One has to only compare the AP story with that appearing in what once was called “the paper of record.” Times writer Christopher Maag refers to the FBI and law enforcement officials as advancing “their side of that debate.”
What debate? A jury found Chesimard guilty. She was later broken out of prison by left-wing radicals and black terrorists in her group.
The story then continues to explain that she “has proclaimed her innocence and called herself the victim of a racist judicial system.” Remember that all convicted leftist figures, from Alger Hiss to the Rosenbergs, always swore they were innocent. The Times story then writes that the FBI ran the notorious COINTELPRO program, which it says “used legal and illegal surveillance in an attempt to discredit mostly leftist political organizations in the 1960s and early ’70s.”
Of course, the Times does not explain that COINTELPRO had nothing to do with the shootout in which Chesimard killed officer Foerster, who was shot in cold blood when the car the group was riding in was stopped for a broken tail light.
Does reporter Maag really want us to believe that the police broke the light when they got in their car, and were waiting for them on the highway? If so, how did they know where they would even drive after they got in their car? And why were they carrying guns, which they took out and began shooting after being stopped?
The story also says Chesimard could not have fired the gun that killed Foerster, because she herself was hit during the first round of gunfire. It is more than possible that even if that was the case, she still could have managed to use the gun to kill the officer. The story then quotes one of her radical lawyers, who of course states that there is “no evidence” that she was the one who murdered Foerster.
He goes on to note that the FBI announcement is only meant to “inflame the public.”
What should inflame the public is that the New York Times used a news report to try to cast doubt regarding Chesimard/Shakur’s guilt, and to make it appear that perhaps she was being tried for her radical views and not for her terrorist action. It is, perhaps, what we can now expect from a once-great newspaper. Rather than issue a report — like even the AP and other newspapers did — it offered an editorial in the guise of a news story.
As for Cuba returning her, or a good Samaritan in Cuba telling the FBI what safe house she resides in, good luck. Cuba has yet to free the imprisoned American Alan Gross, and Raul Castro is not about to hand over Chesimard/Shakur to U.S. authorities. The regime needs to trumpet its fading revolutionary credentials, as more and more people have come to know about the true state of affairs in a failing economy whose people are more and more unafraid to openly protest.
It is good, however, for all of us to be reminded that in our recent past, homegrown communist revolutionaries have done real damage, and have escaped from justice. This is the real world, not the fantasy world portrayed by Robert Redford in his dreadful The Company You Keep.
Kudos to the FBI for putting Chesimard/Shakur on its Most Wanted Terrorists list. This is an act that makes her the first woman to achieve that honor. That is, indeed, an honor she is most deserving of.