[refurb]

Sources rather than “trust me bro” would be nice.

“ In the best traditions of the CIA, catastrophe ensued. Viaux ignored the explicit U.S. instructions to cease-and-desist; two abduction efforts against Schneider, on 19 and 20 October, failed; the third attempt, on 22 October, ended with Schneider being mortally wounded (he died on 25 October);”

[aredox]

Your whole article is a giant "trust me bro" based on some unclassified testimonies coming from the most guilty, and ends with the insane and unsupported assertion that Allende was going to set up gulags (which doesn't address the fact that the CIA, before and after the coup, trained the juntas of all South America how to disappear and torture opponents on the French model of the Battle of Algiers).

[refurb]

The article provides more than 50 references to sources. It has has links to previously classified CIA documents.

Your rebuttal consists of one source completely unrelated to what happened in Chile. Well done.

And what the CIA was doing in other countries is irrelevant to whether what was article describes as happening in Chile is accurate.

If you're going to claim the article isn't true, then an actual rebuttal of the article arguments would be a helpful place to start.

[aredox]

Your article claims Allende was going to set up gulags. No reference.

Meanwhile you pretend we should ignore the CIA trained every torturer and executioner of the juntas of South America.

Pure negationism.

[refurb]

Once again you ignore the facts (with sources) and zero in on the one claim irrelevant to the discussion.

I take that as you can’t actually prove the article is wrong?