Argentine woman tracks down brother snatched at birth during country's military dictatorship-era
Argentina returned to democracy in 1983, but the trauma from those seven years of dictatorship persists. While more than a thousand military officials have been tried and convicted for kidnapping, torturing and murdering Argentine citizens, most of the families of the 30,000 disappeared never learned what happened to their loved ones. Tonight, we'll tell you of one family's search for a baby stolen by the military in 1978. It's a story about truth and memory, both of which have been attacked under the country's president, Javier Milei, a populist leader who's vowed to make Argentina great again.
After years of economic stagnation and runaway inflation, in 2023 Argentina elected an economist as its president: Javier Milei, a chainsaw-toting, self-proclaimed sex guru, and true libertarian. While he's met favor for revitalizing the national economy and slashing bureaucracy, he's met criticism for his open sympathy for military rule, his denial of its brutality, and his defunding of human rights programs.
Taty Almeida (in Spanish/English Translation): After 40 years of democracy, we never thought we would have to fight against these denialists, but we know the truth. We lost an election, but we won't give up, we will resist, which is what we've done all our lives.
Age 94, Taty Almeida is the president of the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo. For half a century, she's been searching for her son, Alejandro, who left for classes one day, never to return.
Taty Almeida (in Spanish/English Translation): When they took the most precious thing a mother has… a child… we went out like lionesses looking for our cubs.
Jon Wertheim: They called you Los Locos, the-- the crazy ones. You didn't take that as an insult. Were-- were you crazy?
Taty Almeida (in Spanish/English Translation):: We were crazy with pain, with rage, with helplessness. Because we mothers know what it's like to carry a child for nine months in the womb and then have it ripped away from you like that.
Twenty five years ago, 60 Minutes correspondent Bob Simon came to the Plaza de Mayo to report on the story of Patricia Roisinblit. In 1978, she was eight-months pregnant, when she and her husband Jose were hauled away by armed government thugs. Patricia was taken here to the ESMA death camp. Human rights groups estimate that 500 babies were born in camps to mothers kept alive only long enough to give birth before being killed. In a systematic campaign, their stolen babies were then given to childless military couples. Back then Bob Simon spoke to Patricia's friend and fellow prisoner, Miriam Lewin—yes, the same investigative journalist who discovered the death plane.
Miriam Lewin: Maybe they thought of it as an act of humanity.
Bob Simon (Voiceover): An act of humanity? To take children away from the people they labeled enemies of the state and raise them as patriots?
Bob Simon: Save the baby from the…
Miriam Lewin: Subversives.
Bob Simon: ...subversive germ of the babies' parents and grandparents?
Miriam Lewin: That's right.
She remembered Patricia in the brief moments after her baby was born, before he was taken away.
Miriam Lewin: He was a beautiful and healthy baby boy, almost blond, and she told me, "his name is going to be Rodolfo," and she was smiling.
Bob Simon (Voiceover): Patricia Roisinblit was never seen again, nor was her husband. Her mother, Rosa, spent years searching police stations, hospitals and orphanages for baby Rodolfo.
Bob Simon: You and the other grandmothers have found 64 children?
Rose Roisinblit: Yes.
Bob Simon: You must be pretty good detectives. How do you do it?
Rosa Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): Yes, we are detectives. We call each other detectives. We call each other Sherlock Holmes.
But the search for her own grandchild Rodolfo was anything but elementary. Rosa became a founding member of the abuelas, or grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo. She spent years searching for him. She was joined by her granddaughter, Rodolfo's older sister, Mariana. She was in her early 20s when 60 Minutes interviewed her.
Twenty-five-years later, we returned to Buenos Aires. Today, Mariana is 47 years old. Rosa is 105.
In 2000, just days after our initial report aired, Mariana received an anonymous tip about a man who might be her brother — his name: Guillermo Gomez. He was working in a fast-food restaurant in a Buenos Aires suburb. So she went to visit him.
Jon Wertheim: You've been envisioning this moment for basically your whole life.
Mariana Eva Pérez: Si.
Jon Wertheim: What was the emotion?
Mariana Eva Pérez:(in Spanish/English Translation): At that moment, I felt, I felt dissociated. I had a feeling of peace and relief and that everything would be okay.
Jon Wertheim: You're 21 years old. You're working in a fast food restaurant. And all of a sudden, one day, a young woman comes in to see you. What-- what happened that day?
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation):: First of all she asks me my full name… most people don't go around asking people on the street their full name, with their whole identity right? That seemed strange to me. I denied that I was her brother. I had a document with a different name and birthdate. I didn't believe it. I didn't understand it.
It was a brief encounter, but before departing, Mariana left him a book with photographs of the disappeared, including her p arents. When Guillermo saw the photograph of her father Jose, he was stunned.
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): It's like in a science fiction movie when you see a picture of yourself in the past. It was a picture of me in the past. I felt that Mariana's father didn't just look similar, but identical.
Jon Wertheim: You– you felt that in--your heart?
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): Yes, you could say that.
A photograph of a man that looked like him was one thing, but a DNA test could confirm his real parentage.
Jon Wertheim: Did you hope it turned out one way or the other?
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): I was very afraid — at that moment, I didn't know who I was.
The results: Guillermo and Mariana were siblings. They tried to cut through time. It wasn't even a reunion—just a union.
But soon, Guillermo learned the awful truth. The couple who had raised him, Francisco Gomez and his wife, Dora, had not only seized him after his mother Patricia's murder, but Gomez, who worked in Argentina's air force intelligence, had taken part in Patricia's capture.
Jon Wertheim: How did it feel when you learned that not only were the people you thought were your parents for the first 20 years of your life weren't your parents, but also they had abducted, they had appropriated you?
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): It's a very, very confusing time because it's like all the ties that you have at that moment are cut and you're absolutely alone.
From that moment of revelation, Guillermo's life cleaved into two parts, the lie, and the painful search for truth as he rebuilt his identity, and learned about his real parents whom he would never meet.
Jon Wertheim: What is it like for you to see these pictures here?
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): It's necessary so that those who come here know they aren't just a number. They aren't just a grave that doesn't exist, you know? They were people. They were people that had a life that was interrupted, they had dreams, they were ordinary people like the rest.
The ESMA death camp—achingly—marks where he was born; and it's the site of his mother's death sentence, just days later.
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): The worst thing is what happened to me here, in this place, that was the worst.
Jon Wertheim: Where we are right now?
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): Of course, the worst is that I was born in captivity like a zoo animal, my mother was also kidnapped, I was separated after three days, I was disappeared for twenty-one years. I'm a contradiction because I am a disappeared person alive. I'm a person who was missing without knowing I was missing.
Guillermo says his childhood was unhappy and that Gomez was violent. He sometimes hoped Gomez wasn't his real father. Guillermo felt differently about Dora, who'd always tried her best, he says, to take care of him.
Jon Wertheim: It seems to me something complicating this even more is that you have differentiated between how you feel about the man who raised you and the woman who raised you.
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): Well, they were two completely different people. I grew up being afraid of him, running away from him. And she, for a long time, was practically my whole world. She was the person I called mom.
Jon Wertheim: Dora, the woman who raised you?
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): I see her and I love her, and I need her in my life. The only thing I wished for the person I had called mom was for nothing to happen to her, for her not to go to jail.
But for Mariana and Rosa, Guillermo's relationship with Dora was a constant source of conflict. It felt like a betrayal. They wanted consequences.
Mariana Eva Pérez (in Spanish/English Translation): Everyday, every morning, when she woke him up, she knew she had stolen someone else's son. And I don't forgive that. They stole a brother from me, and they stole him for all my life.
Jon Wertheim: You don't-- don't "forgive and forget."
Mariana Eva Pérez: No.
Gomez appeared in court in 2016 and on the witness stand, Guillermo faced him and made one final plea.
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): I told him I needed to stop being in constant mourning for the death of my parents and that I needed to know when it happened, who had been responsible for their deaths and where their remains are. And he chose to say nothing; that's what he chose as his last act of cruelty, to say nothing.
Gomez was sentenced to 12 years in prison for Guillermo's abduction. Dora was sentenced to three. After the trial, the siblings presented a unified front with their grandmother Rosa, but their relationship was all but doomed from the beginning. So little in common apart from DNA. They were after all separated for two decades. And there were struggles familiar to many siblings: jealousies, resentments, issues with money.
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): Life isn't a movie. I wish it was a Hollywood production and this had a happy ending. The bottom line is, having been raised separated, not living together, we could never get over that distance between us.
Jon Wertheim: You don't have a relationship?
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): No. We won't be the first or last siblings that don't have a relationship. But she plays a very important role in my life, in my history. And I recognize how long she spent looking for me.
Today, a year into president Milei's rule amid his gutting austerity measures, these are convulsive times in Argentina. When we were in Buenos Aires, Mariana, a celebrated artist and writer, was performing her latest experimental play to a packed audience. It was about dictatorship, conjured memories, and her conflicted identity in the shadow of disappeared parents.
Jon Wertheim: Do you ever wonder whether it would be easier not to have found him and just keep living with this fantasy, this mystery brother?
Mariana Eva Perez (in Spanish/English Translation): No, no, I don't regret it. Because I see the suffering of those who are still looking for a brother or sister. I don't think that in any sense my life would be better if I was still looking for him because I would not have stopped for a moment. I wouldn't be at peace. We all know the seriousness of what the military have done, stealing the babies, raising them as their own children, lying to them. What happened broke everything, so what's broken is broken. It's very difficult for us as a society to accept that it's broken forever. But it's always better to know the most painful truth than not knowing the truth at all.
As for Guillermo, 25-years after meeting Mariana at the fast food restaurant, he's settled into his new identity. Each week, he visits the offices of the grandmothers of the Plaza de Mayo in downtown Buenos Aires, where only a couple of grandmothers are still active. Today, he is a prominent human rights lawyer and has taken grandma Rosa's seat at the table. For all the complications and all the pain, Guillermo says he wouldn't have authored the story any differently.
Jon Wertheim: No regrets? There-- there's no sense of, "My life would be better off if I never knew?"
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish): No. Never.
Jon Wertheim: 'Cause you know the truth now.
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish/English Translation): I would live every day the same because that led me to where I am. My life today, with all the difficulties I've experienced, is extremely positive and hopeful.
Jon Wertheim: Right now you're the person you should've been?
Guillermo Pérez Roisinblit (in Spanish): Yes.
Produced by Michael H. Gavshon. Field producer, Dawn Makinson. Associate producers, Nadim Roberts and Elizabeth Germino. Broadcast associates: Mimi Lamarre and Jane Greeley. Edited by Daniel J. Glucksman.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
34 minutes ago
- The Hill
Sotomayor says public education is doomed without mandatory gay and trans story hour
The end is nigh. That seems to be the message this week from the three liberal justices at the Supreme Court when faced with the nightmarish prospect of parents being able to remove their young children from mandatory classes on gay, lesbian and transgender material. The decision in Mahmoud v. Taylor was a roaring victory for parents in public schools. The Montgomery County, Md. school system fought to require the reading of 13 'LGBTQ+-inclusive' texts in the English and Language Arts curriculum for kids from pre-K through 12th grade. That covers children just 5-11 years old. The children are required to read or listen to stories like 'Prince & Knight' about two male knights who marry each other, and 'Love Violet' about two young girls falling in love. Another, 'Born Ready: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope,' discusses a biological girl who begins a transition to being a boy. Teachers were informed that this was mandatory reading, which must be assigned, and that families would not be allowed to opt out. The guidelines for teachers made clear that students had to be corrected if they expressed errant or opposing views of gender. If a child questions how someone born a boy could become a girl, teachers were encouraged to correct the child and declare, 'That comment is hurtful!' Even if a student merely asks, 'What's transgender?,' teachers are expected to say, 'When we're born, people make a guess about our gender and label us 'boy' or 'girl' based on our body parts. Sometimes they're right and sometimes they're wrong.' Teachers were specifically told to '[d]isrupt' thinking or values opposing transgender views. Many families sought to opt out of these lessons. The school allows for such opt-outs for a variety of reasons, but the Board ruled out withdrawals for these lessons. Ironically, it noted that so many families were upset and objecting that it would be burdensome to allow so many kids to withdraw. The Montgomery County school system is one of the most diverse in the nation. And Christian, Muslim, and other families objected to the mandatory program as undermining their religious and moral values. The majority on the Supreme Court ruled that, as with other opt-outs, Montgomery County must allow parents to withdraw their children from these lessons. The response from liberal groups was outrage. Liberal sites declared 'another victory for right-wing culture warriors,' even though the public overwhelmingly supported these parents. However, the most overwrought language came not from liberal advocates but liberal justices. Justice Sonia Sotomayor declared that there 'will be chaos for this nation's public schools' and both education and children will 'suffer' if parents are allowed to opt their children out of these lessons. She also worried about the 'chilling effect' of the ruling, which would make schools more hesitant to offer such classes in the future. It was a particularly curious concern, since parents would like teachers to focus more on core subjects and show greater restraint in pursuing social agendas. The majority pushed back against 'the deliberately blinkered view' of the three liberal justices on dismissing the objections of so many families to these lessons. Nevertheless, even though such material was only recently added and made mandatory, the liberal justices declared that 'the damage to America's public education system will be profound' and 'threatens the very essence of public education.' The truth is that this decision could actually save public education in the U.S. Previously, during oral argument, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson had shocked many when she dismissed the objections of parents, stating that they could simply remove their children from public schools. It was a callous response to many families who do not have the means to pay for private or parochial schools. Yet, it is a view previously expressed by many Democratic politicians and school officials. State Rep. Lee Snodgrass (D-Wis.) once insisted: 'If parents want to 'have a say' in their child's education, they should homeschool or pay for private school tuition out of their family budget.' Iowa school board member Rachel Wall said: 'The purpose of a public ed is to not teach kids what the parents want. It is to teach them what society needs them to know. The client is not the parent, but the community.' These parents still harbor the apparently misguided notion that these remain their children. Today, many are indeed following Jackson's advice and leaving public schools. The opposition of public-sector unions and many Democratic politicians to school vouchers is precisely because families are fleeing the failing public school systems. Once they are no longer captive to the system, they opt for private schools that offer a greater focus on basic educational subjects and less emphasis on social activism. Our public schools are imploding. Some are lowering standards to achieve 'equity' and graduating students without proficiency skills. Families are objecting to the priority given to political and social agendas to make their kids better people when they lack of math, science, and other skills needed to compete in an increasingly competitive marketplace. This decision may well save public schools from themselves by encouraging a return to core educational priorities. It may offer some cover for more moderate school officials to push back against such demands for mandatory readings to young children. What the majority calls 'the deliberately blinkered view' of the dissent could just as well describe the delusional position of public school boards and unions. Schools are facing rising debt and severe declines in enrollment, yet unions in states like Illinois are demanding even more staff increases and larger expenditures. The liberal justices are right about one thing: This is a fight over 'the essence of public education.' However, it is the parents, not the educators (or these justices) who are trying to restore public education to meet the demands for a diverse nation. Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and the best-selling author of 'The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.'
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Letters to the Editor: The Social Security Fairness Act restored the benefits Americans worked for
To the editor: The Social Security Fairness Act does not give windfall benefits to government workers who did not pay into the system, as contributing writer Veronique de Rugy stated ('Social Security is headed for a cliff. When will voters care?,' June 26). It restores the amount of the monthly benefit the worker receives in their monthly payment (eligibility determined by the worker paying into Social Security for the required 40 quarters) that was cut because the worker also worked for a government entity long enough to draw a pension. I started working at 16 years of age and for the next 19 years, I had Social Security deductions taken from every paycheck. Like many working people, those deductions reduced my take-home pay, but we knew the money would be returned later via our monthly benefit upon retirement. When I applied for Social Security I was notified that due to the pension I was going to receive from my county employment, my monthly Social Security benefit was going to be cut by 50%. For the last nine years I received only half of the Social Security benefit I earned by contributing 19 years of deductions. Thanks to this legislation, which had bipartisan support, Americans are getting the benefits they worked for. Joy Rockport, Valley Glen .. To the editor: Before earning a clear credential in secondary English in 2002, I logged 25 years in the private sector. I give my heartfelt thanks to the Biden administration for recognizing that government workers deserve to benefit from their contributions. I sleep better knowing my retirement will be boosted by an extra $1,800 a month. It seems only fair. Melissa Mazzei, Los Angeles .. To the editor: Several questions arise: First, is it possible that this column exaggerates the peril? As a financial professional, I have witnessed many inaccurate estimates firsthand. Second, why is the role of income inequality neglected? The enormous layer of cream at the top that contributes nothing to the Social Security system is surely worth mentioning. Even a small increase to the Social Security taxable wage base would likely have a huge impact on the projected shortfall. Finally, the headline lays the blame at the feet of the voters. To her credit, de Rugy's column discusses congressional inaction. Much of the public is very busy, many working multiple gigs to pay their bills. Members of Congress are paid to legislate responsibly and to take courageous stands. I ask the author: Have you correctly identified the problem? Susan Wolfson, Glendale .. To the editor: According to my Social Security statement, if I am collecting $4,350 a month in Social Security today, my surviving spouse and minor children can collect up to $5,900 a month, or 36% more than what I am getting while alive. No wonder Social Security is headed for a cliff. Cap the survivor benefit to what the deceased was receiving and limit the duration. Andrew Ko, Glendale
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Fact Check: Unpacking claims video shows over 500 construction workers detained by ICE in Texas
Claim: A video shared on social media claimed that over 500 construction workers being detained by ICE agents at Texas job sites in late June 2025. Rating: In late June 2025, a 10-second video circulated online purportedly showing a mass detention of construction workers by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents gained traction on social media. For example, on June 25, 2025, one Instagram post (archived), which accumulated over 449,000 views as of this writing, stated: "BREAKING: Over 500+ construction workers — mostly Hispanic — have been detained by federal agents in Texas while simply showing up to work. Workers are reportedly being rounded up at job sites and taken to holding camps. This all happened in just the last 48 hours." (occupydemocrats/Instagram) Snopes readers contacted us about the claim, with one reader emailing to ask whether the "video of construction workers detained by ICE" was "accurate or not." The video accompanying the post showed a large number of workers gathered in what appeared to be a temporary tent structure at a construction site. A caption embedded in the video asked: "so, if all these construction workers are detained by ICE, who's doing the construction?" The same video had been circulating on other social media platforms including TikTok (archived) and Threads (archived). However, Snopes' investigation found that while the video appeared to be authentic footage of a construction site gathering, it was miscaptioned and did not show an ICE detention operation in late June 2025. Snopes has not yet been able to confirm who filmed the footage, but there was no evidence the clip was the product of artificial intelligence (AI) software or other digital manipulation. The same video had been circulating on Instagram prior to the June 25 claim. For example, one Instagram account posted (archived) the identical footage on June 8, 2025, with a Spanish-language caption that translated to "Here are the workers detained by ICE." (usalatinnews/Instagram) That earlier post received over 531,000 views, predating the recent posts by more than two weeks and indicating that the video was not tied to any verified enforcement action within the past 48 hours, as recently claimed. Snopes found no publicly available evidence supporting the claim that a mass ICE raid involving more than 500 workers took place in Texas during the time period described in the post. While ICE has carried out workplace enforcement actions at construction sites in recent months, the largest confirmed (archived) operation occurred in Tallahassee, Florida, where "100+" workers were arrested on May 29, 2025, according to the agency. In Texas, the largest publicly documented (archived) construction-site raid involved 25 arrests at job sites in South Padre Island and Brownsville on June 4. We reached out to ICE to ask whether its agents had conducted any operation involving the detention of 500 or more construction workers in Texas during late June 2025. An ICE spokesperson responded directly to Snopes via email: "The video is not related to any activity by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement." Based on visual clues in the video—such as safety signage, worker attire, and the industrial scale of the operation—the footage may have been recorded at the Port Arthur LNG construction site in Texas. This liquefied natural gas export terminal, being built by Bechtel Construction Service for Sempra Infrastructure, regularly holds large safety meetings and worker gatherings that could account for the scene shown. Photos shared on Facebook by both Bechtel (archived) and Sempra (archived) show similar large tented structures used for events and meetings at the Port Arthur LNG site as well as the exact same safety signage, supporting the likelihood that the video was filmed there. Snopes reached out to Sempra Infrastructure and Bechtel to confirm whether the video was filmed at the Port Arthur LNG site and whether any immigration enforcement actions took place at or near the site during the relevant period. As of this writing, neither company has responded to our inquiry. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "ICE arrests more than 100 illegal aliens during targeted enforcement operation in Tallahassee." ICE News Releases, Accessed June 26, 2025. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. "ICE Rio Grande Valley conducts worksite enforcement operation resulting in 25 arrests." ICE News Releases, Accessed June 26, 2025. Bechtel Corporation. "Sempra Infrastructure announces EPC contract with Bechtel for Port Arthur LNG Phase 2." Bechtel Press Releases, Accessed June 26, 2025.
