Talk:Orlando Letelier

Newly Declassified

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/chile/2019-09-20/letelier-moffitt-assassination-state-department-officials-pushed-pinochets-ouster

I assume that someone will want to include this new information, in a nicely crafted form. I can, if nobody else does. We will see. Thanx. RayKiddy (talk) 19:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Untitled

From what I can tell he was actually killed in Sheridan Circle, not Dupont Circle.

Sheridan Circle is right, according to Murder on Embassy Row, by John Dinges

Added references to the The Spike

briefcase business

This material lacks sourcing of any kind whatosever. Novak is famously known to be a liar. Material must be verifiable. If the FBI has released this material in the response to a freedom of information request, then it is valid and can be included here. If it has not been released by the FBI or the widow, it is not verifiable and violates Wikipedia rules. Skywriter 22:33, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

: Material is verifiable from several sources including original documents Novak, Arnaud de Borchgrave, Harvey Klehr and michael Leeden, will add all of this tonite. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 20:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

"Novak is famously known to be a liar." Probably true, but "famously known" constitutes hearsay -- a citation would be preferable. Karl gregory jones (talk) 19:12, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

fyi, TDC was permanently banned a long time ago.... there's no reason to argue with his leftover comments. Dlabtot (talk) 04:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

down the memory hole

The following text was deleted recently from this page:

== The Briefcase Affair == ‹The template Talkfact is being considered for merging.› 

During the FBI investigation into Letelier's assassination, the contents of the briefcase he had with him were copied and leaked to Rowland Evans and Robert Novak of the Washington Times before being returned to his widow. The documents show that Letelier was in constant contact with the surviving political leadership of the various parties that made up the Popular Unity coalition exiled in East Berlin, been given refuge and supported by the East German Government during their stay. The FBI suspected that these individuals had been recruited by the Stasi. Documents in the briefcase showed that Letelier had maintained contact with Salvador Allende’s daughter, Beatriz Allende who was married to Cuban DGI station chief Luis Fernandez Ona.

According to the documents, Letelier was able to receive funding of $5,000 a month from the Cuban government and under the supervision of Beatriz Allende, he used his contacts within the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and western human rights groups to organize a campaign within the United Nations as well as the US Congress to isolate the new Chilean government, also know as Operation TOUCAN. This organized pressure on Pinochet’s government was thought to have been closely coordinated by the Cuban and Soviet governments, using individuals like Letelier‹The template Talkfact is being considered for merging.›  to implement these efforts. Letelier's briefcase also contained his address book which contained the names of dozens of known and suspected East Block intelligence agents. All correspondence between Letelier and individuals in Cuba had been handled via Julian Rizo, who used his diplomatic status to hide his activities.

Fellow IPS member and friend Saul Landau described Evans and Novak as part of an “organized right wing attack”. In 1980, Letelier's widow, Isabel, wrote in the New York Times that the money sent to her late husband from Cuba was from western sources, and that Cuba had simply acted as an intermediary, although Novak and Evans point out that the document from Beatriz Allende were very clear on the source of the money.

Although potentially explosive, the supposed contents of the briefcase proved not to be damaging to the reputations of either Letelier or of the Institute for Policy Studies. Opponents of Letelier and the IPS complained that leading news media in the United States, including the New York Times and the Washington Post refused to cover the story and even rejected paid advertisements referring to the matter. Supporters of Letelier and the IPS feared that public knowledge the contents of the briefcase might turn the assassination into merely a case of spy vs. spy.

The Letelier Briefcase Affair was fictionalized in a bestselling novel by Newsweek national correspondent Arnaud de Borgrave, The Spike. The title refers to the unethical journalistic practice of deliberately spiking or killing a legitimate news story. The affair remains a source of bitter contention among journalists and media critics.

signed: Travb (talk) 05:55, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Merging Letelier Case page into Orlando Letelier page

Bkengland here, and I'd like to merge these two pages, make some improvements, and add some new info to the merged page. Please add comments here, and I'll wait for a few days before I actually do the merge. Bkengland 18:31, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• I disagree. I think all information on the assasination should be kept in the Letelier case page, and THIS page, should include just his biography, of which there's absolutely next to nothing here. For example, who was he before being made a minister? He was never elected to any public office, so how come he all of the sudden appeared at the top of the UP government? Issues like that should be included. The page on the case then can be used to include all information to a matter that was probably the single most contentious issue in the relations between the US and the Chilean government. Mel Romero 02:14, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
• Merge. Until the Letelier case becomes really too big and different from here, they should be merged in order to avoid redundances. Tazmaniacs 01:52, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Permission to use "Unfinished Business" section

From: Sarah Anderson <[email protected] Sent: Jan 5, 2007 11:58 AM To: Diana Alonzo <[email protected] Cc: Nathaniel Kerksick <[email protected] Subject: Re: FW: P.S.2 Re: Wikipedia.org and Letilier-Moffitt case

The proposed text is fine. Nate, could you send him the portraits of Orlando and Ronni we used for the video? Thanks, Sarah

Diana Alonzo wrote: Greetings Nate and Sarah! I hope your holidays are going well. I recently got this email below in regards to someone who wants to post something on Orlando and Ronni. I emailed him to say that we would be able to respond to him next week when we are in the office, but it would be great to set up a policy on this especially if get these kinds of emails at the [email protected]. In any case we talk about this nest week. Take care and have a great New Year's Eve.... Diana

Bkengland 18:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Comments regarding the Bush Administration

The section about the Bush Administration at the end of this article appears to be a personal, biased statement intended to give the reader a negative view of the administration. It is also includes someone's opinion of what the administration should do, which is an opinion and should not be part of an encyclopedia-style article. The author should include the fact that the information has been prepared but not acted on, and leave the reader free to draw their own conclusion about what should be done and by whom.

Foxran14 17:01, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Original research and use of sources

I'm afraid that using 1977 Washington Post sources is close to be original research. Newer sources should be used. Beside, this edit, reverted by the same user four minutes later, provides an interesting viewpoint on this so-called "Briefcase affair"... Tazmaniacs 16:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

: How in the good Lord's name can you even contemplate arguing that the use of Newspaper articles is WP:OR. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 21:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Briefcase Affair Slander

Wel TDC has done it again. Taking an obscure, unproven right-wing smear and trying to pass it off as fact. I have deleted this section for several reasons.

first it is full of original research Like this:

Although potentially explosive, the supposed contents of the briefcase proved not to be damaging to the reputations of either Letelier or of the Institute for Policy Studies. Opponents of Letelier and the IPS complained that leading news media in the United States, including the New York Times and the Washington Post refused to cover the story and even rejected paid advertisements referring to the matter. Supporters of Letelier and the IPS feared that public knowledge the contents of the briefcase might turn the assassination into merely a case of spy vs. spy.

The Letelier Briefcase Affair was fictionalized in a bestselling novel by Newsweek national correspondent Arnaud de Borchgrave, The Spike. The title refers to the unethical journalistic practice of deliberately spiking or killing a legitimate news story. The affair remains a source of bitter contention among journalists and media critics.

These two paragraphs have no sources to support them and contain an outright lie. Arnuad De Borchagrave has said that the Novel the spike was inspired by a story he wrote about the 1972 Munich massacre. So the idea that The Spike was based on the Letelier case is a complete fantasy. Just because Robert Moss was the co-author doesn't mean that the novel was referring to the Letelier case.

Second, outside of Novak and Roland Evans Washington post article's there is no documentation to support this. No reports from any official invesigation that give credence to any of novaks charges. Novak is a highly partisan commentator so his articles should not be taken as credible accusations.

Unless TDC can come up with more documentation to support his claims I think the section should be left out for now.annoynmous 20:33, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

:: It has been sourced to several WP:RS's. Thats the bar for inclusion, not your personal opinions of what is and is not right wing propaganda. Torturous Devastating Cudgel (talk) 01:57, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

What do you base this dubious case on. As far as I can tell from the discussion page the decision was made that the section didn't have enought evidence to support it, but you went ahead and added it anyway.

Unless you can provide solid documentation for this claim it is invalid. annoynmous 10:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

:: Evans Novak and Moss are Reliable sources and their work meets all the criteria for inclusion. Do not start a spurious edit war over something like this. Torturous Devastating Cudgel (talk) 13:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

In what skewed universe is Robert Novak a reliable source. He's an self-avowed conservative who has a history of getting his facts wrong. There is no record of any official investigation to confirm any of his charges and you haven't provided any neutral source that agrees with his accusations.

You also have not provided one shread of evidence for this claim that the novel The Spike was based on this incident.

You were told before to provide documentation for this claim and best you could do is Robert Novak. Either provide credible evidence for these claims or cease trying to add it.annoynmous 15:01, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Jack Anderson also made mention of this affair: Letelier's 'Havana Connection', Washington Post, Dec. 20, 1976. Intangible2.0 (talk) 20:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Once again is there any evidence of any official investigation by any branch off the federal government that corrobates the assertions of these reporters. Jack anderson, like Robert Novak, has a history of making misleading claims (although from a more liberal side).

Opinionated journalists assertions should not be stated as fact.annoynmous 23:05, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Anderson is another op-ed columnist. Is there a link to any of this? Or is it a faith-based argument? Abe Froman (talk) 23:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you should file a FOIA with the FBI, annoynmous. Intangible2.0 (talk) 17:17, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

The biggers question is why doesn't TDC do this sense he's so dead set on having this section in the article. Otherwise it's just gossip from two conservative op-ed columnists. annoynmous 18:22, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why a brief mention of the allegations can't be included, as long as it is clearly identified as unsubstantiated gossip from Evans and Novak. Since Letelier is dead, he does not enjoy the protections of WP:BLP. Dlabtot (talk) 00:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

::: Evans and Novak were in investigative journalists in the late 70's, not op ed writers. And the widely heralded Jack Anderson came to the same conclusion as Evans and Novak did. We are not going to take the only part of the article that is sourced out, and if you do it again annoynmous, I am sure there is a certain someone or two who could come down on you for it. And Dlabtot ... funny to see you here, some might call this stalking.Torturous Devastating Cudgel (talk) 01:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Novak, an 'investigative journalist'? I'd like to see a citation to back up that assertion. You also might want to review WP:STALK. Dlabtot (talk) 03:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

First off, when I see something in an article that happens to be wrong and turns out it was added by TDC, thats not wikistalking it's merely a coincidence. I can't help it if TDC has a habit of trying to unfairly bias articles.

Also you haven't changed a thing in the section. It's basically written the same, but with andersons name and links to his articles thrown in. Novak is an op-ed columnist, his column with Roland evans was called the Evans-Novak Political Report. Here is a piece from Evans Wiki Page:

It was in that role that he met his lifelong writing partner, Robert Novak, the Capitol Hill correspondent for The Wall Street Journal. They founded the "Evans-Novak Political Report" in 1967, four years after they had launched their nationally syndicated column. His work landed him on the master list of Nixon political opponents. "Inside Report" became noteworthy among syndicated political columns for being what the trade called "dope pieces" almost exclusively: inside reporting more than polemics, even though the team's conservative inclination gradually became evident.

Sounds like a pretty biased bunch to me.

You also have failed once again to produce any proof of an official FBI or other governmental investigation that prove these allegations.

I disagree Dlabtot, just because Letelier is dead does not give you the right to make unfounded accusations. The suggestion from this section is that because he was a spy that it was okay to murder him. I think you would agree that just because someones dead doesn't mean you have the right to say there murder was as TDC wrote "A case of Spy vs. Spy".

Sense I doubt TDC is going to let this matter set I would offer as a compromise that this section be moved to the Letelier case artilce. As long as it is stated as a accusation and not fact.annoynmous 11:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

That seems reasonable. Dlabtot (talk) 16:16, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Added 'allegedly' and sourced the allegations, again. This is classic TDC. He finds a Right Wing op-ed columnist, and reports their allegations as fact. Abe Froman (talk) 17:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

:::: Jack Anderson is a Right Wing op-ed columnist .. thats a new one. Also, you should be more cautious about what you accuse me of, rememeber the CPUSA article? How did that one work out for you? Torturous Devastating Cudgel (talk) 02:01, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Abe Forman said nothing of the kind. You didn't do anything new to the article, It was stil based on Novak and Evans claims. All you did was stick Andersons name in there with a links to this articles.

As I said before anderson, like Novak. has a history of making faulty claims.

Abe Forman is exactly right, you are trying to pass off an editorial by two right wing authors as fact. You have not provided and credible evidence of an official investigation or work from a credible journalist to prove your claims. You seem personally intent on biasing the article.

I also find it personally disgusting that you somehow are trying to create the impression that the murder of Letelier was justified or as you wrote, "A case of Spy vs. Spy", a truly disgusting claim.

Despite all that, the section is know in the Letelier article as an accusation and not fact. It's either that or it goes all together.annoynmous 12:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

:: No one denies that the material from Letelier's briefcase were not incriminating, they just chalk it up to efforts to "discredit him" instead of tackle any of the factual nature of the charges. Its now in the article again, in its original form, the one that has been here for months before you started your latest edit war. Torturous Devastating Cudgel (talk) 14:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

It would be better if links to the relevant news articles were included, rather than dead citations. All we have to verify these allegations is faith in TDC's interpretation of 30 year old editorials. That is a slender reed to stand on. Abe Froman (talk) 16:10, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

"No one denies that the material from Letelier's briefcase were not incriminating, they just chalk it up to efforts to "discredit him" instead of tackle any of the factual nature of the charges".

Say's who, the universe according to TDC. It seems to me that outside some conservative circles hardly anyone noticed this absurd charge. Being that there was no solid evidence to back it up the charge seemed to die an appropriately silent death and is only remebered by people like TDC.

Once again you need to provide evidence of an official invetigation to support your claims. If not then the section must be framed as an accusation not fact. I don't understand why this is so hard to understand. annoynmous 12:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

::: Saul Landau, an IPS hack and fellow TNI'er with Letelier mentions the FBI investigation and the incrminating materials from the briefcase. [1]. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 13:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You've got to be kidding me. Theres one sentence in this article where he talks about it and dismisses it as right wing propoganda.

He never admits to the materials being incriminating.

Also, without getting into a debate about the validity of the Mitrokhin archive, how in hell could Novak and Evans have known about an operation name when it wasn't revealed until 20 some years later. This is editorializing on your part.annoynmous 16:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Leaving the military

The part of the article that reads Later he abandoned the military life to attend the University of Chile could be read to imply that he went AWOL. Is that the case? --201.240.241.81 03:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

No. He voluntarily resigned. Mel Romero 04:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Potential source

From the BBC: Orlando Letelier: Murdered in central Washington DC – VisionHolder « talk » 21:27, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Orlando Letelier. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070704140738/http://www.memoriachilena.cl/upload/mi2274-2.pdf to http://www.memoriachilena.cl/upload/mi2274-2.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:33, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

"exodus"

As far as I'm aware (being a native English-speaker) this word never means the departure of just one person. Wiktionary gives the following (and only) definition: "A sudden departure of a large number of people". Why not just "departure"?213.127.210.95 (talk) 12:43, 12 June 2018 (UTC)