The National-Security States Tradition Of Embracing Dictators By Jacob G. Hornberger!!
(2017-05-03 at 14:57:06 )

The National-Security States Tradition of Embracing Dictators by Jacob G. Hornberger

The New York Times editorial board is outraged and indignant that President Trump has invited Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte to the United States to meet with Trump. In an editorial entitled "Donald Trump Embraces Another Despot", the Times points to Dutertes dictatorial practices, including his alleged state-sponsored murders of drug-law violators. The editorial also points to the "friendly reception" that Trump extended to President Abdel Fattah el Sisi, the brutal military dictator of Egypt, and to Trumps praise for President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who recently convinced Turkeys parliament to expand his dictatorial powers.

Why is the Times so indignant and outraged over these actions? Because, the paper says, Trumps actions go against Americas long time role as "a beacon of democracy and a global advocate of human rights and the rule of law."

Is that funny or what?

It is funny in two ways: One, after the United States government was converted from a limited-government republic to a national-security state after World War II, America abandoned its role as a beacon of democracy and global advocate of human rights and the rule of law.

And, two, ever since then, many Americans have chosen to live a life of the lie and a life of delusion, falsely and deceptively convincing themselves that America was still serving as a beacon of democracy and global advocate of human rights and the rule of law.

Let us go back to 1953, to the coup that the Central Intelligence Agency engineered in Iran. The Central Intelligence Agency ousted the democratically elected prime minister of the country in a violent coup. And then it installed a brutal unelected dictator in his stead. And then it trained his domestic police force - the SAVAK - in acts of torture and oppression in order to maintain his grip on power.

Or 1954, when the Central Intelligenc Agency orchestrated the coup in Guatemala that ousted the democratically elected president of the country and installed a succession of brutal unelected military dictators in his stead.

How about the 1950s, when the United States government supported the unelected dictatorial regime of Cubas brutal tyrant, Fulgencio Batista, a corrupt dictator who was partnering with the Mafia and whose forces were delivering young Cuban girls to well-heeled casino customers to be raped.

How about the Central Intelligence Agencys formal program of assassination in the 1950s and 1960s, the one which targeted people who had never attacked the United States, including the dictator who ousted Batista from power, Fidel Castro, and Congos elected president, Patrice Lumumba?

How about the Central Intelligence Agencys acts of sabotage inside Cuba, a country that has never attacked the United States or even threatened to do so? How about the United States embargo against Cuba, which squeezes the lifeblood out of the Cuban people as a way to effect regime change in their country?

How about the sanctions against the people of Iraq, North Korea, Iran, and others who have suffered the same economic brutality at the hands of United States officials?

How about the Central Intelligence Agencys regime-change operation in November 1963 that succeeded in ousting the democratically elected president of the United States, John F. Kennedy, who was threatening to end the national-security establishments Cold War plans for America, and replacing him with Lyndon Johnson, who was committed to continuing such plans, including embroiling the United States in the Vietnam War, which brought the meaningless deaths of more than 58,000 American servicemen?

How about the Central Intelligence Agencys plot to kidnap and assassinate Rene Schneider in 1970, the commanding general of Chiles armed forces, simply because he refused to go along with the Central Intelligence Agencys regime plan for that country?

How about the Central Intelligence Agency-orchestrated coup in Chile in 1973, which succeeded in ousting the democratically elected president of the country and replacing him with a brutal unelected military dictator, whose forces then proceeded to round up, kidnap, incarcerate, torture, rape, execute, or disappear some 60,000 innocent people, including two Americans, Charles Horman and Frank Teruggi, all with the support of the United States national-security establishment?

How about the Central Intelligence Agencys infamous program MKULTA, whose files the Central Intelligence Agency intentionally destroyed so that Americans could not learn what they had done to innocent people?

How about the United States invasions and undeclared wars of aggression against Iraq and Afghanistan? How about the regime change operations in Libya and Syria?

How about the racial bigotry of the drug war and its programs of mass incarceration, warrantless searches and searches, mandatory minimum sentences, and asset-forfeiture programs?

How about those immigration highway checkpoints in the American Southwest that are undoubtedly modeled on those in totalitarian countries?

How about the Central Intelligence Agencys and Pentagons torture program, their rendition-and-torture program, and their indefinite incarceration program?

How about the Central Intelligence Agencys intentional destruction of their torture videotapes? How about Abu Ghraib and the intentional hiding of the Abu Ghraib photos and videos? How about Gitmo and its regime of secrecy, torture, military tribunals, indefinite detention, denial of due process and trial by jury, and the use of coerced confessions, hearsay, and evidence acquired by torture?

How about the National Security Agencys secret surveillance schemes and its illegal telecom activity? How about the United States governments longtime partnerships with some of the most brutal dictatorships in the world, including those in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, and Bahrain?

Pray tell, editorial writers at the New York Times: How is all that consistent with America as a beacon of democracy and advocate of human rights and the rule of law?

Want to know why they are mad at Trump? No, not because he is playing nice with dictators. He is doing what United States officials have done ever since the end of World War II (or even during the war, when President Roosevelt partnered with Soviet communist dictator Joseph Stalin). It is because Trump is doing it openly and publicly.

That is his real crime. He is supposed to downplay Americas longtime partnerships with dictatorial regimes and preach that America continues to be a beacon for democracy and an advocate for human rights and the rule of law. They are mad at Trump because he refuses to be a hypocrite too.

Postscript: Also see "Trumps Support and Praise of Despots Is Central to the United States Tradition, Not a Deviation from It" by Glenn Greenwald.

Printed here with permission from Mr. Jacob G. Hornberger of The Future of Freedom Foundation!! Their Great Website!!