Precisely why I said it was pie-in-sky stuff. A country suffering minimal threat -- It's all daily being taken down in the US. It's also somewhat unseemly when citizens of a country threatening another for 40 years -- not to mention holding it in thrall for the preceding 60 years (despite Mark Twain's belief) -- have been able to do shit-all about stopping those threats, but get worked up on what that other country should or should not do.
Re the execution of the hijackers. I'm opposed to the death penalty on principle, but again it all seems unseemly when citizens of a country which regularly executes people, labels hijackers as 'terrorists', and so on doing protest the execution of hijackers elsewhere. What would happen if some people had hijacked a plane in the USA? How about protesting Moussoui being tried under a code which could see his execution?
I also recall the big hubbub there was about some Indonesian or Chinese contributions to -- was it Clinton? -- campaign funds. Sheesh. And more sheesh, since non-governmental groups are being hounded for sending contributions to various other non-governmental groups -- but of course they are 'terrorist'.
So other than the procedural -- that it was one rushed trial -- would there have been grounds for objection if those charged had been found guilty of such funding, with evidence? I note that the round-up didn't rope in all the dissidents -- there are some well-known ones who weren't touched. Why so? Just playing games, or because those others were not in receipt of funds? That was the charge, wasn't it -- not making statements, protests against the state, but receipt of funds with the aim of overthrowing the state?
I'll happily sign an AI petition, as I've signed many others. I'll happily also sign a Malaysian petition, since Malaysia has recently seen the light and become Cuba-friendly, isn't threatening, hasn't threatened, and is guilty of many of the same offences. By the way, there's also no jury trial in Malaysia; abolished eons ago, and we happily execute people on gun charges, and on drug charges -- presumably, former, no good; latter, good: part of the war on drugs, don't you know.
But I'm glad that people like Chomsky have signed a petition, simply because that helps void talk from the right (and some on the left) about him and others in a similar high profile position being 'soft' on dictatorship. I think others in a similar situation as Chomsky should also do so. Chomsky probably did it on principle -- but I think he could as well have done it on purely pragmatic grounds, since his record on US intervention is so clear and unambiguous. Some of the others...
As for Fuentes and Saramago or Marquez, I also think they should because they might have the desired impact. Although of course they would be given such publicity only because it's Cuba. How often has Saramago been mentioned in the US media? The one I know is that vile, vile piece in the WSJ when he won the Nobel Prize -- there was also a pretty vile on A Sen, when he won his.
Still, Cuba botched the whole thing, I think. At an awkward moment, this will likely cause Europe to line up with the US on the embargo shit, instead of going on breaking it. And that's so important now when Europe seems to be looking for ways to cave in without quite losing face.
kjk