Can some one explain this?

Sami

read-alot wrote: »

"Letelier was killed by a car bomb explosion on September 21, 1976, in Sheridan Circle, along with his American assistant, Ronni Karpen Moffitt; her husband Michael Moffitt was injured but survived. Several people were prosecuted and convicted for the murder. Among them were Michael Townley, a DINA U.S. expatriate who had once worked for the CIA; General Manuel Contreras, former head of the DINA; and Brigadier Pedro Espinoza Bravo, also formerly of DINA. Townley was convicted in the United States in 1978; Contreras and Espinoza were convicted in Chile in 1993. General Augusto Pinochet, who died on December 10, 2006, was never brought to trial for the murders, although Townley implicated him as being responsible for them."

Carriles himself has said he was part of the plot to kill him.

Also from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letelier_case :

"In 1978, Chile agreed to extradite Townley to the United States. During his U.S. trial, Townley confessed that he had hired five anti-Castro Cuban exiles to booby-trap Letelier's car. According to Jean-Guy Allard, after consultations with the Coordination of United Revolutionary Organizations (CORU) leadership, including Luis Posada Carriles and Orlando Bosch, those elected to carry out the murder were Cuban-Americans Jos

jdhdiggs

Bike: You can't prove that he's GUILTY either! And several people have answered your question...

For the sake of argument, lets say that the mountain of evidence was overwhelming and he was guilty and we all knew that.

Why the hell should Bush declare him an enemy combatant? Did he attack the US? Has he engaged in conduct to undermine the US or it's interests in any way? If not, he can not by any stretch of the imagination be called an "enemy combatant". Hell, he could set of a nuke in Tehran or North Korea or Pakistan, or Sudan, or Kenya, or any other number of countries that we really don't give a rats **** about and not be an "enemy combatant".

He would be arrested and tried if he did any of that, but he still wouldn't be an enemy combatant.

So until he commits and attack, physically or verbally, against the US, its interests, or citizens, GW Bush won't give a crap about calling him an "enemy combatant"

I do love the people using wiki as a factual datasource... Hell, you can find out that 9-11 was a GW bush conspiracy to enter into a war with Iraq and to make oil money too!

Sami

jdhdiggs wrote: »

Why the hell should Bush declare him an enemy combatant?

He shouldn't, but he should treat him for what he is, a terrorist. Otherwise he is making the whole meaning of a terrorist a double standard.

read-alot

Sami wrote: »

Carriles himself has said he was part of the plot to kill him.

Also from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letelier_case :

" According to the Miami Herald, Luis Posada Carriles was at this meeting, which formalized details that led to Letelier's death and also the Cubana bombing two weeks later."

So he's guilty because a newspaper said so?

Ricardo

I did not want to get in this, but I feel I must.

1.- Posada was found guilty and went to prison in Venezuela; this was many many years before Chavez was democratically elected as president. I hate seeing myself writing this, but it's the truth. Chavez is not a dictator. I don't like him, and hate what he is doing to my country, but this is how it is.

2.- He escaped from prison (twice as I see).

3.- Many years later he was arrested in the U.S. for some immigration issues.

4.- Venezuela issued an extradition request to bring him back to make him pay for his crime.

End of story with the facts I know. Why the U.S. does not want to send him back, if it is related to his relationship to the C.I.A., or because they don't like Chavez, is a different story and I don't know it.

bobman1235

bikezappa wrote: »

I don't understand why most people in this group think he is a good guy and not responsable of blowing up a jet.

I ask only ONE thing.

I googled him and could not find one article that says he is innocent.

Show me any credable report that says he is innocent of organizing the bombing the jet that kills 75 people.

I said Bush should declare him an enemy combatant that's all. Many other people have been declared this status with much less information.

Not one person said he was a good guy. Not one. Everyone said he's innocent until proven guilty. That's it. Beyond that, expecting the US to extradite ANYONE, regardless of circumstance, to an enemy country is ludicrous. He's being tried here for crimes he may have committed. Chances are he'll die before the trial's over, because he's an old man, but... he's being tried. What more do you want? Why did this guy get such a bug up your ****? All the bombs that kill hundreds of people a year in Israel are equally awful, you're not putting out a witch hunt for the perps of those atrocities.

jdhdiggs

Exactly. Again, Assuming he's guilty, he does not qualify as an enemy combatant. Your argument is completely disjointed and misguided.

I think your real question is why we don't just hand him over to Venezuela or Cuba for execution right?

read-alot

jdhdiggs wrote: »

Exactly. Again, Assuming he's guilty, he does not qualify as an enemy combatant. Your argument is completely disjointed and misguided.

I think your real question is why we don't just hand him over to Venezuela or Cuba for execution right?

Nah Jd I think the real intent ( or question) was to blame George Bush.

shack

read-alot wrote: »

Nah Jd I think the real intent ( or question) was to blame George Bush.

Surely not! :rolleyes:

jdhdiggs

read-alot wrote: »

Nah Jd I think the real intent ( or question) was to blame George Bush.

For an airline bombing in '78?!? That's a hell of a stretch. Heck, Clinton forgave Osama in 6 years, and here he is holding a grudge for 30? :rolleyes:

Demiurge

HTrookie wrote: »

I did not want to get in this, but I feel I must.

1.- Posada was found guilty and went to prison in Venezuela; this was many many years before Chavez was democratically elected as president. I hate seeing myself writing this, but it's the truth. Chavez is not a dictator. I don't like him, and hate what he is doing to my country, but this is how it is.

2.- He escaped from prison (twice as I see).

3.- Many years later he was arrested in the U.S. for some immigration issues.

4.- Venezuela issued an extradition request to bring him back to make him pay for his crime.

End of story with the facts I know. Why the U.S. does not want to send him back, if it is related to his relationship to the C.I.A., or because they don't like Chavez, is a different story and I don't know it.

He was as democratically elected as Saddam Hussein was in Iraq.

If I point a gun to your head and tell you to vote for me or I pull the trigger, am I still democratically elected? That's why I put his title in quotes. He's a member of the communist party in Venezuela.

Comparing the Venezuelan and Cuban justice system to the United States justice system is a complete joke.

Anyhow, read-a-lot already nailed what this thread is all about.

Ricardo

Demiurge wrote: »

He was as democratically elected as Saddam Hussein was in Iraq.

If I point a gun to your head and tell you to vote for me or I pull the trigger, am I still democratically elected? That's why I put his title in quotes. He's a member of the communist party in Venezuela.

Comparing the Venezuelan and Cuban justice system to the United States justice system is a complete joke.

Anyhow, read-a-lot already nailed what this thread is all about.

You are way off here Demi; there has been no gun pointing to get people to vote. It is too complex of a story to tell it in a few words, but let's say that he has been wise enough to take advantage of weak points of previous governments, and has literally bought a huge sector of the country to his side.

bikezappa

[QUOTE= Why did this guy get such a bug up your ****? .[/QUOTE]

Because he was the first person to plan and organize the bombing of a plane in N America.

And he is now at home with his wife on bail.

That pisses me off.

And I were the president of the US I wouldn't allow that and I would use my powers to confine him as an enemy combatent. He has also been involved with other killings and bombings.

read-alot

That's just the point, he wasn't our enemy.

Be pissed of at Bin Laden or someone who is trying to kill you, as Ben Stein would say "there are plenty out there".

bobman1235

Luckily you will never be president, because even after three pages of this thread, you don't understand one of the most basic tenets of our Constitution - "innocent until proven guilty."

You also seem to not understand the phrase "enemy combatant" as it pertains to enemies of a nation. Nor do you understand that nations who are not in good relations do not tend to negotiate criminal exchanges between each other.

I understand being mad at someone you think may have killed lots of innocent people. But just try a LITTLE BIT to be reasonable and remember that you don't know as much about this case as you probably think you do, and that just because YOU and many others htink this man is guilty, doesn't mean he is.

Demiurge

HTrookie wrote: »

You are way off here Demi; there has been no gun pointing to get people to vote. It is too complex of a story to tell it in a few words, but let's say that he has been wise enough to take advantage of weak points of previous governments, and has literally bought a huge sector of the country to his side.

Way off? You've proved exactly my point. The gun pointing is a figure of speech.

Ricardo

No. You compared Chavez to Saddam, which is very different. But you always win, right? :rolleyes:

Sami

bobman1235 wrote: »

Luckily you will never be president, because even after three pages of this thread, you don't understand one of the most basic tenets of our Constitution - "innocent until proven guilty."

He has been proven guilty.

bobman1235 wrote: »

You also seem to not understand the phrase "enemy combatant" as it pertains to enemies of a nation.

I think he is basing that on GWB's stance on terrorists. His "war on terror" = all terrorists are enemies of this nation.

Sami

bobman1235 wrote: »

He's being tried here for crimes he may have committed. Chances are he'll die before the trial's over, because he's an old man, but... he's being tried.

For what? Illegally entering US? He is not on trial here for his terrorist acts, and on top of that he is on bail.

Sami

read-alot wrote: »

So he's guilty because a newspaper said so?

No, Townley, the man who was found guilty.

Sami

Demiurge wrote: »

Way off? You've proved exactly my point. The gun pointing is a figure of speech.

So you are saying there are no democratically elected leaders in this world? All are dictators? Both him and GWB are elected leaders, both are extreme wing politicians but on the different ends of the spectrum, both believe they are doing what's best for their country (or themself and their buddies), and both are (IMO) wrong.

Well, Chavez is a little more extreme than Georgie boy, and tried to take the country by force early on but who is counting? Just because he is against your political ideology doesn't make him a dictator, although everyone on the right wing side tries to believe that.

jdhdiggs

Can you point to the trial where he was found guilty? Oh wait, someone who was convicted for the crime said that he did it...

"Um, I know I was convicted of killing my wife but it really was Sami who set the whole thing up, ARREST HIM!!!"

bobman1235

Sami wrote: »

He has been proven guilty.

This is getting tiring.

I know you all want to throw something on Bush here, and call him a hypocrite. The current "war on terror" is against people who are terrorist threats to the world TODAY. An 80-year old man who may or may not have bombed a plane DECADES ago, an atrocious and terrorist act, is not a threat to anyone. So just get rid of that idea.

I'm not trying to defend this man, he's most likely not the greatest person. But to say that anyone on death's door who committed a terrorist act 30 years ago should be this government's priority over those who intend to do the world harm TODAY is just ludicrous. LUDICROUS.

bikezappa

bobman1235 wrote: »

Luckily you will never be president, because even after three pages of this thread, you don't understand one of the most basic tenets of our Constitution - "innocent until proven guilty."

I don't think this killer should be on bail. He is a hired gun who can kill anybody. Would you allow a person with his record, see the Nation Archive site, to be on bail? I wouldn't. Do you like terrorists?

You also seem to not understand the phrase "enemy combatant" as it pertains to enemies of a nation. Nor do you understand that nations who are not in good relations do not tend to negotiate criminal exchanges between each other.

Bush has said many times it is the world against terror, that's why many nations sent troops to get that killer Ben laden. You can't pick and choose your terrorist. I just surprised that so many people on the thread are so sympathtic to this person. Why?

I understand being mad at someone you think may have killed lots of innocent people. But just try a LITTLE BIT to be reasonable and remember that you don't know as much about this case as you probably think you do, and that just because YOU and many others htink this man is guilty, doesn't mean he is.

And you do know much moreabout this. I never said I know every thing about this case. I know from the documents at many sites this guy is a terrorist. You think he is not guilty, why? What is your data to support that. What data do you have that any enemy combatants are guilty?

People on this thread have called me a communist and other things because I want this guy behind bars. Why do you want to defend him? What is your agenda?

I think it's reasonable to be afriad of some one that has been involved and planned a plane bombing to be kept in jail, not at home with his wife.

Isn't anyone suspisious of this man and fearful of what he has done and can do? Maybe we should give a pension and a cottage. Get real and use your brain.

Demiurge

Sami wrote: »

So you are saying there are no democratically elected leaders in this world? All are dictators? Both him and GWB are elected leaders, both are extreme wing politicians but on the different ends of the spectrum, both believe they are doing what's best for their country (or themself and their buddies), and both are (IMO) wrong.

Well, Chavez is a little more extreme than Georgie boy, and tried to take the country by force early on but who is counting? Just because he is against your political ideology doesn't make him a dictator, although everyone on the right wing side tries to believe that.

No.

No.

Do you understand the difference between a constitutional republic and socialism?

What does any of this have to do with the original post?

Demiurge

bikezappa wrote: »

And you do know much moreabout this. I never said I know every thing about this case. I know from the documents at many sites this guy is a terrorist. You think he is not guilty, why? What is your data to support that. What data do you have that any enemy combatants are guilty?

People on this thread have called me a communist and other things because I want this guy behind bars. Why do you want to defend him? What is your agenda?

I think it's reasonable to be afriad of some one that has been involved and planned a plane bombing to be kept in jail, not at home with his wife.

Isn't anyone suspisious of this man and fearful of what he has done and can do? Maybe we should give a pension and a cottage. Get real and use your brain.

You're motives are so transparent.

aaharvel

Sami wrote: »

Well, Chavez is a little more extreme than Georgie boy, and tried to take the country by force

Sorry but that speaks volumes on Chavez's ability to decide who is and who isn't guilty of terrorism. Neither he or Castro have credibility on the subject, especially if someone was never convicted of a crime in a court of law to begin with. Guilty or innocent - who cares. It was before my time and the guy probably has to wake up 10 times a night just to take a piss.

Sami

jdhdiggs wrote: »

Can you point to the trial where he was found guilty?

I checked what HTRookie said, and he was not convicted, he escaped prison while waiting a trial. So he is not convicted but he is a fugitive. This was in '85, three years before Chavez came to power. US has an extradition treaty with Venezuela: http://www.oas.org/JURIDICO/MLA/en/traites/en_traites-ext-usa-ven.pdf.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB153/index.htm

"In 1985, Posada escaped from prison in Venezuela where he had been incarcerated after the plane bombing and remains a fugitive from justice. He went directly to El Salvador, where he worked, using the alias "Ramon Medina," on the illegal contra resupply program being run by Lt. Col. Oliver North in the Reagan National Security Council. In 1998 he was interviewed by Ann Louise Bardach for the New York Times at a secret location in Aruba, and claimed responsibility for a string of hotel bombings in Havana during which eleven people were injured and one Italian businessman was killed."

Sami

aaharvel wrote: »

Sorry but that speaks volumes on Chavez's ability to decide who is and who isn't guilty of terrorism.

It's been said quite a few times that this dates back to pre-Chavez era.

aaharvel

sure- but wasn't it stated in the original post that Castro government officials and Chavez are condemning the US now? Again, both Castro/Chavez aren't exactly "men of the people" themselves.