Pinchar en la Imagen


Pinchar en la Imegen







Monday, October 31, 2011



"Oh salvaje Norteamerica, oh impudica!  
¡Oh, salvaje!, tendida en la frontera de la nieve" 
"Poeta en Nueva York," Federico Garcia Lorca.
"Lorca: Interpretation de Poeta en Nueva York,"
Miguel Garcia Posada. Pub.: Akal. Madrid: 1981, p. 140Conrad Aike, reviewing the book ("Poet in New Cork," by F. Garcia Lorca) for the 'New Republic,' wrote: "There has been no more terribly acute critic of America than this steel-conscious and death-conscious Spaniard.  
"Poet in New York." Translation by Ben Belitt. Grove Press Inc. New York: 1955. Introduction by Angel del Rio, p. 'x'

"Negation" [Essay in Critical Theory], Herbert Marcuse. Beacon Press: Boston, 1968; p. XV.


"We have seen that we were defending a democracy that had been betrayed by the front of the 'nonintervention', which it is the name that these representative democracies gave to their intervention.. .to destroy, precisely, what they postulated to defend: the democracy ". 
"Topia y Utopia," Eugenic Imaz. Mexico: 1946; p.p. 10-11. 
Quoted from: "El Exilio Filosofico en America," Jose Luis, Aballen. Pub.: Fondo de Cultural Economica; p. 353."Topia y Utopia" was the last book written by Imaz, one of the five thousand intelectuales (a) who fled Spain after the civil war. Imaz committed suicide in Mexico, on 28 January 1951. The hopes of many of these intellectuals vanished in the beginning of this decade, when the "free world" assured the continuity of the Franco regime.        
(a) Jose Luis Abellan, ibid., p. 22.


One such person was Coronel Jose Martin Nestares, the hierarchical authority responsible directly for the assassination of Federico Garcia Lorca. Ian Gibson relates the following regarding the coronel: 
" In the summer of 19661 tutored his daughter in English, with the hopes of one day being able to talk to him about the circumstances of Lorca's death... Nestares is a rich man with great influence in Granada, despite being retired. He has a magnificent house, a half dozen ranches and an impressive block of expensive apartments ('El Ancla') on the coast of Almunecar, La Costa del Sol ". 
"La Represion Nacionalista en Granada y la Muerte de Federico Garcia Lorca," Ian Gibson. Pub.: Ruedo Iberico: 1971, p.95. 
" Until 1972, nobody would admit (in Spain) publicly that Garcia Lorca had been assassinated " 
"Yo, Garcia Lorca," Andres Sorel. Pub.: Editorial Txalaparta. Navarra: 1997, p. 254.


"The Yoke and the Arrows" [A Report on Spain], Herbert L. Mattews. George Braziller: New York, 1961; p. 144.


"Never in Spanish history had there been an exodus of such proportion and nature." J.L. Abellan, ibid., p. 22. 
"El Exilio Español" de 1939," Jose Luis Abellan,. Pub.: Taurus. Madrid: 1976; Vol. 1, p. 99.


"That Republic... brought with it a new consciousness for the pure and new man." Pablo Neruda. 
Andres Sorel, ibid., p. 128.


Such diversity of the political spectrum could be given on these date: 
the result of the electins of February 16, 1936, in which the Frente Popular [Popular Front] won.
This is the final distribution of the 473 chairs in the Parliament: Popular Front: Izquierda Republicana [Azana], Union Republicana [M. Barrios], Esquerra de Cataluna, Partido Socialista, Partido Comunista. Other Leftist Parties. Total charis = 268. Center-Right: Partido Radical [Lerroux], CEDA [Gil Robles], Partido Agrario, Partido Liberal Democratica, Lliga [right of Cataluna], Partido Conserador, Partidos Monarquicos, Other Parties of the Center-Right. Total = 205 chairs. 
"Alcance del Triunfo del Frente Popular del 16 de Febrero," Jose Diaz. Pub. In "La Correspondencia Internacional," March 3, 1936.  Also: "Tres años de Lucha." Pub." Ebro, Paris, 1969; pp. 109-11. 
"Sixteen Communists were elected to the Cortes out of 470 seats [Stowe's figure differs from the 473 seats cited above]. These sixteen Communists were elected, not by Communists only, but by the joint support of all parties in the Popular Front" 
September 6, 1936, New York Herald-Tribune, Leland Stowe. 
Microfilms about the Civil War in Spain, University of California, San Diego, UCSD. ("Geisel" Library), XF 1898. Reel 2; item #866, p. 2. Title: "American Friends of Spanish Republic."


In particular, the anarchist leader Durriti, an important participant in the Spanish Civil War, in an interview conducted by Van Paassen for the newspaper "Toronto Daily Star," published on August 5, 1936, declared:
"... WHEN THE BOURGEOISIE SEES THAT IT IS LOSING ITS POWER, IT TURNS TO FASCISM TO UPHOLD IT. The liberal Spanish government could have long defeated the fascist elements by now. Instead, it put off and delayed any solution; even now, in this very moment, there are men in this government who are willing to bargain wit the rebels... The present government may need these rebel forces later to quell the workers' movement"

We need to define here, for semantic clarification, the concept of "Tree" (the ex-Soviet Union).

--First, the Soviet Union was not an 'Empire':
"If imperialism is a system of economic expropriation, then it is hard to describe the Soviet as "imperialistic". They own not an acre of land, not a factory or oil well in the Middle East or Eastern Europe. Moscow's trade an aid relations with other socialist countries are decidedly favorable to those countries, contrary to the imperialist pattern in which wealth flows from the client states to the dominant nation. Indeed, living conditions in much of Eastern Europe are higher than in the USSR. The contrast between US and Soviet "imperialisms" show up in the was differences in economic conditions between the Soviet "client states" of Eastern Europe and the US client states of the Third World. "   
"The Sword and the Dollar. Imperialism, Revolution and the arms Race", Michael Parenti. Ed.: St. Martin's Press. New York, 1989; p. 193).

This is a very different political ontology from the speech of President Bush pronounced in a June 1, 2002, in the US Military Academy at West Point, when the President stated that " we had the unilateral right to overthrow any government in the world we deemed a threat to our security " -our interests-  

"The Sorrows of Empire', Chalmers Johnson. Pb.: Metropolitan Books. New York, 2004; pp. 285-286.

--Second, the essential characteristic of the imperialism is war, contrary to the policy of the ex-Soviet Union. Reagan stated that Mikhail Gorbachev was "the first Russian leader, to my knowledge, that has ever voiced the idea of reducing and even eliminating nuclear weapons" (New York Times, June 12, 1986).  But the 'knowledge' of Reagan, in this case, was very distorted; an here is its historical record to show it:

 --In 1946: the USSR proposed a ban on the manufactured of atomic weapon of all existing arsenal, along with reduction in conventional arms. --In 1950, and again in 1951 and 1952, at the United Nations, the Soviet proposed banning the atomic bomb.  
--In 1954, they proposed a mutual security with The Western powers.
 --In 1957 and again in 1961, Moscow proposed a nonaggression pact between NATO and the Warsaw Treaty Organization.  
--In 1970, the Soviets made twenty-six separate overtures to limit the deployment of MIRV missiles.  
--From 1971 through 1980, the Soviets submitted a proposal to:

a) prohibit the further teting, manufacturing, and deployment of nuclear weapons, b) ban the production and stockpiling of chemical and biological weapons, c) outlaw any forms of tampering with ocean beds, cloud streams, earth depths, the atmosphere, and the ozone layer for military purposes. In 1979, Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev announced a unilateral reduction of troops in Central Europe and invited the US to reciprocate, even if on a smaller scale...
The list is to long for the purpose of this Notes, but we are going to end it with the most dramatic proposal for disarmament efforts of the Soviet leader M. Gorbachev that, in 1986 and 1987, proposed to rid the world of all strategic and medium-range warheads and delivery system within fifteen years, and the withdrawal of US and Soviet fleets from the Mediterranean -in 1986- and from the Arabian-Persian Gulf in 1987.
"The Sword and the Dollar", Ibid.., pp. 178-179-180. 

All these proposals and overtures were rejected by the US. 
Two different sort of Empires.
In the Spanish's civil war was very transparent the "modus operandi" of both "Empires": the US and the USSR; the former allied itself with the fascist, the later with the Democratic Republic of all the workers" (Article number one of the Constitution).

On 1 June 1933, Claude G. Bowers, the new Ambassador of the United States in Spain, presented his credentials to President Alcala Zamora. What Bowers did not know at the time was that he would become one of the most important informants for the great historical accounts that would be produced years later.  

With respect to the ever-so cherished justification for the threat of "communist subversion", Bowers writes: " There was not one extremist of the Left from top to bottom. There was not even an evolutionary socialist, but a government actually in power by the will of the people, when the generals, in alliance with Hitler and Mussolini, precipitated the bloody, wasteful war on the pretext of wiping out a 'communist plot' or 'red government'. THIS MISERABLE PRETEXT was to serve its purpose throughout the war with the gullibles and the Fascist-minded in the United States and England... The Fascist technique was to divide all people into two classes, communist and Fascists. And because democrats were not Fascist, they were communists! " 
"My Mission to Spain," Claude G. Bowers. Simon and Schuster: New York, 1954; pp. 226-229-230.

 "Finally, Arthur Koestler shows how unreliable wasa the official insurgent statements in regard to the proposed Communist rising, which has been generally given as the justification for General Franco's insurrection"

 "Spanish Testament," Arthur Koestler. Victor Gollancz: Londen; 1937. [Left Book Club Edition: "Not for sale to the public'], p. 9; Introduction.

 "The nationalists—the insurgents—pretend to believe, and they have in part managed to, since their propaganda is based in the lie that the government is a bunch communists... but nothing could be further from the truth. This would be true if in Spain, before the rising, communism had reigned. But in Spain, before that ill-fated 18th of July, there existed a MODERN GOVERNMENT.

"Un Año con Queipo de Llano," 'Memorias de un Nacionalista,' Antonio Bahamonde y Sanchez de Castro, Delegate of Propaganda for Queipo de Llano until January 1938. Pub.: Nuestro Tiempo. Mexico; 1938. p. 9. Bahamonde could no longer support the monstruos crimes of his boss, Queipo de Llano, and therefore left the country to later publish one of the most well-documented and well-received testimony-reproachments of the "pathologic" regime that had seized the nation, for he himself had been part of the regime's administration until his conscience would not let him continue. 
"The Spanish Government did not, at the time it was attacked by Rebel officers under General Franco and Mola, contain any Socialist or Communist members "
October 7, New York Times, Hamilton Fish Armstrong, editor of 'Foreign Affairs,.' [Hamilton was one of the outstanding American authorities in the field of International Relations]
Microfilms. UCSD ("Geisel Library", San Diego), ibid., p. 4.10A.

"The Sorrows of Empire", ibid.; pp. 20 and21.
This book is about militarism in the US Empire, but also touch an essential point: after the "cold war" ended, what the US did was to increase its militarism with the creation of a new enemies.

"The Republic attempted to correct, not by confiscation but by condemnation of uncultivated land with compensation provide for the titular owners of the soil." Because... "in the Spain of today a comparative handful of great lords, e.g., the Duke of Medinaceli, the Duke of Alba and Berwick, the Count of Romanones, the English Duke of Wellington, owned whole provinces, while literally millions of those who depended upon agriculture for subsistence were landless sharecroppers and day laborers" Microfilms. UCSD, ibid., p. 1; under the title: 'The Coming of the Republic and the Genesis of the Revolution.'

"Spain's Struggle for Freedom," Lawrence A. Fernsworth. Beacon Press: Boston, 1957. "Southworth Collection of the Civil War in Spain." UCSD, San Diego, CA.; p. V of the 'Introduction.'
L. Fernsworth was the correspondent in Spain for the New York Times and the London Time, and a contributor of the weekly magazine 'America.' Fernsworth, who was well documented on Spanish history, said:
"Spain's struggle for freedom is an epic of unfaltering courage on the part of unbeatable people... Professor J.B. Trend, head of the Spanish Department at Cambridge University, wrote in one of his books about Spain: 'It is seldom remmbered that democratic government began, not in  England, but in Spain. "
Lawrence A. Fernsworth, ibid., pp. vii and viii (Introduction)

"The Spanish Inquisition," Henery Kamen. Nw American Library, Inc.: New York, 1965, pp. 4, 5.


Kamen, ibid., pp. 5, 8

Departamento dePropriedad (Department of Property) in December 1930. The annotations are provided from: "Freedom's Battle," J. Alvarez del Vayo. Alfred A. Knopf: New York, 1949; p. 142.
With respect to the significance of these 200 pesetas in existential terms, in order to clarify it significance we need to add that, the daily wage of a peasant working all day long was about 4 or  pesetas, while that of an industrial worker was between 7 and 10 pesetas.
The minimum daily salary of 5.50 pesetas was established in 1931. The prices of the time were as follows: meat, between 6.28 pesetas [pst] and 4.74 pst. Kilo; milk, 0.70 pst. Litre; eggs, 2.53 pst [dozen].
"La España del siglo XX," Manuel Tufion de Lara. Pub.: Laia. Barcelona: 1974; Vol. H, pp. 380-388.

"This alliance between the forces of the Spanish oligarchy and foreign capital, guaranteed the latter, de facto, a monopoly over the major economic activities in the peninsula. Consequently, many dividends left the country: once again, the national income was reduced, along with opportunities for saving and investment. "
"An Explanation of Spain," Elena de La Souchere. Random House: New York, 1964; p. 121.
See also: "An Economic History of Spain," Jaime Vicens Vives. Princeton University Press: 1969.


"La España del siglo XIX",  M. Tuñon de Lara.  Editorial Laia: Barcelona, 1973; p. 10.

"History of the Spanish War." Information Service, March 1, 1938.
'Comite International de Coordination et d'Information pour l'Aide a l'Espagne Republicaine,' 38 Rue de Chateaudum, Paris.
Microfilms of UCSD, XF 1898, Reel 53, Item #2137, Num. 5.

All the latifundium superior to the area of 56 acres that were not cultivated, have to be expropriated. In the particular cases of the 'Grandes', the aristocratic big land owners with enormous extensions of abandoned lands, the Republic realized their confiscations by payments according to the 'declaration of values' that the owners have facilitated in order for them to pay tax; obviously, such 'declaration of values' was an underestimation of the authentic value of their latifundium, the only way to pay the minimun tax possible to the State, ofcourse.
On this scenario, the aristocratic land owners , naturally, complain about that they were compensated much less from the real value of their properties. Happens the same thing in Guatemala when the government of Jacobo Arbenz confiscate the lands of the "Fruit Co." and offer to indemnify such Corporation according to the 'declared values'. The "Fruit Co." wanted much more that that, and the 'coup d'etat' of the CIA in 1954, with the overthrow of the government of Arbenz, realized completely such corporative demand.
In Spain, in 1936, the fascist offered to the 'Grandes' the same economical (an political) prerogatives.

Azaña, then Minister of War, announced its Military Reform in quantitative terms: the reduction of the Army divisions from 16 to 8, shortened the obligatory military service to one year, and, generously, giving the entire salary, as a retirement, to these officers tha the Reform was going to put out of service.
"La Constitucion de la Democracia Española y el Problema Regional", Luis Jimenez de Asua. Buenos Aires, 1946; pp. 57 and 58.

18C .-
"Freedom's Battle", J.Alvarez del Vayo. Ed. Alfred A. Knopf. New York: 1940; p. 147.

Under the title "Real causes of the rebellion." The same Microfilm as in Note 18.

The New York Times, October 14 and 16, 1931.

"Reform and Reaction", Jose Maria Sanchez. The University of North Carolina Press,1962; pp. 49 and 142.

"The Civil War in Spain", Frank Jellinek. Ed.: Howard Fertig,. New York, 1969; pp. 46 and 47.

Embassador Bowers also refuted the 'disorder and anarchy' myth:
" In May—1936— no one could doubt that reactionary forces hiostile to a democratic regime were intensively fomenting incidents that could be used in justification to the outside world of the rebellion being prepared. " Bowers, ibid., p. 226.

The war had begun. " I advise Washington that it would be a long, bitter war since IT WAS NOT A CONTEST BETWEEN A PROFESSIONAL AND UNTRAINED ARMY, BUT ONE BETWEEN AN ARMY AND THE PEOPLE. "
Bowers, ibid., p. 246

Frank L. Kluckhohn, New York Times, correspondent with both the Rebel and Loyalist troops, thus describes General Franco, chief Rebel leader: "He sees no inconsistency in killing peasants for their own good, or eliminating opposition through murders masked as military executions."
Microfilms. UCSD, ibid., pp. 4-5.

"¡Guernica, Guernica!", Herbert R. Southworth. Pub.: University of California Press: 1977; p.389.

" The forces in question are the privileged and propertied classes, the army and the Church. The privileged and propertied classes that have kept the people in misery. That is a fact! ".
(Magazine) 'Foreign Affairs,' October, 1936; Lawrence A. Fernsworth. Microfilms. UCSD, ibid., pp. 2-4.

Koestler, ibid., p. 34.

Koestler, ibid., p. 31-32.

" With repression one must show three well defined phases. First: executions in the streets, at the highway exits and at the cemetery walls, to dominate with terror. Second: the phase in which they read to the prisoners a sort of expedient, and, without hearing them, the death sentences are signed by the various authorities responsible for the repression. Third: the actual parody of war councils which, having been pre­selected and handpicked, desire to silence the rumors circulating around so many crimes ... IT HAS BEEN A CRIME ORGANIZED FROM THE POSITION OF THE POWER. "
Bahamonde ibid., p. 80-81-82.

Note the striking parallels between Bahamonde's "three phases" of repression and the "Tres Tercios" plan [the operation was called "Tenazas" (tongs), which established Admiral Merino [who was 'educated' in US military academies] in Chile to liquidate the nation's Popular Union. The following three phases of "Tres-Tercios" illustrate this correlation with the Spanish case. First, phase:
-First phase: 'Motors of marxism': 20,000 people killed within hours after the coup. -Second phase: 'leaders of marxism': arrest and condemn to heavy prison sentences some 3,000 popular leaders. -Third phase: 'exile': force into exile some 3,000 left-leaning politicians.

In Spain the same punitive substratum was essentially applied: rapidly exterminate all opposition leaders; incarcerate and torture all of the Republics people that composed its social structure; and force the rest, intellectuals and undesirables, into exile.

Spain served as a useful model for later experiments in Indonesia and Chile, as well as in many other places.

"The Murder of Allende," Robinson Rojas Stanford. Pub.: Harper and Row. New York: 1975-76; pp. 192-254.
"Death in Washington," Donald Freed and Fred Landis. Pub. Lawrence Hill and Co. Westport, Connecticut: 1980.
"The Murder of Chile," Samuel Chavkin. Pub.: Everest House. New York: 1982.
Coincidences: the same "bogeyman" from Spain appeared in Chile as an exact copy: after the military coup of 11 September 1973, one of the insurgents, Gustavo Leigh Guzman, addressed the nation by television and claimed that the coup had taken place in order "to extirpate the Marxist cancer." Franco, the other "extirpator of cancer," had established the first operating room for this "surgical prophylactic". The demand for social justice was going to be called "cancer'.

"Spain Between Death and Birth," Peter Merin. Dodge Pub. Co.: New York, 1938; p. 184.

" The legionaires hardly care on which side they fight, so long as they are clothed, paid, and fed... They are merely a collection of desperates. "
New York Times (magazine section), Sunday, October 18, 1936.
Piere Van Paassen, internationally renown journalist, wrote in March, 1936: " This military outfit—the legionaires—, chiefly composed of criminal elements from all over Europe. 

"Microfilms. UCSD, ibid., pp. 5-6.

Another important Rebel military group were the Moors. Mohammedan mercenary soldiers ferried over the Straight of Gibraltar from Spanish Morocco to support Franco's 'Christian Crusade.' Regarding some of the inducements used to get them to enlist in the Rebel army, the editor of the 'Week,' a well known English review, writes:  " The sexual question has also a certain military importance. In the small towns hitherto occupied by the Rebels, the commanders of the Moorish detachments have had in some cases to share out the captured women supporters of the Government among the Moors in the ration of only one woman to twenty men. " [Here are the human components of Franco's 'Christian Crusade.']
Microfilms. UCSD, ibid., p. 6.

"Franco's Rule," 'Back to the Middle Ages.' United Editorial Ltd.: London:
1938; p. xi. This book is located in the 'Research Library,' UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, under the code: DP 269 F84. This is a fundamental book for understanding what took place in Spain.

Bahamonde, ibid., p. 79.
This was the 'war strategy' of General Mola, who directed the insurrection before dying later in an "airplane accident".
"Queipo de Llano," Ian Gibson, ibid., p. 81.

"Half of Spain Died," Herbert L. Matthews. Charles Scribner's Son s: New York; 1973, p. 90. (See Note 21). Matthews agrees with Bowers: the war was between a professional army and the (heroic) people.

"Spain: The Unfinished Revolution!" Arthur L. Landis. The Camelot Pub., Co.: Baldwing Park, CA; 1972, p. 169-70.

"Historia Militar de la Guerra en España," Manuel Aznar. Madrid: 1958. Vol. I, p. 184.

Coronel Sosthenes directed ITT in Spain, and was he who installed private telephone lines so that Franco and Mola could continue to hold confidential conversations about war strategies.
"La Republica Espanola y la Guerra Civil," Gabriel Jackson. Editorial Grijalbo: Mexico; 1967, p. 212.

"German-Spanish Relations January-August 1939," Robert Howard Whealey. Dissertation submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Michigan, 1963; p. 85. "Southworth Collection of the Civil War in Spain." UCSD, San Diego, CA.

Foreign Relations of United States, 1936, E, 471-72. Also: "Spain and the Great Powers," Dante Puzzo. Colombia University Press: London and New York; 1962, p. 151.

Foreign Relations, ibid., pp. 475-76. Also: Puzzo, ibid., p.151

New York Times, August 12, 1936.

"Fruta Amarga.", 'La CIA en Guatemala', Stephen Schlesinger and StephenKinzer. Pub.: Siglo Veintiuno, Mexico: 1982; pp. 158-159

Ibid. pp. 121-122

Puzzo, ibid, p. 154

It was at this point, before the Embargo Law was vigorously enacted, that the attack on the Spanish people began. The Spanish ship "Mar Cantabrico," with thw solidarity of New York longshoremen, set sail for Spain with the aviation motors that had been constructed for the Republic by Robert Cuse's company, Vilament.
Thus, a US warship sailed toward the Spanish coast with the hopes that the proposed law would be approved by the time it reached international waters so that it could seize the nave! But the assault failed, and there only remained one option for preventing these motors from arriving at their destination: to send the Fascist navy the ship's coordinates. Not far off the Spanish coast, the ship was therefore boarded and some of its crew executed. Senator Nye reprimanded the New York shipping company that was servicing Franco for having facilitated the capture of the "Mar Cantabrico," but to no avail. The hostility of United States towards the Spanish people reached the point that it even impeded other nations from coming to the aid of the legitimate Spanish government!
In December 1936, a Mexican company purchased some North American civilian airplanes with the intention of selling them to the besieged Republic. The North American ambassador in Mexico, losing his temper, violate all diplomatic norms and marched directly to the Presidential Palace of the Mexican Republic to demand that immediate measures be taken to prevent the proposed sale.
Foreign Relations, ibid., Vo. II, 1936, p. 626.
"Guerra y Revolucion en Espana, 1936-39." Study conducted by a commission under the direction of Dolores Ibarruti. Contributors: Manuel Azcarate, Luis Balaguer, Antonio Cordon, Irene Falcon, and Jose Sandoval. Pub. by Editorial Progresso: Moscu; pp. 229-30.

"Half," Herbert Matthews, ibid., p. 175-77.

"Half," ibid, p. 177.

"The Spanish History," Herbert Feis. Alfred A. Knopf: New York; 1948, p. 269.

H. Feis, ibid, pp. 269-70

Foreign Relations, ibid. Diplomatic Papers, 1936. Vol. n, p. 445.

"Labor Research Association, Labor Fact Book. International Pub.: New York; 1983, pp. 211-12. 

Landis, ibid, p. 208.


"The Public Papers and Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt." London, 1941, p. 285. 
Landis, ibid, p. 208.


"The Masquerade in Spain," Charles Foltz Jr. HoughtonMifflin Co.: Boston; 1948, p. 52. Foltz became director of the Associated Press in Madrid [1940s] and became very familiar with the events in Spain. 
" The companies Studebaker, Ford and General Motors, supplied Franco with 12,000 trucks, while he received 1,700 from Italy and 1,800 from Germany. "
"Guerra y Revolución...", D. Durruti, ibid.; Vol. I, p. 231.

Foltz, ibid., p.52

A similar description would later appear in the US press; this time surrounding Pinochet: in the zenith of the crimes and torture being committed under his initiative in Chile after the military coup, the New York Times denned the dictator as follows: "Tall and strong, disciplined and focused, introvert and businesslike, with a great sense of humor." While the date of the publication has been lost, the fact is completely reliable.
Not only were there similarities between the repressive methodologies of Spain and Chile, but in the descriptions of their leaders as well.

53 .-

"The Wound in the Heart," Allen Guttmann. The Free Press of Glencoe.
New York: 1962; pp.: 51-61.


Interview with Franco, conducted by journalist Jay Allen:
Allen: compromise is possible?
Franco: No. No, decidedly, no. We are fighting for Spain. They are fighting against Spain. We will go on at whatever cost.
Allen: You will have to shoot half of Spain -    I said-He shook his head, smiled and then, looking at me steadily: Franco: I said whatever the cost. CHICAGO DAILY TRIBUNE, July 28, 1936; p. 2. 

Guttman, ibid., p. 60. 

Guttman, ibid., p. 62.

Is not 'democracy' based precisely on indifference and apathy? "In 1975, the Trilateral Commission, representing the more liberal elements of ruling groups in the industrial democracies, published a study entitled 'The Crisis of Democracy;'" it said: "The population must be reduced to apathy and conformism if 'democracy' is to be kept workable and allowed to survive."
"The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism," Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman. Pub.: South End Press. Boston: 1979; p. 2.

"Half," Matthews, ibid., p. 173

No; the war was not over. It continued as a "guerrilla" struggle in the sierras and in the countryside. In the book "La Guerra Antifranquista, 1945-49," Rafael Gomez Parra. Pub.: Editorial Revolution, details the structure of this silenced struggle against fascism in Spain.

After the 'victory,' Franco received the following telegram from Pope Pius XII: "Lifting up our hearts to God, we give sincere thanks with your Excellency for SPAIN'S CATHOLIC VICTORTY."
"Half," H. Matthews; Ibid., p. 41.
The "Catholic Victory", for the Pope, was not a spiritual and divine victory, by the contrary, it was a terrestrial and worldly victory because Franco returned to the Church all of its riches, lands and properties, and, in addition, the Church gained control over the education system and ecclesiastic censorship over the mediums of communication.

Microflims, UCSD ("Geisel" Library). XF 1898. Reel #53; Section 2126, number 8.

"The Spanish Civil War: an exhibition." Humanities Research Center. The University of Texas^at Austin, 1978.

Foltz, ibid., pp. 96-7-8.

"Wind in the Olive Trees," Abel Plenn. Boni & Grey: 1946; pp. 121-2.

R. Gomez Parra, ibid., p. 233

64A .-
"Fruta Amarga", Ibid., p. 60.

"It seems clear, then, that the change in the international situation and the surreptitious policy of the United States in support of the Franco Government, provoked the dissolution of the guerrillas...And by 1948 it was understood that there was no more possibility—for the guerrillas— since the United States now directly supported Franco."
R. Gomez Parra, ibid., p. 241 and 244.

One must acknowledge that the US's support for Spain, with all its socio-political implications, was complex. There were some voices within the North American administration that sometimes turned to "verbal truth," as did Dean Acheeson, the Secretary of State under Truman, who in May 1949, declared: "Spain is a symbol of fascism;" but Acheeson had not discovered anything new—-this was well-known—and this did not, in any way, influence the guidelines of the Empire. For example, three months prior, on 21 February of that same year, the New York Herald wrote: "The Spain of Franco is a country of a legality and order... that constitutes A PLEASANT CONTRAST to Italy and France, victims of strikes and social turmoil." "Historia de la España Franquista," Max Gallo. Pub.: España Contemporanea. Collection compiled by Jose Martinez; pp. 204-205

"Spain's Struggle..." Fernsworth, ibid., p. 307. 

"Spain's..." Fernsworth, ibid., p. 307.

"The Destruction of Reason." Georg Lukacs. The Merlin Press: London. Epilogue; p. 770.

"Marx, Freud, and the Critic of Every Day Life", Bruce Brown. Pub.: Monthly Review Press. New York and London; p. 151.

Ibid., p. 14. 

69.-Bowers, ibid., p. 418. 

Bowers, ibid., p. 419. Puzzo, ibid., p. 167.

71 .-
There is a certain "methodological" concatenation between how the Indonesian "Nosakom," the Chilean Popular Unity, and the Spanish Popular Front were stifled, because the same terror tactics was used in the three countries to exterminate all hopes of political justice. The "Jakarta Plan" was used in Chile to terrorize the public through the operation called "El Descuartizado ("To Quarter" a victim);" the Chilean newspapers published in the daily news all of the horrors that were attributed to the Marxists who were plotting to seize control of the nation with their horrendous abominations. In Indonesia, the "PlanYakarta" involved the delivery of computerized letters to the Indonesian armed militaries, which announced the arrival of Marxists planning to cut off their heads and "to quarter" their bodies. 

In Spain, the version of this "Jakarta Plan" of psychological terror is well described by Bowers in a chapter from his cited book, "The Fascist Provocateurs,": "But as the time of the strike approached, with Fascist agents from Italy and Nazi agents from Germany on the ground, the most fantastic stories were set afloat... I hear fantastic tales of Rightists beheaded in their sleep, in the city of Murcia, where we had just been, with their heads carried on pikes; of Fascists and monarchists elsewhere butchered and their bodies 'fed to pigs'..." The historical psycho-genesis of the "Jakarta Plan" took place in Spain.
"Bowers, ibid., pp. 214 and 210.

Underneath of "Jakarta Plan", en Indonesia, "El Descuartizado" in Chile, or underneath these "fantastic stories... of Rightists beheaded" in Spain, there lied a methodological correlation that revealed the same Mind, the same Inquisition, which, although in different historical moments and distinct geographies, reminds us of author Henery Kamen's brilliant interpretation of the 'Spanish Inquisition': "... and what emerged... was a powerful class arm—the Inquisition—to impose in all the different communities of the peninsula the ideology of a single class: the lay and ecclesiastic aristocracy." [see the text that correspond to Note 13] 

What would be the same now days: 'and what emerged from the struggle to impede social justice (the war against "Marxist subversion") was a powerful class arm (the Inquisition to which all of the Popular Fronts in these nations were subjected) to impose in all the different communities the ideology of a single class: the bourgeoisie.' This modern Inquisition did not require pyres: only "Yakarta" plans, "three-phased repression," such as those of the "Nationalists" described by Bahamonde, or "three-thirds" operations, such as the one implemented by Almirante Merino in Chile [see note 27]. In this sense, the Inquisition that had evolved to the present it is more efficient than the ancient one.

"Spain's..." Fernsworth, ibid., p. 313

"Franco's Rule," ibid., p. x.

"Perhaps within twenty years Spain will be in need of a king; in which case, assuming that they had behaved themselves, the Bourbons could return to the thrown again." Count Ciano, Mussolini's Gran Ministro, wrote this in his diary on 7Junel939.
"The Ciano Diaries." Pub.: Doubleday & Co. Inc.: New York; 1946, p. 95. 

"The Washington Connection and the Third World Fascism," Noam Chomsky, Edward S. Herman. South End Press: Boston, p. 16




United States' position was, of course, sustained by the "free press" that represented the typical osmosis of class interests between the media and the hierarchical power, and, as such, from now on, proceeded to articulate, "ad nauseam," under the same pseudo-fascist idelogy, the aplogetic policy that we will expose at continuation, the identical one that, in the name of the pounding slogan of the "communnist threat", would serve later as an universal alibi to safeguard the omnipresent US imperialistic interests all over the world.. And as we say at the commence of this article, Spain was the psicogesis for the most important crossroad in the fabrication of the historical "bogeyman" that the US needed for its "Manifest of Destiny" to control the world.

On July 30, 1936, the Chicago Tribune reported that the Spanish Republic "Rapidly was growing into a commune."
On August 4, the Dallas News alleged that the "expropriation of private industrial property" was an indication "of an imminent turn to complete socialization."

The Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times "ran cartoons in which the Soviet Union fanned the flames, and watered the seeds of destruction." The position of the Imperial Hearst [we need to bear in mind the imperialistic role that the Hearst publications did in the annexionism of Cuba by the US at the beginning of the XX centyry] consisted of a incondional support of Franco's "Nationalists" on the grounds "of respect for property and for religion." .

'Cosmopolitan' magazine even went to the ridiculous extreme of describing Franco "as kind, brave, austere, suave, anticommunistic, and 'heavily muscled" [52], naming the fascist Generalissimo the "Cosmopolite of the Month" in July 1937 [53]. After that, the "heavily muscled" Cosmopolitan Crusader of the Month seemed determined to gun down media Espana [half of Spain] [54], perhaps because his whishes was to become the "Cosmopolite of the Year."
 (By this time the 'Cosmopolite -man- of the Year' had killed already --in a cosmopolitan way, of course-- few hundred thousands people)

In September 1936, immediately following the insurrection, the National Republic maintained that "Spain had fallen victim to a Communist conspiracy." The magazine published a weekly column titled "The Enemy within Our Gates." The journal's position came illustrated with 'cartoons' from the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times—as mentioned above—,and with photographs of government vehicles with large etiquettes marked "LENIN" and "POUM" [Workers Party of Marxist Unification]
The United States News [USN] denounced the "red" Spaniards and their "terrorist regime." On August 3, 1936, the USN joined the country's "free press" in condemning the "THE DANGERS TO AMERICAN PROPERTY IN SPAIN." On August 8, 1936, Newsweek reported: "the Soviet has come to the land of Loyola, Cervantes and Carmen." On September 4, 1936, Time joined Newsweek in separating the two camps into the same categories used by General Mola: "Reds and Whites" [55], the polychrome division that touch the collective subconscious of humanity in its archaic association of to identify "red" as a blood and "white" as a purity, such an infantile manicheism between the "evil" and the "good" was going to serve in the future as consolidation of the strong values and concepts that, in the mass psychology of the populations that the dominant ideology ought to insert, the system start to anchor in the manipulation of the brains of its citizens.

Once they started bombarding innocent civilians and exposing their merciless criminality, the insurgents started losing their legitimacy as "defenders of Western civilization." . Consequently, the media, recognizing that it would be incredibly difficult to continue publicly endorsing these aberrant psychopaths, started distancing itself from its previous position. 

Thus, on April 3, 1939, two days after Franco's "Catholic Victory," as the Pope called it, Life magazine called the war "an heroically tragic epic" [56]... Although this "heroically tragic epic" would not obstruct one iota the United States from, shortly thereafter, colonizing Spain with all its military and economic machinery

Meanwhile, the American people, in spite of their "democratic tradition," and in spite of the fact that one of the most contemptible crimes against democracy was being committed in Spain, remained indifferent [57]. "The Gallup Polls, even through much of 1937, showed that a great majority of Americans were untouched and ignorant of what was going on in Spain. Two-thirds of the population, according to the polls, were unconcerned. Only 20 percent favored the Loyalists, and that seemed to be because of the intervention by Hitler and Mussolini" [58].


On April 1, 1939, Generalissimo Franco issued, from his headquarters at Burgos, a communique announcing the end of the Spanish Civil War [59]: "Today, after having made prisoner and disarmed the Red army, the Nationalist troops have reached their final military objective: the war is ended."

In Rome, the Pope exuded mystical joy [60]. And in London, Paris and Washington, this mystical joy was transformed by the plutocracy in a complicity toast with champagne for the efficient manner in which the Democracy of the Spanish Republic has been 'toast' in the oven of the hypocritical "Neutrality Act" and in the amoral "Moral Embargo".
But the war had not ended, it had simply entered a new phase; an internal, repressive one filled with death, torture, and insufferable pain.

"The soundproofing pains of the people of Spain', we can titular such forgotten historical period, because when we talk about the liberation of Europe by the Allies forces, never, never it is recognized that there was one important and forgotten country that the Allies forces did not want to liebarate: Spain.

One forgotten pain and yoke under which the Spaniards lived until 1975...! [and after such year... with a King choose, precisely, by Franco himself...!] One forgotten country in which countless mass graves are covering the most hidden truth for which men and women fought in order to bring dignity and hope for all of us, as Albert Eisntein put it: "What can maintain alive in us the hope for a better future, is the heroic people of Spain in their struggle for the freedom a the dignity of the humanity" [60A)
According to the writer Ramon Sender, by mid 1938 the fascists had liquidated 750,000 people in their rearguard [61]. According to Foltz, the number of official executions in the postwar period rose to 400,000 [62]. Five years after the war's end, in 1944, the killings continued to amass. Abel Plenn, the press attached to the United States Embassy in Madrid, issued the following statement: "July 18: 94 executions this afternoon. August 18: 150 prisoners executed last week. August 23: seventy killed a few days ago. September 2: 60 executed. September 8: 450 executions in Madrid two nights ago and 300 more scheduled for tonight..." [63]

These chilling statistics are only the numerical tip of the iceberg of a history that is still being waiting to be written, denounced, and remembered.

After the triumph of the Allies in Europe and Asia, Spain remained the only region in the world in which fascism continued existing and enslaving people. The League of Nations, in an effort to protect what Foltz called "The Masquerade in Spain,"—the explicit titled his book —, was forced, after fascism was defeated in the "delirium tremens" of the Second Imperialistic World War for the sharing out of raw materials, lands and markets of the planet, to condemn the Franco regime in order to maintain the suitable 'facade' that the "free world" need for the selling of its favorites 'troyan horses": 'freedom' and 'democracy'.

The significant and tremendous irony, as well as the fantastic cheek that this hypocrisy imply, was, of course, that the same League of Nations, as a matter of fact, not only did not moved a finger to stop the fascism in Spain, but, as we know, was the main protagonist in the 'debacle' of the Democracy of the Spanish people. But the bourgeoisie (the 'international community" of today) knew very well, due to its long and hazardous historical experience in these cases, that the best way to go was to wait and let the pass of time work in their favor.
But the oligarchies did not wait to long to show its authentic face, because "by 1947 it was becoming apparent that the imperialist powers had fully supported Franco's effort to, as they put it, 'to avoid the threat of communism in Spain'. By this time, Truman and Churchill were already in open communication with Franco and promised him political and economic aid" [64].

It was only on this circumstances, when the internal resistance as well as the struggle in the exterior against Franco, saw very clear that they were no going to obtain any kind of help from the "democracies", because, taken even more their masks aside, their faces show -to the millions that still having a hope to bring justice to these terrorists and robbers of Spain— that they were using fascism as a legitimate sub-product of their class interests.

And there is a very interesting illumination about it in the famous speech of farewell pronounced by Juan Jose Arevalo in the transfer of the presidential power of Guatemala to his successor, Jacobo Arbenz in March 15, 1951: "When in March 15, 1945 ,1 assumed the Presidency of this nation, I was possessed by a romantic fire. I still believe in the essential nobility of men; I was a fervent believe in the purity and sincerity of the political doctrines... But the magnates of the bananas plantations, fellow citizens of president Roosevelt, they revolt against a Central American president who try to give to his comrades citizens the same legal equalities that has the honorable families of this country. And was then when this teacher (Arevalo was a professor of philosophy), naive and romantic, discover, from the Presidency of the Republic, how weak, slippery and temporary are the international brilliant doctrines about 'democracy' and 'freedom'. And was at this juncture when I fell, with a great pain and hopeless, as well with an enormous anger, the pressure of this ANONIMOUS FORCE THAT GOVERN, WfflTOUT LAWS AND MORALS, THE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS... .The war that star in 1939 has ended .. .But in the ideological dialog between the two worlds and its two leaders, Roosevelt had lost the war... The authentic winner has been Hitler ...Little creatures of Hitler have appears and multiply their self in Europe and here, in the Americas ... It is my personal opinion that the ideas that were the fundament that took Hitler to power, is what move today the contemporaneous world." [64A]
And was in this critical momentum when the hopes and dreams of the Spanish people star to collaps. It was then when, the strategy and tactic of the guerrilla war in Spain, that was still being fought, began to erode and crumble almost completely [65]. The exiled political opposition began to disintegrate. Against Franco they could fight, but not against the "international community", no against the "Anonimous Forces" that Arevalo mencioned.

Now, the United States' support and recognition of 'franquismo', tied to petroleum, credit, trucks, bombs and markets, came to resemble the horrific finale that Fernsworth called the "fifth phase" of the Spanish people's struggle for freedom.

Thus, on September 26, 1953, after years of working in secret on the project that the fascist regime and the United States signed as "a tripartite military pact," in which Franco sold his country to the US, Spain joined the ranks of the battlefront of the "free world." against of the "communist threat".

And with reason, considering that, between the two nations, there was a "common civilization" to preserve and defend . This was evidenced in the statement issued by the new North American ambassador (1953), James C. Dunn, when he wen to visit Franco in six-horses carriage , in the old style of the Medieval Times, and presented his credentials to the 'Caudillo of Spain by the divine grace' (as the coins had printed with his personal sphinx).   "Today the friendship and cooperation of the United States and Spain are an important bulwark in the defense of our common civilization" [66]. 

As if this were not enough, they had another major thing in common: they share the same determination to defend 'freedom' (We need to bear -very seriously- in mind, in oder to understand what going on here, that on the time that we are talking obou it, Spain was an absolute concentration camp in which, only by the most merciless terror, the fascists could control de population)

Shortly thereafter, on May 6, 1956, at a lunch honoring Indonesian president Sukarno [who would be overthrown nine years later by the collaboration of the CIA], the President of the United States cautioned: "UNLESS WE DEFEND THE FREEDOM OF THE OTHER FELLOW WE ARE ENDANGERING OUR OWN" [67]. Of course, Eisenhower forgot to define the sort of "fellow" that he had in his 'defend list', may be because, as the philosopher Descartes established, "omnis determinatio est negatio" -'all definitions are a negation'.
Nevertheless, Jacobo Arbenz, from his exile after the CIA 'coup d'etat' overthrow his democratic government, understood exactly the semantic od the President of the US.
And this was precisely the policy upheld by the United States in Spain: protecting Franco's liberty so as not to jeopardize its own. Protecting Franco's liberty to kill, to torture, to incarcerate, to humiliate, to exile and to decapitate the dreams and hopes of the Spaniards in their struggle for a better world.

This is the kind of "freedom" with which the US bloodstained its hands and its soul. Thus, the "common civilization" and common "liberties" formed the same common "modus operandi" between American "democracy" and ttiefranquista fascism in Spain. Without doubt, the historical record is very clear, in Spain, as a paradigmatic symbol for the future, US imperialism showed its unmask face as this "anonymous force that govern without laws and morals". Except that, in Spain, the anonymity of such forces, when they drop its makeup and its cosmetics, become well known the real characteristics of such "anonimacy" in the praxis of a country, the US, that was going to realize the fascist oneiric -dreams—of Hitler, but with a differente methodology and diverse stratagem in the way that the 'thought control' was going to be implemented in the craniums of the masses of people.

One example could visualize this equation: the ex-Soviet Union. The III Reich and the US imperialism had an 'epistemological' (the concordance between the studied object and the knowledge with which the object is studied) and transcendental common ground: in both shores of the capitalism, fascism and 'democracy' (always in eternal concubinage of class interests), the enemy to be destroy is one and one alone: communism (means: social justice); because in this case, the knowledge of these both branches are in acquiescence, first, in to pick the correct 'object' (the correct 'enemy') and study its weakness in order to destroy it, second, in the full knowledge of it. And, as corollary from it, Hitler tried to destroy communism by invading Russia, and the US (with the same 'enemy' in mind) enter against Russia in the so called "cold war'. Hitler failure in such task, but the triumph was for the US. And, on this respect, the "common civilization" that the US had with the fascism in Spain, in its strategic and tactical historical coordinates, was the need to cut one brunch of the Tree, which roots were in the Soviet Union. And after Spain, the gardeners of the imperial garden, start to cut brunches in every places where the social-rationalism of equity and justice began to disrupt the 'balance' that capitalism need in order to maintain its multinational corporations in the pursue of high profits.

Under this militaristic "neoplatonic" optic (we need to bear in mind the so famous aphorism of "the war -the 'pruning'—it is the continuation of politics by another means'), the pruning of the brunches, in order to take out the oxygen that the Tree need to live, started in Spain. Hitler, with a brute impulse, used the military operation "Barbarrossa" to go direct to the trunk; the US imperialism used, first, its "gardeners", to deprive the Tree (of social justice) from all its respiratory system, and after that, the internal contradictions and problems (that was created 'ex-proffesso' in the Tree) did the rest... as we can see today.

Georg Lukacs noticed this much and wrote the following statement, which would prove tremendously prophetic: 

"IN CONTRAST TO GERMANY, THE USA HAD A CONSTITUTION WHICH WAS DEMOCRATIC FROM THE START.   BUT ITS RULING CLASS MANAGED, PARTICULARY DURING THEIR IMPERIAL ERA, TO ACHIEVE A DICTATORSHIP OF MONOPOLY CAPITALISM AT LEAST AS FIRM AS HITLER SET HIS HI REICH UP WITH HIS TYRANNICAL PROCEDURES... The finance monopoly over the press, radio, etc., electioneering costs, which successfully prevented really democratic parties from springing up besides the two parties monopoly capitalism, and lastly the use of terroristic devices [they lynching system], was the creation on which THIS DEMOCRACY COULD, IN SUBSTANCE, REALIZE EVERYTHING SOUGHT BY HITLER WITHOUT NEEDING TO BREAK FORMALLY WITH DEMOCRACY" [68].

We can see this in Iraq, today, and, more over, what we can see, to feel and to apprehend, (without having a Ph. from any University), in the present time, is some thing worse, much worse than that, and it is what Marcuse proclaimed in 1932: "THE SITUATION OF CAPITALISM IS NOT ONLY A QUESTION OF AN ECONOMIC OR POLITICAL CRISIS, BUT -IS—A CATASTROPHE OF THE HUMAN ESSENCE ". [68B]

Nowadays, the victory of the Bush 'administration' and the Republican Party are an axiomatic evidence that the visionary prognostications of Lukacs and Marcuse, are, unfortunately, correct.


Claude G. Bowers, the United States Ambassador to Spain who incessantly criticized his nation for having permitted the destruction of Spanish democracy, returned to his country in March 1939 to visit President Roosevelt, who told him: "We have made a mistake: you have been right all along" [69].

Later, Bowers met with Senator Key Pittman, who, as chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, had seen the Arms Embargo Act through the Senate on 6 January, 1937. After exchanging greetings, Pittman told Bowers: 

"I am afraid we made a mistake in Spain" [70].

No, the United States had not made this kind of "mistake." Quite the contrary: it established a solid anti-communist bastion of the first order which it instructed to "cleanse" a European nation of all its undesirable elements for the hygienic operations of the princes of "Wall Street", it is very simple.

Roosevelt and Pittman made such confessions to Bowers because, in those precise moments, the magnitude of the crime they committed against the Spanish people weighed upon them so heavily that they felt compelled to reduce their own culpability, recognizing it as a "mistake", as something out of the reaches of their will, of their responsibilities, it is a very old mechanism of psychological defend. This is a fairly elementary.

The US also made a "mistake" concerning the "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq and most related postulates from the intelligence services. Was it truly a mistake? . Of course not!. The level of human intelligence is a little above such infantilisms. Just as in the Spanish case, the United States knew full well on which sides their interests lay that it needed to defend. The United States, in its history as an empire, has always enacted "morals embargos" against any social movement in the world that stepped in the path of its hegemonic interests. Whether an event it is judge "a posteriori" and gets interpreted as a "mistake" or the "right choice", depends solely on the demagogy who dictates the circumstances in which such judgment is elaborated.

In this specific case of Spain, the axiomatic historical evidences that the US was far, far away from commit any sort of mistake in its policy toward the Spanish Second Republic... are beyond any kind of doubts...

The Cuban Revolution, Vietnam, Lumumba in the Congo, Bosch in the Dominican Republic, Goulart in Brazil, Arbenz in Guatemala, Bishop in Grenada, the Sandinistas in Nicaragua; the "Nasakom" Indonesian Popular Front, the Chilean Popular Unity under Allende , and the Popular Front in Spain (1936) [71], etc., etc., [and now Jraq]. All of these obstruction in the path of the US hegemony of interests , were subjected, without a "mistake",   to its correspondent "medicine" to secure the well being of the "morals embargos"... against the malady. It is like a policy of "clinical prophylaxis" that attacks the infection that might otherwise give rise to the "undesirable virus" that threatens a system based exclusively on the crass exploitation of man by man.

In Spain, this "clinical prophylaxis," 20 years after the "National Movement," continued to operate to perfection. "On September 20, 1956, Herbert Matthews was obliged to affirm in 'Times' after a reportorial visit to Spain: "More than sixteen years and a half have passed—since the Civil War—and Spain has not taken a single step in any of these directions—i.e. civil liberties and religious freedom—,and there is no reason to suppose that she ever will take one under General Franco" [72].

A nation where "The evidence of these people, as it has appeared published in various places, is so plain in its implications that no room for doubt remains: The Spain of Franco is no Paradise; it is a Hell on earth" [73].
(I was sixteen year old in such Hell)

This "Hell" was producing a terror silenced by the "free world" and forgotten by history, which, in fact, in the paroxysm of historical surrealism, its own boss went on to create a "Law of Succession" in which its successor would be a Bourbon King [74]  A terror that was creating the adequate "cleansing of undesirables" so that it could establish an "investment climate" that "IS POSITIVELY RELATED TO TERROR AND INPROVEMENT OF INVESTMENT CLIMATE AND NEGATIVELY RELATED TO HUMAN RIGHTS". [75]. 

And in their fraternal embrace exchanged in the North American military base of Torrejon de Ardoz, near Madrid, on 21 December 1959, Eisenhower and Franco, with igneous illumination, illustrated the entire veracity of Chomsky's thesis on the "positive relation" between "terror and investment climate."

Manuel Cidoncha-Hinestrosa
San Diego, California, 2001

Blog Archive