Comments on: I Do Suspect the Lusty Moore

By: JKB

JKB — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 22:52:13 +0000

I’ll grant that pursuing these cases might be a small waste of OFAC resources but don’t think the Cuban embargo is an policy past its time. Cuba has been and is still running one of the most active intelligence operations against the US and provides the information they collect to Iran and other enemies. It is apparent that some of this information makes it into the hands of those responsible for 9/11.

Most people haven’t heard of Ana Belen Montes. She was a Defense Intelligence Agency analyst but also a spy for the Cuban government, for over20 years. “She rose to become our senior Cuban analyst in the agency, and largely recognized as the senior Cuba specialist in the entire intelligence community.”

Her arrest in late 2001 was overshadowed by 9/11. Her conviction didn’t make the front page.

Reference:
http://www.aei.org/events/filter.foreign,eventID.1521/transcript.asp

By: Mike Deal

Mike Deal — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 23:17:18 +0000

18 USC 1956(c)(7)(D). Which, makes it a predicate offense for RICO.

By: Mike Deal

Mike Deal — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 23:05:41 +0000

Clif: Moore’s fear is not that unrealistic. The proceeds of transactions of violations of IEEPA as well as AECA and EAR were added to 18 USC 1956 by The P.A.T.R.I.O.T. [sic] Act. In the Gas Tech case, the government filed a forfeiture action against not only all the assets of my client, the corporation, but also against the home of its founder and president, even though he and his wife had bought the home long before the transactions in question, on the theory that some of the proceeds of the allegedly illegal transaction were paid to him and then used to make his mortgage payments for a few months. If I were Moore, I would be afraid that the Yankee government would try to forfeit not just masters of the film, but his copyright in the film as well, and scoop up all the royalties worldwide.

By: anony2

anony2 — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 23:03:53 +0000

You are being naive – its the same logic students use when they see other students not getting caught cheating when they are caught by the proctor, – or what adults say when they speed, “others are speeding” – grow up, this is the US, follow the law. the act of one being singled out is not illegal, with limited resources that is the only option. Also, the idea of punishment and accountability rests on the principle “this could happen to you as well” – I was big fan of Moore when Columbine came out, now I see him at a funny man trying to amuse the world

By: mous, anony

mous, anony — Wed, 13 Jun 2007 13:15:07 +0000

Of course he’s taking advantage of the investigation. Love him or hate him, it cannot be denied that he has a gift (or curse, depending on perspective) for self-promotion.
And the argument that he is being discriminated against makes a little bit of sense, seeing as how he’s the only one being prosecuted for this, despite multiple examples of other people making trips under the exact same circumstances. Until the others are sent similar letters, it’s difficult to argue that he hasn’t been singled out (I’m not saying that he should be left alone. But if he has done wrong, so have many others, so go get them, too.)
Am I overly naive for wanting some consistency?