Random imageNew forum topicsSponsorUser loginEsp/EngMeter la cuchara.To stick one's oar in. Active forum topicsRecent blog postsRecent comments
Currency Rate
|
Buyer of SAM-7 Claims He Was Paid by CIASubmitted by califpacific on 24 February, 2005 - 13:19.
From http://www.nicanet.org/hotline.php#topic1 Topic 1: Buyer of SAM-7 Claims He Was Paid by CIA One of the men convicted of selling a SAM-7 surface-to-air missile in Nicaragua, Jorge Ivan Pineda, said he was paid $1,000 by the CIA to buy the weapon and that the whole thing was planned at a meeting in the US embassy in the presence of the US ambassador Barbara Moore on Dec. 23 2004. The head of the Nicaragua Army, Gen. Javier Carrion, said he believes there could be an international campaign to discredit his institution. \ According to Pineda, two former contras were also present at the meeting at the US embassy. These two men went by the names of "Cascabel" and "Arandu" and were the ones who obtained the weapon, which had never been in possession of the Nicaragua Army but was one of 100 SAM-7 missiles that the US government had given to the contras to fight against the Sandinista government in the 1980s. These weapons have never been recovered and apparently are still in the possession of ex-contra fighters in the northern mountains of Nicaragua. Pineda went on to claim that Silva Clarence, the head of the anti- drug directorate in the National Police force, is really an undercover CIA agent. Those who orchestrated the whole thing, says Pineda, "even asked "Cascabel" and "Arandu" to take a photo of the weapon as proof. This photo would be shown to Bolaños and Moore. All this comes in the same week that George Bush named John Negroponte as head of the US intelligence services. Negroponte, in his acceptance speech, said that his most important work in this post would be to reform the intelligence services so as to be able to fight with more efficiency in the war against terrorism. The news was met with horror in Nicaraguan press. The headline in El Nuevo Diario's Feb. 18 edition read "State Terrorist as Supreme Chief Against Terrorism." The article went on to remind readers of the horrors that were carried out against Nicaraguan citizens by the contra forces, funded and trained by the US army in Honduras, and against El Salvador citizens by death squads also funded and trained in Honduras during Negroponte's time as US ambassador to Honduras during the 1980s. Meanwhile, El Nuevo Diario reported unofficial information suggesting that Washington is planning to replace the current US ambassador to Nicaragua, Barbara Moore, with Paul Travelly who worked in the US embassy in Nicaragua during the government of Violeta Chamorro in the early 1990s. It is assumed that Washington is discontented with Moore for failing to unite the anti-Sandinista forces in Nicaragua and is concerned that she would be unable to avoid a Sandinista victory in the 2006 general elections. Meanwhile on Feb. 17, President Enrique Bolaños made a speech outside the site where a new $59.2 million mega US embassy is under construction. ( categories: )
|
NavigationWho's onlineThere are currently 2 users and 47 guests online.
Online users
Who's new
PollWhich location appeals most? Apartment in the city 2% Home in the city 11% Home in a small town 29% Rural or small farm 52% Big farm 6% Total votes: 62 A ThoughtTodos los Nicas son negros. |
Unbiased?
NicaNet says they are not for any political party but then they post an Ortega letter: http://www.nicanet.org/Ortega_letter.php
Yeah, so
you know they're full of cacapoopoo! You should read more of it - it's enough to make you puke!
Ah, another Nicanet story..
Like a previous poster said - Bad missle, low price, deal made in the embassy, in front of the ambassador. Contra named "Rattlesnake." I think I want to buy the rights to this one. I don't believe it - then a second look, and it is coming from Nicanet - I've been reading their fiction since 1997.
$1000 ?
I do not know exactly how the missiles got there, or who bought them, or why, or who wants to make who look bad. But, I do know that if I was not a U.S. citizen, and was ever inside a U.S. Embassy negotiating anything which I knew to be illegal or at least pretty darn "weird", I would sure as hell walk away with more than $1000! (hell, a grand barely buys a late-notice ticket to a country lacking extradition agreements!).
A responsible and serius handled of the problem.
Is well know in this kind of situation ,that depending on the political agenda , some people will try to take advantage of this and make it , a campaing in prosecution of their objetives. But this is a real problem and need to be address with a serius concern , by the Goverment of Nicaragua , and i think they are doing ,whatever solution they agreed , must be in the consesus of the parties ,safeties , and sovereignity of the country. I'm posting information more serius about this mattter.
Posted on Thu, Feb. 24, 2005
Nicaragua protects its missiles
Associated Press
MANAGUA
E ls government and the army assured yesterday to the United States that they maintain protected the missiles earth well air of the Sam-7 type and that will locate to that they could be into the hands of civilians like surpluses of the war in the decade of 1980.
Thus they presented it the press the minister the Defense, Jose Adam War, and the new head of the army, General Omar Halleslevens, after conversations with Attached Undersecretary Inte-
rina of Political and Military Subjects of the Department of State of the United States, Rose M. Likis.
The civil employee arrived at the country Tuesday to treat on the subject that worries to its country because it fears that the missiles fall in terrorist hands.
' ' the meeting was developed in a cordiality atmosphere, of franqueza and clarity '', said Halleslevens to the journalists in the Presidential House, during an official act of changes of controls in the army.
It added that Likis expressed `` preoccupations that we shared and is about the surpluses of different types from arms that can have in the country ' '.
`` we have raised to Him that to us worries that possibility to us and that we are in the best disposition since we have come making a work with the Police to look for all type of arms that are into the hands of civilians and of illegal way ' '.
War said that Likis offered that the United States will collaborate economically in that sense.
The American preoccupation by the rockets increased in the last weeks, after which the National Police arrested two men who negotiated a Sam-7.
With respect to the defense from the army of about 1.000 Sam-7 in the arsenals of the army, Halleslevens said that `` we were precise and clear in that well they are protected ' '.
Put Source Links To The Articles Posted
If someone speaks for someone else such as, "the person say this and goes on "..... or if someone translates something which has been written by someone else it is necessary to include and post a link to the original article being referenced. In that way the person can go to the source article and read it or check the references for themselves or see who wrote what. By knowing who wrote an article or what publication it is in gives more information as background about the article and any possible biases.
If a person just only gives their personal interpretation to what the article says, without a source reference, who knows what it really said. There usually will be a some differences that get interjected into the supposed article that way by personal biases.
You belived what you have to believe.
That is not neccesary the truth , because if a put a link , that not meand , is true , is a lot of media with bias , and we asume the participants of the site are a honest people , so don't suggest any misleading or caracterization in the information , either way , i reproduced the article like it is, an in the header you can see , is a AP article , personally i don't like be redirect to a other page , if i have the chance to see it together.
Media Bias
First off, let me say that I am "the media", being the Publisher of a print magazine and multiple web sites. In addition, while I consider myself a Green Libertarian, I seem to be getting labeled a Communist here on a regular basis--possibly because I am not a Nazi.
That said, I have studied media bias a lot for at least 25 years. I find "mainstream" media to be the least useful because you don't know the bias. That is, between a couple of articles you could have very different bias because the reporter will have different interests and sources.
If, on the other hand, you go to a clearly biased source (FOX has already been mentioned here for it pro-administration bias--on the other side of the spectrum, People's Weekly World is the Communist paper) it is easier to read an article, apply a "what do they want to present" filter and get closer to reality. Or, pick two different publications with known biases and compare them.
One of the least reliable sources for unbiased news is major TV networks. As Daniel Sheehan would say, they are in the business of "infotainment". You pick your news based on the amount of exciting images you can get in the minimum amount of time. Fires, for example, make great TV news. I expect this appeal of "blood and guts" is why reporting from Iraq has been "contained".
Print media, as bad as it is, is better than anything live. While space limitations prevent covering background in most cases, it is more likely that some research went into the article and there may be some references to help you fill in the blanks.
The exciting trend in media is blogging. A good book that talks about this is "We the Media". Having individuals with wireless-connected laptops at events rather than "the media" eliminates a layer of "interpretation".
hey fyl.....
you are a libertarian. i knew we had some common ground. but i do own 24 acres on breckenridge creek in washington state and the greenies won't let me build where i want to build. oh, well. but come on, fox biased? the big three are biased liberal (i do agree they are all in the infotainment business, if it bleeds, it leads) and fox is middle of the road. bush is not a conservative, william f buckley said so. but i like your elimination of the "interpretation" idea.
william f buckley
The maker of the bad tasting cough syrup?
Maybe your right , maybe not.
like a said this kind of discussion are to never end ,is difficult to agree in certain points , when is two people in a room. I never will pretend to have the true , but i will defend my personal beliefs and experiences , nobody going tell me that our ex- perience with the somocistas and sandinistas was a great thing to my nation , and if this is a bias , the bias must be from those who pretend to paint people like CASTRO ,CHAVEZ ,KIM IL JUNG ,SADDAM , like gifts to the human kind , or also pretend it not to know the true about the kind of regimes this people established. I mention the case of a CARLOS GUADAMUZ , a radionews owner , who was killed by talking against powerful people in Nicaragua , but nobody of the mediabias attackers say something , why??? is because the bias, are bias, only when don't fix our beliefs. I don't know if i'm in the wrong place or if i'm lost , but what i know is ; that i don't alone , here ,on my country , and around the world , is people who belief and express similar thoughs .
Agree or look for useful information?
I don't want to "agree". I want to find some resources so I can form my opinion. To that end, I will post resources when I find them.
I expect we all know that the FSLN got its push to victory by Somoza having a newspaper publisher killed. That unified the right and left against Somoza. No matter which side you were on (and he was on the right), you have to support his willingness to put his life on the line.
Now, what's missing from your comment is where the "bad guys" on your list come from. Castro came from a popular revolt against a US-run dictatorship. Saddam was a US creation that ultimately stopped serving US interests. Go down the list (Osama bin Laden trained by the CIA as our anti-Soviet input in Afghanistan, Manuel Noriega the old friend of George Bush, Sr., ...).
My point, as usual, is that letting nations pick their own leaders seems like what the US thinks democracy is. After the number of "the US will force democracy on you" that have just created a new problem, isn't it about time the US government started letting countries make their own decisions--right or wrong)?
Again..depend of your point of view.
is very simple...your point of view of must all problem is US , because that is your thoug ,and your experience . You make reference to the murder of a PEDRO JOAQUIN CHAMORRO ,but againt , repeat!!!nobody know , nobody say this mouth is my...to say something about CARLOS GUADAMUZ murder , why??? Why the double standar. Now i don't care about who's friend or who create this guys, because is a lot of discussion about this , what i'm corcern is , all this guys make their people suffering , and they received visits from people ,who never were worry about the reality of that people , is this part of the bias ??? All this time i been honest ,and i will ,what i don't see rigth is because some body have antisentiments with his goverment , undermine the aspirations of others ,or even worse try to paint the reality and the history in his convenience. And yes you're right when your say , let the people choose their leaders , but isn't that way , all the time has been a expedicionary force of internationalist taking side and making propaganda to one side or other , and in that way is more factible and maybe reasonable make a pact with the ""enemy"" .
I find 970 references to him
I find 970 references to him in a Google search. One is http://www.nicanet.org/hotline.php?id=105 which I picked because it makes the point about "trial by media". Another interesting one, in Spanish is http://www.americas.org/item_14359
I don't think the US is responsible for all the evil in the world. But, when you read books by ex-CIA officials such as John Stockwell you tend to 1) know what the US has done in the past and 2) find some obvious similarities. Even Stockwell compares what was done in Angolia (that he was in charge of) with what the CIA was doing in Nicaragua in the 1980s. It would be totally irresponsible to ignore things such as this when you are trying to find the truth.
There are people suffering in the United States. Lots of them for lots of reasons. Does that give me the right to invade the United States in order to right that wrong? I think not.
Everything have more than one side.
If look you only like to see one side of the facts , and the side is to your beliefs , you talk about a CIA officer writing ...and you make that a facts ; so give me the reason why you don't believe what a CI officer of the Goverment Sandinista is telling here. And you talk about a Angola ,by personal knowledge i can't talk about Angola , but i know for Cubans Intelligence officers what happen there , and for a little illustration , i will relate a episode during the contra war in Nicaragua: We were taking actions again a Contra Operational group , in a zone between LIMAY , and EL REGADIO Department of Esteli , we call for a Air support, they send a squadron of Russian MI 17 lead it for Cuban pilots , we detect one of the group in a little village EL NARANJO , must of the people there were relatives to the contras fighters , some of the decisions was to set ambush out of the village but the Cubans pilots were calling for a air strike , i oppose that for sure , i explain them that in there were a civilian population , but they respond , than in Angola that was one their tactics , because if we don't kill all the relatives ,they later will become fighters too , it was a bitter argument about this , but non action was taked against this village. This kind of action that was perfomed by the Cuban army in Angola is well know and wasn't the last time i heard from them. We were at war but i never going to condone what the daily practices of war were conducted by the contra rebelds , but either i going to cover what we done by our army. But the difference in Nicaragua is , that the affected people were us , and we ready sane and forgotten that episode , again we are a big family. And yes like american you have the right to straight things in your country , but please leave to the other people to straight their own problems , like you suggesting in reference to the practices of US. It will be the decision of the people and the goverment to be friend or whatever , but let them to take that decision , or you'll be a part of the problem and not of the decision. I'm taking risk to become more public , but like you said , sometimes we must straight things.
Thnaks for clearing everything up.
Gee, I am real glad that you cleared that up. ??????
So, let me see if I get this right.
Not posting a link to source documents is better because,..... well actually I kinda didn't understand that part. But I guess that it must also mean that almost all of the internet practice is wrong then cause the posting of a link is pretty standard practice for all who use internet ettiquette.
Maybe we should forward this to the interenet standards groups who set the standards and explain it to them how links aren't necessary or even desirable anymore?
I am also glad that you have ascertained that all of the group is honest. Does that mean it is also safe now to loan them money?
Oh, of course the question of errors in translation should not be a problem either as I have notice that probably almost all of this group here speaks both perfect english and spanish and have been certified as expert translaters.
I am glad that you mention it is an AP article as they are sure well known to be an impartial unwavering source and never lie or change anything and who would ever think that one would want to see where AP picked up the story from what news source. Silly me.
So, like I said before, thanks for clearing everything up.
Fair and Balanced Propaganda
One tiny snowflake in a blizzard of misinformation/ public relations / propaganda.
http://gadflyer.com/flytrap/index.php?Week=200508#1538
Fair and Balanced Propaganda Paul Waldman (1:59PM) link
Via Media Matters, we get this little bit of pro-administration propaganda
(http://mediamatters.org/items/200502230006 from Fox News: FOX News doctors AP reports to mimic White House terminology)
Since April 2002, FOX News has consistently doctored Associated Press articles featured on the FOX News website concerning terrorist attacks in the Middle East to conform to Bush administration terminology. Without any editorial notation disclosing that words in the AP articles have been changed, FOX News replaces the terms "suicide bomber" and "suicide bombing" with "homicide bomber" and "homicide bombing" to describe attackers who kill themselves and others with explosives. In at least one case, FOX News actually altered an AP quote from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) to fit this naming convention, and then revised it to restore the quote without noting either the original alteration or its correction.
The Associated Press noted in April 2002 that FOX News first began using the term "homicide bombing" in its own reports immediately after Bush administration officials -- such as then-White House press secretary Ari Fleischer -- adopted the term. While other news organizations continued to use the term "suicide bomber," the AP reported, "Dennis Murray, executive producer of [FOX News'] daytime programming, said executives there had heard the phrase ["homicide bombing"] being used by administration officials in recent days and thought it was a good idea."
But Media Matters for America has found that FOX has applied the "homicide" terminology not only in its own original reports, but also in the AP reports that it publishes on its website. Readers are led to believe that the AP itself uses the "homicide" terminology, when in fact it does not. According to a Media Matters search, the AP has used the terms "homicide bomber" or "homicide bombing" when referring to terrorist attacks in only one article, published on May 7, 2004. These terms have otherwise appeared in AP articles only in quotations.
It's one thing to parrot the administration's ridiculous language. It's another thing to alter AP stories to conform to the administration's ridiculous language. It's something entirely different to actually falsify quotes in order to conform to the administration's ridiculous language.
It was back in April of 2002 that the administration decided that "suicide bombing" just didn't convey the proper condemnation, since, one supposes, people might get confused and think that a suicide bombing is when someone blows just themselves up as an act of protest. As Ari Fleischer said at the time, "The reason I started to use that term is because it's a more accurate description. These are not suicide bombings. These are not people who just kill themselves. These are people who deliberately go to murder others, with no regard to the values of their own life. These are murderers. The President has said that in the Rose Garden. And I think that is just a more accurate description of what these people are doing. It's not suicide, it's murder." Yeah, but what makes a suicide bombing different from other kinds of bombing is that in the process the bomber commits, you know, suicide.
There were only two prominent news organizations that adopted this terminology: Fox News, and the New York Post, which by some crazy coincidence is also owned by Rupert Murdoch. One wonders if tomorrow Scott McLellan announced that from this point the administration will refer not to "personal accounts" but "orgasmic bliss accounts," they'd go along with that, too.