Op-ed submission to the Houston Chronicle (unpublished)

By James Thompson

The “Golden rule” is taught to all people raised in Christian households, almost from birth. It is a pillar of Christianity.

However, current US foreign policy towards one of our closest neighbors, Cuba, ignores the “Golden Rule” and, in fact, promotes the opposite of many Biblical teachings. US foreign policy has stubbornly supported the embargo against Cuba, which hurts both people in the US and in Cuba as well as many other countries. The embargo has resulted in a restriction of trade with Cuba for US industrial entities and many other companies in other countries. It has resulted in a travel ban for people from the US who want to travel to Cuba, making it, at times, difficult and at other times, nearly impossible, to travel to Cuba.

In the context of the US embargo against Cuba there is another issue which needs redressing.

There has been some international attention to the situation of the Cuban 5, but relatively little in the US. The Cuban 5 were five heroes from Cuba who came to the US to fight terrorism. They gathered information on anti-Cuban terrorist organizations in Miami to prevent the continuation of violence against Cuba. They were successful in thwarting many savage attacks on the Cuban people.

After some success, the Cuban government offered to cooperate with US intelligence agencies in preventing violence against their country and elsewhere.

Instead of cooperation, the Cuban 5 were arrested and have been in prison since 1998. Condemned by many international human rights organization, this action by the US government has been a horrible stain on the reputation of the US and its people. Two of the five have served their sentences and have returned to Cuba. Three still remain in prison.

Alan Gross, a Jewish American was apprehended by the Cubans in December, 2009. He was a subcontractor for the USAID working on a project funded by the 1996 Helms-Burton act. He has been languishing in prison since his arrest. The Cubans maintain that he committed crimes against the Cuban people.

Recently, four more individuals from the US affiliated with anti-Cuban groups have been apprehended and are in prison in Cuba.

There is a movement supporting the release of the Cuban 5. Similarly, there is a movement encouraging President Obama to “bring Alan Gross home.” There could be a movement to bring home the recently apprehended individuals as well.

Many people have suggested that the US negotiate in good faith with the Cubans to secure the release of Alan Gross and to return the remaining Cuban 5 to their homeland. Now, the demand could include the return of the recently apprehended men.

Detaining the Cuban 5 in federal prisons is blatantly anti-Christian and violates many teachings of the Bible to include “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” and “Love thy neighbor as thyself.”

Failure to bargain in good faith for the release of Alan Gross also violates these principles.

It is time for the people of the US to demand that President Obama release the Cuban 5 and “bring Alan Gross home” and to return home the recently apprehended people. This would be an excellent first step towards normalizing relations with Cuba. Normalizing relations with Cuba would demonstrate that the US government has not forgotten the principal teachings of the Bible. To do otherwise is an affront to Christians everywhere.

by: W. T. Whitney Jr.

May 15 2014 People’s World

Beginning over 50 years ago, terror attacks emanating from the United States struck ships, crops, and infrastructure in Cuba. They killed people there and around the world. Cuban leaders faced murder plots. Terrorists bombed an airliner fully loaded with passengers. Such murderous, destructive attacks seemed to stop, however, with the Havana hotel bombings in 1997. But you would have lost your bet that terrorist preparations had ended.
On May 7 Cuba’s Interior Ministry announced that four men of Cuban origin living in Miami were arrested on April 26. Jose Ortega Amador, Obdulio Rodríguez González, Raibel Pacheco Santos, and Félix Monzón Álvarez reportedly “admitted that they intended to attack Cuban military facilities in order to promote violence. [T]hree of them had traveled to Cuba in several occasions in 2013 to study the scene and prepare their actions.”

Why is this no surprise? One, the Miami area continues as a safe haven for Latin American terror perpetrators fleeing their homelands, Cuba in the lead with Venezuela not far behind. Secondly, the U.S. government, not shy about anti-terrorist rhetoric, never really has condemned terror assaults against Cuba. Third, U.S. government actions or inaction may signal official approval for anti-Cuban terror.

Thus Luis Posada entered the United States illegally in 2005, never to be convicted on that count, or for serious crimes, among them: the airliner bombing attack in 1976, Cuban hotel bombings, and his plan with others to assassinate former Cuban President Fidel Castro in Panama. Despite requests, the U. S. government refuses to extradite Posada to Venezuela to face legal proceedings related to the airliner bombing.

And in 1998 the Cuban government gave FBI personnel reams of incriminating material on terror activities in Florida. The FBI responded by arresting Cuban undercover agents who helped collect that intelligence information.

And at their trial in Miami, five of those anti-terrorist agents – now known as the Cuba Five- received sentences so outlandish as to suggest that some terrorism is allowable. Their combined total of four life sentences plus 75 years contrasts sharply with the usual 10-15 sentences handed out to defendants convicted of spying for Iraq, the Philippines, China, Taiwan, or Israel.

Moreover, the U.S. government made sure those anti-terrorists were convicted. Its Office for Cuba Broadcasting subsidized Miami area journalists to produce over 800 prejudicial newspaper reports or television presentation so as to influence community and jury before and during their long trial.

Lastly, for the sake of destabilization a flood of U.S. money flows through private and university affiliated agencies in Southern Florida on its way to counter-revolutionaries in Cuba. Likely fallout from such a program would be a community ethos that encourages the terrorist faithful to move ahead on their own.

The sparse announcement from the Cuban Interior Ministry indicated that the four men arrested “admitted that these plans have been organized under the leadership of Miami-based individuals, such as Santiago Álvarez Fernández Magriñá, Osvaldo Mitat, and Manuel Alzugaray who are closely linked to international terrorist Luis Posada Carriles.”

Lawyer and construction magnate Álvarez contributed mightily to Miami’s terrorist-friendly atmosphere. In August 2004 he sent two airplanes to Panama to fetch Posada and three Miamians released early from prison to which they were sentenced for the assassination attempt against President Castro. Posada was dropped off in Honduras. Álvarez’ yacht brought him to Miami the following year.

In late 2005 Broward County police discovered Álvarez’ cache of 20 automatic weapons, plus grenades, a grenade launcher, ammunition, gas masks, and a silencer. Other illegal weapons belonging to Álvarez surfaced in the Bahamas. Through plea bargaining he and employee Osvaldo Mitat received reduced sentences of 30 months and two years, respectively. Allegedly Álvarez once tried to have Havana’s Tropicana nightclub bombed.

At far as the New York Times is concerned, the arrest in Cuba of men bent on terror is a Cuban problem, not a U.S. one. Its May 8 report said that Álvarez “denies any involvement in the alleged plot. Some others here (Miami) raised questions about how much the case is about crime and how much is about politics…. [A] week after Washington again kept Cuba on its short list of state sponsors of terrorism, the Cuban government publicly announced that violent plots persist. Cuba-watchers said the case was hard to separate from political theater.”

www.thecuban5.org

May 15, 2014

By Salim Lamrani

Since 2009, U. S. agent Alan Gross has been serving a fifteen year prison sentence in Cuba for providing material support to the Cuban opposition. In the meanwhile, three Cuban agents have been incarcerated in the United States since 1998. The possibility of an exchange of prisoners exists. The case of Gerardo Hernández, one of the three Cubans sentenced to two terms of life imprisonment, lends itself particularly well to such a humanitarian agreement. Here, in 25 points, are the reasons why.

1. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, the radical sector of the Florida-based Cuban exile community increased its terrorist attacks against Cuba. The tourism industry – a vital sector of the fragile Cuban economy – was a particular target. Bomb attacks resulted in dozens of casualties. Faced with the immunity these violent fringe groups were receiving from U.S. authorities, the Havana government decided to send several agents to the United States to infiltrate these criminal organizations and prevent the realization of further potentially lethal acts.

2. In June 1998, after gathering evidence about the terrorist activities of 64 exiles living in Florida, the Cuban government invited two FBI officers to Havana in order to present them with the evidence that it had accumulated. But, rather than arresting those responsible for these crimes, the FBI arrested the five Cuban intelligence services agents who had infiltrated the criminal organizations: René González Sehweret, Ramón Labañino Salazar, Fernando González Llort, Antonio Guerrero Rodriguez and Gerardo Hernández Nordelo.

3. Following a trial that has been denounced by many legal institutions for its numerous irregularities, the five Cubans nonetheless won their case on appeal from a three-judge panel of the Atlanta Court of Appeals. The tribunal found that they had not received a fair trial. The U.S. government, however, lodged an appeal and the Five eventually received a total of four sentences of life imprisonment, and an additional sentence of 77 years. On October 13, 2009, the Atlanta Court of Appeals instructed the Florida court to modify the prison sentences for three of the five defendants. The review that was conducted resulted in Antonio Guerrero’s penalty of life imprisonment plus 10 years being changed to 21 years plus 10 months, plus an additional penalty of five years of supervised release. On December 8, 2009, Fernando González’ sentence of 19 years was reduced to 17 years plus nine months. In the case of Ramón Labañino, his sentence of imprisonment for life plus 18 years was reduced to 30 years in prison. Rene González and Fernando González were freed after serving their entire sentences.

4. Gerardo Hernández was sentenced to two terms of life imprisonment plus 15 years in prison for conspiracy to commit a quadruple murder. He is accused of being directly involved in an incident that occurred on February 24, 1996. That day two planes, manned by four pilots from the Florida-based organization Brothers to the Rescue (BTTR), were shot down by Cuban armed forces after having violated Cuban airspace 25 times in 20 months.

5. José Basulto, president of BTTR, a former CIA officer who had participated in the Bay of Pigs invasion, is heavily implicated in terrorist acts against Cuba. In a Miami television interview Basulto publicly admitted to having participated in several strikes against Cuba, including a bazooka attack on a hotel in August of 1962.

6. BTTR was founded in 1991 to assist the Cubans trying to reach Florida by sea. In 1994, Washington and Havana signed immigration agreements that authorized the granting of 20,000 visas per year to Cubans wishing to emigrate. These agreements also provide that any person attempting to reach the United States by sea would be returned to Cuba. With this agreement, BTTR lost its reason for being and has since begun organizing raids inside Cuban airspace.

7. A chronology of events permits us to capture the key elements of this story. During the months preceding the serious incident of February 24, 1996, Cuban authorities warned the United States frequently, both through diplomatic notes and unofficial channels, that repeated violations of its airspace constituted a threat to Cuban national security and that the planes involved were running the risk of being shot down. Washington chose to ignore these warnings.

8. Ignoring the risk of being shot down, BTTR aircraft on several occasions provoked the Cuban armed forces by entering Cuban national airspace. In addition to its forays over the capital, BTTR planes created interference between the Havana control tower and aircraft landing at José Martí International Airport, thereby endangering the lives of thousands of Cuban passengers and foreign tourists.

9. On July 13, 1995, BTTR planes flew over the city of Havana and dropped 20,000 leaflets, inciting the population to rise up against the government.

10. On the same day, Cuban authorities sent a letter emphasizing the possibility of a military response to the Federal Aviation Administration. The letter underscored the illegal incursions into Cuban national airspace and the “serious consequences” that such acts could entail if they were to continue .

11. The Government of the United States, instead of taking the necessary measures to prevent such violations of international law, allowed BTTR the latitude necessary to pursue their incursions, despite the fact that the organization, since 1994, had repeatedly filled false flight plans with the Federal Aviation Administration.

12. At no time had Gerardo Hernández participated in the Cuban airspace violations, nor had he incited BTTR members to commit these illegal and dangerous acts. Moreover, Hernandez had never participated at the necessary hierarchical level within BTTR to prevent these flights. Everything was under the control of José Basulto.

13. The State Department issued several statements warning BTTR that its planes ran the risk of being shot down if they continued to violate Cuban airspace.

14. In January 1996, BTTR dropped 500,000 leaflets over Havana inciting the population to overthrow the government. On January 15, 1996, Cuba once again demanded that the U.S. put an end to the repeated violations of its airspace.

15. After new breaches of their national airspace in January 1996, Cuba warned Washington that if these overflights continued, the aircraft would be shot down. Havana reiterated these warnings to all U.S. public figures who visited the island between January 15 and February 23, 1996.

16. On January 22, 1996, the State Department sent an alert to the Federal Aviation Administration: “One of these days, the Cubans are going to shoot down one of those planes .” José Basulto had repeatedly stated in the media that he was aware of the danger.

17. In February 1996, Cuban authorities sent a message to their agents in Miami indicating that in no case should they participate in BTTR flights.

18. On February 23, 1996, the Federal Aviation Agency sent an “Alert Cuba” message to several agencies indicating that BTTR planned a new foray into Cuban airspace the following day. “The State Department said it would be unlikely that the Cuban government would exercise restraint this time .”

19. On 24 February 1996, the government of the United States warned the Cuban authorities that three BTTR planes had taken off from Miami and were able to penetrate Cuban airspace.

20. After several warnings, two of the three planes were shot down by Cuban forces in Cuban airspace, an action that constitutes an act of self-defence under international law. No country in the world – certainly not the United States – would have waited until the 26th violation of its airspace by an organization, after having made numerous appeals for help, to take such a measure.

21. However, the United States asserts that, according to its satellite data, the two planes were shot down in the international zone, which would constitute the crime for which Gerardo Hernández is accused. Of course, publication of satellite data would remove any ambiguity about the matter. However, since 1996, the United States has refused, for reasons of “national security,” to make this information public despite repeated requests from Gerardo Hernández’ lawyers.

22. In any case, Hernández has not been implicated in the decision to shoot down the planes, a decision that was taken by the Cuban authorities at the highest level.

23. In order to convict Gerardo Hernández, the prosecution needed to prove that there had been an illegal scheme afoot to shoot down BTTR aircraft in international airspace and that Hernández had precise knowledge of this scheme and in fact had supported such an action. The prosecution was unable to provide any evidence demonstrating the involvement of Gerardo Hernández in this drama. Better yet, the prosecutor acknowledged that “the evidence presented at trial that attempts [to prove the involvement of Gerardo Hernández] represents an insurmountable obstacle for the United States .”

24. Judge Phyllis A. Kravitch of the Atlanta Court of Appeals has spoken about the case of Gerardo Hernández: “A shoot down in Cuban airspace would not have been unlawful […]. It is not enough for the Government to show that a shoot down merely occurred in international airspace: the Government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Hernández agreed to a shoot down in international airspace. Although such an agreement may be proven by circumstantial evidence, here, the Government failed to provide either direct or circumstantial evidence that Hernández agreed to a shoot down in international airspace. Instead, the evidence points out toward a confrontation in Cuban airspace, thus negating the requirement that he agreed to commit an unlawful act.”

25. For all of these reasons, Barack Obama should use his powers as President of the United States and pardon the three Cubans that are still imprisoned. This will have the immediate effect of freeing Alan Gross and improving relations between Washington and Havana.

Translated from the French by Larry R. Oberg

Docteur ès Etudes Ibériques et Latino-américaines at the University of Paris Sorbonne-Paris IV, Salim Lamrani is a Lecturer the University of La Réunion, and a journalist who specializes in relations between Cuba and the United States.

The author’s latest book is The Economic War against Cuba. A Historical and Legal Perspective on the U.S. Blockade, New York, Monthly Review Press, 2013. http://monthlyreview.org/press/books/pb3409/  (prologue by Wayne S. Smith and preface by Paul Estrade).

http://www.globalresearch.ca/cuban-five-a-prisoner-exchange-that-could-improve-relations-between-cuba-and-the-united-states/5382416

Contact : lamranisalim@yahoo.fr  ; Salim.Lamrani@univ-reunion.fr

Facebook : https://www.facebook.com/SalimLamraniOfficiel

U.S. Friends of the Soviet People
P. O. Box 140434
Staten Island, NY 10314-0434 us.soviet.people@gmail.com , http://usfriendsofthesovietpeople.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE April 17, 2014
Contact: Dr. Angelo D’Angelo
(718) 979-6563

RECENT EVENTS IN UKRAINE

Events in Ukraine recall the spread of fascism in Europe before and during World War II. The same Nazi collaborators known as the Svoboda Party and the Right Sector in the Ukraine, the followers of Stephen Bandera, leader of the Ukrainian fascists in WW II, have now removed a democratically elected government through the use of “the open terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic, and most imperialist elements of finance capital” which is the classic definition of fascism. The players in this crime are the usual suspects, the United States and the European Union.

Since the fascist coup d’état in Kiev, wholesale violence against working people has increased. The U.S. appointed Prime Minister of Ukraine, Arseniy Yatseniuk, has said that mass protests against his regime are crimes against the state, and many anti-fascist activists are in Kiev jails. Despite his continued bellicose rhetoric, the masses of the Ukraine’s largest cities continue to protest against the fascist Kiev government. The people remember all too well attempts by Bandera and his followers to “ethnically cleanse” the Ukraine for the Nazis in WW II of Russians, Jews, Poles, and other groups. All of the Ukraine was liberated from Nazism by the Soviet Red Army at a cost of millions of lives. Now the USA and EU find themselves on the same side, helping to accomplish what the Nazis and Ukrainian fascists failed to do the first time.

We in the USFSP unwaveringly stand in solidarity with the struggling anti-fascist working class of Ukraine, who are calling for referenda on determining their regions’ future status, establishing People’s Republics, organizing armed self-defense people’s militia, and passionately requesting material assistance, by any means necessary, from all progressive forces. Many people are raising red flags reminiscent of their Socialist Soviet republics. We call on the United States and its economic partners to withdraw their support from the followers of Svoboda, Right Sector, and other fascist organizations. We support the right of the Ukrainian people to self-determination, for democratic rights including respect for cultural and national differences, and to live free from the terror of fascist tyranny.

On the creation of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republic

Statement of Union Borotba (Struggle)

In a referendum with a high turnout on May 11, the vast majority of voters supported the creation of an independent Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republic. Both from the media and from our friends living in the DNR and LC, we know of the great enthusiasm and active participation of the population in the referendum.

There is no doubt that the desire for separation is not due to the influence of some mythical “separatists,” but to the anti-people policies of the Kiev junta, the terrorist attacks on Slavyansk, Mariupol and Kramatorsk, the punitive expedition of neo-Nazi gangs in Odessa, and right-wing terror in Kiev. It is clear that people do not want to live in such a “Ukraine.”

We understand that the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics will not be socialist. It is likely that part of the large and medium-sized businesses will retain their positions. Russian capitalist corporations will try to extend their influence. But at the “bottom,” the creation of the people’s republics, the experience of the anti-fascist, anti-imperialist and anti-oligarchic mass struggle, has undoubtedly moved not only South-East Ukraine, but also the entire post-Soviet space, to the left.

We support the decision of Vyacheslav Ponomarev, the People’s Mayor of Slavyansk, to nationalize all industry in the city, and we urge that this be extended to the whole territory of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republic.

Union Borotba, together with others on the left, will fight for the development of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republic toward people’s democracy and socialism.

http://borotba.org/o_sozdanii_doneczkoj_i_luganskoj_narodnyix_respublik.html

Donetsk People’s Republic opposes the persecution of Borotba

On May 14, the press service of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of Donetsk issued an official statement which says in part:

“Having presided over a complete political and economic debacle, unleashing a bloody war against its own people, the Kiev junta is frantically trying to establish a terrorist dictatorship in the country and remove from the political field any forces resisting its political course. The organization Borotba has faced harassment and brutal repression by the Kiev authorities for consistently upholding its leftist anti-fascist ideals.

We thank the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of Donetsk for its support during this difficult time.

http://borotba.org/mid_doneczkoj_narodnoj_respubliki_vyistupil_protiv_presledovanij_borotbyi.html

Against a conservative turn by the People’s Republic of Donetsk

Statement of Union Borotba (Struggle)

According to the Draft Constitution of the People’s Republic of Donetsk published in the press, the fundamental law of the new state is to include a state religion — Orthodox Moscow Patriarchate.

Union Borotba strongly protests against the institution of a state religion in the Republic created by the people. We insist on the inclusion in the Constitution of DNR rules on freedom of conscience and religion, the separation of church and state, and separation of the school from the church. This democratic norm was the outcome of struggle by many generations of our ancestors against the reactionary clerical regime and was enshrined in the laws of the Republic of Donetsk-Krivoy Rog, of which the DNR considers itself the successor, and the Constitutions of the RSFSR and the USSR.

We believe that the state created by the people should not bow to clerical elements and impose a mandatory public religion.

Also troubling in the draft Constitution is the provision on equality of all forms of ownership, where private ownership comes first in the list. Does it not follow from the experience of our struggle that large private property (oligarchy) led the country to disaster and decay? Is it not the largest private owners who have paid and organized the neo-Nazi gangs and other groups which are terrorizing the South-East?

In our view, the priority in the new state should be nationalized state ownership and workers’ control. Only popular rule over the national wealth and economy will prevent a parasitic oligarchy.

The Donetsk People’s Republic should really become a socialist state. Otherwise it will only be a second edition of Ukraine as we have known it since 1991; only the replacement of Ukrainian nationalism by Russian. Union Borotba urges the DNR not to follow the conservative-clerical forces supported by a minority. This is the path to a dead end, the path to defeat.

http://borotba.org/protiv_konservativnogo_povorota_v_doneczkoj_narodnoj_respublike.html

An investigation into the details of the massacre on more than 40 protesters in the Ukrainian city of Odessa, who rejected to recognize the legality of the US / EU – backed post-coup government in Kiev. This photo and video documentation was compiled by the editor of Strategic Culture Foundation and reveals that the massacre was a premeditated act of mass murder – a mass casualty event, consistent with NATO Unconventional Warfare Doctrine. Text edited by nsnbc. Viewer discretion is advised – Christof Lehmann, editor-in-chief, nsnbc international.

Read and see more http://nsnbc.me/2014/05/10/odessa-massacre-detail-investigation/

http://rt.com/news/158760-ukraine-military-russian-journalists/

Published time: May 13, 2014 21:05
Edited time: May 14, 2014 01:49
Ukrainian armed forces have opened fire on journalists from Russia’s LifeNews working near the city of Kramatorsk, eastern Ukraine, where fighting broke out between self-defense forces and Kiev’s army.

The shooting began around 1 p.m. as three members of a LifeNews crew tried to enter the village of Oktyabrskoe following the fighting. The village is located some 20 kilometers from Kramatorsk.

“We saw that machines were gone and the shooting stopped like half-an-hour ago. We tried to enter the premises of the village to find out what happened to locals, if they needed help, and if there were wounded among them,” reporter Oleg Sidyakin told RT. “But as we got closer to the outskirts of the village, we ran into an armored troop carrier with a Ukrainian flag on it and armed people in black uniforms. We were going in a car with ‘TV’ stickers, indicating that were are press. We stuck hands out of windows, but first there came one shot and then machine gun fire.”

Sidyakin said he did not know where the shots were aimed – in the air or above their heads – but still decided to turn away and move to a safer location, in order to avoid provoking armed people.

“I had to make such decision because I could not put in danger the lives of a driver and a cameraman,” he said.

The LifeNews reporter said that local residents were shocked, stating that some of them hid in basements. Many still cannot return home. Sidyakin said that phone communication was cut off, which “as self-defense forces told us, is a sign of an ‘active phase’ of the military operation” conducted by Kiev forces.

Fighting between Kiev’s army and local self-defense groups broke out in the afternoon near Oktyabrskoe.

“It was around noon. The Ukrainian army was taking ammunitions to the city of Kramatorsk,” local resident Vladimir told RT, citing his friend Aleksandr, who lives nearby. “There is the village of Oktyabrskoe, where there is a bridge [on the way]. Our self-defense blew up a vehicle with ammunition and set Kiev’s APC on fire,” he said.

According to Kiev’s Defense Ministry, a group of around 30 self-defense troops “ambushed a convoy of armored vehicles of one of the military units.”

The ministry said the self-defense group came to the scene beforehand and hid in bushes along the river.

“The first shot from a grenade launcher targeted the engine of an APC, which came up to the bridge. There was an explosion. Another APC tried to pull away the damaged machine that caught fire further away from the village. The soldiers engaged in the fight,” the ministry’s statement read.

Kiev says that six of its army fighters were killed and another eight injured, with one in critical condition.

Hours after the fight, self-defense units confirmed that they “destroyed two of the enemy’s APCs.” They also reported that one of their militiamen died.

“It is true that there was an armed clash,” the Kramatorsk self-defense unit told Interfax. “The enemy retreated.”

The fight near Kramatorsk is the latest in a string of local fights as Kiev continues to conduct its “punitive operation” against anti-government activists in southeastern Ukraine, which began May 2.