an extensive operation or sphere of activity controlled by one person or group

Which country has more foreign military bases than any country in world history?

Which country spends more on violence and domination than the rest of the world combined?

Which country has overthrown or attempted to overthrow some 60 governments, most of them democracies?

Wednesday, October 15, 2014

Why Bush Censored Discovery of Chemical Weapons in Iraq

Reports out today:

A new report says the Bush administration concealed the discovery of chemical weapons in Iraq that had been developed with U.S. support in the 1980s — and then denied medical care to the wounded American soldiers involved. According to The New York Times, U.S. troops secretly reported finding more than 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or bombs after the 2003 invasion. All of the chemical weaponry predated 1991, just one year after Saddam Hussein stopped being a U.S. ally and recipient of the Western military aid that helped build his arsenal. At least 17 American and six Iraqi troops were wounded in their handling of the munitions in six separate incidents between 2004 and 2011. The weapons’ existence was kept from the troops entering those areas, and officials denied the victims the care they needed. One soldier talked about his health problems as a result of chemical exposure.
Andrew Goldman: “I still have residual blisters every now and then. I still have a lot of trouble breathing. I have a constant headache. I haven’t not had a headache since 2008 … Only thing I can think of is politics. Doesn’t jive with the story they wanted.”
In addition to raising new questions about the neglect of soldiers’ health and the Bush administration’s false pretext for going to war, the disclosure also carries implications for Iraq’s ongoing crisis. The Islamic State now controls most of the territory where the chemical weapons were found.
“In five of six incidents in which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared to have been designed in the United States, manufactured in Europe and filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western companies…”
As reported by RT and others, the chemical weapons, etc., that the US provided Saddam Hussein:
…may now be in the hands of Islamic State militants [who now control the very areas where the weapons were found].
People are acting like this is all new information, but it is absolutely not.
Anyone who wanted to know could have known, starting in the early 1980s, that the USA was (completely openly, not even covertly) providing Saddam with chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons components, since the USA was one of the members of the Axis of Evil that was waging a war of aggression and genocide against Iran and the Kurds, killing over a million (in addition to 500,000 young Iraqis, mainly conscripts).
In 1982, the USA took Saddam off its “terrorist” list (leaving Nelson Mandela on until 2007) so the USA could join in Saddam’s Axis for the invasion and genocide (the USA also committed genocide against the Kurds in Turkey, under Bill Clinton.)
Here, for example, is Noam Chomsky in 2006, giving what today is being reported as “new” information:
Bush administration policies have, again, consciously been carried out in a way, which they know is likely to increase the threat of terror. The most obvious example is the Iraq invasion. That was undertaken with the anticipation that it would be very likely to increase the threat of terror and also nuclear proliferation. And, in fact, that’s exactly what happened, according to the judgment of the C.I.A., National Intelligence Council, foreign intelligence agencies, independent specialists. They all point out that, yes, as anticipated, it increased the threat of terror. In fact, it did so in ways well beyond what was anticipated.
To mention just one, we commonly read that there were no weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq. Well, it’s not totally accurate. There were means to develop weapons of mass destruction in Iraq [provided by the USA] and known to be in Iraq. They were under guard by U.N. inspectors, who were dismantling them. When Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the rest sent in their troops, they neglected to instruct them to guard these sites. The U.N. inspectors were expelled, the sites were left unguarded. The inspectors continued their work by satellite and reported that over a hundred sites had been looted, in fact, systematically looted, not just somebody walking in, but careful looting. That included dangerous biotoxins, means to hide precision equipment to be used to develop nuclear weapons and missiles, means to develop chemical weapons and so on. All of this has disappeared. One hates to imagine where it’s disappeared to, but it could end up in New York.
Here is Chomsky in 2008 talking about how the US supported Saddam, including providing him with chemical weapons, etc.
Here is Chomsky in 2002 talking about how in the ’80s he was strongly opposing the USA’s noble mission to ensure Saddam could gas Iran and the Kurds.
Neither Iraq having US-provided WMD or US soldiers being injured by them and denied care by all-loving, all-benevolent US leaders (who always have the best interests of the world in their hearts) is news:

U.S. companies sold Iraq the ingredients for a witch’s brew

The United States almost went to war against Iraq in February because of Saddam Hussein’s weapons program. In his State of the Union address, President Clinton castigated Hussein for “developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them.”
“You cannot defy the will of the world,” the President proclaimed. “You have used weapons of mass destruction before. We are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.”
Most Americans listening to the President did not know that the United States supplied Iraq with much of the raw material for creating a chemical and biological warfare program. Nor did the media report that U.S. companies sold Iraq more than $1 billion worth of the components needed to build nuclear weapons and diverse types of missiles, including the infamous Scud.
When Iraq engaged in chemical and biological warfare in the 1980s, barely a peep of moral outrage could be heard from Washington, as it kept supplying Saddam with the materials he needed to build weapons.
According to a 1994 Senate report, private American suppliers, licensed by the U.S. Department of Commerce, exported a witch’s brew of biological and chemical materials to Iraq from 1985 through 1989. Among the biological materials, which often produce slow, agonizing death, were:
* Bacillus Anthracis, cause of anthrax.
* Clostridium Botulinum, a source of botulinum toxin.
* Histoplasma Capsulatam, cause of a disease attacking lungs, brain, spinal cord, and heart.
* Brucella Melitensis, a bacteria that can damage major organs.
* Clostridium Perfringens, a highly toxic bacteria causing systemic illness.
* Clostridium tetani, a highly toxigenic substance.
Also on the list: Escherichia coli (E. coli), genetic materials, human and bacterial DNA, and dozens of other pathogenic biological agents. “These biological materials were not attenuated or weakened and were capable of reproduction,” the Senate report stated. “It was later learned that these microorganisms exported by the United States were identical to those the United Nations inspectors found and removed from the Iraqi biological warfare program.”
The report noted further that U.S. exports to Iraq included the precursors to chemical-warfare agents, plans for chemical and biological warfare production facilities, and chemical-warhead filling equipment.
The American company that provided the most biological materials to Iraq in the 1980s was American Type Culture Collection of Maryland and Virginia, which made seventy shipments of the anthrax-causing germ and other pathogenic agents, according to a 1996 Newsday story.
Other American companies also provided Iraq with the chemical or biological compounds, or the facilities and equipment used to create the compounds for chemical and biological warfare. Among these suppliers were the following:
* Alcolac International, a Baltimore chemical manufacturer already linked to the illegal shipment of chemicals to Iran, shipped large quantities of thiodiglycol (used to make mustard gas) as well as other chemical and biological ingredients, according to a 1989 story in The New York Times.
* Nu Kraft Mercantile Corp. of Brooklyn (affiliated with the United Steel and Strip Corporation) also supplied Iraq with huge amounts of thiodiglycol, the Times reported.
* Celery Corp., Charlotte, NC
* Matrix-Churchill Corp., Cleveland, OH (regarded as a front for the Iraqi government, according to Representative Henry Gonzalez, Democrat of Texas, who quoted U.S. intelligence documents to this effect in a 1992 speech on the House floor).
The following companies were also named as chemical and biological materials suppliers in the 1992 Senate hearings on “United States export policy toward Iraq prior to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait”:
* Mouse Master, Lilburn, GA
* Sullaire Corp., Charlotte, NC
* Pure Aire, Charlotte, NC
* Posi Seal, Inc., N. Stonington, CT
* Union Carbide, Danbury, CT
* Evapco, Taneytown, MD
* Gorman-Rupp, Mansfield, OH
Additionally, several other companies were sued in connection with their activities providing Iraq with chemical or biological supplies: subsidiaries or branches of Fisher Controls International, Inc., St. Louis; Rhone-Poulenc, Inc., Princeton, NJ; Bechtel Group, Inc., San Francisco; and Lummus Crest, Inc., Bloomfield, NJ, which built one chemical plant in Iraq and, before the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in August 1990, was building an ethylene facility. Ethylene is a necessary ingredient for thiodiglycol.
In 1994, a group of twenty-six veterans, suffering from what has come to be known as Gulf War Syndrome, filed a billion-dollar lawsuit in Houston against Fisher, Rhone-Poulenc, Bechtel Group, and Lummus Crest, as well as American Type Culture Collection (ATCC) and six other firms, for helping Iraq to obtain or produce the compounds which the veterans blamed for their illnesses. By 1998, the number of plaintiffs has risen to more than 4,000 and the suit is still pending in Texas.
A Pentagon study in 1994 dismissed links between chemical and biological weapons and Gulf War Syndrome. Newsday later disclosed, however, that the man who headed the study, Nobel laureate Joshua Lederberg, was a director of ATCC. Moreover, at the time of ATCC’s shipments to Iraq, which the Commerce Department approved, the firm’s CEO was a member of the Commerce Department’s Technical Advisory Committee, the paper found.
A larger number of American firms supplied Iraq with the specialized computers, lasers, testing and analyzing equipment, and other instruments and hardware vital to the manufacture of nuclear weapons, missiles, and delivery systems. Computers, in particular, play a key role in nuclear weapons development. Advanced computers make it feasible to avoid carrying out nuclear test explosions, thus preserving the program’s secrecy. The 1992 Senate hearings implicated the following firms:
* Kennametal, Latrobe, PA
* Hewlett Packard, Palo Alto, CA
* International Computer Systems, CA, SC, and TX
* Perkins-Elmer, Norwalk, CT
* BDM Corp., McLean, VA
* Leybold Vacuum Systems, Export, PA
* Spectra Physics, Mountain View, CA
* Unisys Corp., Blue Bell, PA
* Finnigan MAT, San Jose, CA
* Scientific Atlanta, Atlanta, GA
* Spectral Data Corp., Champaign, IL
* Tektronix, Wilsonville, OR
* Veeco Instruments, Inc., Plainview, NY
* Wiltron Company, Morgan Hill, CA
The House report also singled out: TI Coating, Inc., Axel Electronics, Data General Corp., Gerber Systems, Honeywell, Inc., Digital Equipment Corp., Sackman Associates, Rockwell Collins International, Wild Magnavox Satellite Survey, Zeta Laboratories, Carl Schenck, EZ Logic Data, International Imaging Systems, Semetex Corp., and Thermo Jarrell Ash Corporation.
Some of the companies said later that they had no idea Iraq might ever put their products to military use. A spokesperson for Hewlett Packard said the company believed that the Iraqi recipient of its shipments, Saad 16, was an institution of higher learning. In fact, in 1990 The Wall Street Journal described Saad 16 as “a heavily fortified, state-of-the-art complex for aircraft construction, missile design, and, almost certainly, nuclear-weapons research.”
Other corporations recognized the military potential of their goods but considered it the government’s job to worry about it. “Every once in a while you kind of wonder when you sell something to a certain country,” said Robert Finney, president of Electronic Associates, Inc., which supplied Saad 16 with a powerful computer that could be used for missile testing and development. “But it’s not up to us to make foreign policy,” Finney told The Wall Street Journal.
In 1982, the Reagan Administration took Iraq off its list of countries alleged to sponsor terrorism, making it eligible to receive high-tech items generally denied to those on the list. Conventional military sales began in December of that year. Representative Samuel Gejdenson, Democrat of Connecticut, chairman of a House subcommittee investigating “United States Exports of Sensitive Technology to Iraq,” stated in 1991:
“From 1985 to 1990, the United States Government approved 771 licenses for the export to Iraq of $1.5 billion worth of biological agents and high-tech equipment with military application. [Only thirty-nine applications were rejected.] The United States spent virtually an entire decade making sure that Saddam Hussein had almost whatever he wanted. . . . The Administration has never acknowledged that it took this course of action, nor has it explained why it did so. In reviewing documents and press accounts, and interviewing knowledgeable sources, it becomes clear that United States export-control policy was directed by U.S. foreign policy as formulated by the State Department, and it was U.S. foreign policy to assist the regime of Saddam Hussein.”
Subsequently, Representative John Dingell, Democrat of Michigan, investigated the Department of Energy concerning an unheeded 1989 warning about Iraq’s nuclear weapons program. In 1992, he accused the DOE of punishing employees who raised the alarm and rewarding those who didn’t take it seriously. One DOE scientist, interviewed by Dingell’s Energy and Commerce Committee, was especially conscientious about the mission of the nuclear non-proliferation program. For his efforts, he received very little cooperation, inadequate staff, and was finally forced to quit in frustration. “It was impossible to do a good job,” said William Emel. His immediate manager, who tried to get the proliferation program fully staffed, was chastened by management and removed from his position. Emel was hounded by the DOE at his new job as well.
Another Senate committee, investigating “United States export policy toward Iraq prior to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait,” heard testimony in 1992 that Commerce Department personnel “changed information on sixty-eight licenses; that references to military end uses were deleted and the designation ‘military truck’ was changed. This was done on licenses having a total value of over $1 billion.” Testimony made clear that the White House was “involved” in “a deliberate effort . . . to alter these documents and mislead the Congress.”
American foreign-policy makers maintained a cooperative relationship with U.S. corporate interests in the region. In 1985, Marshall Wiley, former U.S. ambassador to Oman, set up the Washington-based U.S.-Iraq Business Forum, which lobbied in Washington on behalf of Iraq to promote U.S. trade with that country. Speaking of the Forum’s creation, Wiley later explained, “I went to the State Department and told them what I was planning to do, and they said, ‘Fine. It sounds like a good idea.’ It was our policy to increase exports to Iraq.
Though the government readily approved most sales to Iraq, officials at Defense and Commerce clashed over some of them (with the State Department and the White House backing Commerce).
“If an item was in dispute, my attitude was if they were readily available from other markets, I didn’t see why we should deprive American markets,” explained Richard Murphy in 1990. Murphy was Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs from 1983 to 1989.
As it turned out, Iraq did not use any chemical or biological weapons against U.S. forces in the Gulf War. But American planes bombed chemical and biological weapons storage facilities with abandon, potentially dooming tens of thousands of American soldiers to lives of prolonged and permanent agony, and an unknown number of Iraqis to a similar fate. Among the symptoms reported by the affected soldiers are memory loss, scarred lungs, chronic fatigue, severe headache, raspy voice, and passing out. The Pentagon estimates that nearly 100,000 American soldiers were exposed to sarin gas alone.
After the war, White House and Defense Department officials tried their best to deny that Gulf War Syndrome had anything to do with the bombings. The suffering of soldiers was not their overriding concern. The top concerns of the Bush and Clinton Administrations were to protect perceived U.S. interests in the Middle East, and to ensure that American corporations still had healthy balance sheets.
What are US “interests” in the Middle East?  Blum, in the same article, quotes Chomsky:
“It’s been a leading, driving doctrine of U.S. foreign policy since the 1940s that the vast and unparalleled energy resources of the Gulf region will be effectively dominated by the United States and its clients, and, crucially, that no independent indigenous force will be permitted to have a substantial influence on the administration of oil production and price.”
Not one US official who participated in the Axis of Evil genocide against Iran and the Kurds has been prosecuted or jailed.  Instead, Obama is protecting them, and has even hired at least one Bush Jr. era torturer into his regime (and Obama is himself, of course, a torturer).
However, one Dutch businessman, Frans van Anraat, who also provided Saddam with chemicals, etc., was jailed for 17 years for War Crimes, illustrating that trying American-monster counterparts of Anraat is, technically, possible.  At the very least, Anraat’s arrest confirms that we can, and should, disassociate ourselves from and boycott the heinous US corporate government.
Iraq having US and European weapons did not make an invasion legal in any way, which is why the highest authority in the UN stated that the invasion was illegal.  Do US chemical weapons and other WMD stockpiles, the world’s biggest, or the fact that the US has used them more than any other country, or the fact that the US was an accomplice in Saddam’s worst crimes, mean other countries can invade the US?
Robert Barsocchini is a researcher focusing on global force dynamics.  He also writes professionally for the film industry.  Here is his blog.  Also see his free e-book, Whatever it Takes – Hillary Clinton’s Record of Support for War and other Depravities.  Click here to follow Robert and his UK-based colleague, Dean Robinson, on Twitter.
Also published in Washington's Blog, Counter Currents, and various other journals. 

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Casting Doubt on “Facts” That Drive the West

In this 25 minute interview (below), Professor Chomsky throws a monkey wrench into some of the most fundamental parts of the enveloping machinery of unquestioned propaganda that propels the West, particularly the highly insulated USA:

  • What is the most dangerous, war-like country?
  • Is Maoist China the worst country in terms of the number of citizens who died due to government policy?
  • Is Iran really a threat, or simply being labeled as one by Western countries that want to (again) seize control of Iran’s resources and incorporate the country into the West’s empire?
  • What do Western elites mean by “stabilization” and “destabilization”?
And more.
The professor also stresses the importance of creating our own media outlets (like Washington’s Blog) to counter deadly Western myths.  (As the late professor Chalmers Johnson has said, like Soviet Pravda[Johnson's comparison], “You don’t read the New York Times for the truth.  You read it for the lies.”  Johnson says his personal morning newspaper of choice is Antiwar.com.)
Part 1 of Chomsky interview (12 mins):

Part 2 (13.5 mins):

Robert Barsocchini is a researcher focusing on global force dynamics.  He also writes professionally for the film industry.  Here is his blog.  Also see his free e-book, Whatever it Takes – Hillary Clinton’s Record of Support for War and other Depravities.  Click here to follow Robert and his UK-based colleague, Dean Robinson, on Twitter.
Also  published in Washington's Blog. 

Monday, October 6, 2014

Hillary Clinton Confirms Commitment to Democracy by Acknowledging Role in Overthrow of Honduran Democracy

As reported by Al Jazeera, Hillary Clinton now publicly acknowledges her globally isolated role in aiding a terrorist organization in the overthrow of Honduras’s democratically elected president, Manuel Zelaya, in 2009.

Demonstrating her unwavering commitment to democracy and respect for the Honduran people, Clinton says she cemented the terrorist takeover by blocking Zelaya’s attempts to return to his elected post.
The terrorist organization Clinton helped seize power has since carried out mass violence and repression, including forcing down Honduran wages and other such changes desired by Clinton’s corporate backers and associates, who exert force internationally to keep down the costs of foreign labor and resources so they can seize larger percentages of value produced by others.
This Hillary Clinton trademark was described in the 1700s by economist Adam Smith, who, in his scathing critiques of people like Clinton and her friends, expressed what he called the “vile maxim of the masters of mankind: all for ourselves, and nothing for other people.”
Here is a brief look at why Clinton helped overthrow democratically elected Zelaya even though doing so further isolated Clinton from the international community:
“Despite … initial conservative leanings, Zelaya began to criticize powerful, vested interests in the country such as the media and owners of maquiladora sweatshops which produced goods for export in industrial free zones.  Gradually he started to adopt some socially progressive policies.  For example, Zelaya instituted a 60 per cent minimum wage increase which angered the wealthy business community.  The hike in the minimum wage, Zelaya declared, would “force the business oligarchy to start paying what is fair.”  “This is a government of great social transformations, committed to the poor,” he added.  [Big strike one.]  Trade unions celebrated the decision, not surprising given that Honduras is the third poorest country in the hemisphere and 70 per cent of its people live in poverty.  When private business associations announced that they would challenge the government’s wage decree in Honduras’ Supreme Court, Zelaya’s Labor Minister called the critics “greedy exploiters.”  [Strike two.]
In another move that must have raised eyebrows in Washington, Zelaya declared during a meeting of Latin American and Caribbean anti-drug officials that drug consumption should be legalized to halt violence related to smuggling.  In recent years Honduras has been plagued by drug trafficking and so-called maras or street gangs which carry out gruesome beheadings, rapes and eye gouging.  “Instead of pursuing drug traffickers, societies should invest resources in educating drug addicts and curbing their demand,” Zelaya said.”  [Strike three, you're out!]
(Bonus strike four: Zelaya also “scrapped school tuition”.  Another a no-no.)
Hillary Clinton, of course, disapproves of the idea of being violently overthrown from her own posts because of someone else’s preferences and beliefs.  Thus, in carrying out her various acts of terrorism around the world, she further enunciates her philosophy that there is no law or basic morality, like the golden rule; the weak are simply at the mercy of pirates, who, as Clinton facilitates, plunder to their content.
Apt Pupil
Clinton’s “vile” philosophy and mastery of hypocrisy (demonstrated time and again) were nurtured by her “close friend”, “top informal adviser”, and role model for women everywhere, Madeleine Albright.
Albright was Bill Clinton’s ambassador to the United Nations and then secretary of state.  She was the one who went on national television and said that trying to remove Saddam Hussein from political office was worth executing one child, age five or under, every day for one-thousand-three-hundred-seventy years (i.e. 500,000 children).
This would be an important lesson in hypocrisy for Hillary:
Extremists like Albright often talk about how their claimed political goals are well worth the deaths of other people’s children.
But despite Albright’s willingness to kill hundreds of thousands of other people’s kids, one remains skeptical about whether Albright, who has three children of her own, would have been willing to execute even one of them (let alone herself) to remove Saddam.
If pressed on this, like any good politician, she would change her tune and say that killing the Iraqi kids was actually all a mistake, a big misunderstanding, and so on, and so therefore no, she would not sacrifice even one of her own daughters, let alone all three, let alone herself, to unseat Saddam.
But to say the killing of the five-hundred-thousand kids was a mistake would be a lie.  They were killed by the USA knowingly (and perhaps intentionally – as a goal, not just a known by-product of another goal) over a period of years, as Albright’s statement, actions, and declassified US documents confirm:
When Albright said it was reasonable to kill hundreds of thousands of children to achieve her political goals, it was May, 1996.
Declassified US documents show that in 1991 the US knew the effects that its sanctions and clean-water-supply destruction were having against Iraq; namely, what would obviously happen if any populated area were cut off from the world and its water treatment facilities were bombed: vast swathes of Iraqis, predominantly children and the elderly, were dying.  (Some fringe people, such as the world’s most cited living academic, have had the crazy idea that by cutting Iraq off from the world and destroying its water treatment facilities, the USA intended to kill Iraqi civilians and weaken the population, as the US is documented to have been doing, for example, to Cuba since the 50s, but we can leave that aside.)
Albright was thus in the Clinton regime for eight solid years (starting in 1993) while maintaining and publicly defending the sanctions, the obvious effects of which were known since 1991, before she came into office.  And, true to her word, the sanctions were continued for the approximately five more years she remained in office after her public confession, during which time she made no effort to end the sanctions, thus triply confirming her statement that killing mountains of other people’s kids was worth her stated political goals.
(Albright and the Clintons kept the sanctions going for their entire time in office, ’93 to ’01, for a total of 8 solid years, after the approx. two years under Bush Sr., for a total of 10.  The sanctions were condemned by UN authorities as “genocidal”, but never once denounced by Hillary, despite her enormous platform and influence as first lady of the USA.)
Albright’s predictable evasion about not being willing to sacrifice any children for the sake of removing Hussein would simply further confirm that, as demonstrated, she is extremely willing to kill children for her political goals, just not her children.  She is thus not only one of the worst terrorists in history, but, icing on the cake, a model of hypocrisy.
Thugs like Albright, her star pupil Hillary, and Hillary’s monstrous husband Bill, never sacrifice their own kids for their corporate-linked terrorism, nor will they ever even feel guilty enough to surrender themselves to an international tribunal for trial.
Of course, these are not regular people, but prime examples of the lowest dregs humanity has to offer, or, to use the idiom preferred in the US corporate press, “bad guys”.
US Rap Sheet in Honduras
2009 was not the first time US terrorists tortured Hondurans (with support from Hillary Clinton – see below).
In the 1980s, the USA sent militants from US terrorist training camps into Honduras to torture and execute people.  The US gave “indispensable support to the infamous Battalion 316, which kidnapped, tortured and killed hundreds of citizens, using shock and suffocation devices for interrogation, amongst other techniques.” (William Blum)
The USA “supplied torture equipment, torture manuals, and in both Honduras and the US, taught battalion members methods of psychological and physical torture.”
In an interview with the Baltimore Sun, former “torturer[s] and murderer[s]” for Battalion 316 talked about how they executed prisoners, “nearly suffocated people with rubber masks … attached wires to their genitals and shocked them with electricity … tore off a man’s testicles with a rope.”
“The Americans knew everything we were doing,” said one.
“‘We let [the victims] stay in their own excrement,’ he said … ‘When they were very weak, we would take them to disappear.’”
Their prisoners “always ended up dead.”
One of the terrorists said they targeted a 35 year old graduate student and “stabbed him to death … Then … cut his body to pieces with a machete and buried the pieces in different places along the road”.
Witnesses described some of the men as “cold blooded killers” who “killed because they wanted to.”
One favored torture technique was “to force a prisoner to stand naked on a chair, then to tie a basket to his testicles. As the torturer asked questions, he filled the basket with rocks or corn and swung it back and forth.”
Torture was “always used”.
“[O]ne night, on a dirt road outside Tegucigalpa … a battalion member pushed a prisoner from the car and began stabbing him… After five thrusts, the prisoner was still alive, murmuring what sounded like a prayer.”
One of them men then “pulled a gun and shot the prisoner. They left the body by the roadside.”
“In August 1985, Barrera thrust a knife into the abdomen of Juan Hernandez Dominguez.
‘I did it to earn merit,’ he said.”
When torturing, ”The first thing we would say is that we know your mother, your younger brother, and it’s better you cooperate, because if you don’t, we’re going to bring them in and rape them and torture them and kill them.”
All of the men interviewed said they were trained by the USA, some at secret US-based terrorist training camps thought to be in Texas, where the terrorists were given “everything we needed — food, drink, a swimming pool.”
The US now harbors some members of its Battalion 316 terrorist group.  They live comfortably in South Florida, along with many other notorious terrorists, including the US-backed general who ordered the rape and execution of four US nuns in El Salvador in the 80s.  (US officials and the press only pretend to be shocked and opposed to lurid executions of US citizens when the killings can be used as propaganda to expand US international domination, as demonstrated by the two recent killings of US citizens in an area the US wants to exert more control over, the Middle East.  In contrast, news of the rape and killing of the four nuns was heavily repressed by the US government and corporate press, and at least one of their killers, a terrorist, is now harbored by the US government.)
A chief reason for US terrorist activities in Honduras in the 1980s was to create a swamp in which the USA could spawn and provide safe haven to more terrorists: the USA’s Contras, which Hillary Clinton strongly supported
The US would soon be convicted by the World Court of international terrorism for sicking its Contras on Nicaragua, and also reprimanded by the Security Council and General Assembly, all of which the USA ignored, instead escalating its terror campaigns.
At that time, the USA also protected illegal narcotics traffickers in Honduras (as well as the US) who were working for the Contras.
Also see this: The per-capita equivalent of the number of Nicaraguans the USA killed (with Hillary Clinton’s support) would be about 2.5 million US citizens, more than all US citizens killed in all US wars combined, including the US civil war.
Robert Barsocchini is a researcher focusing on global force dynamics.  He also writes professionally for the film industry.  Here is his blog.  Also see his free e-book, Whatever it Takes – Hillary Clinton’s Record of Support for War and other Depravities.  Click here to follow Robert and his UK-based colleague, Dean Robinson, on Twitter.
Also published in Washington's Blog and Whatever it Takes - Hillary Clinton's Record of Support for War and Other Depravities.