Attempts to reach the website for the Bronx District Attorney were blocked at NYPL computers. I have copied the bogus notice appearing at Google Chrome when I attempted to do so.
This "blocking" of a website could place New Yorkers' lives in danger by preventing persons from reporting crimes in their communities. It is difficult to believe that corrupt police officers from New Jersey would be willing to take such risks in efforts to intimidate me. ("New Jersey's Office of Attorney Ethics" and "New Jersey's 'Ethical' Legal System" then "John McGill, Esq., the OAE, and New Jersey Corruption.")
I will be posting an open letter to Mr. Vance, with copies to the Manhattan U.S. Attorney and also to Robert Johnson, Esq., the Bronx District Attorney. Computer crime always makes it very difficult to know whether I will be able to continue writing at this site. ("How censorship works in America" and "Censorship and Cruelty in New Jersey.")
Attacks on this text are always expected and likely. The size of letters in several paragraphs has been altered. Other deformations of sentences and paragraphs cannot be ruled out for the time being. There is always a danger that I will be prevented from returning to this site. (Again: "How censorship works in America.")
"The Moment to Restore Ties to Cuba," (Editorial) The New York Times, Sunday Review, October 12, 2014, p. 10.
Michael Barbaro, "G.O.P. Right Still Has Doubt About Christie," The New York Times, October 13, 2014, p. A1. (Mr. Christie continues to claim that he will fight for the "least of us" if elected president. More likely, Mr. Christie will work for the "least of us" -- provided that they are multimillionaires -- if elected to the nation's highest office, which seems unlikely.)
Mark Mazetti, "C.I.A. Study Says Arming Rebels Seldom Works," The New York Times, October 15, 2014, p. A1. (U.S. efforts against ISIS and in Iraq are doomed to fail without incentives for prospective Iraqui opponents of ISIS. The Turks are now bombing the most effective opponents of ISIS, the Northern Iraqui Kurds. Claims by Turkish authorities of "cooperation" with the Kurds against ISIS should be greeted with extreme caution.)
"Ernesto Londono," [Manohla Dargis] "Still Pondering U.S.-Cuba Relations, Fidel Castro Responds," The New York Times, October 15, 2014, p. A34. ("Ernesto Londono" is probably Mr. Lincoln Diaz-Balart with assistance from the Cuban American National Foundation as well as the so-called "gang of three": Menendez, Ros-Leghtinen, Rubio. This comment is the past; the editorial quoted below is the future.)
Robert Menendez, "Time to End the Embargo Against Cuba?," The New York Times, October 15, 2014, p. A34. (Sen. Menendez's letter -- emailed from a "sexy" resort beach in the Dominican Republic, perhaps? -- is "derivative" and marred by false allegations of fact. Cuba's human rights record is among the best in Latin America and compares well with most First World states today, including the U.S. record on such issues. Mr. Menendez cannot help ending his epistle with a trite and spent platitude. Time to tell the truth, Mr. Menendez. Is New Jersey's senior senator wearing my Invicta watch? "Menendez Consorts With Underage Prostitutes" and "Menendez Croney's Office Raided.")
Lovisa Stannow, "The Shame of Our Prisons: New Evidence," in The New York Review of Books, October 24, 2013, p. 57. (A new report confirms last year's findings and suggests international condemnation for U.S. prison conditions that violate human rights laws is appropriate. Will Mr. Menendez protest human rights violations in U.S. prisons? "Justice For Mumia Abu-Jamal" and "So Black and So Blue in Prison.")
As I was preparing my open letter to Cyrus Vance, Jr., Esq., I was surprised to discover that the Editorial Board of America's "newspaper of record" -- after what appears to be a fierce war of conscience -- has published an editorial that is actually reflective of public opinion in the world and among well-informed Manhattanites, for once, concerning the Cuban embargo.
Is it true that "Manohla Dargis" has threatened to quit over this editorial? If so, this may be one true motive for publishing what amounts to common sense opinion on the issue. ("Time to End the Embargo Against Cuba.")
It is indeed time to end an embargo that causes so much unnecessary suffering to many innocent persons, in both countries, and also to restore diplomatic relations between the two nations:
"For the first time in more than 50 years shifting politics in the United States and changing policies in Cuba make it politically feasible to re-establish formal diplomatic relations and dismantle the senseless embargo. The Castro regime has long blamed the embargo for its shortcomings ... ."
Nearly $1 TRILLION (one million billion dollars) has been lost to the Cuban economy since 1961 because of the U.S.-imposed embargo.
Every man, woman, and child in Cuba is damaged in his or her life-conditions and -prospects by this material deprivation and impoverishment that is profoundly unjust.
This fact suggests that there are good reasons to "blame" the embargo for the island nation's difficulties of an economic nature:
"Mr. Obama should seize the opportunity to end the long era of enmity and help a population that has suffered enormously since Washington ended diplomatic relations in 1961, two years after Fidel Castro seized power."
There are excellent reasons for Mr. Obama to end the embargo: For one thing, this action would align the U.S. position with world opinion on the matter.
The embargo is nearly unanimously condemned by the community of nations (U.N.), on a regular basis, often with the U.S. as the sole nation favoring the, essentially, illegal embargo and upholding it by veto. An embargo is usually deemed to be an act of war against a people.
After all, it is the same "community of nations" at the UN that the U.S. calls upon when it seeks sanctions against nations deemed by the American State Department to violate international law and that finds, also on a yearly basis, that the U.S. violates international law through the imposition of the embargo against Cuba.
Russia has neatly sidestepped U.S. condemnations over Ukraine by pointing to the example of Cuba to illustrate claims of American inconsistency and hypocrisy on sanctions and human rights issues. ("American Hypocrisy and Luis Posada Carriles.")
After relative silence from American officials in response to the Israeli military action in Gaza that resulted in 2,000 casualties of innocent civilians (including "500 babies" as Cornel West pointed out in a recent talk at which I was present), 15,000 wounded persons, 100,000 made homeless -- allegations that concern with human rights in Cuba motivates the embargo seem absurd. ("The Audacity of Hope" and "Israel Heightens Gaza Crisis.")
Senator Menendez does not deny receiving Israeli lobby money. The senator from Union City has remained silent on the human rights issues surrounding the Gaza military action. ("Is Senator Menendez 'For' Human Rights?" and "Is Menendez For Sale?")
Ending the embargo would demonstrate that the U.S. is not only concerned to mobilize military operations against small countries in the Middle East, or "terrorist organizations" (this usually means "unruly Muslims"), but also can make peace with old adversaries in order to provide an example of progress, say, for Israelis and Palestinians as well as others in the world negotiating for peace. ("Fidel Castro's 'History Will Absolve Me.'")
Cuba is not a terrorist state in 2014. Cuba is leading the effort to bring a resolution to rival factions in Colombia by hosting peace negotiations in Havana; Cuba, according to UN experts, has released all political prisoners and is willing to negotiate for the release of a probable American spy currently held in custody; and Cuba will participate in meetings of the Organization of American States despite Washington's discontent.
This is to say nothing of the animosity of Cuban-American politicians to Cuba's revolution and people, which hurts the people of Cuba in many ways that are not usually reckoned in connection with the embargo.
Much of the battle over this issue in the world today is about who will define the Cuban revolution and Cuba, whether Miami's politicians with access to American media and propaganda machinery -- or Cuba's leaders with no such access -- will establish the identity of the Cuban people is something only history will decide.
I have also been involved in a similar battle for self-definition against powerful forces in America. Luckily and mysteriously, against all odds, the truth seems to prevail, somehow.
Cuba and I seem to have managed to tell the truth about ourselves today.
Among politicians opposed to Cuba are Iliana Ros-Leghtinen (also "Manohla Dargis"?) who is said to be "livid" about the suggestion that the embargo should be lifted. Bob Menendez and Marco Rubio "concur" in efforts to maintain the embargo. ("Menendez Blames Castro For His Prositution Habit" and "Marco Rubio Lies About His Past" then "Cubanazos Pose a Threat to National Security.")
A majority of Cuban-Americans now FAVOR ending the embargo, also restoring normal economic and legal relations between the two countries:
"The generation [of Cuban-Americans] that adamantly supports the embargo is dying off. Younger Cuban-Americans hold starkly different views, having come to see the sanctions as more damaging than helpful. A recent poll found that a slight majority of Cuban-Americans in Miami [and New Jersey] now oppose the embargo. A significant majority of them favor restoring diplomatic ties, mirroring the views of other Americans."
Good old American self-interest favors a normalization of relations. Increased trade between the U.S. and Cuba would mean BILLIONS of dollars for the U.S. economy, especially in the southern portion of the nation, but also for airlines and travel agents as well as hotel companies and commercial enterprises everywhere, like Wallmart, or even Starbucks and Barnes & Noble, all of which could find themselves with a Havana location catering to the global tourist trade.
Enhanced Cuban relations with China and Russia would be matched by similar joint ventures with American partners.
After the new marina and seaport project in Havana, can a McDonald's hamburger restaurant be far behind? Why not Mickey Mouse? Major league baseball? Sabado Gigante?
"Restoring diplomatic ties, [something] which the White House can do without Congressional approval, would allow the U.S. to expand and deepen cooperation in areas where the two nations already manage to work collaboratively -- like managing migration flows, maritime patrolling [war on terror?] and oil rig safety. It would better position Washington to press the Cubans on democratic reforms, and could stem a new wave of migration to the U.S. driven by [economic] hopelessness."
Already it has become evident that "business as usual" is no longer acceptable anywhere in the hemisphere, not even in Miami or New Jersey:
"In April, Western Hemisphere heads of state will meet in Panama City for the seventh Summit of the Americas. Latin American governments [again] insisted that Cuba, the Caribbean's most populous island and one of the [best] educated societies in the hemisphere, be invited, breaking with traditional exclusions [imposed] at the insistence of Washington."
