Shepherd
08-17-2007, 06:41 AM
TESTIMONY ABOUT FRANK TERUGGI’S DEATH IN 1973
An Interview With Teruggi’s Friend Shepherd Bliss, Santiago Times
(Aug. 15, 2007) (Ed. Note: Two weeks ago, the Santiago Times reported on advances in his investigation into the deaths of two young U.S. journalists – Charles Horman and Frank Teruggi – killed in murky circumstances just days after the September 11, 1973 military coup led by Gen. Augusto Pinochet. Horman and Teruggi are believed to have been arrested, held prisoner and killed at Santiago's National Stadium. Perhaps on orders by U.S. government officials. Teruggi's body was found in a Santiago morgue a few days after he was arrested, with evident signs of torture.
In this interview, the Santiago Times sat down with an old friend of Teruggi’s, Dr. Shepherd Bliss. Dr. Bliss, who is currently a professor of humanities and at Sonoma State University, knew Frank Teruggi and testified in the latest hearings about his death. In this interview, Dr. Bliss talks about his relationship with Frank, what attracted them both to Chile in the 1970s, his experiences while testifying, and his motivation to keep cases like Teruggi and Horman’s in the news.)
SANTIAGO TIMES: Please tell us a little bit about yourself and your relation to this case.
DR. SHEPHERD BLISS: I met Frank in the late 1960s when we both lived in Chicago. I knew Frank and his whole family. They were very devout Catholics. He was a very serious student.
The testimony which I gave (to the Chilean judge investigating the case) documented that Frank was in Chile to participate in an historical moment. There were thousands of young people from all over the world in Chile because Chile had chosen a peaceful route towards socialism. That is why Frank was here; he believed in just that. He was an activist in the peace movement in the United States, and this move to Chile was an extension of his interest.
ST: Why and how were you chosen to testify?
DSB: I was chosen as a character reference. I knew Frank very well, personally. I was just a couple of years older than him, but I acted as his mentor. Also, I had done the same as him. I had come to Chile in 1971. I was the member of a group called The Chicago Area Group on Latin America. Frank was also a member of this group, and we hit it off.
Still, our visits to Chile did not overlap. I came to Chile in the end of 1971, and went back. He came, actually, a few weeks after I left.
ST: And what brought you personally to Chile?
DSB: I came to Chile because then, in the 1970s, it was a country that had chosen a path to a peaceful way of life. What inspired me was that, in the Gospel, it says that people have the right to equal access. People who have been disadvantaged, be they workers or farmers, could have equal access to a good way of life. Chile was a place that drew many people because of that type of solidarity, that type of connection.
Allende represented a figure on the international horizon. He was a caring person, obviously, because he was a physician. There were hopes that there would be something (in Chile) along the lines as to what Gandhi had led in India, that would deepen the level of Chilean independence as a whole. The country’s wealth would be not for a small number of people, but rather for the workers and the other people who actually extract material from the ground.
People like Frank and I were also very critical of things that were happening in the United States at that time, particularly the Vietnam War. Eventually, we, the people, were able to make the U.S. president stop the war, to back off. But, during the early 1970s, the war was still raging. I think that this historical context is important.
But, in Chile, we were doing the contrary. We were in a place which was building, where people were constructing. People had gone beyond criticizing and were actually making a better world.
ST: And Frank was part of the same group as you?
DSB: Yes, Frank was part of the Chicago Area Group on Latin America. Frank was a serious student. He was studying at the Universidad la Catolica. He also took classes at the Universidad de Chile. He was also a very caring man. He was the man who would get up early in the morning and go out and help get food for people. He was that kind of man, a very considerate man.
ST: During your stay there, what support did you receive?
DSB: I received funding from a Church group. But, they gave us minimal funding. I also wrote for a publication called the Christian Century. My Editor, Dean Peerman, still works there. He was also a member of the 1974 Chicago Commission which went, along with Frank Teruggi’s dad, to Chile to investigate what had happened. That committee made a very critical assessment of what had happened in Chile, and I gave this information to Judge Zepeda.
Here is what the commission had to say: “The Commission concluded that a systematic and organized campaign of terror exists in Chile. Political assassinations are numerous, and the use of torture is prevalent.”
ST: And how did the U.S. embassy react to all of this? About U.S. citizens that were assassinated?
DSB: I have no information about that. I do not think that this is really something that I can comment on.
I will say something positive about U.S. government during the presidency of Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton declassified 24,000 documents. There were documents from the C.I.A, the F.B.I., the Pentagon, national security. These documents are essential. They document a couple of things which I feel to be important. And they show certain things which I most want to communicate in this interview.
The first point is that Frank was intentionally killed by the Pinochet dictatorship. Sometimes they make it seem as if he violated a curfew. He was really rounded up and shot. There is documentation that Frank was imprisoned in the National Stadium and he was killed in the National Stadium. It was an intentional act which was probably carried out by the head of Chilean intelligence. What I learned during my time there was that it was an intentional act.
The second thing was that, in addition to the crime of taking this young man’s life, they covered it up! The military has denied that he was in the Stadium. We know, however, that he was in the Stadium, that he was picked up at his home with his roommate. His roommate’s pregnant wife was not taken. But, they were taken. His roommate was released. Frank, for some reason, was not. The second crime here is the cover-up.
What we are talking about here is a crime against humanity which violates international law.
ST: Why do you think the army has not yet released those documents?
DSB: Because I think that they will be incriminating. This man was singled out, possibly because he had anti-war literature, which I am sure he did. Perhaps because he was reading all sorts of political literature, which he was. But, Frank Teruggi was singled out and executed in September, 1973 by the Chilean police. Of that, I am sure.
ST: How would you describe the experience of testifying for this case?
DSB: Everything was very professional. Everyone listened well. People were listening and taking notes. The environment was non-adversarial. I think that it was well worth the time to go. And now other Americans are expected to come down.
My perspective is that there is an opening now in Chile. Some of the cases which were forgotten by some—but not, of course, by the family members—are now going to courts.
I had been waiting to go to Chile for more than 30 years. I always knew that I would go back and that I had unfinished business there. For me, this was the return to the scene of a crime. To go back to your original question, I think that the judge and attorneys were very helpful.
ST: And how helpful do you think this testimony will be for finding out who exactly was responsible and clarifying these events?
DSB: First of all, let me say that the torturers are known. But, they had been covered-up. The names of the torturers have since been given. Some of them are still in civil society. It would be my hope that they will be given a fair trial and that they face the consequences of their actions. I am 62 years old, and this is probably the greatest unfinished business in my life. Other Americans are likely to come down.
Frank was there to create solidarity between the people of the United States and the people of Chile. Some of us still believe in that solidarity, and that it should be based on justice.
ST: Moving on to a different topic, when you were here in Chile, did you communicate with the U.S. embassy?
DSB: I left, but Frank’s sister did meet with U.S. embassy officials. My understanding from the human rights attorney is that the U.S. embassy is cooperating fully with this investigation. It is certainly in the interests of the United States to investigate what happened to its citizens in Chile. I know that the embassy has a human rights division and that the people who work there are professional. It is my understanding that the U.S. embassy has been cooperating to the fullest extent.
ST: Has the U.S. embassy always helped?
DSB: My impression is that, at least since the Clinton administration, there was an attempt to get to the truth in cases like this.
I think that a lot of this depends on when Chile is willing to move forward on this. I think that the time has come. Maybe people are aware that Pinochet died in December of last year, and that he was never brought to justice.
I think that this is very important. A future is built on a past. If you deny the past, then you cannot get to the future. Historic memory is important. That is why, when I was in Chile, I went to places like Villa Grimaldi. I did not, however, go to the National Stadium. I knew that I could not do it. The trip was very emotional for me. It was a very difficult trip. All in all, my Chilean contacts did their best to help me. I felt a lot of Chilean hospitality and warmth. But, the reality is that I am dealing with the loss of one of the best friends in my life. And we still do not know the details! We do not know why he was singled out!
ST: Is there anything else that we have not discussed that you would like to add?
DSB: The main thing for me that I would like to underline is the historic importance of this legal process. This has meaning for Chile. The meaning isn’t just for Frank. Frank is a high-profile case because he was a U.S. citizen. But, he is a symbol of a lot of people who were tortured during the Pinochet dictatorship. A lot of those people were not even specifically followers of Allende; they just happened to live in the wrong slum. They were not politically active. They were not literate; they certainly can not get a lawyer and appear before a judge.
Keeping Frank in the news is a way so that other people have some hope of what happened to their desaparecidos.
Interviewed by: Matt Malinowski ([email protected])
An Interview With Teruggi’s Friend Shepherd Bliss, Santiago Times
(Aug. 15, 2007) (Ed. Note: Two weeks ago, the Santiago Times reported on advances in his investigation into the deaths of two young U.S. journalists – Charles Horman and Frank Teruggi – killed in murky circumstances just days after the September 11, 1973 military coup led by Gen. Augusto Pinochet. Horman and Teruggi are believed to have been arrested, held prisoner and killed at Santiago's National Stadium. Perhaps on orders by U.S. government officials. Teruggi's body was found in a Santiago morgue a few days after he was arrested, with evident signs of torture.
In this interview, the Santiago Times sat down with an old friend of Teruggi’s, Dr. Shepherd Bliss. Dr. Bliss, who is currently a professor of humanities and at Sonoma State University, knew Frank Teruggi and testified in the latest hearings about his death. In this interview, Dr. Bliss talks about his relationship with Frank, what attracted them both to Chile in the 1970s, his experiences while testifying, and his motivation to keep cases like Teruggi and Horman’s in the news.)
SANTIAGO TIMES: Please tell us a little bit about yourself and your relation to this case.
DR. SHEPHERD BLISS: I met Frank in the late 1960s when we both lived in Chicago. I knew Frank and his whole family. They were very devout Catholics. He was a very serious student.
The testimony which I gave (to the Chilean judge investigating the case) documented that Frank was in Chile to participate in an historical moment. There were thousands of young people from all over the world in Chile because Chile had chosen a peaceful route towards socialism. That is why Frank was here; he believed in just that. He was an activist in the peace movement in the United States, and this move to Chile was an extension of his interest.
ST: Why and how were you chosen to testify?
DSB: I was chosen as a character reference. I knew Frank very well, personally. I was just a couple of years older than him, but I acted as his mentor. Also, I had done the same as him. I had come to Chile in 1971. I was the member of a group called The Chicago Area Group on Latin America. Frank was also a member of this group, and we hit it off.
Still, our visits to Chile did not overlap. I came to Chile in the end of 1971, and went back. He came, actually, a few weeks after I left.
ST: And what brought you personally to Chile?
DSB: I came to Chile because then, in the 1970s, it was a country that had chosen a path to a peaceful way of life. What inspired me was that, in the Gospel, it says that people have the right to equal access. People who have been disadvantaged, be they workers or farmers, could have equal access to a good way of life. Chile was a place that drew many people because of that type of solidarity, that type of connection.
Allende represented a figure on the international horizon. He was a caring person, obviously, because he was a physician. There were hopes that there would be something (in Chile) along the lines as to what Gandhi had led in India, that would deepen the level of Chilean independence as a whole. The country’s wealth would be not for a small number of people, but rather for the workers and the other people who actually extract material from the ground.
People like Frank and I were also very critical of things that were happening in the United States at that time, particularly the Vietnam War. Eventually, we, the people, were able to make the U.S. president stop the war, to back off. But, during the early 1970s, the war was still raging. I think that this historical context is important.
But, in Chile, we were doing the contrary. We were in a place which was building, where people were constructing. People had gone beyond criticizing and were actually making a better world.
ST: And Frank was part of the same group as you?
DSB: Yes, Frank was part of the Chicago Area Group on Latin America. Frank was a serious student. He was studying at the Universidad la Catolica. He also took classes at the Universidad de Chile. He was also a very caring man. He was the man who would get up early in the morning and go out and help get food for people. He was that kind of man, a very considerate man.
ST: During your stay there, what support did you receive?
DSB: I received funding from a Church group. But, they gave us minimal funding. I also wrote for a publication called the Christian Century. My Editor, Dean Peerman, still works there. He was also a member of the 1974 Chicago Commission which went, along with Frank Teruggi’s dad, to Chile to investigate what had happened. That committee made a very critical assessment of what had happened in Chile, and I gave this information to Judge Zepeda.
Here is what the commission had to say: “The Commission concluded that a systematic and organized campaign of terror exists in Chile. Political assassinations are numerous, and the use of torture is prevalent.”
ST: And how did the U.S. embassy react to all of this? About U.S. citizens that were assassinated?
DSB: I have no information about that. I do not think that this is really something that I can comment on.
I will say something positive about U.S. government during the presidency of Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton declassified 24,000 documents. There were documents from the C.I.A, the F.B.I., the Pentagon, national security. These documents are essential. They document a couple of things which I feel to be important. And they show certain things which I most want to communicate in this interview.
The first point is that Frank was intentionally killed by the Pinochet dictatorship. Sometimes they make it seem as if he violated a curfew. He was really rounded up and shot. There is documentation that Frank was imprisoned in the National Stadium and he was killed in the National Stadium. It was an intentional act which was probably carried out by the head of Chilean intelligence. What I learned during my time there was that it was an intentional act.
The second thing was that, in addition to the crime of taking this young man’s life, they covered it up! The military has denied that he was in the Stadium. We know, however, that he was in the Stadium, that he was picked up at his home with his roommate. His roommate’s pregnant wife was not taken. But, they were taken. His roommate was released. Frank, for some reason, was not. The second crime here is the cover-up.
What we are talking about here is a crime against humanity which violates international law.
ST: Why do you think the army has not yet released those documents?
DSB: Because I think that they will be incriminating. This man was singled out, possibly because he had anti-war literature, which I am sure he did. Perhaps because he was reading all sorts of political literature, which he was. But, Frank Teruggi was singled out and executed in September, 1973 by the Chilean police. Of that, I am sure.
ST: How would you describe the experience of testifying for this case?
DSB: Everything was very professional. Everyone listened well. People were listening and taking notes. The environment was non-adversarial. I think that it was well worth the time to go. And now other Americans are expected to come down.
My perspective is that there is an opening now in Chile. Some of the cases which were forgotten by some—but not, of course, by the family members—are now going to courts.
I had been waiting to go to Chile for more than 30 years. I always knew that I would go back and that I had unfinished business there. For me, this was the return to the scene of a crime. To go back to your original question, I think that the judge and attorneys were very helpful.
ST: And how helpful do you think this testimony will be for finding out who exactly was responsible and clarifying these events?
DSB: First of all, let me say that the torturers are known. But, they had been covered-up. The names of the torturers have since been given. Some of them are still in civil society. It would be my hope that they will be given a fair trial and that they face the consequences of their actions. I am 62 years old, and this is probably the greatest unfinished business in my life. Other Americans are likely to come down.
Frank was there to create solidarity between the people of the United States and the people of Chile. Some of us still believe in that solidarity, and that it should be based on justice.
ST: Moving on to a different topic, when you were here in Chile, did you communicate with the U.S. embassy?
DSB: I left, but Frank’s sister did meet with U.S. embassy officials. My understanding from the human rights attorney is that the U.S. embassy is cooperating fully with this investigation. It is certainly in the interests of the United States to investigate what happened to its citizens in Chile. I know that the embassy has a human rights division and that the people who work there are professional. It is my understanding that the U.S. embassy has been cooperating to the fullest extent.
ST: Has the U.S. embassy always helped?
DSB: My impression is that, at least since the Clinton administration, there was an attempt to get to the truth in cases like this.
I think that a lot of this depends on when Chile is willing to move forward on this. I think that the time has come. Maybe people are aware that Pinochet died in December of last year, and that he was never brought to justice.
I think that this is very important. A future is built on a past. If you deny the past, then you cannot get to the future. Historic memory is important. That is why, when I was in Chile, I went to places like Villa Grimaldi. I did not, however, go to the National Stadium. I knew that I could not do it. The trip was very emotional for me. It was a very difficult trip. All in all, my Chilean contacts did their best to help me. I felt a lot of Chilean hospitality and warmth. But, the reality is that I am dealing with the loss of one of the best friends in my life. And we still do not know the details! We do not know why he was singled out!
ST: Is there anything else that we have not discussed that you would like to add?
DSB: The main thing for me that I would like to underline is the historic importance of this legal process. This has meaning for Chile. The meaning isn’t just for Frank. Frank is a high-profile case because he was a U.S. citizen. But, he is a symbol of a lot of people who were tortured during the Pinochet dictatorship. A lot of those people were not even specifically followers of Allende; they just happened to live in the wrong slum. They were not politically active. They were not literate; they certainly can not get a lawyer and appear before a judge.
Keeping Frank in the news is a way so that other people have some hope of what happened to their desaparecidos.
Interviewed by: Matt Malinowski ([email protected])