Jump to content
The Education Forum

Luis Posada Carriles


Recommended Posts

Can you say "realpolitik"? The U.S. stance toward Uzbekistan sounds like the same pragmatic policy the U.S. has had historically toward any foreign country: better some dictator, no matter how oppressive, running the place, than someone freely elected who might appropriate fruit companies or whatever in which important U.S. politicians or their powerful friends are stockholders.

If it's all about "spreading freedom," why didn't we invade Saudi Arabia the day after 9/11, instead of Rummy wanting to bomb Iraq because there were no good targets in Afghanistan? After all, wasn't it a bunch of Saudis who flew those hijacked airliners into their targets? Wasn't it a bunch of Saudis whom the U.S. government then flew safely out of the country, lest they be torn apart by some American mob? Did they think that Americans had no right to be mad at Saudis? Are they blind? (Remember the old Hank Williams song, "I Saudi Light"?)

Ron

Edited by Ron Ecker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ron,

The Saudi royal family has apparently booby trapped their entire petroleum system.

If anyone invades them, the entire Peninsula's petrochemical system is set to explode causing worldwide and permanent disruption of the world oil system and unprecedented pollution.

I read this recently (can't remember the source) but you can easily Google a few key words to find out more........

I have always said that the US/IRAQ WAR is simply the neo-conservatives' way to get the strategic "chessboard" back to where it was before 1979.

When the Shah fell, we lost our client state in the Mid East and with the fall of the Soviet Union it became possible for the US to invade and hold Iran, or its strategic equivalent, Iraq.

Saddam Hussein's tyranny became an excuse to place US LAND/SEA/AIR forces in the area for the long term.

This is a global energy strategy and only has limited relationship with

FREEDOM, DEMOCRACY or any of the other feel good words the Bush White House uses.

The US/Britain now has a MAJOR military presence in the region, in addition to its allies in Qatar, Isreal and Saudi Arabia............

and of course this was BUSH CHENEY RUMSFELD's plan all along.

THERE WERE NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

SADDAM HUSSEIN HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH SEPTEMBER ELEVENTH

While Medicaid, EPA and Higher Education take spending cuts,

One Hundred Billion Dollars a year goes to the IRAQ project.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In addition to Shanet's post, I think I'd throw in a bit about the protection of 'American oil' in Iraq (!) - one of the jokes in the UK at the time of the latest venture into Iraq was to call it "Operation Four Star".

Now there's a first, the Old Guard/Establishment looking after their oil interests & power bases & empires & future income or gains......funny old world eh?!

Keep up the good work guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve wrote:

In addition to Shanet's post, I think I'd throw in a bit about the protection of 'American oil' in Iraq (!) - one of the jokes in the UK at the time of the latest venture into Iraq was to call it "Operation Four Star".

But the REAL question is: What is all of THEIR sand doing on top of OUR oil?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re the foregoing post, see my previous post where I wrote:

Now, am I ducking your question about Uzbekistan because I do not have a good answer to it? Frankly, yes

What is "dishonest" about this admission?

You are being fundamental dishonest (to yourself) because of your unwillingness to accept that the Bush is not really interested in pursuing a ethical foreign policy that is attempting to destroy tyranny and to spread democracy in the world.

This is partly exposed by his policy towards military dictatorships like the one in Uzbekistan. It is not that he is unwilling to send in the troops to protect the people from this tyranny. The point I am making is that he is helping President Karimov to stay in power by giving him millions of dollars in aid.

As Ron and Shanet have pointed out, if Bush wanted to punish the countries responsible for 9/11 he would have invaded Saudi Arabia. Instead of doing that he enabled members of this country to escape from America. He no doubt had very good reasons for letting this happen. However, it had nothing to do with having an ethical foreign policy.

I know no American president has ever pursued an ethical foreign policy. However, I can think of no other president who has pursued such an unethical foreign policy as Bush. While you continue to support the man, I will constantly question your ethics, as you are obviously too intelligent to be a complete fool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve wrote:

In addition to Shanet's post, I think I'd throw in a bit about the protection of 'American oil' in Iraq (!) - one of the jokes in the UK at the time of the latest venture into Iraq was to call it "Operation Four Star".

But the REAL question is:  What is all of THEIR sand doing on top of OUR oil?

Spoken like a true lefty, there is still hope for you..........

BUT SERIOUSLY,

John is right, I don't know much about Uzbeks, but the lack of initiative and resolve in SUDAN shows the Bush administration to be a paper tiger, and a genocide supporter.

We are now so over committed to policing IRAQ and BAGHDAD that we have no capacity to defend against REAL weapons of mass destruction being built in IRAN, PAKISTAN and NORTH KOREA, or mass murder in AFRICA.

WWMD?

Edited by Shanet Clark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John wrote:

. . .as you are obviously too intelligent to be a complete fool.

Thank you, John, for the recognition that at least I am not a complete fool! I am not quite sure whether that is a compliment or an insult. Next time, just omit the adjective!

But, respectfully, your comment about my ethics goes beyond the pale. It reminds me of the Catholic Church refusing communion to politicians who differ with its stand on abortion. It would be easy to turn the table and say anyone who opposed the war in Iraq was evil because Hussein was truly an evil man.

And since the discussion was centering on Bush's support for Uzbekistan, is it then your position that anyone who supported the WWII alliance with the murderous Stalin was also evil? I assume not. Your position boils down to the fact that you do not see a justification for our alliance with Uzbekistan. Because I do not claim sufficient knowledge to make a judgment, you question my ethics?

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And since the discussion was centering on Bush's support for Uzbekistan, is it then your position that anyone who supported the WWII alliance with the murderous Stalin was also evil?  I assume not.  Your position boils down to the fact that you do not see a justification for our alliance with Uzbekistan.  Because I do not claim sufficient knowledge to make a judgment, you question my ethics?

It is rarely useful to use historical analogies to explain a political situation. I know Bush and Blair constantly referred to the UK and US role in the Second World War in the run-up to war. This was an attempt to equate Saddam Hussein with Adolf Hitler. This was plainly ridiculous and in the UK Blair was condemned by historians for his poor knowledge of the political situation in the 1930s and 1940s.

It is just as ridiculous to compare Joseph Stalin with President Islam Karimov of Uzbekistan. It is necessary to look at the events that led to Roosevelt forming an alliance with Stalin.

23rd August, 1939: Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler signed the Nazi-Soviet Pact

1st September, 1939: The German Army invaded Poland.

3rd September, 1939: Britain and France declared war on Nazi Germany.

17th September, 1939: The Red Army invaded Poland.

22nd June, 1941: Adolf Hitler launched Operation Barbarossa (the invasion of the Soviet Union).

12th July, 1941: Soviet Union and Britain sign an agreement of mutual aid.

7th December, 1941: Japanese forces attack the US Fleet at Pearl Harbor.

8th December, 1941: President Roosevelt declares war on Japan.

9th December, 1941: Adolf Hitler declares war on the US.

As you can see this was no joint moral campaign against Nazi Germany. In fact, Hitler declared war on the US, not the other way round.

It was only because of the circumstances that they found themselves in December, 1941 that the UK, US and the Soviet Union joined forces.

Now compare the case of the US alliance with Uzbekistan. US, the most powerful country in the world, has freely formed an alliance with one of the weakest, but most corrupt and tyrannical. This includes providing President Karimov with the aid needed to retain his reign of terror against his people.

I ask you once again. How does this fit into Bush’s moral crusade to establish democratic governments throughout the world? Are you surprised that everyone who is not a paid up member of the Republican Party comes to the conclusion that Bush’s campaign has more to do with oil than democracy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

The contents of an email that I have just received:

You may already know this, but here is a little FYI you might find interesting or significant.

Your Spartacus site is cited in 4 or 5 footnotes in the June 17th issue of the LaRouche organization's weekly Executive Intelligence Review (EIR) in an article entitled: "Luis Posada Carriles Gives the Lie To George Bush's 'War on Terrorism.'"

I would say this is a real feather in your cap. EIR is probably the world-wide state of the art in coverage of things of this nature.

I assume he means the Forum rather than my actual Spartacus website. Does anyone else read the Executive Intelligence Review. I wonder if Luis Posada Carriles reads it?

In fact I have been supplying several journalists with the information that I have on Posada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Oscar Corral

ocorral@herald.com

The Miami Herald

Jul. 26, 2005

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/12222041.htm

El PASO -- An immigration judge on Monday rejected a request by Luis Posada Carriles to be released on bond, ruling the Cuban exile must remain in detention until his case is resolved.

Judge William L. Abbott cited allegations that Posada is a terror suspect and concerns he would flee if granted bond.

Listing a series of terror allegations against Posada over the years, Abbott said even Posada's participation in operations against Cuba in the early 1960s could be considered terror under today's standards.

Abbott's statement seemed to catch by surprise Posada's lawyer, Matthew Archambeault, who interpreted it to mean the judge would include the Bay of Pigs invasion -- sponsored by the U.S. government -- as an act of terror under today's definition of terrorism.

''It doesn't necessarily matter who helped it,'' the judge said, in response. "The question is whether that kind of activity today would be defined as aiding terrorism or participating in acts of terrorism.''

A former CIA operative, Posada played a role in the ill-fated Bay of Pigs operation but was not part of the invasion force itself. Afterward, Posada joined the CIA and participated in post-Bay of Pigs CIA-backed Cuba operations before moving to Venezuela in the late 1960s. In Caracas, Posada served as a senior Venezuelan security officer and later operated a private security agency.

He was arrested and charged in connection with the blowing up of a Cuban jetliner in 1976 that killed 73 people. Acquitted by a military court, Posada escaped from a Venezuelan prison in 1985 before a civilian court could reach a verdict.

Posada was detained in Miami-Dade on May 17 and accused of entering the country illegally. He was sent to a detention facility in El Paso.

Posada showed up at his second court hearing since his detention with his face heavily bandaged from skin cancer surgery. He seemed to be wearing a bullet-proof vest underneath his red government-issued jump suit.

Archambeault told the judge he planned to renew his request to transfer Posada's case to Miami, citing Posada's skin cancer. Archambeault also dropped Posada's contention that he is still a U.S. resident, noting that his client was withdrawing that claim because he didn't want to add peripheral issues to the case.

Another issue Abbott cited was Venezuela's extradition request for Posada. He said that according to U.S. law, a person detained in the United States for being illegally in the country and who is suspected of terrorism in another country must remain in custody.

The judge rejected a request by Posada's lawyers to throw out the government's evidence against Posada on the ground it's hearsay. Abbott said hearsay was admissible in immigration court.

Abbott said unless Posada openly insists on the witness stand that media reports about him are ''not true,'' the judge would not suppress newspaper clippings that the government has included in its evidence package.

The judge came down hard on Posada. He said he would likely consider Posada's conviction in Panama on charges of possessing explosives as a valid prior criminal record barring him from admission to the United States -- despite a Panamanian presidential pardon last year that enabled Posada and three other exiles to walk free after being arrested in connection with an alleged plot to kill Cuban leader Fidel Castro.

Under immigration law, a foreign pardon does not protect a foreign national from being denied admission into the country.

''The conviction does seem to exist for immigration purposes,'' Abbott said, adding: ``He's here as an uninvited guest. . .There are potentially a number of different charges Mr. Posada can face.''

The federal evidence against Posada also includes use of a false Salvadoran passport to travel to Miami in April 2000, six months before Posada used the same passport to enter Panama where he was arrested in the alleged assassination conspiracy. That issue was not raised Tuesday.

The immigration service's lead prosecutor in the case, Gina Garrett-Jackson, said Posada is subject to mandatory detention.

The next hearing in the case is scheduled for Aug. 29, when Posada's asylum trial is expected to begin.

Herald staff writer Alfonso Chardy in Miami contributed to this report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The contents of an email that I have just received:

You may already know this, but here is a little FYI you might find interesting or significant.

Your Spartacus site is cited in 4 or 5 footnotes in the June 17th issue of the LaRouche organization's weekly Executive Intelligence Review (EIR) in an article entitled: "Luis Posada Carriles Gives the Lie To George Bush's 'War on Terrorism.'"

I would say this is a real feather in your cap. EIR is probably the world-wide state of the art in coverage of things of this nature.

I assume he means the Forum rather than my actual Spartacus website. Does anyone else read the Executive Intelligence Review. I wonder if  Luis Posada Carriles reads it?

John,

EIR is the same outfit that says (in its book Dope Inc.) that Albert Alexander Osborne and seven of his assassins from Mexico were the shooters in Dealey Plaza. Its sole source for this was the Torbitt Document. I don't think I would call this "the world-wide state of the art in coverage of things of this nature."

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John,

EIR is the same outfit that says (in its book Dope Inc.) that Albert Alexander Osborne and seven of his assassins from Mexico were the shooters in Dealey Plaza. Its sole source for this was the Torbitt Document. I don't think I would call this "the world-wide state of the art in coverage of things of this nature."

Ron

The Larouche stuff is a mixed-bag and they are probably a little careless in their conclusions. On the other hand, their carelessness can be helpful while trying to connect the dots in conspiracy-land. Their book on George Bush I was way ahead of the pack. A lot of the books that have come out in the last year or two about the Bush family have presented as new the very evidence the LaRouchies uncovered in the early nineties e.g. the Bush family ties to Nazi Germany and the eugenics movement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting article in Granma. I will point out before Tim Gratz does that Granma is published by the Cuban Communist Party. Jean-Guy Allard also seems to be a critic of George Bush and therefore, according to Tim, makes him very unreliable as a source.

http://www.granma.cu/ingles/2005/julio/mier27/31posada2.html

Judge Abbott: material to play with

• Refuses bail for Posada Carriles

BY JEAN-GUY ALLARD—Special for Granma International—

CATCHING Luis Posada Carriles’s lawyer by surprise by denying the release of the terrorist on bail, immigration judge William L. Abbott enumerated a series of antecedents concerning the terrorism-related acts of the accused and made it clear that he was even going to bear in mind Posada Carriles’ participation in actions against Cuba perpetrated in the Bay of Pigs period.

According to Oscar Corral, The Miami Herald reporter in the El Paso courthouse for the July 24 hearing, the magistrate noted that those incidents could be considered as acts of terrorism under present standards.

Corral affirmed that Abbott’s inclusion of the Bay of Pigs invasion as an act of terror seemed to take Matthew Archambeault, Posada’s lawyer, by surprise.

The judge also stated that he would consider Posada’s prison term in Panama, discounting the pardon granted by the then president, Mireya Moscoso, and that the notorious terrorist could be the object of various other charges.

If judge Abbott is to study, as proposed, the case of Posada Carriles in all its extension, he will be the first U.S. magistrate not to be influenced by the conjugated interference of the FBI, the CIA, the Miami mafia and the White House in a case of terrorism against Cuba.

Luis Faustino Posada Carriles, born February 15, 1928 in the city of Cienfuegos, devoted himself full time to terror after leaving Cuba on February 25, 1961.

ASPECTS OF AN INTERMINABLE "ROAD MAP"

To give some idea of the amplitude of the file on this terrorist – leaving aside his drug trafficking and repressive activities, torture and the physical elimination of political adversaries in Venezuela and Central America – here are certain aspects of his "road map." Many of those activities are documented in declassified CIA and FBI reports.

• Selected for the CIA Operation 40 – which trained dozens of saboteurs, killers, and terrorists at Fort Benning in the early 60’s to support the Bay of Pigs invasion – Posada was located by various experts among Cuban Americans present in Dallas when John F. Kennedy was assassinated.

• In 1964 he was in Tampa, heading a Junta Revolucionaria (JURE) terrorist camp, and training terrorists of Cuban origin. He personally directed a terrorist CIA commando that undertook actions against the island. As a CIA agent, he was linked to Alpha 66, the L Commandos and the 30th of November Movement.

• In 1976, in the Dominican Republic, he founded the terrorist group of the Coordination of United Revolutionary Organizations (CORU) with Orlando Bosch and that same year coordinated a whole series of bomb attacks in the United States, Canada, Spain, Jamaica, Barbados, Colombia, Trinidad and Tobago, and Panama.

• He participated in the assassination ploy that cost the lives of Orlando Letelier and Ronni Moffit in Washington, and the sabotage of a Cubana passenger plane on October 6, 1976, which provoked the death of 73 people.

• In the 1990s he had multiple contact with Miami terrorists with whom he tried to organize various attempts on the life of the Cuban president, and supported various Miami organizations in the acquisition of arms in Central America for the execution of violent acts against Cuba.

• In 1995, in complicity with some Honduran soldiers, Posada Carriles placed 14 explosive devices in Honduras, according to the 1997 exposé of Dr. Ramón Custodio, leader of the Honduran Human Rights Committee.

• In 1997, Posada took part in planning the assassination of the Cuban president, which failed when La Esperanza yacht was accidentally intercepted close to Puerto Rico. That same year he organized a terrors campaign in Cuba utilizing mercenaries to plant 14 bombs on the island, eight of which exploded, one of them killing Italian-Canadian tourist Fabio di Celmo.

In El Paso, Posada’s defenders continued objecting against a list of totally illegal journeys carried out by the terrorist under a false identity, including visits to U.S. territory in 1998, 1999 and in April and October of 2000, being brought before the court.

Those dates are extremely interesting. In all that period, subsequent to the attacks in Havana, Posada was involved in the acts of terrorism already cited and the Miami FBI was then headed by the Special Agent in Charge Héctor Pesquera, closely linked to various terrorist capos there.

Pesquera, who publicly boasted of those relations on TV and radio programs, could not have been unaware of the various visits of his buddies’ "hero."

In 2000, Posada was living in El Salvador, in La Floresta building, between Bogotá and Brasilia Streets, and moved around in a Honda car, license plates P-364-951. He traveled abroad a lot, using a false Salvadoran passport (Number A-143258), issued on March 17, 1998, in the name of Franco Rodríguez Mena.

Posada traveled to Nicaragua on March 26 of that same year, landing at the Augusto Césae Sandino international airport, "with $10,000 handed him by Arnaldo Monzón Plasencia" and met up with contacts in the city of Estelí "to acquire two portable rocket launchers and a certain quantity of C-4," according to Guatemalan writer and researcher Percy Alvarado.

That was at the point of his illegal entry into the United States, in April 2000.

A few days later, on May 7, Posada returned to Nicaragua, and oversaw the purchase of the explosive there.

Between August and October of 2000, he went to Honduras, Costa Rica, Panama and the United States.

Two directors of the Cuban-American National Foundation, José Francisco "Pepe" Hernández Calvo and Alberto Hernández Sarduy, traveled to El Salvador in the first week of August 2000 to meet up with Posada.

That was when the two Miami men proposed to Posada the assassination plot against President Fidel Castro, designed to take place during the Ibero-American Summit in Panama.

Shortly after that meeting, Gaspar Jiménez Escobedo also traveled to El Salvador to meet with Posada. In this meeting, Posada said that he had selected some potential accomplices, including Santiago Alvarez Fernández Magrña, who sponsored his current illegal entry into the United States.

In Honduras, Posada traveled to San Pedro Sula where he met with Rafael Hernández Nodarse (alias Ralph Nodarse), who lives on 5th Avenue, between 25 and 26, and with his son Joaquín, resident in Circunvalación 26. Both are known arms dealers, part from their more official activities in television.

In Costa Ricas, he was attended to by CANF agents Gustavo and Armando Lora Hernández, who were in touch with José Francisco "Pepe" Hernández.

On November 5, 2000, a few days after another stay in the United States, Posada entered Panama illegally via Paso Canoa, with false documents in the name of Franco Rodríguez Mena.

On his arrival at San Pedro Sula, Honduras after leaving Panama in August 2004, Posada was identified by a false U.S. passport in the name of Melvin Thompson.

There is still much to investigate in terms of the multiple movements of Posada within and outside of the United States. And in terms of the police tolerance that he and his many accomplices have enjoyed in the course of the years, with disastrous consequences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...