loop. The coup d’etat took place, Allende committed suicide, and General August became the dictator of Chile and implemented a reign of terror for anyone who disagreed with his policies or programs. See {634506}.