Issues Related to Jorge Zorreguita's Role in the Videla Regime

[Marengo]

According to free aily newspaper 'De Pers' there is new information about Jorge Zorreguieta's role in the revolution of 1976, when the junta came to power.

Tuesday the Argentinian secretary for Human Rights, Jorge Duhalde revealed that mr. Zorreguieta played a keyrole in the agricultural strike that happened just before the coop d'etat of the junta. According to Duhalde the chaos of the strike enabled the junta to get into power and Zorreguita was later rewarded with a position in the government.

Mr. Duhalde made his statement during a pressconference in which he announced that he would start a trial against Martínez de Hoz, a former minister who is accused of murdering a high public servant in 1977.

Read the articdle in Dutch here.

From Clarin, an article in Spanish about Mr. Duhalde's pressconference, look here.

[Princess Maxima]

Good for Jorge.

I wonder why is there a new thread about this topic and this is not posted in Máxima's family

[lucien]

Originally Posted by Princess Maxima

Good for Jorge.

I wonder why is there a new thread about this topic and this is not posted in Máxima's family

Aqui el mismo,and it doesn't really add all that much either,not much of special news.

At the time Argentina was one big mess,bankrupt,corrupt,poorhouse, everything negative,thanks to Isabel Peron.

With this "thread" it seems it was Jorge who singlehandedly caused the military to intervene,which was absolutely not the case.

[Marengo]

The information used in this thread is based on information given by a secretary of state of the Argentinian government. If he finds Jorge's role important enough to discuss, I suppose that we are wrong in just labelling it as nonsense and gettign angry that he is bringing rain on our royal parade.

We all rather had that Maxima came from a family who wasn't stained in such a way, but sadly she does not, and the government and the RF knew and accepted that at the time. The consequenses are that disturbing news like this is bound to pop up from time to time, but the other option its to turn our heads and forget all about the the atrocities of the regime, with which Zorreguieta willingly cooperated and forget the 30.000 people who 'disappeared' too.

New information like this shows that the role of Zorreguieta was larger than we were told and in that light we can wonder if we want such a man on the staris of Palace Het Loo next to our Queen, if we want him present at christenings of people in line for our throne and in the future, if we want him present at a national event like the enthronement of King Willem IV. The arrogance of the RF in this matter, parading with a such a man, is rather disappointing, I wish they had the decency to keep him on the background and not include him in pictures that were released to the press. It is already bad enough that the RF is associated with him and that the future monarch of this country has him as a grandfather, no need to flaunt it even further.

Of course it makes people here uncomfortable, everybody likes Maxima and in that light many just want to pretend that the father was just a guy at the wrong place at the wrong time, we cover everything up and just pretend that everything is all right.

[lucien]

I think it just tells that Jorge,and the agricultural world in Argentina,from farmers to presidents of sugar corporations etc etc,were
more then fet up with Isabel and her desastrous regime.

Every union member in Argentina was on strike,strikes everyday for months on end,so Jorge helped pull the plug in the agriculturel field,
big deal.

And no,I am not defending those mucho macho nutcases that came into power then.Allthough,all the world knew about them and what they did,and still,all the world was trading with the Junta,all the world attended the World Championship Football,we too,so all have butter on their b*tts.So all this hazzbazz by any of us pointing to Jorge,in this case,is hypocrite.We should have taken actions then and there.

And I stick with it,his role,Jorge's,isn't/wasn't halve as big as suggested here.

[Marengo]

I am not sure what is suggested by mr. Duhalde, the article of 'De pers' is too vague to get a good idea about that and I haven't seen the remarks in any Argentinian newspaper yet.

Indeed, his involvement in a strike alone isn't too shocking, considering Isabel Perron's regime, but if the article is right, and that Zorreguieta got 'rewarded' by the junta with a post in the government it sheds some different light on the reasons of the involvement in such a strike.

Anyway, it would be interesting to see what mr. Duhalde actually said.

[lucien]

Originally Posted by Marengo

I am not sure what is suggested by mr. Duhalde, the article of 'De pers' is too vague to get a good idea about that and I haven't seen the remarks in any Argentinian newspaper yet.

Indeed, his involvement in a strike alone isn't too shocking, considering Isabel Perron's regime, but if the article is right, and that Zorreguieta got 'rewarded' by the junta with a post in the government it sheds some different light on the reasons of the involvement in such a strike.

Anyway, it would be interesting to see what mr. Duhalde actually said.

The national press,ours that is,didn't pick this story up,like our dear Henry said at the BRMB.And the "Pers" is just one of those free newspapers that sometimes try and create a certain mood,and then fail.Another "could have been hype" down the drain.

I don't think he was rewarded tho,he was just the best there was in the field,with decades of experience in the argentinean agricultural world,in all its aspects,so that is why they appointed him.The importance of agriculture,or more so sugar and meat production,is immens for Argentina,always was a numero uno export product,think huge steaks,corned beef etc etc,so getting Jorge on that job was the best way to end the misery for the hundreds of thousands of workers in that industry.And that worked,he did a great job considering the circumstances.

[Empress]

Well, I don't think that Maxima ought to be stained by the actions of her father, over which she had no control.

Unfortunately that is impossible for some people to do. So the best situation that we can hope for, is that Maxima's endearing personality and good qualities over ride the nasty connotations of her family situation. And she should continue to do what she does now, which is support charities that help people to better their situations, and encourage open and honest communication from various types of people, and trying to give everyone the opportunity to live a peaceful and prosperous life.

I think that in her way, using her position, she is doing her best to right the wrongs of her father. Although not discussing it directly, as it would do not a bit of good for her to do that.

[lucien]

I absolutely totally agree from A to Z.

[Marengo]

We can not blame Maxima for what her father did but IMO we can 'blame' her for getting her father in the public eye, while it was pretty obvious that a large part of the Dutch would rather not have him there as there is something 'fishy' about him, to say the least. I highly doubt that this would be happening under a Labour prime minister btw, but the Christian Democrats are always overly eager to please the RF.

[Princess Maxima]

Originally Posted by Marengo

We can not blame Maxima for what her father did but IMO we can 'blame' her for getting her father in the public eye, while it was pretty obvious that a large part of the Dutch would rather not have him there as there is something 'fishy' about him, to say the least. I highly doubt that this would be happening under a Labour prime minister btw, but the Christian Democrats are always overly eager to please the RF.

But what is it that her father did?? Did he kill somebody? No...he was just secretary of agriculture at Videla's government, nothing more.

[lucien]

Originally Posted by Princess Maxima

But what is it that her father did?? Did he kill somebody? No...he was just secretary of agriculture at Videla's government, nothing more.

Exactly,y nada mas.

Empress has said all there is to say before..

[Marengo]

But what is it that her father did?? Did he kill somebody? No...he was just secretary of agriculture at Videla's government, nothing more.

If there would have been anything 'more' than what there already is I highly doubt that the Prince of Orange would have been able to keep his rights to the throne if Macima hadn't fullybroken of contact with her parents. But it is already bad enough, mr Zorreguieta was in a government that is responsible for throwing over 30.000 people in the sea or let them 'disappear' in other ways. And that is only the start of the atrocities, rapes, torture and what not... To collaborate with such a regime makes you morally co-responsable for what it does, even though you didn't actually rape, torture or murder yourself. Note here too that Prof. Baron M. Baud did a very thorough investigation which came to the conclusion that it is virtualy impossible that Jorge Zorreguieta did not know about the 'disappearances'.

That Maxima is a very likable woman, the most popular woman of the country probably does not change that fact, no matter how much we want to ignore it, due to Maxima's likability-factor. That Jorge and Carmen Zorreguieta seem friendly people, and nice (grand)parents does not change his role during these times either. We all would rather have it that the Zorreguieta's weren't 'stained' but sadly they are, a risk that was willingly taken by the RF and which seems to have worked, though these kind of stories are probably unwelcome at court.

I do not want to take a moral highground here, but to pretend that all is sweet and nice about Mr. Zorreguieta and that people who think otherwise are whining republicans is a bit too much for me (not that the last thing was done here, but suggestions like that have been made in the previously).

[lucien]

It's not like someone is trying to ignore all of that.It is old news,very old,30 years and more ago,before you were even born dear Marengo.
It is only in the "Pers" ,no-one gives a flying whatever,as you might have noticed,in the national media.None of it.I know what happened,I remember it from the time it was happening.Meanwhile so many things have happened in so many places that were far more atrocious and still we receive those responsible for that as "friends" from "friendly states".
I don't fall for the hypocrisy anymore,and hypes don't do it for me either.

[Marengo]

I do not fall for hypes either, and neither do I like hypocrisy anymore than you do :). But there is nothing hypocritic in the secretary of human rights in Argentina revealing that Jorge Zorreguieta played a more important role in the militairy coup than we were led to believe thus far. That it happened 30 years ago or that in other countries worse things happen(ed) does not change that. Again I don't want to take the moral highground here, but the man was 'wrong' and we can all pretend that it never happened and that only sour republicans think so, but that simply isn't true. He was co-responsible for 30.000 deaths and from this new information it seems he also played a role in the chaos in Argentina that enabled the militairy coup. The man 'stincks', as too many others do of course.

The national media has other priorities at the moment, with the Fitna movie going on. That the story wasn't hyped or not taken on by other media does not change the information of Mr. Duhalde.

[Princess Maxima]

[quote=Marengo;747472] But it is already bad enough, mr Zorreguieta was in a government that is responsible for throwing over 30.000 people in the sea or let them 'disappear' in other ways. And that is only the start of the atrocities, rapes, torture and what not... To collaborate with such a regime makes you morally co-responsable for what it does, even though you didn't actually rape, torture or murder yourself. Note here too that Prof. Baron M. Baud did a very thorough investigation which came to the conclusion that it is virtualy impossible that Jorge Zorreguieta did not know about the 'disappearances'.
quote]

So do you think the 30.000 people who died were all innocent poor people?? It was like a civil war.Also many innocent militars were killed and nobody remembers them

It depends who taught you about/were did you read from Videla's government... the goverments and human rights story its just a part of it..

And Mrs. Kirchner who always defended the human rights and critized the dictatorship is doing now the same . There are only 2 newspapers who are showing the real truth of Argentina now etc..... Hope we don't end like Venezuela

[rosana]

A civil war??? For God sake dear P. M. I suppose you are still a little girl and repeat what you hear at home, shame on you, you need to read good books about Argentinian history and think for yourself, make your own judgment.
I´m sure you heard only one side of the story. When a government uses all its military power to hunt, torture, threaten, violate, steal babies, and kill the civil population it is not a war i´m afraid, it is called terrorism of state, and one of the sides is in clear disadvantage.

Marengo you said everything i wanted to say, no need to repeat.

[princess olga]

Originally Posted by Princess Maxima

So do you think the 30.000 people who died were all innocent poor people??

Even if all those 30,000 people that died <had> in fact been all criminals, that still didn't give Videla & friends the right to convict and send these Videla opponents to their deaths without so much as an open court trial.

The fact they did anyway is and was a brazen act in violation with the the following parts of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

"Among the rights of individuals are:

• the right to legal recourse when their rights have been violated, even if the violator was acting in an official capacity
• the right to life
• the right to liberty and freedom of movement
• the right to equality before the law
• the right to presumption of innocence til proven guilty
• the right to appeal a conviction
• the right to be recognized as a person before the law
• the right to privacy and protection of that privacy by law
• freedom of thought, conscience, and religion
• freedom of opinion and expression
• freedom of assembly and association"

Source: United Nations Agreements on Human Rights

Period, end of story.


To go back to Zorreguieta...I think I do, however, have a scenario that would get him slightly off the hook, just slightly:

Fed up with the utterly incapable Peron government, Zorreguieta helps orchestrate the farmer strike. The strategy works and eventually Maxima's dad gets a gig as minister of agriculture in the government of his friends who realize they owe Jorge a favor. Jorge accepts the position.

Fast forward a few years. Assuming Zorreguieta sincerely didn't realize what Videla had been up to regarding the disappearance of the regime's opponents, let's say Zorreguieta finds out one day that that is what's happening. But by then, it's too late for Zorreguieta to withdraw from his position or even to vocally disagree with Videla's course of action. Afraid for his life and the life of his family and friends, Zorreguieta keeps his mouth shut and, hypocritically as that may be, does so to this day.

So, in that light, is the man still morally bankrupt? You bet. But I'm also making the argument that in his case, it may not have been so black and white. You could think: what would we have done in his position, at the time?

[lucien]

Good point Princess Olga.What we would have done in his position?Save our butts.Like he did,for his sake and of his family.No doubt.
Let's not be hypocritical about that.

[lucien]

Originally Posted by rosana

A civil war??? For God sake dear P. M. I suppose you are still a little girl and repeat what you hear at home, shame on you, you need to read good books about Argentinian history and think for yourself, make your own judgment.
I´m sure you heard only one side of the story. When a government uses all its military power to hunt, torture, threaten, violate, steal babies, and kill the civil population it is not a war i´m afraid, it is called terrorism of state, and one of the sides is in clear disadvantage.

Marengo you said everything i wanted to say, no need to repeat.

Civil war maybe is too big an expression,anarchy,total anarchy a la Chè is the better expression,because that is what it was.We were bored with the same images of intense violence day by day in a country on the loose,where no-one talked with anyone,under Isabel the Incompetent.

I,happily,live in a very free part of the world and had a first class view on what was going on in poor Argentina at the time,the strikes,the students,the fans of Chè among the students,the bombings,the shooting at random on innocent passers by by radical elements,there was a guerilla going on,in the cities,the countryside,everywhere.
Isabel Peron had lost controle totally.

I do hope the very new function/holder of a secretary of human rights takes this with him in his decisions,he holds a public function,funded with public money,and has to produce at least a couple of sentences on paper to proof his money's worth.

No-one,really no-one,has given any reaction worthwhile,in any media,anywhere,that is how strong his so-called new proof is.Right.
Only read about it here on TRF,Isn't that something.