Novak is a registered Democrat, I kid you not. The networks merely pretend that he is a conservative Republican.
Posted on 07/31/2003 7:35:45 AM PDT by OldCorps
Repatriated Cubans spell boatload of trouble for Bush
July 31, 2003
BY ROBERT NOVAK SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST Advertisement
It was not just that the Bush administration dispatched 12 Cubans who hijacked a boat to the tender mercies of Fidel Castro. What inflamed pro-Bush Cuban Americans in south Florida is that the United States negotiated with the communist dictator to impose 10-year prison sentences. This sudden agreement between Washington and Havana could cost George W. Bush a second term.
President Bush's Cuban-American friends consider this a de facto trial, resulting in incarceration by a police state. ''This is a very pained community,'' Republican Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart told me. Sharing the pain of his Cuban constituents and known to be unhappy with the decision is the president's brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. ''I do not think the president was aware of this decision,'' said Diaz-Balart.
Although there is truly no sign the decision went to the Oval Office, its political sting may be felt there. It is clear that Bush could not have won Florida and the presidency in 2000 without Cuban votes. Since repatriation of the hijackers, Florida Democrats have been busy pointing out betrayal by the White House. If Cuban voters stay home next time, Florida will almost surely be won by Bush's Democratic opponent.
Eleven men and one woman, seeking freedom in America, stole the Cuban boat Gaviota 16 on July 15 but were intercepted by the U.S. Coast Guard the next day. They were denied automatic entry into the United States, granted under law, citing an agreement with Castro made by President Bill Clinton. The issue went to a U.S. interagency committee, where Justice and State Department career bureaucrats insisted the refugees be returned to Castro.
The three Cuban Americans from south Florida in Congress--Lincoln Diaz-Balart, his brother, Mario, and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen--pleaded to send the hijackers elsewhere, perhaps Guantanamo. Instead, the bureaucrats bargained with the Cuban dictator. Once Castro agreed not to execute the refugees as he had U.S.-bound hijackers in April, U.S. negotiators eagerly accepted 10-year prison sentences. The freedom-seekers were sent back July 21.
Desire to achieve accord with Castro has not borne fruit. Starting July 6, U.S. broadcasts to Iran that are critical of the mullahs were illegally jammed from Cuba. Why has the U.S. government not protested? The CIA has informed the White House that the jamming originated at the Iranian embassy in Havana. It defies belief that this could have been done without concurrence and cooperation by Cuba's government.
Repatriation of the hijackers fits a pattern. In federal court in Key West, Fla., July 10, a Cuban accused of skyjacking was denied permission to testify that he feared for his life if he surrendered control of the plane to Castro's agents. Bush has waived the rights of Americans to sue foreign speculators who profit from stolen American properties in Cuba. The Justice Department never has sought indictments of Cuban Air Force pilots who shot down small civilian aircraft in international air space.
Bush has been prevented from getting his choices in control of Cuban policy. Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd has been relentless in blocking confirmation of Bush's own assistant secretary of state for Latin America. Without much effort made by the White House, Bush gave up on Otto Reich, former ambassador to Venezuela, who was instead named a presidential adviser. Roger Noriega, ambassador to the Organization of American States, was finally confirmed by the Senate Tuesday night after a four-month wait.
If Castro was a fixation for John F. Kennedy, he seems off the screen for George W. Bush. While repatriation to Cuban prisons caused a furor in south Florida, it hardly made a ripple in Washington. My check of Bush policy and political advisers indicated neither awareness nor interest in what happened.
Diaz-Balart refers to the Cubans as the base of Hispanic support for the president and the Republican Party. If this is the treatment given the only minority group that supports the GOP, he wonders what message will be sent other minority groups wooed by Republicans. ''When the base is ignored,'' the congressman said, ''there is a problem.'' More than ignored, the Cubans are simply disrespected, and that is the painful message in Miami.
Feel free to cut and paste from any of my posts where I made such a ludicrous assertion.
You're spinning in circles and throwing accusations that don't stick. I'm tired of going around and around with you answering your expanding list of grievances. I have better things to do.
Wanna bet? (about the antique guns, that is)
Novak is a registered Democrat, I kid you not. The networks merely pretend that he is a conservative Republican.
That statement was proven false for many reasons.
First of all, there is no lengthy review process to address asylum seekers from Cuba while there are intercepted 10 feet from a Florida beach.
Second, there is no lengthy review process to address asylum seekers from Cuba after they touch dry land. There are covered automatically under the Cuban-Adjustment Act.
And yes, our wet foot, dry foot policy is capricious. The same person is considered a refugee or an illegal migrant depending on whether his feet are dry or wet. That's why during the Surfide Six incident, the police tried to keep the refugees inside the one-foot deep beach water to avoid giving them refugee status. After the refugees walked on dry sand, they went from illegal migrant to legal refugees.
Hell. No wonder. No doubt, he's on a mission to fracture the party from within. Now how do you convince the paleos that he's no friend of theirs either?
capricious
adj 1: changeable; "a capricious summer breeze"; "freakish weather" [syn: freakish] 2: determined by chance or impulse or whim rather than by necessity or reason; "a capricious refusal"; "authoritarian rulers are frequently capricious"; "the victim of whimsical persecutions" [syn: impulsive, whimsical]
----------------
Also, all of my posts have been my personal opinion. I'm regurgitating some things I have seen in the news over the years... this doesn't make me an authority and I'm not pretending to be one. I'm not paid by the State Dept to defend their policy positions. Pointing out that there is no lengthy review process because they are covered under another act... big, flippin' deal. Asylum seekers and refugees still go through a review process regardless of the act or executive order covering them.
The fact is still that the rules are known and the risks are accepted by those who test them. Those who don't want to risk making it to shore, negotiate ahead of time (remember the baseball player, Hernandez?). Do I think it makes sense that there's a different set of rules for those who step out of 1 ft of water? No, but again, these rules are the result of years of evolution through disparate situations. They will evolve again.
How many times does someone have to ask you to go away before you get the hint?
With whom?
Do you have the name or phone number of the person a Cuban in the island can call to "negotiate?"
Do you know of any case where an average Cuban has done this "negotiation?"
The Hernandez case is not applicable. He was already in dry land, Bahamas, and a complicated arrangement was workout for himself because of his star status. Again, capricious.
You don't own this board, dear. You keep repeating false information, and you will find people who refutes it.
I don't know. Joe Average turns on the TV set and hears avowed liberals bashing Novak (garnerning sympathy from the Right in the process), see Novak spouting a few Conservative platitudes, and then fall hook, line, and sinker for his various roles as either being a deliberate fall guy who tosses out setup lines that the liberals can easily refute, or who fall for his same old trick of acting as though Bush's "base" is offering legitimate criticism (which the Left on his shows never seem to mind or disagree with for some reason)...
Correction: When I state that somewhere in the past I recall reading something that has helped me form an opinion, I will run into intransigent blowhards who will demand proof of what has led me to that opinion. Well, for the third time, I don't have first hand knowledge of how this process works only that I recall reading that it has been done. The following is from the USCG website. I won't bother asking you politely to go away this time. I will simply wait for you to challenge me again for concrete proof of my personal opinion.
--------
INS 800 Number on Cuban Migrant Interdiction Process
Good day. This is the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, the INS. if you are calling about a Cuban national who has been picked up at sea by the U.S. Coast Guard, please stay on the line and we will provide you with information on Cuban migrant interdictions. To listen to this information in English, press 1. For Spanish, press 2.
--------
Under the migration accord signed May 2, 1995, by the United States and Cuba, Cuban citizens interdicted by the U.S. Coast Guard in International or U.S. waters are returned to Cuba.
Individuals who believe they cannot return to Cuba have the opportunity to speak with a specially trained INS asylum officer. This officer sends the Information provided by each individual to INS Headquarters in Washington where senior INS officers determine whether the individual has a "credible fear of persecution." This standard is a generous one and is designed to ensure that no one who might be at risk is returned to Cuba.
People on board the cutter who are found to have a credible fear of persecution are transferred to the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. After being interviewed a second time at Guantanamo, those found to have legitimate protection concerns are resettled ln third countries by the Department of State. The U.S. Government does not resettle any one in the United States, even though the individual may have close family in this country.
[Sounds an awful lot like a lengthy review process for asylum seekers to me...]
Cuban migrants who are transferred to the naval base may place a collect telephone call to relatives to let them know they are safe. As the decision process and the transfer to Guantanamo may take several days, family members should not expect to be contacted immediately if they believe their family member has been taken to the naval base.
Cuban migrants who are found not to have a credible fear of persecution are returned by the Coast Guard directly to Cuba. Again, the return process may take several days, and no one should expect to hear immediately from a family member or friend being returned.
It is INS policy to hold in confidence the identity of all Cuban migrants interdicted at sea. we cannot confirm whether a particular individual is on board a U.S. Coast Guard cutter, regardless of the closeness of your relationship to that individual. Family members and friends must wait to be contacted by the migrants themselves, whether it be from Guantanamo or their homes in Cuba. Please do not call the U.S. Coast Guard or the INS office in Miami about your relative or friend since they cannot provide any Information beyond that whIch you are hearing on this tape.
Migrants picked up by the U.S. Coast Guard in Bahamian waters or on Bahamian territory are turned over to the Government of the Bahamas. The U.S. Government does not return migrants interdicted in Bahamian waters directly to Cuba. We hope the preceding information will be helpful in understanding U.S. policy under the May 2, 1995, migration agreement.
--------
Now, I know what comes next; "It says specifically that family members shouldn't call them." Yeah, it does. Now if I could only remember where it was that I read that they can call ahead of time to let the government know that their loved ones had taken to sea in a bid for freedom. I don't remember, so don't ask.
I won't.
The "wet feet-dry feet" policy allows individuals who can prove during their at-sea interviews that they face immediate persecution if they return to Cuba to seek asylum. But in most cases, this is impossible to prove. Most Cubans who attempt to flee and fail face reprisals because they attempted to flee. And reprisals can be subtle, such as the denial of employment. (With the exception of a few luxury Varadero Beach resorts from which most Cubans are barred, the government is the only employer of any significance in Cuba.)Consider the story of Cuban dentist Noris Pena, who defected to the U.S. in 2001 while in Zimbabwe. Her parents and brothers were granted visas through the lottery. But, because she declared herself a political refugee, Castro's government denied her family members exit papers. "They were told the only way they were going to get off the island was on a raft," Pena told Newsday. Her family then decided to pay a smuggler to carry them to Florida. But Castro's secret police found out about their escape plan and met them before they reached the boat. They jailed Pena's father for three days and seized the family's life savings of 48,000 Cuban pesos (about $2,500). "If people use smugglers to leave Cuba, I think it's . . . a crazy idea," says Pena. "If my family told me they were going to try it, I would tell them no. But would I do it if I was still in Cuba? I think yes."
The government continued to prosecute people for "illegal exit" if they attempted to leave the island without first obtaining official permission to do so. Such permission was sometimes denied arbitrarily, or made contingent on the purchase of an expensive exit permit.Prisoners were kept in abusive conditions, often in overcrowded cells. Many prisoners lost weight during incarceration and received inadequate medical care. Some endured physical and sexual abuse, typically by other inmates with the acquiescence of guards. Prison authorities insisted that all detainees participate in politically oriented "re-education" sessions or face punishment. Political prisoners who denounced poor conditions of imprisonment were frequently punished by long periods in punitive isolation cells, restricted visits, or denial of medical treatment.
Totally different. If a Communist government is intent on keeping power it will, hands down. No other type government in the history of the world is so thoroughly evil and so thoroughly unconquerable when the leaders are intent on keeping it (as Castro is).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.