Guatemala apologizes to U.S. widow over murder

[Judi Lynn]

Guatemala apologizes to U.S. widow over murder
17 Oct 2006 01:59:15 GMT
Source: Reuters

By Mica Rosenberg

GUATEMALA CITY, Oct 16 (Reuters) - After three hunger strikes, a Supreme Court case and over a decade of waiting, U.S. lawyer Jennifer Harbury received an apology on Monday from Guatemala for the torture and murder of her guerrilla husband.

The government claimed responsibility for the disappearance of Mayan rebel leader Efrain Bamaca at an official event at the National Palace, where in 1994 Harbury went on a 32-day hunger strike to push for information about her husband's death.

"Today Guatemala wants to publicly recognize the atrocities of the past ... to stop denying the undeniable, excusing what is not excusable," said Frank La Rue, head of the government's human rights commission.

La Rue admitted Bamaca was kidnapped and murdered by state security forces.
(snip/...)

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N16424669.htm

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From DU'er Gabi Hayes' links posted in an earlier thread, part of an interview with Buzzflash:

...My husband was picked up by the Guatemalan military. He was captured alive in 1992. Then they falsely stated that he had been killed in combat. I found out six months later that he was, in fact, still alive, that they had faked his death in order to torture him long term, with medical assistance to avoid accidentally killing him, so that he would break psychologically and reveal all of his information to them.
(snip)

, it was revealed by U.S. Rep. Robert Torricelli, who was then on the Intelligence Committee in the House, that my husband had indeed been captured alive, had been held for two and a half years and severely tortured, then extra-judiciously executed or assassinated by military intelligence officials in Guatemala, who were also on the CIA payroll as paid informants.

In other words, the CIA had been paying the very people that were torturing and who eventually killed my husband without trial. The documents from the U.S. government also showed that both the CIA and the United States Embassy had known where my husband was, and the fact that he was being tortured in the hands of U.S.-paid informants, from the first week of his capture. We could have saved him.

The documents also revealed that there were 350 other prisoners in similar circumstances. That was announced to the CIA and the U.S. Embassy during the first year. We not only could have saved my husband's life, we could have saved 350 other lives. But we were not allowed to do so because we were given false information by the CIA and the U.S. – the United States Embassy.

BuzzFlash: Your husband was tortured and kept in a body cast so he couldn't escape, while interrogators tortured him nearly to death. They had a doctor there to make sure he wouldn't die, they revived him, and then tortured him some more. In your book, you point out that the interrogator in the Guatemalan military – a high-ranking officer– that this man was trained at the infamous School of the Americas in Fort Benning, Georgia.
(snip)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2564416#2565285

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You might want to keep an eye out for her on C-Span, as she has shown up there for speeches, interviews.

[LynnTheDem]

1. They should teach bush's CIA, FBI etc on their torture techniques.

Now that the USA officially sanctions torture, perhaps they have techniques bush would like to use on any American or non-US citizen bush decides to deem an "enemy combatant".

[Jed Dilligan]

2. Why bother?

They learned them from the CIA who learned them from the SD.

[Judi Lynn]

3. The torture Dubya is using now against "enemy combatants" was used

a long time ago in Viet Nam, then in Latin America by CIA trained people. I think it's covered in DU'er Gabi Hayes post #57 links (or post #55, if not) on Jennifer Harbury. During the years she has spent trying to find out more about what happened to her husband, she has uncovered a lot about U.S. torture as it was created and used against MANY, MANY other poor souls.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2564416#2565285

Published on Saturday, September 24, 2005 by Newsday
US Has Sanctioned Torture for Far Too Long
by Jennifer K. Harbury

As the United Nations intensifies its scrutiny of torture practices in Iraq, many Americans feel outrage and confusion.

How could this have happened? The truth lies in the realities that led to the Katrina disaster. The horrors are not new, but long-term and deep-rooted.

The photographs of Abu Ghraib torture practices left many of us with a chilling sense of deja vu. Anyone who survived torture in Latin America or lost a loved one to death squads there, remembers these techniques. We also remember the U.S. participants. Although our government leaders insist that the recent abuses were acts of a few "bad apples" - young MPs out of control - we can only shake our heads. We have heard it all before. While our young soldiers face prison time for following orders, those who authorized and ordered the torture continue to violate our laws with full impunity. Why?

Given the extraordinary flow of disclosures, confirming the use of identical U.S. torture practices throughout Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo, the "bad apple" defense is coy at best. It is impossible for so many soldiers to dream up identical techniques by coincidence. We are dealing with official policy, not individual excess. Legal responsibility goes all the way to the top.

We must also remember that these horrific practices were not invented during the war against terror. Throughout Latin America, secretly held prisoners were subjected to raging dogs, excruciating positions, simulated drownings, long-term sleep and food deprivation, blasting noises and terrifying threats.

U.S. responsibility was hardly limited to funding and training military death squads. In many cases, U.S. intelligence agents visited cells, observed battered prisoners and gave advice or asked questions. Instead of insisting on humane treatment, these agents simply left the detainees to their fates.

Worse yet, many notorious torturers were on the CIA payroll as informants. I ought to know. My husband, a Mayan resistance leader, was brutally tortured for two years by Guatemalan officials serving as such "assets." The "water-pit" technique referred to in Afghanistan appears in his files, too. Eventually, he was either thrown from a helicopter or dismembered. Within six days of his capture, the CIA knew he was in the hands of its own people, yet continued payments and kept the matter secret even from our Congress. My husband's life could have been saved.

These practices have been developed through the decades. The iconic photograph of the Abu Ghraib detainee, hooded and wired and standing on a small box, depicts a position known to intelligence officials as "The Vietnam."
(snip)

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0924-30.htm

[dipsydoodle]

4. Just one of a number or reasons

why Guatemala shouldn't get the UN seat.

[LynnTheDem]

5. And why the USA should be removed from having a UN seat.

Removed and barred.

[Judi Lynn]

6. Absolutely! They are acting as the designated S.C. seat holder for Bush.

Their government has been doing Republican American Presidents' bidding since Eisenhower, to the great sorrow, suffering of the Guatemalan people.

[MrPrax]

13. A professor,

who was some Marxist type involved with a Caribbean government, before he fled due to a power transition, often quipped that EVEN among good leftist like his friends, the two most important jobs for any Third World regime is 'President' and 'UN Ambassador' and sadly MOST of his comrades wanted the 'UN job'.

Why? Because you get to hang out in New York, you don't have to deal directly with the People, much better shopping, less hassles and bribes buying luxury cars there, you get big money and a chance to network with other 'Marxist types', and if the government gets overthrown, you are safe until the extradiction process completes itself (assuming there is one). Much better than being just the President, don't you think ;-)

Indeed, I am sure everyone at the UN knows that Guatemala is a good 'little American buddy' on this vote, but Chavez didn't do himself any favours with his 'harague' last month either. The first vote shows unmistakenly that the current crop of General Assembly is closer to my old Professor's take.

While I liked Chavez comments, a speech in front of the UN usually requires a tact a bit broader than basically internet chat room generalizations. We progressives always have to wear a 'game face' once in awhile and it would have been a greater tribute to the man if Hugo decided to don it for that speech.

Chavez should have played to the crowd and not the home audience -- fiery speeches about Bush being a devil might be amusing, but it isn't likely to sway 'some guy's brother in law' who has perhaps murdered people to get that UN seat, educated at the Sorbonne and is extensively involved in setting up a nephew's import/export business in America. I should also point out that taking the grand tour of such wonderful world destinations as Belorus and Iran probably didn't help -- especially if you are trying to buy influence which is the same game the US has played.


Nobody in the General Assembly is elected by the People; they are all appointments from whatever government is in power and many on the Left shouldn't put TOO much credence in this organization until it becomes closer to the EU Parliamentary model...where we are our 'representatives' are at least elected and at least bear some resemblence to our highly touted 'democratic' ideals

Let's not split hairs here...Chevaz was trying to buy influence for his SC nomination as well. It's an honest charge. Hopefully Chavez will prevail, but more than likely at this point Chevaz will lose. Let's just hope that Mr. Chevaz figures out what he did wrong and demonstrate that he can tell the difference between street campaigning in Caracas and a 'statesman-like' speech.

[ozone_man]

8. With all of the human rights attrocities

committed in Guatemala over the years, I can't see voting for them over Venezuela. The U.S. wants one thing only, to let the multinational corporations in or back in South America and Cuba.

[Judi Lynn]

9. You're right. Guatemala is simply an extra automatic vote for Bush. n/t

[glitch]

21. That is the only reason why they are apologizing now. nt

[TacticalPeek]

7. This measures how bad Bushco wants to keep Venezuela off the Sec. Council.

They let the cover-up go for over a decade. Now, to get some lipstick on Guatemala, they must have tortured some Guatemalan generals to get them to fess up.

[dipsydoodle]

10. Some historic background information

for the benefit of those not already aware. It's well worth reading through : http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/Guatemala_KH.html The key it was the relationship between the Dulles brothers and United Fruit.

More here :

United Fruit had, for years, enjoyed special tax breaks (they paid none) which would be lost under these new government programs. They also undervalued their holdings in order to minimize real estate taxes. Previous compliant dictators had agreed to these concessions in exchange for United Fruit support and special financial considerations. Their personal greed obliterated whatever concern they should have had for the Guatemala citizens.

http://www.soaw.org/new/newswire_detail.php?id=1006

I could go on and on - this is my pet hate subject. Can people be charged at the Hague posthumously ?

[Judi Lynn]

12. It almost hurts to read this! My God. From your link:

Obviously, Arbenz was more interested in helping the citizens of Guatemala than he was in sustaining the overgrown influence of the very profitable United Fruit Company which has since metastasized into a dozen other Caribbean nations. The CIA, on behalf of United Fruit, labeled Arbenz a communist even though his land reform plan was within the guidelines of the U.S. State Department seven years later as part of President Kennedy's Alliance for Progress program. <8>

As early as February of 1952 "CIA Headquarters began generating memos with subject titles such as 'Guatemalan Communist Personnel to be disposed of during Military Operations,' outlining categories of persons to be neutralized 'through Executive Action' — murder — or through imprisonment and exile. The 'A' list of those to be assassinated contained 58 names, all of which the CIA has excised from the declassified documents." <9> Additional prominent individuals were to also be eliminated "immediately in the event of a successful anti-Communist coup." This, of course, would require money, training and the establishment of assassination squads. Potential assassination targets might include journalists, doctors, teachers and patriots (insurgents?).

A well-documented CIA orchestrated overthrow, called Operation PBSUCCESS was authorized by President Eisenhower in August 1953 with a budget of $2.7 million budget for "psychological warfare and political action" and "subversion." For American media purposes it was the beginnings of what would come to be called an intervention supposedly to keep a particular country "safe for democracy" or as in our current Iraqi war farce — to establish democracy. The word intervention is actually double-speak for destabilization which is a primary function of the CIA on behalf of big American business.
(snip)

Bloodshed and despair at the hands of successive right wing barbaric dictators has been the lot of the citizens of Guatemala — all financed by trusting, distracted American taxpayers who are force-fed by government/corporate media propaganda. We blindly fund American big business friendly governments convinced by our complicit government that the Guatemalan people would fall prey to dreaded communism if we withhold our support. Yet, because of our blood-soaked money, they fall prey to their own barbaric, American installed puppet leaders.

Sabino Perez, who watched in 1982 as his village went up in flames, said, "You can give money to reconstruct a country after a war, but you can't reconstruct the lost humanity. You can build buildings — but nothing can bring the dead back to life."
(snip)

Thank you so much for providing this information. Hopefully, DU'ers who haven't taken the time to read about Guatemala will look it over. They'll gain a LOT for their effort.

[dipsydoodle]

14. A more thorough DU link is here

with much more detailed sub-links
http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/United_Fruit_Company

I came across that on google while searching for details on who the "jumper" whose name I'd forgotten. It was Eli Black who already knew he'd be done for bribing the President of Honduras with $1.25 million.

I've also noticed that the Dimson's Pa was another former owner - go figure !

[Judi Lynn]

17. It's almost an overload to imagine a Bush mucking around in United Fruit,

too! Is there any square inch in the Western Hemisphere they haven't raped?

Thank you for this link. Very helpful.

[Judi Lynn]

19. "Eli Black" would be good to research when more time allows.

Hard to believe he would have screwed his life up so completely he felt he had no choice but to leap at 53.

So United Fruits name got laundered to "United Brands," which doesn't carry the genocide associations. Nice.

[dipsydoodle]

20. Try these for further info.

Some probably duplicates information from earlier today. That's mainly because a lot of the information of the other links was lifted , by others , from a site which seems to have disappeared. They then loaded in Wikipaediatric as though original :

Corporate raider Eli M. Black bought 733,000 shares of United Fruit in 1968, becoming the company's largest shareholder.

In 1969 Zapata Corporation, a company in which George H. W. Bush held significant interest, acquired a controlling interest in United Fruit. The president of Zapata was Robert Gow, a friend of the Bush family. Robert's father, Ralph Gow, was on United Fruit's board of directors.

In June 1970, Black merged United Fruit with his own public company, AMK (owner of meatpacker John Morrel), to create the United Brands Company. United Fruit had far less cash than Black had counted on and Black's mismanagement led to United Brands becoming crippled with debt. The company's losses were exacerbated by Hurricane Fifi in 1974, which destroyed many banana plantations in Honduras. On February 3, 1975, Black committed suicide by jumping out of his office on the 44th floor of the Pan Am Building in New York City. Later that year, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission exposed a scheme by United Brands to bribe Honduran President Oswaldo López Arellano with $1.25 million, and the promise of another $1.25 million upon the reduction of certain export taxes. Trading in United Brands stock was halted and Lopez was ousted in a military coup.

After Black's suicide, Cincinnati-based American Financial, one of millionaire Carl H. Lindner, Jr.'s companies, bought into United Brands. In August 1984, Lindner took control of the company and renamed it Chiquita Brands International. The headquarters was moved to Cincinnati in 1985
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Fruit_Company

then :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli_M._Black

The sequence of ownership had led to Chiquita and subsequently back to the very country, whose President, Black had bribed : http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/chiquita/chiquita18.htm
and here : http://www.geocities.com/~virtualtruth/chiquita.htm

Chiquita came unstuck when they decided to take on the EEC - very fucking heroic that was. They'd attempted to stop the EEC buying bananas from the Caribbean at better prices.
Most of the links to that are extensive PDF's etc or closed groups of published works. There is however some information here : http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/globalisation_part_2_the.php
Search bananas once you're in there.

[EFerrari]

11. When I was in school in the late 80s, there was a display

of drawings made by children in Guatemala who had witnessed massacres by the military. It was overwhelming.

[dipsydoodle]

15. In Guatemala for "terrrorists" maybe interpret

as meaning the entire indigenous Mayan population. Chances are that the children who did the paintings are Mayan children.

It's also worth noting that the main four TV stations are government owned so freedom of expression is as dead as Monty Python's parrot.

See also :

One reason is that freedom of expression is stifled inside Guatemala. Death threats are commonplace for working journalists - and they are routinely killed to prove the point. As a result many atrocities go unreported. A recent fact-finding report by the Canadian Committee to Protect Journalists says the media has 'become the messenger for state terrorism'.
http://www.newint.org/issue226/killing.htm

[EFerrari]

18. Yes, they were Mayan children and their work was the most

damning indictment of both their government and our own.

[Judi Lynn]

16. LA Times: Lawyer Gets Apology for Husband's Killing

Lawyer Gets Apology for Husband's Killing
From Times Wire Reports
October 17, 2006

Guatemala apologized to U.S. lawyer Jennifer Harbury for the torture and slaying of her guerrilla husband by state security forces in the 1990s.

The government took responsibility for the disappearance of Maya rebel leader Efrain Bamaca at an official event at the National Palace, where in 1994 Harbury went on a 32-day hunger strike to push for information about her husband's death.

"Today Guatemala wants to publicly recognize the atrocities of the past," said Frank La Rue, head of the government's human rights commission.
(snip/)

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-briefs17.6oct17,1,1969754.story?coll=la-headlines-world



Jennifer Harbury