Hmm, I wonder how long they can keep him locked up on the immigration paper issue.
Apparently they are trying to gain time, perhaps working on a solution involving a third country.
Anyhow, the so called "war on terrorism" is sinking deeper in the hole of hypocrisy for every day that pass on.
OW, this action is indeed perfect--in all of its multi-dimensions.
Now, the more these thugs that so willfully flout the rule of international law, the more difficult will be their on-going project to rally nations in the Americas toward the imperialist goal of isolating Venezuela and attacking Bolivarismo as an illegitimate program of development.
As they have so often in the past, they are digging the grave for neocolonialism by themselves.
We just need to push these thugs in and fill the hole with dirt.
If they were smart they would attempt to appear as magnanimous by turning Posada over to Venezuela and then standing back and exclaiming their love for the 'rule of law'.
But anyone with a brain so-far has full understanding that these people are pure thugs, people who think of nothing of snuffing out women and children to advance their sorry geopolitical and economic ends.
I get no joy out of pointing out this fact--from the terror of Hiroshima and Nagasaki til today, in Iraq, the dastardly/diabolical logic of this imperialist duopoly is clear for every one to see.
"Based on the evidence in the public domain there is no doubt that if this had been a terrorist attack against the U.S. he would certainly have been charged with acts of terrorism and indicted. But given U.S. double standards the he is not currently charged with any such thing."
Not only that they would have wisked him away to some other country - the outsrourcing of justice - where he could be detained indefinately and without trial. Not too far removed from the fears they have of Posada ending up in Cuba. Although those fears have already been addressed by the Venezuelan Gov. by simple fact of the want to extradite for purposes of trying him for his crimes.
Some have claimed that this terrorist is now being sought for retrial raising questions of double jeapordy. Let me be the first to mention to these idiots that Venezuelan law at the time allowed for those being prosecuted for crimes to remian incarcerated while pending appeal. Despite being aquitted (surely by a prefertial jury and system) the fact remains that he BROKE THE LAW by escaping from prison, and escaping from a formal round of the judicial process which may have found him guilty. I love the way some try to spin the information to make something out of nothing as if he were free and walking the streets when he decided to avoid the law. No the least of which are the periodicals from the south of Fla. The man is living, as we speak, on borrowed time, too much if you ask me. As I said before the US will try to delay this process as much as they can. The goal is to gain favor with the Miami cuban GOP or (and perhaps the real reason) to let public opinion die down so much that the story is not anywhere within the first 6 pages of newspapers before they decide to negate the extradition with minimum damage to their credibility. The Ven Gov. at this time should expedite any and all procedures to fill the paper work and submit them, following all the guidelines with ample fanfare at every junction enough to garner international observers interests. If I were working for the ministry of information, Id be soliciting prime time air space on Al Jazeera if need be. Whole page ads in the NYTimes,every Lat. Am periodical, anything, and everything, to bring this issue to the publics attention. To counter any unforseen and/or calculated news events that draws attention away from pertinent issues.
Well Comandante, I believe that the goal of garnering the support of Miami Cubans is part of the behavior here.
However, they must really believe that the news media will not play-up the hypocrisy, that they will allow this issue to die down.
And they may, indeed, be correct--given the fact that the corporate media almost always plays down US complicity with acts of terror when they service US elite policy goals throughout the world.
The way that news and hubbub runs in predictable cycles, I could easily see how this issue is relegated to the back pages of the news papers.
Definately will not count on the cowardly Democrats to play-up this issue.
But, how does sticking a finger in Venezuela's eye help the US isolate or topple the Bolivarian government? I see this action as further delegitimizing US power in the region.
Are the Bushies and neocons that stupid?--don't answer that.
I noticed that US media call Posada a "militant". The use of language is often very revealing.
Yes Elliv--the use of propaganda is very subtle.
Posada is just a Cuban militant, a man that helped the US stop communism from sweeping Latin America.
Thus the innocent victims of this man's fanaticism are "regretable"--but 'necessary' for ensuring that "freedom" and "democracy" prevail.
If you regurgatate this type of illogic to the population from youth to old age, then it makes sense that "democracy" demarcates a situation where an elite corporate class make the important decisions that slowly immiserate the masses.
Indeed, if you tell the slaves that they are enjoying freedom in their bondage, then they will start to believe it. Pointing out the logical inconsistencies will appear to be a type of heresy.
The population can become quiessente and thouroughly conditioned. When a slave steps out of line and declares that the 'emperor has no cloths', then that person is punished in subtle and myriad ways.
This is how class society is conditioned and the corporate status quo protected day-in, day-out.
What is the answer?--same as it ever was, same as it ever was: organization, education, mutual aid, the struggle to form a democratic popular movement that can capture and transform institutions where real power is deployed.
This popular mobilization, of course, will be called "authoritarian" and against "freedom" by the brain-washed, hired-intellectuals who prostitute themselves to the corporate elite.
Are we to expect anything different from this unethical people, people who have historically used terrorists like Posada to maintain their crude, dehumanizing world order? Of course not.
So now the oligarch traitors, the vendepatrias, are at it again.
They take a comment that Steven H. made many, many moons ago, in an opposition web blog, and post it here.
They lie, steal identities, engage in terrorism, etc.--all because these parasites cannot win back their illegitimate power.
Sad--but an indication that the Bolivarian forces for social justice and human liberty are making progress.
They are fearful and angry.
LOL!! Gringo loco, stop playing with yourself!!! So you want to go to venezuela and start an opposition party?? WTF! Tremendo bolivariano eres. WE DONT NEED YOU lolololol. thx.
Reader of Blogs, I think that Steven's idea has a degree of merit--even though he expressed the particular comments above on another blog some months ago.
You in the opposition are utterly incapable of crafting a political strategy that does not depend on Uncle Sammie 'liberating' your oil...um, I mean country.
The word 'parasites' comes to mind. But, that is just my humble opinion.
Too bad I am not the leader of Venezuela--i would engage the 'upper' classes in honest labor, like cutting sugarcane, or organic farming. Again, something physically demanding, but inherently honest.
It is a good thing that you hide your idenity ROB--because, when I meet with Comandante we could discuss assigning you a 'special' task. LOL
so let me get this straitgh gringo loco acomplejado, i was reading the other comments in this site and saw that you say that you were banned three times before with different 'personas'. So obiously you and steven h. are the same person. Who is your third 'persona', el pulpo, gringo loco? obiously you are not elliv. i saw that he claims on the escualidos blogs or is called a sweden guy. I think he is honest.
so who is your third 'persona' gringo loco? Are you man enough to tell or are you going to hide in yet another 'persona'? thx.
Some of my friends affectionately nickname me "Quico"--but when I dress in women's closes I also go by the name "Chrisitina"
When I wake up in a bad mood, but still in my femme-fatal mode, I might wish to be called "Feathers"
As I stated previously--I am all names.
But, as a closed-minded person, you just would not be capable of understanding.
Since you have developed an infatuation with me (as a 'stalker' of sorts). I think that I will allow you to simply refer to me as "JR"--but, mind you, that is not the same as 'Jr.'
Got it?
Back to Posada, if I may...
Any thoughts on why Venezuela didn't request Posada's extradition from Panama during the four years that he was in custody there?
Don't know. Could be any number of reasons - not knowing where he was, not having an extradition treaty with Panama, the Panamanian govovernment was asked and refused, etc. Has anyone posed that question to the Venezuelan government?
In any event, it has no bearing on this case. Everyone knows he is in US custody, there is an extradition treaty between the two countries, the U.S. has a "war on terror", and Venezuela has started submitting the paperwork. Seems to me the US is obligated to hand him over or make complete hypocrites of themselves if they don't, irrespective of what occured with Panama.
Visitor:
"Any thoughts on why Venezuela didn't request Posada's extradition from Panama during the four years that he was in custody there?"
The key word there is custody or better incarcerated. He was not mingling with his ex. conspirators in the South of Fla. There was a sense of justice and pucnishment for crimes committed - what has happened since is nothing less than the US harboring a known terrorist. Regarding your comment on whether the Venezuela asked for extradition from panama the article below says they did.
Posada Carriles in the USA, seeking asylum
By Eric Jackson
From The Panama News
Certain contradictions in US President George W. Bush's rhetoric about a worldwide War on Terror have come to the fore again, several months after they were at the center of attention in Panama. One Luis Posada Carriles in in the United States applying for legal residence there, and the Bush administration has little to say about it.
Recall that late last August, outgoing President Mireya Moscoso issued a list of pardons (one of which was for this reporter, but that's another story) that included four anti-Castro Cuban activists who were serving prison terms here. One of the men --- their leader, in fact --- was Posada Carriles.
http://www.politicalaffairs.net/...e/view/985/1/
89
"Could be any number of reasons - not knowing where he was"
I believe he was in a Panamanian jail for four years. Remember, he was placed on trial and found guilty for some odd-named offense (from link in post by El Pulpo, it was "endangering public safety") related to possessing plastic explosive.
I agree that it has no bearing on what the US does, but it raises a certain hypocrisy question in another direction. Unless there was a very good reason, it shows that the current uproar on the Venezuelan/Cuban side isn't really about Posada, but about the US - because without a good reason, that's the only difference here.
El Pulpo, I don't think Posada is mingling with anyone right now. Isn't he stuck in Krone? (All right, I suppose you can call that mingling...of sorts.) And if you only want to talk about what he was doing before he was caught, compare that to what he did in Panama.
"All during the legal proceedings, the governments of Cuba and Venezuela had demanded Posada Carriles's extradition"
They are "demanding" his extradition now...which apparently is NOT the same as providing a legal request. That's the question. Maybe best posed to the Panamians rather than the Venezuelans.
Visitor, I believe that your charge against Venezuela as being hypocritical is grossly unfair.
When Posada was help in Panama the nation of Cuba was actively seeking his extradition for past crimes.
Venezuela stayed on the sidelines because they were letting Cuba take the lead in this matter--after all it was mostly Cubans that were murdered with Posoda and company's terrorism.
Venezuela is taking the most active role in requesting Posada's extradition now because of the imnity between the Bush administration and Cuba.
It is much, much more difficult for the Bush administration to justify to the US public why they refuse to hand over Posada to Venezuela--the Bush administration cannot simply say that Venezuela is a dictatorship, etc., etc.
Indeed Visitor--the charge of hyocrisy can only be assigned to the US at this point, the bully-boys that bray so loudly about how they fight terror, etc., etc.
Yes indeed, the US's policies for decades has shown a propensity to kill and maim innocent people so that the nation can achieve its foriegn policy and economic goals in the world.
Last I checked-these practices that kill and maim innocent people to achieve poltical and economic goals are called 'terrorism'.
We can only hope that in twenty or thirty years we will see Bush, Cheney and Rice having to hide out in Texas to avoid being brought before a world court.
Wouldn't that be precious--watching UN soldiers pulling Bush out of a Texas 'spider' hole? LOL
When Posada was help in Panama the nation of Cuba was actively seeking his extradition for past crimes.
Venezuela stayed on the sidelines because they were letting Cuba take the lead in this matter
Can you cite a source for this information? I'd like to know more.
On the other hand, I think claims of US hypocrisy are rather premature. It's not like they've made a final decision, or even done something questionable like let him roam free pending that decision. For all we know at this point, Bush wants desperately to extradite him to Venezuela, and is just waiting for the legal paperwork to be in place before giving the order. I'm not going to lay odds on that, but wouldn't that situation look exactly like the present?
Visitor: Do you know if Venezuela and Panama even have extradition treaties? If not, they can't do anything more than "demand" his extradition - which the Panamanian government should have complied with.
So I think you need to find something out about that before implying any problem on Venezuelas part (and Jim R's point is also valid).
Also, the U.S. is CLEARLY being hypocritical on this. Have you read the posts? If so then you know that it is hypocritical of the US to stick to legal formalisms in this case while when it wanted terrorists it did not feel complelled to respect any such legalisms. Also, it has been reported that the US would not "voluntarily" hand him over to Venezuela - again, it is in the posts. Lastly, he is only in jail for immigration paperwork problems. If those were cleared up he could walk tomorrow as the US rejected the preventative arrest request made by Venezuela. Any thoughts on the US rejection of that request?
ow, the issue of a Venezuela-Panama extradition treaty is valid, and very important as well. I have no idea where to find that information, or even if it would be available online. I said it RAISES the hypocrisy question - not answers it.
I think the cases you refer to about not respecting "legal formalisms" are about enemy combatants and prisoners of war. I'm not a lawyer, so I have no clue about all the intricacies that entails, but I think you have to admit those circumstances at the very least make the situation more complex.
As for not wanting to hand him over to Venezuela, maybe they're just taking seriously complaints by organizations such as Amnesty and HRW that the judiciary is not independent. They won't look very pro-justice towards any of their allies if they hand him over to where the verdict is already known.
"he is only in jail for immigration paperwork problems. If those were cleared up he could walk tomorrow"
If is a mighty big word - too big to get upset about it before it happens.
My thoughts on the rejection? It doesn't mean anything, really. There is NOTHING to prevent Venezuela from asking again, or from submitting the full extradition request.
They won't look very pro-justice towards any of their allies if they hand him over to where the verdict is already known.
Look, the only ones I could think of being upset would be the Miami-Cubans.
Upset, perhaps, but would you like to make a prediction of the chance of a Posadas acquittal in Venezuela?
Besides, there are others who might well not be upset, but would gladly use that against the US in some forum. I'm sure you can think of a few.
no, it only "raises" the question if you knew that such an extradition treaty existed and Venezuela didn't use it. Barring that information nothing is even raised.
Also Visitor, as to the others cases - read the posts where they are detailed and that should resolve that.
"Upset, perhaps, but would you like to make a prediction of the chance of a Posadas acquittal in Venezuela?"
Probably about the same as Bin-laden getting acquitted in the U.S.
"Barring that information nothing is even raised"
You don't even wonder about it?
"Probably about the same as Bin-laden getting acquitted in the U.S."
An interesting comment, since Bin Laden has publicly admitted to a considerable number of terrorist acts, while Posada has only admitted to one - which I understand he later retracted. (Not to say that proves anything about Posada, but an undisputed confession usually goes a loooooong way in court.)
More on the use of language.
El Universals english webpage call Posada "anti-Castro activist".
National Assembly (AN) president Nicolás Maduro Tuesday described as "outrageous" US authorities attempts at "hiding" anti-Castro activist Luis Posada Carriles.
http://english.eluniversal.com/
2...31A565145.shtml
How dare El Universal escualido pasquin to call Posada a anti-Casro activist, when everyone knows, no need of phony trials, that he is a bloody terrorist!!
Ahh but I see they have no problem calling the FARC freedom fighters terrorists. The hipocrisy of these escualidos knows no limits!
Posada has only admitted to one - which I understand he later retracted
Yes I think he's now saying he was joking when admitting the bombings in Cuba. Funny guy..
You think? Can you provide a link instead of hearsay from a escualido?
Having that kind of information in written form would be awsome. thanks for any help providing those. thx.
R.O.B. you need to read the blog more thoroughly. Among other entries you may wish to check this one.
http://oilwars.blogspot.com/2005...ith-
terror.html
and as to his admission you can check this one:
http://oilwars.blogspot.com/2005...against-
us.html
and on the question of the FARC you can check this:
http://oilwars.blogspot.com/2005...-update-
ii.html
thanks ow for the links provided. I have so many questions!
From the first link, on may 9th. i see you say "Luis Posada is a terrorist guilty of carrying out various terroristic acts resulting in the deaths of scores of people. He is now in the United States. And Venezuela has requested his extradition."
Could you please tell me if as today 01 of June has el eficientisimo MRE completed the necesary paperwork for the extradition request? Para callarles la boca a los gringos de una buena vez? You see my feeling OW, there are so many chapuceros rodeando a Chavez!.. Infiltrados, in my opinion.
Also, you mention that "So here we have clear evidence that the pre-Chavez Venezuelan intelligence service was involved in terrorist acts. Not good!!"
My question to you, because i honestly dont know is this. Is venezuelan "Revolutionary" justice, presided by mickey-mouse florida mall loving Mora, or Isaias, or whoever taking cartas en el asunto con estos disips?
Are ANY of these pre-chavez disip officers being charged with any crime cono, cualquiera?? WHO are they anyways? I would love to know.
Again, thanks for your links. Ill read and comment the rest of your insightfull posts. Sorry I missed them!
ROB, read carefully. If you do you should know why if Venezuela just follows the US's example in how to conduct the war on terrorism formal extradition paperwork shouldn't be necessary.
On the DISIP, good question. Being the good revolutionary you are I'm sure you will turn over whatever info you have that may be of use in tracking down these vermin 
Unfortunatly those dastardly opposition types never seem to co-operate. Ortega was running around for what seemed like ages, even showing up at opposition rallies, until he got turned in by a revolutionary bingo player.
Visitor, I just love the term "lack of independence of the judiciary".
This is an amporphous assignation that functions as an excuse to protect a rouge extremist that the US has had on the payroll for decades--even after it was rumored that Posada played a part in terrorist acts.
The real story behind all of this is the role of the US government in abedding terrorist acts--like the deathsquads troughout the Americas.
Posada is "one of their own", a good old vendepatria that has licked Uncle Sammy's feet for over thirty years.
The criminality on the part of the United States for decades is well documented Visitor.
But I am sure that you loose sleep at night worrying about the US held prisioners at Gitmo. Don't make us laugh at your credulousness.
And don't be afraid to expound your views here as vociferously as you do on Daniel and Miguel's blogs.
Jim and others, did you read in the NYT today the article the little CIA airforce and that cute little thing they call "rendition". Definitely blows away any trepidation the US can claim to have about sending Posada to Venezuela
OW--I also love the statement by one of the men charged with releasing the Amnesty report. I couldn't believe it--this guy, named Schultz, stated clearly that the international communinty should consider apprehending Bush or Rumsfeld as, get this--war criminals!
Again, I couldn't believe it--that Amnesty (who have functioned very hypocritically and selectively in many occassions in the past) actually called on other nations to apprehend Bush et al.
It would be interesting if someone did a little 'rendition' routine and actually apprehended Bush. But at least ourside (at least four billion of the world's population) would make sure that these 'alledged' international war criminals recieved a fair trial.
For the record--I, Jim R., am not advocating that someone apprehend Bush and bring him and his cronies to justice in an international court of law. I am merely stating that it would be 'interesting'.
That is for the offical record--and OW and ROB will surely back me up on that.
Hint for OW--Schultz's quote would certainly make a nice post!
What was Shultz' quote?
BTW, to you or anyone if you have things you think are interesting and relevant feel free to e-mail me.
ow, you seem to be avoiding the two issues that I have raised.
1. Why is the Venezuelan government suddenly so up in arms about a country turning over Posada? Why didn't they file for extradition from Panama, or get vociferous about it? Why, when Posada left Panama, did they not do the next logical step - file an INTERPOL arrest request? See: http://www.interpol.org/Public/W...8&
Search=Search
(This is a hypocrisy issue, too, as this was raised many times by Venezuela during the Granda affair.)
2. The US hypocrisy issue is moot until a decision is reached. You can talk about the double standard, but what is certain is that, when they have removed alleged terrorists from other countries, they had permission from the local government. In other words, it was done in accordance with local law. Would you like them to ignore local (US) law in this case? If US law protecting the accused means nothing in this case, why should it mean anything if you were ever arrested there? The ramifications of "formal extradition paperwork shouldn't be necessary" are quite extensive, and I don't think you want to live them.
JR, my point, which you should be able to acknowledge, is that people take the statements of those organizations seriously. If you disagree, take it up with those organizations.
"And don't be afraid to expound your views here as vociferously as you do on Daniel and Miguel's blogs"
A stupid assumption, because I don't participate in those.
Nope you seem to be avoiding answers - where is the extradition treaty between Panama and Venezuela?
And the US does things in accordance with laws? What law permitted it to attack Afgahnistan for not turning over Muhamed Omar? WHere was the legal paperwork. They certainly didn't have the Afgahns permission to attack. And where was the paperwork to kidnap the person in Serbia refered to in the Times yesterday and fly him to Afghanistan to be tortured? Can you show me how that was in accordance with the law? If not I think we're going no-where
So seem to be making assertions which you can't really back up with facts and avoiding facts which are inconvient.
No, if you want to accuse one entity of being hypocritical, you need to show that the other entity involved is NOT hypocritical, at least on the same issue. You haven't done so, and proving the existence of the treaty would be a solid step. And the treaty has nothing to do with the lack of international arrest warrant, does it? But you're not avoiding anything...
"What law permitted it to attack Afgahnistan for not turning over Muhamed Omar"
That has nothing to do with extradition, does it? The fact that you are reaching to examples like this shows the difficulty you're having.
"What law permitted it to attack Afgahnistan for not turning over Muhamed Omar"
Ask the government of Serbia, since it apparently happened there.
"So seem to be making assertions which you can't really back up with facts and avoiding facts which are inconvient."
An ironic claim, given what you have done. Plus, you WANT Bush to violate US law and extradite without providing Posada all legal protections that come from the Constitution. Think about where that road leads - straight to fascism.
Your rudeness doesn't deserve this, but I'm doing you a favor:
http://www.oas.org/juridico/mla/...ieurs-
ti55.html
Too funny. Obviously this "treaty" is not in effect as published there.
Back to the drawing board for you.
Also,
""What law permitted it to attack Afgahnistan for not turning over Muhamed Omar"
That has nothing to do with extradition, does it? The fact that you are reaching to examples like this shows the difficulty you're having.
"
Asking that some one be handed over to another country is extradition. That you avoid this shows the problems you're having in coming up with rational arguements.
As far as Bush goes he obeys laws when convenient and ignores them when convenient so Venezuela wouldn't be requesting he do anything he hasn't done before.
Why is the treaty not in effect? I'm afraid it isn't obvious - humor me.
You still ignore that the Venezuelan government failed to request an INTERPOL arrest warrant, though that was a big issue with Granda. Double standard.
"Asking that some one be handed over to another country is extradition"
But the attack is not. If you want to say Bush acted like a spoiled kid who was told he couldn't have his favorite toy, whatever. But you still can't call US handling of Posada hypocritical until a decision has been made.
"Venezuela wouldn't be requesting he do anything he hasn't done before"
Yes they would. They'd be requesting that he violate the US Constitution. And you are recommending that. In other words, you have stooped to the level which you accuse him of being on. Talk about hypocrisy.
Vistor--your arguments might seem logical in the perverted universe of the empire and their oligarchical minions. However, the sheer hypocrisy and double-standards with respect to US policies and international law are just too obvious to ignore.
You deploy a discourse that pretends to follow 'rule of law', but, as OW has stated, the US only obeys law when it is convienient to do so. This is obvious.
Again, your line of 'reason' has currency only with indoctrianted elites who are incredibly credulous with respect to the pronouncements of empire.
Reminds me of the reasoning used by die-hard, hypcritical Stalinists in the West decades ago.
We all know where their willful 'credulity' brought their political project--to the rhelm of being an abject failure.
Similarly with those that place faith in the US as the font of human progress and justice.
Sad but true--with your logic the forces of reaction and imperialism will be soundly defeated in time.
Posada has engaged in terror and is being protected by the US--a country whose hypocrisy and neoliberal project is quickly reaching its limits. This limit is reached when it is impossible for human society to survive the ideological limitations that are a function of the ecocidial/genocidal economic model of the current 'masters'.
However, from the morass and contradictions of the decrepit US promoted economic model, from the bowels of the imperial system, two of the world's most unlikely super heros have arrived to liberate humankind.
I am working with these entities--their identities will be disclosed shortly.
JR, I don't know why you insist on reading into my words things that are not there. I don't appreciate being used to advance your personal agenda.
My point is simple: the US is not automatically hypocritical for following different rules in different places. (Do you expect all countries to have the same laws?) If you want to list all the ways that the US has violated international law in various extradition cases, go right ahead - I'll come back in a month or so and check. (Please provide sources.) But that's something that can only be PROVEN by specifics - not the generalities that are being thrown around here.
And it's nonsense to say that Posada is "protected" until a decision has been reached. I'm a patient person - are you?
I notice you haven't expressed interest in Venezuela's lack of effort to bring Posada to justice up until now, that perhaps "screwing the enemy trumps the 'war on justice.'" But then, though that issue fits very well in the stated purpose of this blog, it doesn't seem to fit in your agenda.
visitor: heres a hint, look at the signatories. This can't be the extradition treaty between the US and Ven as the US isn't on it. So that casts doubt on it. Secondly, if it IS in effect that it makes perfect sense why Ven wouldn't have requested his extradition. Cuba is a signatory an given that it was their plane and people they would have been the ones to request it.
Also, quite avoiding the Afgahn question. Why in that case did the US not need to show proof but Venezuela does? Simple - hypocracy. For reference:
http://oilwars.blogspot.com/2005...a-update-
v.html
He hasn't violated the Constitution? Care to show me a congressional declaration of war against Iraq?
"This can't be the extradition treaty between the US and Ven as the US isn't on it"
Hint: no, but Venezuela and PANAMA are...
"the Afgahn question. Why in that case did the US not need to show proof"
Or did the US provide such proof and the Afghans still refused? I'm guessing you don't know either. (By the way, the link doesn't work.)
"He hasn't violated the Constitution?"
I didn't ask if he had, but if you wanted him to. Let me make my question as simple as possible:
Do you want the US/Bush to do the right thing or the wrong thing with respect to Posada?
If you want him to do the wrong thing, then indeed "we're going no-where."
"Hint: no, but Venezuela and PANAMA are..."
And as I said Cuba is too and in that case they would be the ones to request extradition as they are more the victims than Venezuela. So if your treaty is legit it in fact answers your own question
"Or did the US provide such proof and the Afghans still refused? I'm guessing you don't know either. (By the way, the link doesn't work.)"
The referenced article said Bush and the US said no evidence was needed. So we do know. The links work fine - click on them. If that still doesn't work for you go back the post which was from about a week ago.
"if your treaty is legit it in fact answers your own question"
No, it doesn't - why didn't Venezuela ask for extradition from Panama? You're backtracking from your previous position: "it only "raises" the question if you knew that such an extradition treaty existed and Venezuela didn't use it." Question raised - please answer.
And you haven't answered my other question - why didn't Venezuela ever file an international arrest warrant when Posada was at large? Either before or after Panama - take your pick.
The Part V link works now - it timed me out yesterday. Bush laid down conditions, the Afghans didn't agree, Bush responded. Chavez has laid down his conditions, the US has yet to decide, Chavez will be able to decide later how to respond.
But you're missing the point completely. Let's say I agree completely that what Bush did in 2001 was wrong. Is that any reason for him to do the wrong thing now?
If that's what you want, then you step into his realm: you want the "right" thing done when it's convenient, and the "wrong" thing when it suits you.
Pure hypocrisy.
The question you pose was clearly answered a couple posts before that IF that was the treaty then CUBA was part of and and CUBA would be the ones to request extradition not Venezuela. So that would completely explain why Ven would not have requested it.
The link you gave to Interpol was wanted people for June 1. Do they keep people on the wanted list who are already in custody?
I didn't say Bush should do anything illegal - although since 9/11 I'm pretty sure he has the legal power to send terrorists where he wants as they are already doing it. I said he was hypocritical for dealing with some "terrorists" in one way and other "terrorist" in a different way. Point stands.
Now it is annoying to have had to retype these same points several times as you seem to ignore them when I write them the first time. So I don't intend to continue this. Just as you are free to ignore what I write I am free not to waste my time writing what you won't read anyways.
"So that would completely explain why Ven would not have requested it"
No, it could possibly explain it. Not "completely." Even if so, a consistent posture would be to have been vocal about getting him extradited to Cuba.
"Do they keep people on the wanted list who are already in custody?"
He's only detained, not arrested (as was detailed in this very post by you). Would INTERPOL be so irresponsible as to remove him from the list, so he could walk free if released tomorrow?
"I didn't say Bush should do anything illegal - although since 9/11 I'm pretty sure he has the legal power to send terrorists where he wants"
You didn't say so directly, but if you think Bush can send Posada where he wants, you expect him to break US law. If you don't expect him to break the law, you have to sit and wait for the legal process to happen, rather than demand certain things happen now. There's the hypocrisy - you're mad at him for breaking the law, but you expect him to break the law and do what you want.
"So I don't intend to continue this"
But you will continue to dwell in your biased world, with hypocritical expectations, all in the name of justice - as defined by you. Sad.
Commenting by HaloScan
