Sanitizing History

It’s a cliche that history is written by the victors, “victors” being a supremely flexible term. By victor we often mean people who remain very wealthy and influential even after their own plans cost thousands of lives and their righteous “cause” turns to shit. We see history today being loudly written and rewritten, in real-time, by powerful, well-funded electoral losers, as it was rewritten by the wealthy, embittered daughters of the defeated Confederacy, decades after their beloved pappies were in their graves after the disgraceful “Northern War of Aggression”.

Trump’s party has removed from the RNC website the bragging page about Trump ending the long war in Afghanistan. The brag was scrubbed almost as soon as Biden made good on Trump’s promise to remove American troops and the Taliban immediately retook control of the nation that has never been militarily subdued by anybody in thousands of years of recorded history. The mess in Afghanistan, all those lost lives and a trillion dollars later, is fucking illegitimate Sleepy Joe’s to try to talk his way out of.

The name of celebrated diplomat and war criminal, Nobel Laureate Henry Kissinger, came up the other night (OK, I probably brought it up). The old Nazi, a one-time orthodox Jew who at 15 fled here with his family from the original Nazi paradise in 1938, is 98 years old, and still getting his ample ass kissed regularly by conservatives as an elder statesman, a supremely pragmatic American genius of international politics. I knew only a fraction of his actual war crimes, and threw a wet blanket over a small party by describing them briefly (without the numbers, which I found out later) the other night. I mentioned his advocacy of carpet bombing in Laos and Cambodia, to destroy the Ho Chi Minh Trail, and the thousands of Cambodian and Laotian civilians killed.

The number, it turns out, is at least 300,000 dead over the four years or so Mr. Kissinger kept his foot on the gas pedal of the secret, illegal carpet bombing (nice phrase, carpet bombing) campaign against densely populated civilian centers in two countries the US was not at war with, during the long “police action” against Communist North Vietnam. Not to mention the panicked instability the continued bombing created, which lead directly to the regime of Pol Pot and his genocide against millions whose remains were later found in the Killing Fields of Cambodia. Shit happens, as Mr. Kissinger might say.

After heading up to bed (my comments about Kissinger immediately reminded everyone it was time for bed) I looked up his biography and the first hit I had was this one:

The anodyne weaselishness of “he was later critiqued for some of his covert actions at home and abroad” rivals Mike Pence’s wonderful accounting of the January 6 MAGA riot when the boss he’d obsequiously served sent a crowd to string him up for cowardice and disloyalty. “We may never see eye to eye about that day,” said Pence philosophically, referring to his former boss and him.

“You mean about that day he sent a lynch mob to grab you and lynch you?” asked a wag on the internet.

So, you know, some critical critics critically criticized Kissinger just because he deliberately prolonged the senseless slaughter of the Viet Nam War by at least four years, for political reasons (to hurt Hubert Humphrey in 1968 and ensure Nixon’s election and then reelection) and was the architect of a vast secret, illegal bombing campaign that killed hundreds of thousands of civilians.

He indisputably won a Nobel Peace Prize for ending the war (his Vietnamese counterpart didn’t accept his own bullshit Peace Prize, knowing the true facts behind Kissinger’s mass murdering treachery). takes no position on whether this critique of Kissinger is fair or not, we merely mention it out of a sense of fairness since so many seem to believe that the mass killings in Asia that he was deeply involved in was an American war crime.

This is how winners write history. Those leftists on East Timor that posed an ill-defined political threat to nearby Indonesia? Well, you visit the leader of Indonesia, give him some excellent weapons and tell him to wait. He waits, until the plane carrying you and Mr. Nixon taxis and lifts off Indonesian soil, then he slaughters one third of the civilian population of that island, including tens of thousands of cringing women and the crying children they tried to protect. Nothing to see here, what had WE to do with THAT?

I heard Kissinger interviewed by Leonard Lopate on WNYC a few years back. Kissinger had a new historical memoir out and was making the rounds of the talk shows. Lopate asked Kissinger about the slaughter on East Timor, which apparently began the moment Air Force One was wheels up, inches above the tarmac of an Indonesian airport. Kissinger responded in self-righteous fury. “You are so arrogant! You know nothing about history! How dare you?!!”

Lopate kept his cool, said something like “well, I may very well be arrogant, I don’t know, but that has nothing to do with my question. I’m reading directly from your book, on page 383 where you write….”

Kissinger attacked again, but the damage was done, among those of us who have long found the icon of international diplomacy to have been a self-righteous, unaccountable, murderous pile of dreck who always argued that in geopolitics the ends justify the means (means necessarily hidden under a cloak of secrecy, much of the time). Any status quo, no matter how flawed, is preferable to international chaos and possible revolution, Kissinger argued. That he was one of America’s greatest beneficiaries of this status quo apparently never entered his calculations.

Kissinger, who was never elected to any government position, greatly enjoyed his vast power of life and death over countless “enemies”, power which he famously called “the ultimate aphrodisiac”. One does not want to imagine Kissinger deploying that aphrodisiac.

Apparently power is a great aphrodisiac, if you think of a certain type — star fuckers, who will let you do anything to them if you are a big star. Apparently they let you walk right up to them and grab ’em by the pussy, LOL! The aphrodisiac effect of power is even more undeniable if consider a sex partner’s apparent lack of reciprocity to be no indication of her sexual appetite not being enhanced by the powerful aphrodisiac of the powerful person who is doing the fucking.

Muammar Gaddafi had unlimited power in Libya and, apparently, an unlimited, if sometimes sadistic, sexual appetite. He had a special crew going through the crowd wherever he spoke, picking out good looking young women to be taken to rooms to wait for the great man to give them a whiff of the ultimate aphrodisiac. Critics later called these rooms “rape rooms”. Mussolini apparently ran a similar game, stayed very busy with as much fucking as possible, but apparently found more willing women than the handsome, charismatic dictator of Libya. Both men ended badly. Fuck ’em.

When Henry Kissinger finally dies he will be lionized as a giant of American politics in the second half of the twentieth century. He will also be criticized, of course, by the critical critics, for what can arguably be called “war crimes,” but . . . well, those are critics who hate him. Who are you going to believe, those who loved the man for his brilliance and his measured, realistic view of world politics or those who hated him just because he might have had something to do with the deaths of a few hundred thousand so-called innocent civilians? Those anonymous kids that were killed would have grown up to hate America anyway, most likely. You can’t win, can you, Henry?

But wait a second —

he was later critiqued for some of his covert actions at home and abroad”?

At home? Covert actions at home? Wait . . . could Henry have played a Bill Barr-like role, as Nixon’s Secretary of State, in justifying, or even authorizing, say, the murder by hit squad of one of Nixon’s declared enemies? Covert actions at home? Like that squad of federal marshals that jumped out of two SUVs in the state of Washington and opened fire on a guy accused of shooting a militant pro-Trump fighter who’d come to Portland to kick some commie ass [1]? Things like that can’t happen here, they can’t happen here!

They can’t happen here, can they, Henry?


Barr sent federal troops to protect a federal building in Portland, Oregon, pursuant to an Executive Order about protecting federal property from violence. Violence escalated immediately, once the anti-riot forces arrived on the scene. You recall the unmarked shock troops jumping out of unmarked rented vans to grab protesters, who they drove around, handcuffed and hooded, and released without charges. It was a radical experiment, to see if federal forces could be widely deployed to put down this threatening Black revolution. Black Lives Matter was portrayed as a violent terrorist group, as was antifa. People who claimed that police killings of unarmed Blacks is a serious ongoing problem in America were themselves the serious ongoing problem in America. These lawless rioters would not be tolerated.

Recall how things escalated in Portland. Trump supporters began staging counter protests in Portland. An armed Trump supporter was shot to death one night by a violent “antifa terrorist”. Four days later, the suspected anitfa killer was found 120 miles from Portland and quickly died in a hail of police bullets when federal marshals staged a raid. The story of the original murder of the Trump supporter, was reported, by the Washington Post, at the very end of the article about the police killing of his suspected murderer, this way:.

The incident came after a caravan of Trump supporters, including members of the Patriot Prayer group, made their way through Portland, sparking skirmishes with those who objected to their presence. Portland has seen more than three months of often violent protests after the death of George Floyd in police custody in Minneapolis, and the shooting seemed to intensify the persistent tension.


As for the police killing of the suspected killer of the Trump supporter? From that same article in the Washington Post:

A vocal proponent of the far-left antifa movement who was suspected of fatally shooting a supporter of a far-right group in Portland, Ore., this weekend was shot and killed in a confrontation with law enforcement Thursday, the U.S. Marshals Service said.

Investigators were seeking to take Michael Forest Reinoehl into custody in connection with the fatal shooting of 39-year-old Aaron J. Danielson on Saturday after confrontations between supporters of President Trump and Black Lives Matter counterprotesters.

The agency said Reinoehl was shot by police near Olympia, Wash., after drawing a weapon as officers tried to arrest him.

“The fugitive task force located Reinoehl in Olympia and attempted to peacefully arrest him,” said Jurgen R. Soekhoe, a U.S. Marshals spokesman, in a statement. “Initial reports indicate the suspect produced a firearm, threatening the lives of law enforcement officers. Task force members responded to the threat and struck the suspect who was pronounced dead at the scene.”


The attempt to peacefully arrest him was accomplished when officers jumped out of two SUVs that had sped to the scene, cut off Reinhoel’s parked car and opened fire on the left-wing suspect, killing him in a barrage of 37 bullets.

The rest of this largely forgotten footnote of an American Death Squad story, of task force members executing a hated enemy while “responding to the threat” from the unarmed man they opened fired on, is here, in the second half of the April 13th post (below the Amazon ad).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s