The first message:
From: Henry Gomez
Subject: NewsBlaze.com Contact
Date: May 9, 2007 12:15:37 AM EDT
Do you make it a policy to print the press releases of all totalitarian dictatorships in their entirety or just Cuba?
Henry Louis Gomez
Subject: Re: NewsBlaze.com Contact
Date: May 9, 2007 12:53:54 AM EDT
To: Henry Gomez
If you know anything about NewsBlaze, you’d know that isn’t true.
This looked like an interesting item that people should know about.
Releasing a person who has been talked about as a terrorist for a very long time
just might be of interest to people who live in Miami – or any other place he might go
and the Cuban government aren’t the only ones who think so.
In an open society like the US, there is one group of people you can read
about just as much as you read about your friends and that is the people who
you think are your enemies.
– Or do you subscribe to the belief that you only listen to one side of an argument or conversation?
If the only complaint you have about the item is that it came from Cuba,
then its a minor thing. If Cuba is so bad, why is it that there is so
much interaction with Cuba?
Its a very strange game that is being played.
Did you send a similar letter to the US government when they allowed
Hugo Chavez, president of Venezuela to enter the US?
Did you send them a letter when they supported the Maoists in Nepal?
Will we continue to publish press releases from Cuba?
Probably not, unless there is something of interest.
And the reply to the reply
The American media rarely covers Cuba and when it does, almost without exception, it does what you did. Namely repackage something from Prensa Latina (Fidel’s PR firm) without any corroboration or investigation. That’s not journalism. The court order in this case has been made public.
Anyone that reads it will understand that this case wasn’t about terrorism it was about immigration. Read the court order and you will see that the judge dismissed the case because in her words:
The realm of this case is not, as some have suggested, terrorism. It is immigration fraud. Terrorism, and the determination of whether or not to classify an individual as a terrorist, lies within the sound discretion of the executive branch. It does not lie with this Court…
For example, a typical defendant convicted of all seven counts with which Defendant is currently charged would receive a maximum sentence of six to twelve months under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. In addition, any time that such defendant served in federal incarceration would more likely than not qualify such defendant for time served, or at the very least, probation.
As with each and every defendant who comes before this Court, Defendant in this case is entitled to certain rights under the United States Constitution. This Court will not set aside such rights nor overlook Government misconduct because Defendant is a political hot potato. This Court’s concern is not politics; it is the preservation of criminal justice.
You took a statement from an admittedly biased source, published it in its entirety and provided no actual facts or opposing opinion to balance it. Nothing you wrote me mitigates this fact. I never said Posada was innocent. Just that you published an opinion of a totalitarian state without question or thought or investigation to its veracity.
Unfortunately it’s not just your outlet that does this. The New York Times actually created the legend of Fidel Castro in 1958 and hasn’t stopped cheerleading for him since.
At this point I can’t expect anything more from the American media, but your act of publishing that statement was such a gross injustice that I had to comment. I hope you are proud of yourself knowing that have joined the long line of editors and reporters that enable the most oppressive regime in the Western Hemisphere to stay in power through a carefully planned and managed propaganda campaign that covers all of the “good” in Cuba and none of the bad.