Henry is moving in the right direction in the Posada case and he's moving Babalú along with him. Which is good. Late but good. Not entirely there yet but good — for now and for what it's worth, which is little. ["Who Flunked 8th Grade Civics?" May 15].
Henry wants Posada to be treated fairly and for justice to prevail in his case. That's the good part. Where we disagree is in his assertion that "The Judge's decision to let Posada walk on the immigration charges is in no way a reflection [on] the Bush administration." Oh, but it is, a very great reflection and a negative one. But more about that later. Let us tackle first Henry's assertion that "the judge let Posada walk." Did she, really? The expression he uses ("let him walk"), in common parlance, implies that the defendant may have been guilty (and probably was) but got off on some technicality born perhaps of the judge's unwarranted indulgence. Simply put, the implication is that a guilty man beat the system. How does this apply to Posada Carriles? Judge Cardone made clear that Posada's indictmernt was obtained through fraud and carried forth with malicious intent in an attempt to subvert the law. It is the Attorney General, the Director of the FBI and the President who walked away from their sworn oath to defend and support the Constitution. The Judge let them walk but not without prejudice (i.e. she rubbed it in their faces good). Judge Cardone made it quite clear in her 38-page decision, and not just between the lines, that the executive branch had acted in fragrant violation of the defendant's rights, had, indeed, concocted a case from whole cloth for the explicit purpose of subverting the law. How the hell doesn't this reflect negatively on the Bush administration? Or does Henry subscribe to the position of the Castro regime that the entire process was a ruse to protect Posada from more serious charges, concocted by the FBI and Justice Department under the coordination of the White House?
Why is it that even when Henry is defending Posada (sort of) he cannot resist the temptation to sneak in a snide remark at the expense of the old man? We have already parsed the "let him walk" remark, but there is one even worse which leaves us no doubt that Henry's trying to do something for which he has no stomach or heart: "What results [from Posada's release] is an undoubted uncomfortable situation for the Bush administration ..." As before Henry is more concerned about Bush's "comfort" than he is Posada's. In fact, Henry not only appears to prefer Bush's comfort over the triumph of Justice, he even appears willing to buy one at the price of the other. No need to say who would be the loser in such a bargain.
But no, Henry must appear at least fair even when he isn't. And so he allows — and what a concession it is! — that we shouldn't throw out the entire legal system to secure Posada's conviction. I guess that everything short of throwing out our whole legal system is O.K.
He ends his defense with an appeal to liberals to come to Posada's side, which is now the most ridiculous thing I ever read or anyone ever wrote. As if. Henry should have concentrated his efforts on convincing his fellow Cuban-American bloggers to come to Posada's defense, or, at the very least, convinced himself of Posada's innocence.
http://www.babalublog.com/archives/005184.html
POSTSCRIPT:
FLASH!!! Val Prieto has just quoted Humberto Fontova to the effect that the accusations against Posada Carriles are "slanders." Val has waited for the great Humberto Fontova to have his say and followed him, which is always a smart thing to do. Some day, hopefully, Val will develop his own instincts on Posada and find his own words to defend him. But better to be a follower in the right direction than take the wrong road by following his own lights.
http://www.babalublog.com/archives/005187.html
Henry wants Posada to be treated fairly and for justice to prevail in his case. That's the good part. Where we disagree is in his assertion that "The Judge's decision to let Posada walk on the immigration charges is in no way a reflection [on] the Bush administration." Oh, but it is, a very great reflection and a negative one. But more about that later. Let us tackle first Henry's assertion that "the judge let Posada walk." Did she, really? The expression he uses ("let him walk"), in common parlance, implies that the defendant may have been guilty (and probably was) but got off on some technicality born perhaps of the judge's unwarranted indulgence. Simply put, the implication is that a guilty man beat the system. How does this apply to Posada Carriles? Judge Cardone made clear that Posada's indictmernt was obtained through fraud and carried forth with malicious intent in an attempt to subvert the law. It is the Attorney General, the Director of the FBI and the President who walked away from their sworn oath to defend and support the Constitution. The Judge let them walk but not without prejudice (i.e. she rubbed it in their faces good). Judge Cardone made it quite clear in her 38-page decision, and not just between the lines, that the executive branch had acted in fragrant violation of the defendant's rights, had, indeed, concocted a case from whole cloth for the explicit purpose of subverting the law. How the hell doesn't this reflect negatively on the Bush administration? Or does Henry subscribe to the position of the Castro regime that the entire process was a ruse to protect Posada from more serious charges, concocted by the FBI and Justice Department under the coordination of the White House?
Why is it that even when Henry is defending Posada (sort of) he cannot resist the temptation to sneak in a snide remark at the expense of the old man? We have already parsed the "let him walk" remark, but there is one even worse which leaves us no doubt that Henry's trying to do something for which he has no stomach or heart: "What results [from Posada's release] is an undoubted uncomfortable situation for the Bush administration ..." As before Henry is more concerned about Bush's "comfort" than he is Posada's. In fact, Henry not only appears to prefer Bush's comfort over the triumph of Justice, he even appears willing to buy one at the price of the other. No need to say who would be the loser in such a bargain.
But no, Henry must appear at least fair even when he isn't. And so he allows — and what a concession it is! — that we shouldn't throw out the entire legal system to secure Posada's conviction. I guess that everything short of throwing out our whole legal system is O.K.
He ends his defense with an appeal to liberals to come to Posada's side, which is now the most ridiculous thing I ever read or anyone ever wrote. As if. Henry should have concentrated his efforts on convincing his fellow Cuban-American bloggers to come to Posada's defense, or, at the very least, convinced himself of Posada's innocence.
http://www.babalublog.com/archives/005184.html
POSTSCRIPT:
FLASH!!! Val Prieto has just quoted Humberto Fontova to the effect that the accusations against Posada Carriles are "slanders." Val has waited for the great Humberto Fontova to have his say and followed him, which is always a smart thing to do. Some day, hopefully, Val will develop his own instincts on Posada and find his own words to defend him. But better to be a follower in the right direction than take the wrong road by following his own lights.
http://www.babalublog.com/archives/005187.html
4 comments:
Response to an E-Mail:
I know I have a very negative effect on Henry Gómez, and sometimes I am sorry for it though no fault of mine. A case in point is Bloggers United for Cuban Liberty, the acronym for which is BUCL, pronouced BUCKLE (as in surrender). Henry admits that it is a horrible name for his new organization, but refuses to change it because I pointed this fact out to him. If I told him not to step in front of a coming train Henry would probably ignore my advice to spite me. Really, it's a frightening thing to have such power over a stranger. It is a good thing for Henry that I am no Svengali.
Well Manuel at least they are seeing the light at the end of the tunnel at Babalu, it is so obvious to me that Posada is a hero, think you gotta be pretty dense not to see it clearly
How can people not see that Posada is a hero? He has dedicated his life fighting against the apartheid dictatorship,he served in the US miltary, and how many times has he been found innocent by trial? how many crimes has the crusty dictator committed yet never been to trial?
Manny, your command of the english language puts me to shame!
Alfredo:
So you are our blog's wellwisher in Texas! I am very happy to have you here. Thank-you for your kind remarks but I am rather ashamed of my command of English because, besides my translations of José Martí, I have done nothing meaningful with it.
Post a Comment