[ot] [!nt] \n2+0\

[integer at www.god-emil.dk]

[takk]





Their Terrorists and Ours
by Edward S. Herman
Z magazine, September 1998

On July 12 and 13, 1998, the New York Times had successive front-page 
articles on the career of Luis Carriles Posada, a world class 
terrorist who had been trained by the CIA in the 1950s in preparation 
for the Bay of Pigs invasion, and who thereafter devoted his life to 
terrorist actions against Cuba. As a U.S.-sponsored terrorist, for 
many years in direct U.S. service, and who continued to terrorize a 
country subject to U.S. economic and other forms of warfare, Posada 
remained under effective U.S. protection for over 30 years. This 
protection was paralleled by a treatment by terrorism "experts" and 
the U.S. media that differed sharply from that accorded terrorists 
like Carlos the Jackal. The Times articles of July 12 and 13 
represent a partial break from the past, in which a potent double 
standard between "their terrorists" and our own had been consistently 
maintained. In 1988, the Pentagon listed the African National 
Congress as one of the "more notorious terrorist groups" in the 
world, but not Savimbi's Unita, nor the Israel-sponsored proxy army 
in South Lebanon, nor the U.S.-organized Nicaraguan contras. Libya 
has long been declared a sponsor of international terrorism, but 
never South Africa, which in the 1980s was supporting not only Unita 
in Angola and Renamo in Mozambique, but whose assassination attempts 
abroad extended to London, Paris, and Sweden (in 1996, the former 
head of a covert South African hit squad claimed that Swedish Prime 
Minister Olof Palme had been murdered in 1986 by South African 
agents). In its recent report on "Patterns of Global Terrorism," 
issued on April 30, 1998, the State Department lists Cuba as a 
sponsor of international terrorism, solely on the grounds that it 
"harbors" alleged terrorists. But Saudi Arabia's giving safe haven to 
Idi Amin is different, and the U.S. provision of refuge to Haitian 
killers General Raoul Cedras and Emmanuel Constant, Salvadoran 
military officers Jose Guillermo Garcia and Carlos Vides 
Casanova-both recently named by the released soldiers who murdered 
four U.S. religious women in 1980 as the ones who gave the orders to 
kill-and numerous Cuban refugee terrorists, does not interfere for a 
moment with the Godfather's right to name the world's terrorists.

Carlos Versus Posada

Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, popularly known as Carlos the Jackal, carried 
out many terroristic acts against Israel, other Western states, 
including France, and Arabs who cooperated with Israel and the West 
(one of his most notable ventures was kidnapping a group of Arab 
country oil officials from a high level conference). The Western 
media have credited him with some 83 killings over his career. Taken 
into custody by France in a deal with Sudan where he was in hiding, 
Carlos was recently tried and convicted of murder in Paris. For the 
Western media and experts, Carlos is the model terrorist and is 
portrayed without qualification as evil incarnate.

Luis Posada Carriles, on the other hand, was trained by the CIA as 
part of the Bay of Pigs invasion project, and has been a 
long-standing member of the Cuban refugee terrorist network. This 
network has been one of the most active and durable anywhere, because 
it was given legitimacy by U.S. sponsorship, has served U.S. aims, 
and has in consequence been under U.S. protection. The U.S. official 
and media treatment of Posada has reflected this protection and role 
of the network.

Posada came to public notice when a Cuban airliner was blown up in 
October 1976 killing 73 people. Two Cubans were apprehended, 
confessed, and implicated Posada and Orlando Bosch as fellow 
participants. Posada was caught and tried three times in Venezuela, 
but was acquitted on technicalities. Before a further trial could be 
held, he escaped prison. He next came into notice when Eugene 
Hasenfus's contra supply plane was shot down over Nicaragua in 1986, 
and evidence surfaced that Posada was an operative in the contra 
supply network, working for the Reagan administration at Ilopango 
airbase in El Salvador.

The mainstream media's treatment of this disclosure was extremely 
muted. I believe that if Carlos had turned up as an employee of 
Bulgaria or the Soviet Union in some military-terrorist function, the 
media would have expressed outrage, and would have cited this as 
definitive evidence of a Soviet terror network. When it was disclosed 
in 1990 that Carlos had been given refuge in Hungary, the New York 
Times gave this-front page coverage ("Aide Says Hungary Gave Refuge 
in '79 to Terrorist Carlos," June 28, 1990)-and it distorted the news 
in the process, by suppressing the fact, available in the European 
media, that Carlos's refuge was conditional on his suspending all 
terrorist activities, and that he was expelled in 1982. In the case 
of Posada, an escaped and wanted terrorist was not only being 
protected against prosecution for serious terrorist crimes, he was 
being used in U. S terrorist operations against Nicaragua. But as he 
was our terrorist, the media were virtually silent, thereby 
collaborating as "news" organizations in facilitating the U.S. 
"unlawful use of force" (World Court) and sponsorship of contra 
terrorism.

The U.S. media always search diligently for links to high officials 
in the case of enemy misdeeds. With Posada, there was a very definite 
link to the top: he was a good friend of Felix Rodriguez, a fellow 
right-wing Cuban, who was Vice President George Bush's liaison to the 
contra terrorist campaign against Nicaragua in the 1980s. But in this 
case, the media showed no interest whatever in the link of this 
terrorist to the political leadership. There were also other 
differences from the treatment of Carlos. The Times article that 
discussed Posada (December 10, 1986)-and the only one ever to focus 
on him in any detail until the two part series on July 12 and 13, 
1998 (the paper had at least 14 separate articles featuring 
Carlos)-was on page 21, and was entitled "Accused Terrorist Helping 
to Supply Contras." Even U.S. officials acknowledged that Posada had 
been involved in the Cuban airliner bombing and was a real terrorist, 
but unlike Carlos, Posada was only an "accused" terrorist in the 
Times. While mentioning the accusation that he had participated in a 
terrorist bombing killing 73, the paper didn't mention that two 
colleagues had quickly incriminated him, and that he was still wanted 
for crimes in Venezuela. Also, the article stressed his 
anticommunism, long fight against Castro, and devotion to his family, 
a form of exoneration not extended to Carlos.

Posada Terrorizes Cuba and Honduras

Posada has been living in Honduras and El Salvador since 1986. His 
exact location has been known to U.S. authorities (as was 
acknowledged to the Miami Herald [June 7, 1998]), and he could easily 
be extradited or seized by U.S. forces in these client states; this 
would be easier than France's recovery of Carlos from the Sudan. But 
Posada is a terrorist who has worked for us directly and indirectly, 
and thus has remained free to continue his activities. The contrast 
between our treatment of this world class terrorist and the French 
treatment of Carlos is not discussed in the mainstream media. In 1994 
and 1995 Posada joined with a group of right-wing army officers in 
Honduras to destabilize the government of Carlos Roberto Reina, who 
had angered the officers by cutting the military budget and curbing 
their kickbacks on arms purchases, and who the Cuban right wing felt 
was too soft on Castro and might interfere with plans to use Honduras 
as another secret base for anti-Cuban operations. This terrorist 
program involved a dozen or more bombings in late 1994 and early 
1995, with at least six Hondurans killed and 26 injured (Miami 
Herald, September 28, 1997). Neither the terrorist operation in 
Honduras nor Posada's involvement were reported in the leading U.S. 
newspapers or TV newscasts.

On November 16, 1997, a lengthy article in the Miami Herald, by Juan 
O. Tamayo, traced the 11 bombings of hotels and restaurants in Cuba 
during 1997 to a "ring of Salvadoran car thieves and armed robbers 
directed and financed by Cuban exiles in El Salvador and Miami...And 
it was Luis Posada Carriles. . . who was the key link between El 
Salvador and the South Florida exiles who raised $15,000 for the 
operation." The Cuban bombings killed one tourist and wounded six 
other people.

The Miami Herald article on the Cuban bombings was based on "dozens 
of interviews with security officials, friends of the bombers, Cuban 
exiles and others in El Salvador, Miami, Guatemala and Honduras." 
Carried out by a distinguished group of reporters, led by Tamayo, 
this story had great credibility. But it was neither reproduced nor 
were its findings summarized in the New York Times, Washington Post, 
Los Angeles Times, or on the TV network broadcasts. In fact, in the 
puny stories covering these terrorist attacks none of these papers 
ever mentioned Posada.

Nor were the important revelations of a subsequent investigative 
report by the Miami Herald picked up in any of the major media 
forums. "One of the most ambitious" of Posada's adventures, the 
Herald reports, "appears to have been a plot to assassinate Castro at 
a 1994 summit of Ibero-American heads of government in the Colombian 
port city of Cartegena." But although Posada and his five accomplices 
"managed to smuggle arms into Cartegena," the report continues, 
"Columbian security cordons kept them too far away to take a good 
shot at Castro..." ("An exile's relentless aim: oust Castro," June 7, 
1998). "If there is no publicity, the work is not useful," the Herald 
reporter quotes Posada as having written to a fellow "conspirator. " 
"The U.S. newspapers don't publish anything unless it is confirmed." 
Posada was wrong-stories that fit newspapers' biases require minimal 
confirmation; those that don't, like Posada's terrorist activities, 
will get minimal publicity despite compelling evidence.

The New York Times method of keeping the story of Posada's connection 
to the Cuban bombings out of the public eye in 1997 is enlightening. 
The killing of the tourist was covered in World News Briefs, on page 
A13, and got 3.5 inches of space (September 5, 1997). In the case of 
the other bombings, the Times quoted generalities from Cuban reports 
and accusations, always on the back pages (e.g., September 6, 1997). 
After a Salvadoran was captured, confessed, and linked the bombings 
to the Cuban-American National Foundation (CANF), the Times said that 
"Havana tries to link a suspect to an exile group in Miami" 
(September 12, 1997). The confession didn't make the link real for 
the Times, and it was offset by denials from the CANF and statements 
by the State Department that Cuba hasn't given them solid evidence. 
But Tamayo and his colleagues did more, and the Times trick is to 
cite only Cuban officials-easily dismissed as biased-and to avoid a 
serious source that is more credible. (This method, of using the less 
credible witness to make the case you oppose, is widely used by the 
Times and other media; e.g., in its letters column the Times often 
publishes a weak offering that provides nominal balance while 
rejecting others that contain unwanted critical substance.) It is 
also notable that the Times failed to do any investigative research 
of its own on the anti-Cuban terrorism. It didn'twant to know, or to 
have the public know, of the escapades of our terrorist. Posada in 
the Times

However, on July 12 and 13, 1998, the Times ran two lengthy 
front-page articles on Posada, by Ann Louise Bardach and Larry 
Rohter, based on interviews with him at his secret Caribbean hideout, 
as well as on borrowings (unacknowledged) from the Miami Herald. What 
caused the Times to alter its news judgment and give Posada such 
attention? One reason was the recent softening in Administration 
policy toward Cuba, manifested in the reopening of direct air travel 
between Cuba and the U. S., the tightening of restraints on exile 
forays into Cuban waters, and a crackdown on the smuggling of 
refugees from Cuba. The Times has long "followed the flag" in 
reporting on foreign policy, so that when a bipartisan hard-line 
policy is in place the paper protects "our terrorists" and downplays 
the U.S. terror campaign in which a Posada (or D'Aubuisson, or 
Savimbi) plays his part. While the Times performed this protective 
service in relation to Posada through 1997, it had not been entirely 
happy with U. S. policy toward Cuba, denouncing Helms-Burton and 
calling for a more humane mode of opposition to the Castro regime 
(e.g., "Turning a Page in Cuba," ed., November 25, 1997). The 
softening of policy that preceded the July articles was therefore 
surely welcomed and this editorial position undoubtedly contributed 
to making Posada, at long last, newsworthy.

The moderation of policy has been a reflection of changing political 
forces bearing on Cuban policy, including the effect of the Pope's 
visit to Cuba, the growing interest of U.S. business in Cuban 
markets, and the desire to move away from the damaging confrontation 
with allies over Helms-Burton and the U.S. policy of destructive 
engagement.

Another important factor was the November 1997 death of Jorge Mas 
Canosa, the influential head of the CANF, and the consequent disarray 
and weakening of his hard-line faction (displayed in part by the 
willingness of Posada to implicate CANF in his activities, and 
thereby damage its legal and moral status in the U.S.). The July 
articles featured Posada's close relationship with Mas Canosa and the 
long-time and regular funding Posada received from him and CANF. 
Posada made it clear that the money was provided with the 
understanding that it was underwriting his general terrorist 
activities, including the 1997 bombing campaign in Cuba. In short, he 
was a terrorist arm of the tax exempt CANF, which had been organized 
at the recommendation of the Reagan administration.

The articles also focus on Posada's long relationship with the CIA as 
an agent and informant, and it quotes Posada time and again 
explaining how his friendly relations with CIA and FBI personnel and 
long service as a U.S. operative protected him and allowed him to 
continue his life and "work." The Times describes in detail how a 
Cuban-America businessman in Guatemala, who discovered Posada's (and 
his partners') assemblage of bombs and a planned assassination 
attempt against Castro, notified the FBI, which apparently made no 
investigation and took no action on the case. Posada told the 
interviewer that the FBI had never questioned him in connection with 
this incident. It is made clear throughout the series that the rule 
of law has long been inoperative in dealing with CANF, Posada, and 
the approved terrorism they represent.

While much of this information is not new or surprising, it is useful 
to have it confirmed from the terrorist's mouth and given a Times 
news imprimatur. It should be noted, however, that significant biases 
are still evident in these articles. For example, Posada is not 
referred to as a terrorist; in fact, the authors note that Cuba calls 
Posada a terrorist, but they themselves repeatedly describe him as a 
"Cuba foe" and as a man who has "devoted his life to trying to bring 
down Castro," or even as a "fugitive." They state that when 
Hasenfus's plane was shot down in Nicaragua in 1986, the world soon 
learned that "Ramon Medina was actually Luis Posada Carriles, the 
international fugitive." The Times never called Carlos a mere 
"fugitive," nor did it ever identify Carlos by his self-designated 
objectives (anti-Israel, anti-imperialist); unlike Posada, his acts 
and methods made him an unqualified terrorist.

The series is kind to Posada in other ways. The authors state that 
Posada "opposed the dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista," without 
offering any evidence. Almost as much space is given to the injuries 
Posada suffered in a 1990 assassination attempt as to his terrorist 
acts and the damage inflicted on his victims. As in the past, the 
Times does not mention the fact that the two terrorists apprehended 
following the 1976 Cuban airliner bombing quickly named Posada as an 
accomplice. This bloody killer is humanized and asked no difficult or 
harsh questions. His history and linkages are spelled out by him on 
his own terms, with his own rationales unchallenged.

The articles also fail to make connections and draw conclusions. His 
close relationship with Felix Rodriguez, with whom he worked at the 
Ilopango air base in El Salvador in the 1980s, is mentioned without 
noting that Rodriguez was Vice President George Bush's liaison to the 
contra war, which ties the employment of this terrorist to the 
highest echelons of the U.S. government. More important, the authors 
nowhere ask whether the close relationship between the "fugitive " 
and U. S. government doesn't make the U.S. a sponsor of international 
terrorism and its leaders and mainstream intellectuals and 
journalists-who regularly denounce the scourge of terrorism-world 
class hypocrites.

When Cuba shot down an overflying Cuban refugee network plane in 
1996, the Times gave this front page and intense coverage, and 
expressed the greatest indignation. This is the same refugee network 
that Posada has tapped for his terrorist activities, and one under U. 
S. protection. The relative treatment of the shootdown, and the 
intense and indignant coverage of Carlos, versus the earlier "don't 
want to know" treatment of Posada, and recent surfacing and moderate 
critique of Posada in a time of softening policy, exemplifies well 
the Times's bias, role, and propaganda service.

Edward S. Herman is an economist, author, media analyst, and 
professor emeritus at Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.