Been busy, but plan to post big soon on the ongoing case of Luis Posada Carriles (he's not off the hook YET). Some time back I was carefully looking at one of Enrique Encinosa's arguments defending Luis Posada Carriles. The article, titled La Verdad sobre Luis Posada (The Truth about Luis Posada), is in fact very far from the "Truth." Doing some simple research on his allegations shows that Encinosa conveniently leaves out a lot of information that contradicts his side of the story. It's embarassing.Anyway, my next post will definitely target most of the popular "defenses" and defenders of Luis Posada Carriles. I will try to show that there really is no defense for people who have long and undeniable histories of violence. Those who attempt to, end up sacrificing any form of logic and rationale, contradicting their very own principles.
This may explain why some prefer not to directly comment on Posada's or Orlando Bosch's past violent history, and prefer to obviate by describing them as heroes, thus automatically justifying all their prior actions as noble. This method has its limits, especially in the face of facts.
Late last month, Nick Welsh for the Santa Barbara Independent wrote about Ann Louise Bardach, the journalist who extensively interviewed Posada Carriles in 1998. Welsh reminds us that the FBI has been very active in its investigation on Luis Posada Carriles, in an attempt to be "consistent with our global-war-on-terror rhetoric," but also suggests that the Justice Department may have something else up their sleeve, which may be good news for Posada Carriles, and bad for Ann Louise Bardach.
Welsh recounts how the FBI has repeatedly subpoenaed Bardach for important information on Posada Carriles (ever since they mysteriously destroyed their Posada files in 2003), and how they may be deliberately targeting Bardach "precisely because they know she’ll put up a fight" (Bardach has refused to hand over her notes on Posada Carriles to the government).
The rationale by the FBI may be the based on the fact that "the feds can’t afford to go after Carriles because of what he knows and what he might say. But because of the administration’s so-called war on terror, the feds can’t afford to give him a pass either. The best solution... is to orchestrate an impasse."
Provided that the FBI has been to Cuba to collect facts, and shown others positive signs, there seems to be a strong case to charge Luis Posada Carriles in the US. Welsh also writes that Bardach "contends the government already has more than enough information to nail Carriles to the wall." But, there also seems to be a growing motivation to allow the federal investigation to stall, and maybe even collapse with a simple order by the executive branch.
It seems that only time will tell.
4 comments:
I am in favor of indicting Bardrach for obstruction of justice and compelling her to surrender all materials in her possession concerning Posada Carriles. Will you call for the same?
I'm in favor of full disclosure precisely because she isn't. The tape recordings of their interview will show that Posada never said what she imputed to him just as in the now infamous case of the Immigration interview, which was described by the court as irregular and a set-up, where the translator even transmuted "yes" for "no" and "no" for "yes" in order to incriminate Posada.
If the FBI did indeed destroy its own Posada files in 2003, it wasn't to protect Posada but themselves and this government. That fact points to their own guilt, not Posada's.
-"I am in favor of indicting Bardrach for obstruction of justice and compelling her to surrender all materials in her possession concerning Posada Carriles. Will you call for the same?"
No, because reporters should not be at the obedient service of the government, and deserve protection of their collected sources and notes from any government.
-"I'm in favor of full disclosure precisely because she isn't."
This is called irrationality based on sole reactance.
-"If the FBI did indeed destroy its own Posada files in 2003, it wasn't to protect Posada but themselves and this government. That fact points to their own guilt, not Posada's."
Wow. Do you blame the US, just as the Cuban government does? What are you a communist?! The declassified documents on the case show that the CIA had warnings of a possible bombing in 1976, but there is no evidence that I have seen that shows a US conspiracy to the bombing.
About the interviews, according to many acounts, Posada Carriles knows English very well, and expresses himself with the same clarity. His excuse of a language barrier is suspicious.
Whom is Bardrach protecting? Certainly not Posada Carriles who has never raised any objection to the release of the tapes. It is Ms. Bardrach, obviously, who has the objections.
Since no court is compelling her to release the tapes, she may do without raising constitutional questions. Why doesn't she?
I do blame the U.S. government for Posada's plight, but not for the reasons Castro does. Castro blames the U.S. government for embracing Posada; I blame it for cutting him loose when it no longer required his services and then proceeding to prosecute him for his past services.
I do not believe that either Posada or the U.S. government had anything to do with blowing up the Cubana de Aviación plane. It was the work of a double-agent in the employ the Castro regime, who before being assassinated at Castro's orders confessed to the crime in a Florida court.
- "Since no court is compelling her to release the tapes, she may do without raising constitutional questions. Why doesn't she?"
Because she is a reporter and the evidence in question was collected during her own professional investigation. Her findings should be protected by their owner, just as the government should have the same right to protect their own intelligence findings.
-"I do not believe that either Posada or the U.S. government had anything to do with blowing up the Cubana de Aviación plane. It was the work of a double-agent in the employ the Castro regime, who before being assassinated at Castro's orders confessed to the crime in a Florida court."
I am going to comment on the "double-agent" Ricardo Morales Navarrete, and show that he is as guilty as Bosch and Posada Carriles for prior knowledge and conspiracy of the 1976 bombing, all based on his own confessions.
That is of course if you believe Morales. It's surprising that you do.
Post a Comment