Key points that the mainstream U.S. media knew all along but didn't report as such. Not without code words anyways, as we'll soon see in contrast: In El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras the task was carried out by U.S. mercenary forces, trained, supplied, and directed by U.S. agents and advisers. "The same 'control mentality' that dictated broader U.S. policy in the region, manifested itself in the micro-management of the Contra war," Peter Kornbluh observes. The supervisors were especially concerned with countering the region's liberation theology clergy. The belief was that "preaching Good News to the Poor was dangerous": What U.S. elites term "democracy" could not be established as long as popular organizations still existed: Turning to the revolutionary alternative: The corporate media was complicit in all this, as we'll see here. Most of the above information is generally re-stated but in coded language. Imperial Culture in Corporate Media A.M. Rosenthal, executive editor of the New York Times. Using the terminology of Henry Kissinger, Boston Globe editor Randolph Ryan writes that in 1980-81 "there was an impression that the revolutionary left was on a roll in Central America. The administration correctly saw that infectious spirit as a ‘virus’ that had to be stopped." In the New York Times Magazine, New Republic literary editor Leon Wieseltier assures readers (12/07/86) that "It would be hard to exaggerate the purity of heart that the Reagan Administration feels" as representatives of "a great and good power." "The pure hearts dream of democracy in Nicaragua". We must support the "elected governments in the region," the editors of the New York Times demanded, bolstering the "democratic regimes in El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala" and their "elected presidents," and defending them against the plundering of the "Sandinistas." Times reporter Elaine Sciolino informs us (05/14/87) that Guatemala has decided not to get involved militarily against Nicaragua but "favors re-establishment of a democratic system there," implying that it was a democracy under Somoza. The Washington Post explains that that U.S. "is working through the contras to restore democracy to Nicaragua" and that Washington's role is "to help contain the spread of the Sandinista revolution beyond Nicaragua." Clifford Krauss: veteran presstitute reporter. "Fortunately for the neighbors," a Wall Street Journal reporter exulted, "leftist groups have been declining throughout the isthmus since 1983." The editors of the New Republic then, surveying the carnage, declared El Salvador "the real model for supporting democracy in our sphere", and advised "Reagan & Co" that military aid must continue to be sent to "Latin-style fascists regardless of how many are murdered", because "there are higher American priorities than Salvadoran human rights." The Post's editors advised that Nicaragua be restored to the "Central American mode" and forced to adhere to the "regional standards" that prevailed in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras. New York Times chief propagandist James LeMoyne. Meanwhile, Times bureau chief James LeMoyne concludes (02/07/88) U.S. support for these "elected governments" has been "a relative success." Meaning they remain safely within "the Central American mode." LeMoyne did some dirty work of his own for good measure. In a letter to the Times (09/18/88), Ines Murillo, a Honduran victim of torture, responds to James LeMoyne’s reporting of the interview with her, noting a series of distortions and falsehoods, which "have caused great damage to me and my family" and "could be used to justify the kidnapping, disappearance and assassination of hundreds of people." LeMoyne's response doesn't challenge any of her specific points.