There seems to be some indication that the case of Luis Posada Carriles is not yet over.Watching the evening Spanish news today, America TeVe's Noticias 41 is reporting that US Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez is "in disagreement" with the latest immigration decision from Judge Cardone in El Paso, Texas. The Noticias 41 website [retrieved May10, 2007] says "La administracion Bush nada contenta con libertad de Posadas Carriles" (The Bush Administration Not at All Happy with release of Posada Carriles). If Gonzalez is actually serious about this (not likely) it may give legitimacy to the serious investigation in progress by the FBI.
Anita Snow, from the Associated Press, also reports today about the federal grand jury in Newark whose "lawyers say there's a good chance that Posada will be tried in New Jersey." Oddly, Snow only quotes ONE lawyer, Gilberto M. Garcia, saying that "[t]he (U.S.) government is working very hard on this [case... and are under tremendous pressure] to get him on something." Garcia is the lawyer of five Cuban-Americans that have been called to testify for the New Jersey investigation, but all of whom claim to be innocent of any wrong-doing.
Snow also quotes Phil Peters, Vice President and "Cuba expert" of the Lexington Institute, from his blog saying "[f]ollow the Newark grand jury... The immigration charges were always a sideshow." Snow precedes this quote with an optimistic opinion that "New Jersey has the most potential to put Posada behind bars." But, Peters' New Jersey quote comes from one of four possible scenarios:
1) Posada Carriles might be deported;
2) he might be indicted in New Jersey;
3) might be extradited to Venezuela [very unlikely];
4) or, be detained under the Patriot Act.
Peters does not mention which one scenario has more potential over the other.
Finally, Anita Snow also mentions the 2005, 10-page, FBI affidavit [PDF] presented by special agent Thomas H. Rice, a 13-year counter-terrorism investigator. Its a collection of evidence that Phil Peters describes as "quite a bit" for a possible indictment. I will comment on this affidavit later, but Snow really offers little to hope for aside from the report by agent Rice.
In the blogoshpere, Leftside has excellent queries about Judge Cardone's decision.
The case of Luis Posada Carriles seems to have some potential for real justice, but only time will tell.
8 comments:
How forlorn you must all be. I could almost pity you if you were better men and I was a worse one. But you will get over it. Southerners overcame the urge to lynch black men, and, hopefully, you too will overcome with time your animus towards the much acquitted and much-vindicated Posada Carriles. Really, all that it would take is for all of you to stop doing Castro's bidding, but that, we know, would require a level of autonomy that is beyond your abilities or even desires.
So the object now, as outlined by Gilberto M. García, is to "get him on something." Hasn't that always been the object? And isn't that the reason that his persecutors have failed and will continue to fail? At least we can all be confident that seeing justice done is not and has never been their motivation.
After the latest stunning defeat it is no surprise that the likes of Phil Peters now contend that "the immigration charges were always a sideshow." But all the same you all put a lot of your eggs in that basket, didn't you?
Nothing can be more ridiculous and self-deluding than for you to believe that, having failed to "get Posada" on immigration charges, it will be easier to "get him" on terrorist ones.
As for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the least qualified individual to occupy that office since Robert Kennedy, what can he possibly do besieged as he is on all sides by his own scandals and malfeasance? The best thing he can do, for his own sake, is to stay as far from the Posada case as possible. If the MSM were not as biased as they are against Posada, they would highlight Posada's treatment at the hands of the Justice Department as the greatest travesty of Gonzales' shameful tenure (and that is saying a lot).
Still, I can't help but laugh to think that Alberto Gonzales is now your "Great White Hope" for getting Posada.
BTW, Pancho, don't you mean that An Indictment Is On the Horizon. "Horizon Towards Indictment" makes no sense.
Mr. Tellechea,
Allow me dispel any false assumptions you have about my position on Luis Posada Carriles.
You obviously are convinced that I have some kind of animosity towards Posada Carriles, but I don't. I've commented before elsewhere, as I again will now, that my priorities are first towards researching a solution to the US/Cuba conflict where finally human rights abuses from both sides will finally be addressed.
The justice that I hope for in the case of Posada Carriles is merely a formal one: that he be legally designated a "terrorist" by the US Department of Justice. I do not care for any punitive measures. I actually prefer that Posada Carriles be sentenced to monitored house arrest, and to live wherever he wants in peace.
I believe this legal gesture would prove constructive to a better relationship between US and Cuba for the future: my utmost concern.
I have no hatred towards the man, neither do I wish any harm towards him like your "Southern" analogy suggests.
Rather, I think your analogy reveals a personal sentiment you may have. I wouldn't find it shocking to hear you talk about your "animus" towards Communists or Fidel Castro, and your fantasy of lynching them.
In fact, I'm preparing to write about the March 1986 Miami demonstration that ended in violence, mostly attributed to Cuban-Americans who were belligerent towards opposition to Reagan policies.
One article actually describes one man who had a NOOSE in his hand engaged within a mob.
As for the "Great White Hope", I don't think it will be Gonzalez, but rather the FBI.
Stay tuned.
Before he can be designated a "terrorist," Posada must first be convicted of being a terrorist. There are no bar sinisters in this country that do not proceed from a judicial finding. Merely declaring Posada a "terrorist" is not an option, and let's be grateful that we don't live in a country where the government can bypass the courts and issue anathemas at will to everybody it suspects of engaging in activities contrary to its interests.
Your next project seems to indicate a rather tendentious propensity on your part to defame Cuban-Americans whether by association or moral equivalence. Cuban-Americans have never rioted in this country. Parts of Miami have been burned down several times since Cubans have been there, but never did they light the matches.
Mr. Tellechea,
I encourage you to read the Delahunt letter I posted recently. The US attorney general does have the power to designate a person a "terrorist" where there is evidence that indicates so.
My upcoming posts on the 1986 demonstration will describe one section of hard-liners in Miami. It is not aimed at Cuban-Americans in general. But rather provides essential lessons of obstructions to free speech in Miami.
Explain to me, Pancho, since this is your blog and should feature your opinions, if you personally favor the Attorney General or anyone else in government labelling someone a "terrorist" without a judicial basis for doing so? Why have laws or courts at all, then. Simply label people whatever you want. You are a murderer. She is a thief. And he is a child molester. Proof, you ask? No proof is necessary. The Attorney General says so. And, of course, we know that the current Attorney General is the most honest of men who would never tell a lie or abuse his power. Right, Pancho?
Pancho, may I offer you a suggestion? Why don't you write a post about counterfeit cigars?
The deleted comment above was posted by Manuel A. Tellechea.
Mr. Tellechea took the courtesy to post an entire Humberto Fontova column published that same day.
I have directly responded to the statements made in Mr. Fontova's column, and have described it as an exercise of propaganda for Luis Posada Carriles.
All comments that appear as already published commentary shall be removed, especially if they are copied in their entirety and provide no additional reflection from the original commenter.
Post a Comment